with recent thread re: alternatives to HAL : any HAL cruisers try MSC?

Recent thread stating MSC is coming out with more ships - have any HAL cruisers tried MSC? specifically in Europe or Asia?

would love to hear thoughts and opinions..... always open for new adventure!

Not on our list. My perception is lots of smokers and announcements in five languages.

Our list would include azamara, Viking ocean and possibly Oceania.

Read the reviews of the MSC ships. Reading them sure doesn't make me want to try MSC. Ever.

Friends of ours, confirmed Celebrity cruisers, recently tried MSC and said Never Again!

uncontrolled children, noisy, and mediocre food.

Friends of ours, confirmed Celebrity cruisers, recently tried MSC and said Never Again!

uncontrolled children, noisy, and mediocre food.

Thank you -- I had heard the same reports.

On the other hand, aboard the Zaandam this January, docked in Buenos Aires, friends and I were having breakfast in the Lido Restaurant and our conversation turned to the MSC Orchestra which was docked within our sight. None of us have sailed on MSC and we wondered about what doing so might be like. A woman at an adjoining table joined our conversation. Her family had sailed on MSC and they enjoyed all aspects of their cruise. We asked: "Would you sail them again?" Her answer was "Yes".

Another case of "different strokes for different folks"?

MY TA tried MSC in the Caribbean. She was not impressed. Said the food needed a lot of improvement for one thing.

So no, I have no desire to try them at this point in time.

I think that I read an interview with the CEO of MSC. Maybe it was in Cruise Industry News. He acknowledged that MSC's meeting the expectations of North American cruise guests has involved a learning curve. And, they are still learning.

We have just booked our first HAL cruise so I cannot compare to HAL but I can compare MSC to Celebrity and confirm most of what has been said. My sister and Daughter (then in college) went on a spring break Caribbean cruise in 2009. The food was definitely an issue then. The service in the MDR was appalling - I don't think they ever got everyone's order correct at a table for eight. The announcements are in 5 languages - just like Costa - and many staff do not even pretend to speak English. As to be expected on a spring break cruise, there were kids everywhere and the pool decks were packed. Also, because of the European clientele there were, in addition to lots of smokers, :confused:topless sunbathers and lots of guys in speedos who should not be wearing speedos.:eek: We coped but all that flesh bouncing around could be an issue for some.

That said, I would go on MSC again and actually considered several MSC cruises before selecting the upcoming HAL cruise. We focus on itinerary and price and MSC often has an interesting option and discounts, especially if you have more than two in a cabin. We enjoyed the pasta that was always available at lunch and they had an incredible steam room available to all. It is a definite step down from Celebrity (which we really like) but it depends on what is important to you on your cruise.

With MSC, you need to be comparing apples to apples. If you're in the Yatch Club, you'll likely find the experience much more similar to HAL quality than you would if you were sailing in a regular cabin. While we had an enjoyable experience on the MSC Meraviglia to the Med in January, we opted to cancel another sailing on her to Norway and chose the Koningsdam instead. We found the food to be boring, except and dinner, and very limited dining options during the day. Two weeks without variety--the buffet had nearly the same offerings every day--would get old fast. Even with just a 7 day sailing with only one sea day, we could not imagine spending two weeks on her with six sea days.

We didn't find the announcements to be problematic or smoking within the ship to be a problem. In fact, they follow the same smoking policies as much cruise lines. Our biggest problem was smoking on the balconies. While it is against the posted rules, it's something that the cruise line does not enforce nor do they fine passengers for smoking in their rooms.

Wet tried it once, that was enough. Never again.

That company could do nothing right.

This winter we were on Konigsdam for 11 nights followed by MSC Seaside for 7 nights.

MSC had much better entertainment - Production shows every night, including acrobats, opera, etc.

Food was about the same, I would rate MSC MDR food and service as slightly better.

Seaside has over 4000 passengers and many more of them were international. Yes, announcements were in 6 languages, but it wasn’t a concern.

Konigsdam had very few children, average age must have been 70+. Seaside had many children on board (Don’t they need to be in school?)

Seaside had many areas that were off-limits to people not in Yacht Club.

Seaside had many more venues to appeal to children and young asults - four water slides, a water play area.

Konigsdam has Lincoln Center Stage, with classical music every night.

Overall, Konigsdam will appeal to more mature people. Seaside will appeal to children and young adults.

"Learning curve", huh?

Well, all I can say is, when it comes to food, they must be mighty slow learners! ;p

My only cruise w MSC was a partial Panama Canal transit in April 2005. While it had various things to recommend it-- for example, the itinerary was good, the service was fine, and the entertainment creative in order to overcome the multi-language barrier-- it remains the only cruise line I've ever tried with food I found consistently disappointing. (That came as a real shock, not only because the ownership was Italian, but because the guy running the line at that time was the same man who'd earlier been in charge of Celebrity when they were making their reputation as having the best dining experience available on any mainstream cruise line.) And thirteen years later, passengers are STILL expressing their disappointment with MSC's food!

