looking for a new cruise line

we have gone on 10 cruises, Emerald Sea 1974,RCCI, Costa, Sitmar, Princess, and last HAL in Deluxe Suite. Except for a wonderful balcony the rest uas just ok. Sitmaar was our best experience. Please tell me about the untold amenities of this line. Thank you

read the boards...small ships, nice people, lovely cabins, great food, more $$$ but worth every dime

I agree with Joanna... I think everything has been told, there are no mysteries. You pay more but get a better product. More importantly, you are not sailing with 3,000 of your "best friends".

This is a great line but I love Oceania just as much if not more!

Jan

*****

It might be good to note that JanCruz is an Oceania travel agent. I have not cruised that line, but met a couple on our RSSC cruise last year that liked the passengers much more on the Regent cruiseline. We love it, feel you get what you pay for. I love not having to pay for each bottle of water, wine, mixed drinks etc. Makes it more of a country club feel...perfect for us.

Cheers, Pam

In our opinion Regent is a much better cruiseline than Oceania. When we were on the Navigator recently, the chef told us they only use Kobe and Wagu(SP?) beef. They have fresh fish picked up in ports along the way (by the way Crystal does the same). Regent makes their stocks from scratch.

On Oceania, the fish had obviously been frozen (iodine taste, mushy consistency), the veal chop was total fat, the souffle had the consistency of bread. The food on Oceania is preplated and is never hot. Special orders are not taken on Oceania. Regent's Signatures restaurant is truly the equal of a five star restaurant in the States. The lowest category cabins on Regent are gigantic (about 350 square feet) compared to Oceania's very small cabins. The all inclusive policy on Regent is nice, but you pay for it upfront.

As for travel agents making comments on these boards, I believe cruisecritic allows that, but suggests that TAs identify themselves as such. What is not revealed is when a TA has a special relationship with one cruiseline. That leads to biased reporting. A word to the wise.

What is it about cruising that you love the most. That will help you make the decision. Is it the ports? Is it the service? Is it the food? Is it the beds? Is it the onboard amenities?

That is what you need to ask. In 2001, we left mass market cruising for good. We had a suite on HAL, but the onboard experience had declined due to the discounting that made the food, the service, the atmosphere, etc. no longer the product we wanted.

So, we started booking luxury trips. We take the smaller suites but get the same amenities that we were looking for when we booked the expensive suites on HAL.

To us, we want quality shore experiences, no "bus trips" so the concierge recommended excursions on Regent fit us. We pay thousands less to stay in Category G or H but spend it to take romantic sunset sailing excursions, or the "Ephesus with Terrace Houses" concierge tour, or our splurge for pre-cruise in Istanbul at the Four Seasons with a private limo, guide and included tours.

That is what lured us to Regent, that plus the included wines with meals, since to us, wine is part of dinner and should be included. Others don't drink wine so don't care, but we do.

We love the little extras, like private island days on Princess Cays for just the 500 or 700 RSSC guests. We also think the onboard excursion staff is excellent. We got great ideas for our day in St. Bart's with our rented jeep.

We love the open seating dining with enough tables to accommodate the entire ship at the same time. No one hour waits for tables. No need to use the "buffet" dining in order to have dinner without waiting. We like to eat at 7:30 or 8 PM and those times would create a problem on a ship with inadequate dining space.

We love the full breakfast in our suite, no matter what category we booked. We love the full dinner menu available as room service, no matter what category we booked. We used it once when we returned late from touring and didn't feel like changing for an informal night.

As you may guess, we find those areas to be the areas where mass market and premium lines would not satisfy us. So, we book RSSC or look at possibilities with Seabourn or Silversea for the future.

Our next venture is a river cruise this fall, but we are planning for 2008, where we are looking at Tahiti, Antarctica or the Galapagos --- I know, an odd list but places we wish to see. RSSC is in the running for Antarctica and we are crossing our fingers that the Paul Gauguin will still be marketed by RSSC and not Saga. That will sway us to Tahiti.

