Interesting Article

[Cruz-OR]

jcarron44, Well, welcome to Cruise Critic Message Board. The boards can be a little rough sometimes but you've made good points and I respect you for that. I like your sense of diversity and inclusion. Viking might would feel the same way if it was more profitable for them. Other river cruiselines probably have a very similiar plan but have not publicly stated it so obviously. You may need look to hard to find a river cruiseline that meets your criteria at a price you can afford. Again welcome to Cruise Critic and please keep posting on issues you feel strongly about. Your posts are very important.

[Ship's Wake]

Hi Huffy2K-

I agree that Viking has helped build the river cruise segment (and, in the article, the competition agreed to that fact as well).

 

What is really awful, however, is that he calls cruisers that book with others/the competition "crumbs." To quote," We generate demand [for river cruises]. So, of course, what happens now – I’m a little bit annoyed – is that when we are full, someone else will pick up some of the crumbs. But let them. We don’t intend to leave a lot of crumbs for our competitors, but we should leave some.”

 

In addition, in my opinion, this company is taking WAY too much credit for growth in river cruising. It seems to me that until the competition came along, Viking was quite happy offering us old, dated and cramped ships. It's only been recently that they have built new ships (and only because Tor said he was tired of others saying they had the "newest" ships).

 

And, now this guy has some sort of "world domination" goal. The biggest is not always the best and that couldn't be more true (again, in my opinion) with Viking.

 

There's really just so much more to this story that we should all pay attention to ... Some of "my favorite" (sarcasm) quotes from the article are:

“We have no need whatsoever to say we want some younger people onboard. If you have teenagers, then you should go somewhere else. We don’t encourage [inter] generational travel.”

 

“I’m a minimalist. Because there are a lot of women around, we have to have some décor, some style.”

 

"One gets the sense that Viking’s management understands that its product doesn’t need to be best, as long as it’s good enough.”

 

"[Hagen’s] proud that he can carry more passengers on the same size ship [by eliminating amenities] as competitors."

 

"His minimalist décor might make spaces look less cramped, but it also saves money on fixtures."

 

"Asked to explain the differences among the three generations of Longships, he was hard-pressed to come up with any. The ships are “all the same, apart from their lipstick.”

 

"Hagan is first and foremost a financial guy. He believes in using space efficiently, and the Longship designs reflect that. He squared off the bow so that he could get seven additional cabins in “for free.” [Amenities] take up space that could become additional cabins."

 

"Hagen said no one should “discount the possibility” that there will be 100 ships in total before the end of the decade."

 

And he's calling you a "crumb" as well! (just a joke to lighten things up a bit ;)).

 

I see nothing wrong with his approach - he is choosing the direction he and his team think is the best for Viking. You have every right to agree or disagree with it and take your money elsewhere if you feel offended. Fortunately, you have plenty of other choices - I'm sure you'll find another river cruise line that matches your outlook.

 

I read recently that of 50K cabins available for 2013 they have approximately 500 left to sell. Amazing performance.

[sippican]

Really? That's what you got from reading the article? I interpreted it as they market to English speaking markets, the official language of their boats are English so that makes perfect sense to me. Now, if he had said something akin to "we market to white middle aged couples - period" then you (and I) would have a beef.

 

The guy has steered Viking to dominance in a rapidly growing segment of the travel world - he must be doing something right.

 

Really, what I get out of this quote:

"We market to North Americans, Brits, Australians. Nothing else. No Turks, no Brazilians. They may sneak on a person from Hong Kong or whatever, but the language is English, and it's the ambience of these types of people [that we strive for]."

borders on bigotry and prejudice. And what exactly is the ambience of "these types of people"?

[AF-1]

gang, it's all about choices. you can choose to sail with Viking or choose to sail with another line. same holds true with the large cruiselines. you can choose to sail with Royal Caribbean or choose to sail with someone else. if you don't like what the CEO stands for you have the option of sailing elsewhere. same with shopping. If you don't like what Walmart or Starbucks stands for you can buy elsewhere. it's all about choices. I am going on record that this is my opinion and do no intend to offend anyone from this thread.

[jiminyC_fan]

The article doesn't change my opinion. I look forward to my cruise in November. I guess that makes me a crumb but I take no offense. I don't mind taking a cruise where there are no children. There are other options for families. I don't mind not having a spa or gym. I like to be myself and don't require the finer things. Sounds like Viking is a perfect match for us.