As for the line's onboard decor, from pictures I've seen, that has only gotten weirder and more sterile over the years.

"Learning curve", huh?

 

Well, all I can say is, when it comes to food, they must be mighty slow learners! ;p

 

My only cruise w MSC was a partial Panama Canal transit in April 2005. While it had various things to recommend it-- for example, the itinerary was good, the service was fine, and the entertainment creative in order to overcome the multi-language barrier-- it remains the only cruise line I've ever tried with food I found consistently disappointing. (That came as a real shock, not only because the ownership was Italian, but because the guy running the line at that time was the same man who'd earlier been in charge of Celebrity when they were making their reputation as having the best dining experience available on any mainstream cruise line.) And thirteen years later, passengers are STILL expressing their disappointment with MSC's food!

 

As for the line's onboard decor, from pictures I've seen, that has only gotten weirder and more sterile over the years.

Your post is a great example of what is a problem on CC (and other blogs). You are judging MSC based on a cruise you took 13 years ago! That line has undergone huge changes in that time...as has most other cruise lines. In the cruise industry, even 2 years is a lifetime. HAL is not even a shadow of what it was 13 years ago and that applies to most cruise lines. 13 years ago we thought that Celebrity was an amazing product in terms of food (far better than anything on HAL) entertainment, service, and ships. But now, Celebrity has been a victim of many cuts (we call it a death by a thousand cut-backs) and a relatively new CEO (from RCI) that seems to value the bottom line above all else.

So consider that the MSC Yacht Club did not even exist 13 years ago... and consider that 10 of their ships did not even exist 13 years ago! Now consider that HAL has only added 4 new ships in the past 13 years. MSC will be adding about another 10 new ships in the next few years while HAL will likely add 1.

The cruise industry is truly dynamic with changes happening so fast....that it becomes very difficult to keep up with the trends. As very active cruisers (often over 100 days a year) we struggle to keep up with the changes and trends in the industry. It is a daunting task...but also a lot of fun. One line that we loved 13 years ago we will not even cruise today. And 13 years ago we would not have considered MSC (for some of the reasons you cited) but today.....we are intrigued by that line.. 13 years ago there was not even Viking Ocean Cruises...but today it has become a major player with 6 ships. Consider that Cruise Critic has rated Viking as the Number 1 small- medium ship cruise line in the world. And Travel and Leisure has rated them the Number 1 cruise line in the 600 - 2199 guests category (the same category that has HAL). Yes this line did not exist 13 years ago.

In another few years what will you have? If HAL continues to survive, most of their ships will be aging and without many of the amenities expected on cruise ships. Viking Ocean Cruises will likely have a few more vessels. MSC will have at least 20 ships (almost all relatively new) of which 4 will be smaller ships. The new Virgin Cruise Line will likely have several ships...and we have no clue as to how they will stack up against the competition (although Richard Branson's history would lead many to predict that they will be among the best). . Celebrity will have 5 brand new "Edge Class" ships (about 2900 passenger) with everything state of the art and all with a high percentage of balcony cabins. Princess will be adding 3 more "Royal Class" ships to the three that already exist

My point is that if you haven't been on a cruise line in the past 2-3 years...your knowledge is not even relevant to what exists today. And personally, we have issues rating ships/lines we haven't experienced in the past 1-2 years. It is a very exciting time in the cruise industry with so many changes and new builds. Some HAL fans (and fans of other lines) love to live in the past...but often ignore the present. Times are changing and the big question for the suits in Seattle is....are they going to try and compete.

Like many HAL fans we are seniors....but we do try hard to keep current. We view the future of cruising as very exciting but wonder if HAL will still be living in the distant past.

I do understand that this type of post will get me "flamed" by some long-tme HAL fans (and we are also in that category) who do not want to acknowledge that things change. HAL loves to talk about the long history of the line...but there is not a lot of talk about the long future.

Hank

Well said Hank!

I have not yet sailed MSC, but I have several friends who have sailed them in recent years. The feedback is pretty consistent with this thread. Those who sailed MSC in Europe hated it, but those who sailed MSC out of Miami loved it.

Make it stop! :loudcry:

Well my wife and I sailed out of Venice on MSC in 2016 and absolutely loved the ports of call which included Italy, Greece and Croatia. Croatia was great as was Santorini and Mykonos. As far as the ship itself was concerned, we had no real problem with the food although the nightly entertainment was kind of lacking. We were part of a group of about 40 people so we all made our own fun. My 2 cents.

Paul

My wife, SIL, Mom and I have been on MSC Divina 10/14 and Orchestra 4/09 in Caribbean and enjoyed both. Best shows at sea we thought and beautiful ships. Will do MSC again and eager to try the Seaside.

Sent from my iPad using Forums

There has been discussion about the premium experience provided by the "ship within a ship" concept such as MSC Yacht Club and NCl Haven. When I priced these out, they seem comparable to Regent, Seabourn and Crystal. So, if someone wants an "upscale" experience, why would not choose the latter cruise lines which are much more exclusive than the 4,000+ guest behemoths like NCL and MSC? I realize the latter will provide better entertainment but in all other categories it seems the luxury lines win hands down. Of course, its a matter of personal choice.