If you don't care about the quality of the shore excursions because you do your own thing, and don't drink wine with dinner, then Oceania may be a better fit for you. I find those to be weaknesses based on reviews I have read, and for my preferences, I would be unhappy, but others won't be affected at all.

I want my preferences met to my satisfaction and RSSC is one of the choices I make to get what I want for my money.:)

I also can't understand why anyone would make the comparison between Oceanic and any of the luxury lines - it just doesn't even fit in the same category. They are excellent at what they do - but they are far from luxury - from dining, to service, even down to passenger mix. I just don't get it.

I also can't understand why anyone would make the comparison between Oceanic and any of the luxury lines - it just doesn't even fit in the same category. They are excellent at what they do - but they are far from luxury - from dining, to service, even down to passenger mix. I just don't get it.

Oceania doesn't market itself as luxury either. I think the willingness to compare it is because so many find it a perfect fit for them. (Obviously others don't.)

Frankly there are things on most lines that I truly enjoy and other things that I think miss the mark. Regent generally does a very good job; better than most.

However, Celebrity does a good job - dependent on accomodations and your willingness to accept upcharges (total cruise cost) and so does Seabourn...though some satisfied Regent guests don't really care or pick up on the differences that matter to, say, me.

In other words, different flavored ice cream exists for a reason.

I think you'll find lots of Oceania partisans around, but few of them are those who are "coming down" to Oceania from, say, Regent, Silversea or Seabourn. I could be wrong, I'm a Regent-only cruiser, who is spoiled rotten, and still looking into Oceania and/or Silversea for itineraries that fit my schedule.

I think it's fair for Jan to say whatever she likes about O, but to say it's better than Regent is showing her bias, and she should acknowledge it, for sure.

We are pampered on Regent. Love the immense basic staterooms. Voyager is all-balcony, as is Mariner, Navigator almost so. Dining is wonderful.

But it's the small size, and the lack of nickel and diming that are the kickers for us. Intimate, lovely service, no tipping, all-inclusive.

And yes, excursions are usually well-organized, even the basic ones (I haven't tried the concierge offerings yet.)

Having cruised on all the above lines I can only agree with Annie.We just wont cruise on the large mass media ships again. We started on Crystal back in 95 and switched over to Regent in 2006.I also have done a 16 day cruise on Oceania with a classmate and thoroughly enjoyed it.Very different from Crystal and Regent but the food was the best I have eaten on any of the ships.Would I sail on her again? you bet,but would move up to penthouse suite.Guess I've been spoiled by the two best lines on the sea;) Cheers Pat and Ray.

First, Iamboatman, I really appreciate the fact that you identify yourself as a TA -- wish all TA's did. Anyway, just in case someone on the board didn't read the news, Oceania was sold this week or last (so was Wind Star). The announcements state that there will be no change to the how the cruiseline will be run, I don't trust that 100%. I worked for a company that was bought out three times -- things remained the same for the first year or so -- suddenly everything changed.

In terms of Regent, it is truly a beautiful cruising experience. Although we mainly book our excursions on the internet with private companies (you have to be very careful doing this -- check reviews, etc.), Regent also offers great excursions (a bit pricier than the ones we find on the outside).

Regent, Seabourn and Silversea are, according to most TA's and publications, considered to be in the "luxury" class. Crystal seems to be the very top of all other classes (larger ships, smaller cabins, set seating time, pay for drinks, great food). Regent does a great job of making sure each passenger has everything they need -- from great food (most of the time:-), spacious cabins, room service -- even washers/dryers that don't require you to find money to pay for it. All-inclusive -- the way to go!;)

I don't cruise as much as I used to. Ill and elderly parents make it a problem. Also, fares for the REALLY GOOD lines like Regent have gone up markedly in the last three years or so, especially when you take into account the "specials" I used to find and their apparent scarcity now. I have not "scaled down" to "lower cost lines" (like Oceania), as by the time I get through upgrading to a room or suite that is large enough for me, and pay for all the "extras" (usually badly over-priced), I find that they are really not "lower cost lines". For me, it seems that it is either pay up front or pay as you go, but either way, I'm going to pay. With all of Regent's ships, the lowest cost accomodations are a 200 sq. ft. to about 300 sq. ft. outside room or suite, depending on ship, and on some ships with a balcony. That's good enough for us. But on Oceania, Celebrity, and the other lines in the class just below Regent, I have to do some serious upgrading to get such accomodations. Then, Regent is all beverage inclusive, so there is zero "bar bill" -- even though on "extra charge ships" my "bar bill" is mostly bottled water and Diet Coke. Regent is "tips included" and since I would never knowingly put myself in a "tipping environment" and not tip, that is an extra charge for me. And so on.

