Regent a tough sell

As a long time supporter of Regent, I am finding it increasingly difficult to justify the prices they are currently charging. The issues for me are the included shore excursions and air.

As seasoned travelers, we often want to arrange our own shorex, walk about town, or stay on board. However, Regent does not rebate for shorex not taken.

In addition, as frequent flyers, we like to use our points to pay for our business class air tickets when we cruise to save thousands of dollars. However, the air rebate from Regent is very small.

As a result, whenever I look at Regent versus Crystal or Seabourn for a lengthy cruise, the prices are much more expensive on Regent and not always worth the added cost to me. That's why I recently booked a 36-day cruise with Seabourn to Asia instead of Regent.

I like Regent very much, but just can't justify the more expensive prices for things I don't want to take advantage of.

Am I the exception to their all-inclusive strategy, or does anyone else feel the same way?

No, you are not alone. We have used, and plan to use, Crystal and Seabourn too and for similar reasons. We prefer to make our own flight arrangements anyway as we like some flexibility and we have learned the hard way that "free" excursions are often very mediocre so we do some research and then take private tours. More expensive but better value for money. It would be nice if Regent made allowances for pax wishing to "opt out" but realistically the resulting admin and aggro probably isn't worth it for them. Regent offers a deal and it's it's up to us to take or leave it IMO. The same applies to their single supplement (another rant).

Having said that our primary consideration when choosing a cruise is itinerary so if Regent offers a good one we'll still probably take it.

Dave, very well said. We very strongly concur as evidenced by our cruising in 2013; 42 days on Silversea, 0 on regent, 2014 (15 days booked on Silversea, 0 booked on Regent).

We also use frequent flyer miles/hotel points to leverage our international travel (e.g., flew first class to Lisbon last March, FC to London last July and FC to Madiera last November). The three voyages we sailed on Silversea last year would have cost us thousands (multiple) more on Regent (even after factoring in that we paid for all our excursions on SS).

However, if you cherry pick your voyages on Regent, on rare occasion, Regent does offer a good itinerary at good value--we booked Capetown to Capetown in Nov 2015 at about $380 per diem. Regent also includes a good pre excursion coupled with this Capetown voyage (4day safari or 4 day winelands tour) for $499 pp (our Taj Mahal pre cruise on Regent in Dec 2012 was $0 (included in price), now however Regent charges $499 pp for these pre cruises) .

We always do our own air using miles. So I take the credit. I have had great excursions on regent and not so great. Mostly pretty good. You do have to cherry pick, as Wes said. But I am still mostly ok with regent though I do look at other cruise lines. We did an Oceania cruise recently. I was able to compare prices very easily as regent offered the identical itinerary (just in reverse order). When I luxed up our cruise to the level of regent included,, we actually paid a little more for the Oceania trip. And I had terrible Internet to boot.

As a long time supporter of Regent, I am finding it increasingly difficult to justify the prices they are currently charging. The issues for me are the included shore excursions and air.

 

As seasoned travelers, we often want to arrange our own shorex, walk about town, or stay on board. However, Regent does not rebate for shorex not taken.

 

In addition, as frequent flyers, we like to use our points to pay for our business class air tickets when we cruise to save thousands of dollars. However, the air rebate from Regent is very small.

 

As a result, whenever I look at Regent versus Crystal or Seabourn for a lengthy cruise, the prices are much more expensive on Regent and not always worth the added cost to me. That's why I recently booked a 36-day cruise with Seabourn to Asia instead of Regent.

 

I like Regent very much, but just can't justify the more expensive prices for things I don't want to take advantage of.

 

Am I the exception to their all-inclusive strategy, or does anyone else feel the same way?

In addition to the above you left out a few things

• When you book a premium tour there's no credit given for the already paid for included tour (eg: the premium tours price is the same as any other line - except with Regent you've already paid a tour fee)
  
• Their single supplement which seems stuck at 200%
  
• That a single paying the single supplement doesn't get double the airfare
  
• That a single paying the single supplement doesn't get to double any OBC
  

[*]When you book a premium tour there's no credit given for the already paid for included tour (eg: the premium tours price is the same as any other line - except with Regent you've already paid a tour fee)

 

I don't want to go on another rant about included excursions as I have made my point numerous times on the Regent board, however, when comparing the cost of an identical excursion in Alaska on Regent and Silversea, the price was double on Silversea which leads me to believe that there is credit given for the already paid portion of the excursion. Whew - that was a long sentence:) While this was the only side by side comparison I was able to make of identical excursions, we noted that the cost of excursions on Oceania were extremely high compared to Regent.