[franski]

I read all of the posts - and then went back and followed the link to the article. I see it a little differently than some others here.

 

The CEO is opinionated - and makes no apologies for it. He has a clear vision of the marketing strategy he uses, and it seems to work for him. I doubt I will ever be on a Viking cruise with this gentleman, so will not have to worry about how he presents himself in person. If the staff on the Viking ships were all as boorish/insensitive as he appears to be, then Viking would not have much in the way of repeat business. But - there are many "happy campers" (or perhaps I should call them "happy cruisers") out there who have sailed more than once with Viking - so it does not seem as if his personal approach to the cruising public is emulated by the staff on board.

 

I don't book vacations based on my opinions of the the CEO of the company. So, this article would not have affected my decision to book with Viking - even if I read it before I booked my upcoming cruise. But, my decision to travel with them again will definitely hinge on my experiences on the Aegir.

 

We will be boarding the Aegir 3 weeks from today.... And, I am still excited about that prospect (even after reading the article!!!)

 

Fran

[Cruzin Terri]

I still look at it this way. I would rather give my business to a company who values me as a customer rather than one whose CEO thinks of me and all his other customers as "crumbs".

 

I feel the same way about local businesses and will not return to a business where a shop owner does not value his/her customers. There's a lot of competition out there and I refuse to be treated poorly. If Mr. Hagen wishes to treat his clientele in such a manner and they accept it, they is fine. I will take my business elsewhere. I realize everyone is out to make a profit, but I expect to be treated well when I help them become profitable.

Terri

[royal29]

Yes, a CEO has a right to voice his opinions, as we all do on this board. However, this guy's straightshooting talk reflects racial and gender bias, and a lot of other thoughts I find repugnant. And, we as consumers can make any choices we want. Last summer, we had a fabulous first time river cruise on AMA and booked our second for this September. AMA even has bikes and a small gym on board :). Even IF Viking would be a future consideration for me, no longer. I already sensed Viking was becoming the Carnival of the river cruise market, and this may be happening.

[franski]

What are the chances that some of his comments were taken out of context?

 

People have different reasons for booking a particular cruise - and if you choose NOT to book with Viking based on one article written by an unknown author - that is as good a reason as any, I suppose.

 

He is very upfront about his target audience. No less restrictive than Grand Circle or Vantage that target pretty much exclusively to the US market.... Although they are less vocal about their marketing strategies.

 

I would be less inclined to book with them if they did not treat their staff well - but won't have a sense of that for another few weeks.

 

Fran

[Cruzin Terri]

What are the chances that some of his comments were taken out of context?

 

People have different reasons for booking a particular cruise - and if you choose NOT to book with Viking based on one article written by an unknown author - that is as good a reason as any, I suppose.

 

He is very upfront about his target audience. No less restrictive than Grand Circle or Vantage that target pretty much exclusively to the US market.... Although they are less vocal about their marketing strategies.

 

I would be less inclined to book with them if they did not treat their staff well - but won't have a sense of that for another few weeks.

 

Fran

 

Travel Weekly is a publication of the Travel Industry. Somehow I got on their mailing list and receive their newsletter.

As for the "unknown author," here is a little bit about him from ASTA (American Society of Travel Agents). I think he is well respected in the travel industry.

 

Orlando, Sept. 12, 2010 -Arnie Weissmann, Travel Weekly's editor-in-chief and the editorial director for Business Travel News, today received ASTA'sTravel Journalist of the Year Award at a presentation held during THETRADESHOW. The award recognizes a journalist whose outstanding efforts have contributed to the promotion of the travel agent community.

"Arnie exemplifies what it means to be a travel journalist. His dedication to the industry, his passion to uncovering the next big story and his ongoing support of travel agents is the reason he has twice been awarded ASTA's Travel Journalist of the Year award," said Chris Russo, ASTA president and chair.

Weissmann has been involved in virtually every aspect of travel journalism, publishing and media more than 25 years. His writing has won more than 40 national awards, including ASTA's Journalist of the Year recognition in 1996, and he created the industry's first destination information service (Weissmann Travel Reports), authored a best-selling textbook and has served as publisher of critical hotel and destination guides for the travel industry.