In other words, it does not matter cost-wise whether I take a cruise with the accomodations and content I want on Regent, Oceania, or Celebrity. Given my desires and demands, the cost will be about the same.

One could save money on Oceania or Celebrity over the likes of Regent, but only by booking a dinky room, not drinking bottled water, soda, beer, liquor, or wine -- and not tipping. But since I just don't cruise like that, I will cruise only Regent (and Silversea, Seabourn, and Sea Dream). They way I want to cruise, there is no way to go cheaper -- and if I can't afford that at the moment, I just stay home.

Thanks,

Richard

I actually posted about the Oceania sale on the Seabourn board. What I read from the trades and in speaking to some people is that the idea is to have enough money to build a new ship or two.

I, too, am sure there will be changes. There are always changes. Some good. Some not.

Overall the cruise market is changing. More ships are sailing below capacity on most lines. Everything from NCL to Celebrity to Regent to Silversea has sailings with less passengers than expected.

There is a balancing being done from the last years of driving prices up and now consumer resistance (along with an economy that isn't that strong for most).

It is going to be interesting.

We just got home on Thursday night, from 11 nights on Navigator. We were on the same ship just over a year ago, and there have been a vast number of changes; as far as we could tell, all the changes were positive. It was our sixth cruise on Regent, and ranks right up there on the favorites list.

We met some people from CC who hadn't ever cruised Regent before, and they fell head over heels in love. We dazzled them with the ability to order "fish 'n chips", shrimp tempura, and zucchini tempura for the next night.

>>>Silversea has sailings with less passengers than expected.<<<

Silversea told me a few years ago that they choose to sail with empty cabins rather than drastically reduce them for a last minute "sale". A strange business ploy I thought. Is it better to have no money than some? Don't know if that's still their custom, though.

First, Iamboatman, I really appreciate the fact that you identify yourself as a TA -- wish all TA's did. Anyway, just in case someone on the board didn't read the news, Oceania was sold this week or last (so was Wind Star). The announcements state that there will be no change to the how the cruiseline will be run, I don't trust that 100%. I worked for a company that was bought out three times -- things remained the same for the first year or so -- suddenly everything changed.

 

In terms of Regent, it is truly a beautiful cruising experience. Although we mainly book our excursions on the internet with private companies (you have to be very careful doing this -- check reviews, etc.), Regent also offers great excursions (a bit pricier than the ones we find on the outside).

 

Regent, Seabourn and Silversea are, according to most TA's and publications, considered to be in the "luxury" class. Crystal seems to be the very top of all other classes (larger ships, smaller cabins, set seating time, pay for drinks, great food). Regent does a great job of making sure each passenger has everything they need -- from great food (most of the time:-), spacious cabins, room service -- even washers/dryers that don't require you to find money to pay for it. All-inclusive -- the way to go!;)

I thought I was up on the cruise news - I knew Windstar had been sold - but who bought Oceania?

Boatman:

I too appreciate your posts, and the fact that you don't conceal the fact that you are a TA.

In light of what you said about ships not being full these days due to the price increases, I shall be again looking for those "specials" on the GOOD LINES I used to find and book.

Perhaps (and I hope) history is repeating.

Thanks,

Richard

I thought I was up on the cruise news - I knew Windstar had been sold - but who bought Oceania?

The following is an article from last week:

Oceania Cruises sold to new owners

There's big news this week for fans of Oceania Cruises, the four-year-old line founded by former Renaissance Cruises executives. New York-based private equity fund Apollo Management will pay $850 million for the company and its three 684-passenger ships, all former Renaissance vessels.