In terms of single supplement, if Regent sailings were not selling as well as they are, the single supplement would be discounted. I am not arguing the point of not needing two airfares, etc. The new ship will reportedly have single cabins which should help alleviate the single supplement issue.

IMO, air is not an issue since there is a credit given for non-use. We have not been able to find Business Class flights at the price Regent charges for Business Class upgrades. Not everyone has frequent flyer miles and less may in the future with some airlines changing their award programs pretty dramatically.

We do sail on Silversea and Oceania but feel most comfortable with Regent which is why we sail with them. We are booking less cruises which is cost and itinerary related. Why pay 30-40% more to go to the same place we went to on Regent only a few years ago?

.....We do sail on Silversea and Oceania but feel most comfortable with Regent which is why we sail with them. We are booking less cruises which is cost and itinerary related. Why pay 30-40% more to go to the same place we went to on Regent only a few years ago?

We have only experienced Regent and are generally very satisfied with them. We are, however, limited to European itineraries as we have to avoid long-haul flights and since we travel only in May or June this inevitably means the Mediterranean destinations. Hence we are beginning to to take trips which repeat ports . We also enjoy relaxing days on board. These factors will inevitably lead us to consider cruising with Seabourn, Silversea or Crystal in future to avoid paying for excursions many of which we do not wish to take.

Regents 'all-inclusive' offering is obviously very effective in attracting new business but, at least in our case, will reduce or even prevent repeat business.:(

In addition to the higher included excursions (most of which we can't use because I am unable to keep up), and the extremely limited number of seated and 1-walker excursions on many cruises, the higher business air charges ($1299 vs. $999) and the rumored $500 and higher surcharges for nearly all desirable (to us) airlines have caused us to cut back on cruising with Regent. Where we used to cruise 2-3 times a year, 50 or more nights, recently it has been once and not more than 12 to 16 nights.

Understand why: Apollo/PCH has announced an Initial Public Offering and is doing everything they can to make the company look better. In the process, they are discouraging quite a few of their long-term, loyal clients, as is evident from this and other threads on this site. I believe (don't know for sure) that attracting new clients is harder and more expensive than keeping existing ones, so this may become a big burden on the newly public company, a factor I don't think was clearly disclosed in the (draft?) SEC document I saw. In any event, it certainly seems they are spending a lot more on advertising these days, but the ships seems to be full more of the time too, so maybe it pays off.

You have to go with what you're comfortable with. We like the "all inclusive" aspect of Regent. We enjoy the tours and most have been good with some (last year in Asia and later Greece/Israel/Turkey) outstanding. We don't have lots of miles any longer because we are retired. I won't fly economy for longer flights so the business upgrade works for us. We always take it (except for cruise to Tahiti where upgrade is almost $10,000...I bought tickets in Air France business for less) and I feel the upgrade is not excessive. Yes, it was better when it was $900 instead of $1200 to Europe. We are doing the Cape Town to Cape Town cruise and we feel the value is very good plus the upgrade to business is reasonable. Is Regent expensive? Yes. Do they keep on raising prices? Yes. I'm sure there may come a time when Regent will be way to expensive for us. In the meantime, it works and we enjoy the small ships, service, food, and everything included. I have crunched numbers and by the time I add tips, drinks, excursions, and business air, I'd be paying more with another luxury cruise line. Again, is a personal decision. I'd never go back to mainstream cruise lines so for the time being, Regent it is.

I'm with you Commodoredave. I will never sail with Regent again until they abandon this included shore policy. Except in very rare instances I never take a ship's excursion. Getting on a bus with forty other people ruins the luxury aspect of any cruise for me. And to be charged for it with bo possibility of opting out is insane.

The included shore excursions are the main reason why I stick to Seabourn and Silversea. We have been on three Regent cruises, the first was paid shorex, the second and third had the included trips. The final trip from Sydney to Singapore was four years ago and the included trips were very poor. I accept that we all expect different things from a shore excursion but these were very weak, delayed starts, trips cut short and poor content coupled with inefficient destination staff.

Regent is our choice as we don't have frequent flyer points for BC flights and Regent's upgrades are reasonable compared to paying for flights. Like many others we aren't going to do the long haul flights in economy and Regent provides a good option. So far we have enjoyed most of the included excursions with only the occasional disappointment but then again i have spent money on private tours and had disappointments. Love the suites on Voyager and really don't want to give up that space.

Being an accountant I run the numbers each time we pick an itinerary and every time Regent has come out ahead of the competition. We are not in a position to cruise many times a year where we repeat ports so we take advantage of everything Regent offers on our cruise. That makes a big difference when doing the calculations.