There has been discussion about the premium experience provided by the "ship within a ship" concept such as MSC Yacht Club and NCl Haven. When I priced these out, they seem comparable to Regent, Seabourn and Crystal. So, if someone wants an "upscale" experience, why would not choose the latter cruise lines which are much more exclusive than the 4,000+ guest behemoths like NCL and MSC? I realize the latter will provide better entertainment but in all other categories it seems the luxury lines win hands down. Of course, its a matter of personal choice.

I ask the same questions. Showing up in a port with 4000 plus people is not my idea of a good travel experience. Let alone being in port with a few more ships just like that.

There has been discussion about the premium experience provided by the "ship within a ship" concept such as MSC Yacht Club and NCl Haven. When I priced these out, they seem comparable to Regent, Seabourn and Crystal. So, if someone wants an "upscale" experience, why would not choose the latter cruise lines which are much more exclusive than the 4,000+ guest behemoths like NCL and MSC? I realize the latter will provide better entertainment but in all other categories it seems the luxury lines win hands down. Of course, its a matter of personal choice.

When we looked at NCL's Haven suites we also thought they were somewhat overpriced. But we have an MSC Yacht Club Booking (21 days) where our cost per day is less than half the price of the luxury lines (i.e. Regent, Seabourn, etc). Not sure how the Yacht Club will stack-up against the more expensive ultra luxury line....but we shall find out by the end of this year :). But when compared to the pricing on many HAL cruises, we are paying no more for the Yacht Club then a balcony cabin on most HAL ships. And with the Yacht Club deal we essentially have an all-inclusive cruise (we will have trouble using all our OBCs) which includes a very premium beverage package, pre paid gratuities, and a generous OBC.

Hank

Hlitner, to be clear, I'm not judging today's MSC by my 2005 cruise-- I'm merely mentioning that even in looking at recent reviews, the food STILL seems to be a major source of disappointment and complaint.

My comment on the way their public rooms are decorated is a reflection of my taste, as would be the case for any individual's comment on that score-- but again, I'm going by pictures of their latest vessels.

That said, I don't disagree with the great majority of what you said in your post. Cruise lines seem to be sorting themselves into two groups: those like Viking, who have a particular vision of what it takes to "do it right", or "do it the way we think it should be done", or "do it the way things were done before the age of extreme discounting and the cutbacks that inevitably led to." Then they charge what they have to charge to cover the cost of doing it their way, plus make a little profit-- even if the resulting fares are two or three times as high as HAL or Princess might charge. There are always those who will shell out a lot more for that quality without the compromises.

And then there's the mainstream lines-- trying to cater to a bargain-hungry public, a vastly larger demographic than those who could afford to cruise in, say, 1985. But of course, when you're charging the same amount per-day in 2018 that you did in 1985, when a dollar went three times as far, you can't supply the same product! Large, fuel-efficient, identically-designed ships, crewing from low-wage countries, and corporate consolidation, have yielded tremendous economies of scale-- but even all those things put together can't make up the difference in revenue. So goodies and perks get scaled back, even on a line that most appeals to tradition.

Still, it's a great value vacation-- even when passengers have to claw back some of those perks by paying extra for them. As long as you know what to expect, that shouldn't be a deal-breaker. I've noticed the slippage in standards since I took my first cruise in 2001, but I still love the experience-- and like you, I'm curious to see what newcomers like Branson may bring to the game.

I cruised Fantastica in the Mediterranean and hated it. MSC joined Costa on my list of never agains.

Then they rebranded for American service with permanently assigned ships to the Caribbean so I reconsidered my boycott. I tried Divina and loved it! Everything was excellent.

I just returned from Seaside. Wow. MSC has joined the big leagues in the US. Although they’re on the level of RCI and NCL with entertainment, the service and food - dare I say it - was better than my last couple HAL cruises.

I cruised Fantastica in the Mediterranean and hated it. MSC joined Costa on my list of never agains.

 

Then they rebranded for American service with permanently assigned ships to the Caribbean so I reconsidered my boycott. I tried Divina and loved it! Everything was excellent.

 

I just returned from Seaside. Wow. MSC has joined the big leagues in the US. Although they’re on the level of RCI and NCL with entertainment, the service and food - dare I say it - was better than my last couple HAL cruises.

I feel the same way. DW and I have been jumping around, but we have 5 or 6 current bookings with MSC, and 2 with Oceania. We have a couple with Royal in there as well, but not to the extent of MSC. To be honest, Holland America hasn't REALLY impressed me in quite a while. The last cruise we took on the Eurodam was definitely a step in the correct direction though. We have had issues on multiple sailings within a very short time period, and that is very difficult for me to overlook. And while I know that no cruise line is perfect, we have had more issues with HAL than NCL, Oceania, RCI, and MSC combined.

When DW and I take 4 or 5 cruises a year, that is not insignificant. We will likely continue booking with other cruise lines until we can count on a good experience and a good product.