Oceania was founded in the wake of Renaissance's collapse in 2001, which followed the downturn in tourism after the 9/11 attacks. Like Renaissance, it has a loyal following. What does the takeover mean for Oceania lovers? In the day-to-day of ship operations, probably not all that much. Apollo praised the current management in its annoucement of the takeover this week, and it appears the line will continue to operate as it has before.

The big difference could be in funding for future vessels, a long-standing question mark with Oceania. Apollo has deep pockets and could afford to finance an expansion of the line, either by acquiring existing ships or building new. Stay tuned.

As the Original Poster asked about Regent -- as matters are now -- and not about Oceania as matters might be in the future, I will only comment again that I have never "done my math" concerning a cruise wherein I could save a dime by taking Oceania or Celebrity or the like instead of Regent -- given what I want out of a cruise in terms of accomodations and ammenities. I would ad that when one is considering Regent, one should also look at Silversea, Seabourn, and Sea Dream for comparable itineraries, pricing, and timing. These four lines offer similar content. So comparing them is fair. They are all the "top" of the lines. But one cannot compare these four to other lines. What the other lines may make up in reduced fares, they take back in extra charges.

`When I received an Oceania brochure, a few years ago, I was very tempted to try the line after discovering some new, small ports. My wife started reading the brochure and reading a review. As soon as she found out that bottle water is chargeable - "Forget it," said she. That small item put her off completely. It compares Regent and Silversea in a nutshell !! After 8 Regents and 2 Silverseas, we won't change.

Glad my expressly stating I am a travel agent is met with more positive comments. I wondered if the disclosure to all would be received well, but Laura said it was encouraged...and hence.

As for paying for this or that, it is a personal thing. I, personally, don't care if I get charged for the water if the final price of the cruise makes sense. It is a pain, but I pay for each item at the club and that isn't considered lower quality. For me, Oceania's biggest downside is the size of most cabins; not necessarily a dealbreaker, but a harder sell. OTOH, Regent's spacious cabins make a deal with an OK itinerary more palatable.

Oceania, Seabourn and Silversea tend to have the more unusual itineraries. That is a big plus for me. The unevenness of Silversea as expressed by many of its past passengers is, however, a bit unnerving.

Love this or love that, I still find Seabourn (even without true balconies) to be the best choice: Great service. Great food. Great itineraries. And with the price of a Regent cruise having risen (as I said they had quite a while ago), there is not much - if any - of a premium. The biggest problem is finding a peak season sailing with a suite available.

Neville, I know what you mean. My husband feels the same. I'm more pragmatic, so I will do the cost accounting for 2008, and count on some of my cruise buddies who do O before that to give me the scoop. Getting me away from Regent is going to be tough, but it's likely to come down to itinerary. I'm not willing to go too much higher than the per diems we have been paying, and both SS and SB appear to be higher, as does SD. Of course, I haven't seen the 2008 prices for Regent yet.

Boat, I'm interested in the unevenness of Silversea that you mention. Care to expand, or point me to threads?

Regent is in the process if adding the 2008 itinerary to their website -- the Navigator seems to be the most up to date. I did see the entire schedule for 2008 (without pricing) last week and its very exciting!:)

Boatman:

Yes, please fill us in on the unevenness of Silversea. I had read some posts about it, but they were pretty non-specific as to what was wrong. We cruised Silversea once last September. We deviated from our usual Regent choice because the SS itinerary was perfect for what we wanted, and there was a "special" that made the per diem a little less than anything similar we could find around the same time on Regent. Plus, I had always wanted to try Silversea. I would have done a review on that cruise, but was way too busy working in a political campaign (my wife's) to do so, and now it would be rather "stale." What we experienced on SS was a very Regent-like experience. A few things up (like entertainment) and a few things down (excursions), but in the balance, very much like Regent. There was another difference that some might interpret as a flaw -- or a benefit -- depending on ones preferences. The service was more "formal" and less "friendly and homey" on SS compared to Regent. The quality and quantity of service was just like Regent, but the style was a little different, that's all.

Thanks,

Richard