Will we be able to continue to sail Regent going forward? Who knows but for now we are carefully picking our itinerary and maximizing the experience. Our next Regent cruise is November 2014 Dubai to Cape Town including the Taj Mahal tour in the middle and the 4 day safari at the end. Right now we are having a challenge trying to get good BC flights back home. We are working with our TA and Regent to find an airline that Regent uses, we are prepared to fly and we don't have to pay a supplement.

I truly believe that some Regent customers that are now sailing other lines would return to Regent if they had an opt out policy for excursions. There are times that we actually appreciate some of the excursions and are happy to have the cost of them included in the cruise fare. When we were in the Middle East, South Africa and even South America, the included excursions were welcome. Our upcoming cruise to Scandinavia has many small ports (mostly in Norway) and there are few options for private excursions. One reason we are sailing on Oceania later this year (Caribbean) is because we do not have excursions included (none of which we are interested in when sailing in the Caribbean). Plus, we are able to stay in a huge suite for 2 weeks at a per diem rate much less than Regent (even after adding the premium alcohol package).

P.S. 1982CruzStart: One odd but interesting option when flying to Dubai from Vancouver (assuming this is your home airport?) is to fly to Seattle or San Francisco and get a non-stop flight to Dubai on Emirates (generally accepted by Regent when doing a deviation). As you probably know, you can fly into or out of Canada on British Air without the supplemental fee that applies to flights from the U.S. The flight from Cape Town is horrendously long. We flew business class on British Air and it was manageable. The only downside is that there is a long stopover at Heathrow. You can rent a day room and spend some time there. This is what we plan to do when we return from Cape Town next year.

I understand that included shore excursions are attractive to a lot of less well-traveled cruisers.

My point, as acknowledged by several posters, is that many of us well-traveled cruisers like to do our own thing in port rather than paying for excursions we don't want to use.

The current Regent strategy seems to be working well in terms of attracting new luxury cruisers. However, I question whether it will keep passengers loyal to the line over the long term.

 

P.S. 1982CruzStart: One odd but interesting option when flying to Dubai from Vancouver (assuming this is your home airport?) is to fly to Seattle or San Francisco and get a non-stop flight to Dubai on Emirates (generally accepted by Regent when doing a deviation). As you probably know, you can fly into or out of Canada on British Air without the supplemental fee that applies to flights from the U.S. The flight from Cape Town is horrendously long. We flew business class on British Air and it was manageable. The only downside is that there is a long stopover at Heathrow. You can rent a day room and spend some time there. This is what we plan to do when we return from Cape Town next year.

Yes it is Vancouver that we fly out of. I was told by Regent that they are now charging a 1500 pp each way supplement to fly on Emirates. We are flying to Dubai on BA (have to leave a day earlier to do so) but it was going to be a 1700 pp supplement to return from Johannesburg on BA. I was also told that they don't use South African Airways and AC was a 1000 pp supplement in and out of Cape Town. We were offered Delta through Atlanta and Seattle but we try and avoid flying through the States when we fly internationally but it may end up being our only choice with lie flat beds.

Dave, very well said. We very strongly concur as evidenced by our cruising in 2013; 42 days on Silversea, 0 on regent, 2014 (15 days booked on Silversea, 0 booked on Regent).

 

We also use frequent flyer miles/hotel points to leverage our international travel (e.g., flew first class to Lisbon last March, FC to London last July and FC to Madiera last November). The three voyages we sailed on Silversea last year would have cost us thousands (multiple) more on Regent (even after factoring in that we paid for all our excursions on SS).

 

However, if you cherry pick your voyages on Regent, on rare occasion, Regent does offer a good itinerary at good value--we booked Capetown to Capetown in Nov 2015 at about $380 per diem. Regent also includes a good pre excursion coupled with this Capetown voyage (4day safari or 4 day winelands tour) for $499 pp (our Taj Mahal pre cruise on Regent in Dec 2012 was $0 (included in price), now however Regent charges $499 pp for these pre cruises) .

Couldn't agree more that Regent can be a great choice on a highly selective basis. We recently did a western Caribbean cruise on Regent (see review at http://www.cruisecritic.com/memberreviews/memberreview.cfm?EntryID=251572) just to test Regent after a long absence. The test had certain limitations as Navigator doesn't have Signatures and it is the oldest, smallest and most limited-facilities ship in the fleet. We did, however, get to experience Regent Shore-ex, something that was much less relevant on their eastern Caribbean itineraries. Airfare was not a meaningful part of our evaluation as we typically fly on self-purchased airfare (domestic) or FF (international BC).

Many aspects of Regent cruises are first class, but to claim six-star status one very important factor is consistency. Six-star status cannot be rightfully claimed when only certain elements are six-star and others fall below/well-below that threshold. For those for whom value-for-money is not a major consideration, Regent offers an easy, convenient format and usually charges a too-high premium that is not a part of that demographic's consideration. For my wife and I we are value conscious enough that it does enter into the equation. When the itinerary and the pricing are right we will consider/choose Regent, but then [and this is key!] not think about value-for-money any further when onboard and allow ourselves to enjoy the strong-points of a Regent cruise.

Our future cruises do not presently include any Regent cruises, but may in the future. We think that Regent is clearly capable of upping their game - constrained only by a bottom-line calculus and the desire to increase margins pre-IPO - and look forward to the launch of Explorer in 2016 and [hopefully] anticipate that this will lead to fleet wide upgrades at some point.

There is no such thing as six star status. it is a made up status that Regent has given itself just as the Burj Al Arab has given itself seven stars. Pure marketing ploy!

There is no such thing as six star status. it is a made up status that Regent has given itself just as the Burj Al Arab has given itself seven stars. Pure marketing ploy!

Michelin only needs 3 stars for their rating systems and I believe they are still the most trusted guide for either dining or lodging.

Forevertravel,

I could not agree with you more.

Your points make total sense!

I truly believe that some Regent customers that are now sailing other lines would return to Regent if they had an opt out policy for excursions. There are times that we actually appreciate some of the excursions and are happy to have the cost of them included in the cruise fare. When we were in the Middle East, South Africa and even South America, the included excursions were welcome. Our upcoming cruise to Scandinavia has many small ports (mostly in Norway) and there are few options for private excursions. One reason we are sailing on Oceania later this year (Caribbean) is because we do not have excursions included (none of which we are interested in when sailing in the Caribbean). Plus, we are able to stay in a huge suite for 2 weeks at a per diem rate much less than Regent (even after adding the premium alcohol package).

 

P.S. 1982CruzStart: One odd but interesting option when flying to Dubai from Vancouver (assuming this is your home airport?) is to fly to Seattle or San Francisco and get a non-stop flight to Dubai on Emirates (generally accepted by Regent when doing a deviation). As you probably know, you can fly into or out of Canada on British Air without the supplemental fee that applies to flights from the U.S. The flight from Cape Town is horrendously long. We flew business class on British Air and it was manageable. The only downside is that there is a long stopover at Heathrow. You can rent a day room and spend some time there. This is what we plan to do when we return from Cape Town next year.

A huge a suite is that?

A huge a suite is that?

Not sure what you question is.

Not sure what you question is.

I presume she meant, "A huge suite is what?" Owner's, Vista, Oceania?

My latest offer from Regent is exactly what I a talking about in this thread. A 10-day Stockholm to London cruise which arrived in my in-basket today is being touted as a deal for $9,499 per person -- or the equivalent of almost $2,000 per day per cabin. In contrast, my Seabourn cruise is costing $9,999 per person for a 36-day cruise, or about $600 per day, per cabin.

Yes, the Regent fare includes air fare and all excursions. But if I don't want either, why would I want to pay more than 3 times the fare I am paying on Seabourn?

http://www.rssc.com/cruises/VOY140805/summary/default.aspx?int=apg&d=031914&t=emint&cid=itin1

My latest offer from Regent is exactly what I a talking about in this thread. A 10-day Stockholm to London cruise which arrived in my in-basket today is being touted as a deal for $9,499 per person -- or the equivalent of almost $2,000 per day per cabin. In contrast, my Seabourn cruise is costing $9,999 per person for a 36-day cruise, or about $600 per day, per cabin.

 

Yes, the Regent fare includes air fare and all excursions. But if I don't want either, why would I want to pay more than 3 times the fare I am paying on Seabourn?

 

http://www.rssc.com/cruises/VOY140805/summary/default.aspx?int=apg&d=031914&t=emint&cid=itin1

Well, I don't know where you're going for 36 days, but it's probably not the Baltic. So that makes for a pretty meaningless comparison. Apples and oranges and all.

We actually are going on the very cruise you are talking about, and before booking we compared it to a comparable Seabourn cruise. The cheapest balcony cabin on Seabourn was $8,099, to which you must add over $400 in taxes and port charges that Regent includes.

So now the difference is "only" $1000. But we do want to take Regent air, especially with the $699 business class upgrade that is offered. and we will take at least some of the offered excursions. Therefore, the Regent offer is very competitive with Seabourn.

Agree that it is not a good comparison. Firstly, longer itineraries have lower rates per day. Regent has a Dubai to London itinerary - 35 days - at a daily rate for of $600/day and a 73 day itinerary (Beijing to London) at a daily rate of $493. The rate is slightly lower if you opt of hotel and airfare.