Weissmann was also a Web pioneer, creating the first core destination content for America Online and licensing Web content to Apple, Time, Inc, CNN and Marriott International, among others. Weissmann Travel Reports was sold to Reed Elsevier in 1996, whereupon he took responsibility for Star Service (critical hotel and cruise reviews), Official Hotel Guide Worldwide and a dozen OAG-branded publications in the UK. In 1999, he took on the role of senior advisor for business development with RTG's successor company, Northstar Travel Media.

In October 2001, he was appointed editor-in-chief of Travel Weekly, the primary source of news, research, analysis and opinion in for the U.S. travel community. In March 2010, he was also given responsibility for Business Travel News, with the title Editorial Director. Weissmann's comments have appeared on NBC, CNN, BBC and NPR, and he is often quoted in newspapers, including the Wall Street Journal and USA Today. He sits on many advisory boards, including, the UN Foundation's Steering Committee for the Partnership for Global Sustainable Tourism Criteria, ForbesTraveler.com, Futurebrand and Marquis' Who's Who, and has been a guest lecturer at Cornell University School of Hotel Administration

ABOUT ASTA

The mission of the American Society of Travel Agents (ASTA) is to facilitate the business of selling travel through effective representation, shared knowledge and the enhancement of professionalism. ASTA seeks a retail travel marketplace that is profitable and growing and a rewarding field in which to work, invest and do business.

[Huffy2k]

The world just continues to slide deeper and deeper into political correctness hell, and this thread illustrates the point...:eek:

[Ship's Wake]

http://www.travelpulse.com/invasion-of-the-viking-longships.html

 

 

Here's a video interview of the same CEO that offers more context than the Travel Weekly article.

[Ozjohnno]

I've read this thread with great interest and I believe it truly is a snapshot of human traits. As for me I don't care what the CEO of Viking said in his address as I look at many, many things when planning a river cruise. We're in the very early stages of planning our 2014 holiday and I can honestly say that Viking is not being considered because it offers us nothing of what we want in a river cruise. We don't want to be a part of 200 other cruisers - it's like being with a mob of sheep; We don't want to have to allocate extra money on what we've already paid up front to "optional tours", gratuities or any any other extra that's not included in the initial price. Viking suits many but not us and our preference for another river cruise company is not based on what the CEO said but on what Viking doesn't offer.

[orchestrapal]

Interesting. This guy runs a MASS market line on which he wants a luxury line clientele. Is he for real? We'll never find out since we'll never get on one of his ships.;)

[franski]

Travel Weekly is a publication of the Travel Industry. Somehow I got on their mailing list and receive their newsletter.

As for the "unknown author," here is a little bit about him from ASTA (American Society of Travel Agents). I think he is well respected in the travel industry.

 

Well known perhaps in a niche market. Recognized by his peers in that same market.

 

Again - people will book - or not - for their own reasons.

 

Thanks for posting the original link. It seems as if some people will be taking that into account when planning their next cruise.

 

Fran

[Cruzin Terri]

I've read this thread with great interest and I believe it truly is a snapshot of human traits. As for me I don't care what the CEO of Viking said in his address as I look at many, many things when planning a river cruise. We're in the very early stages of planning our 2014 holiday and I can honestly say that Viking is not being considered because it offers us nothing of what we want in a river cruise. We don't want to be a part of 200 other cruisers - it's like being with a mob of sheep; We don't want to have to allocate extra money on what we've already paid up front to "optional tours", gratuities or any any other extra that's not included in the initial price. Viking suits many but not us and our preference for another river cruise company is not based on what the CEO said but on what Viking doesn't offer.

 

Interesting. This guy runs a MASS market line on which he wants a luxury line clientele. Is he for real? We'll never find out since we'll never get on one of his ships.;)

 

I agree with both of you. We did a lot of research prior to booking our river cruise with Tauck. We found that Viking's lower price was non-inclusive and there was a lot of "nickel and diming" after one boarded the ship. I have some dietary restrictions and found that Tauck was the only line that could guarantee they would meet those needs. In researching the included tours, again Tauck stood out above the rest--not only by being all-inclusive, but also in the quality of the tours. Tauck also offered transfers whether or not you booked air with them. We are arriving in Budapest by train and they are meeting us at the station at no extra cost. All gratuities are included in the initial price and no options are sold on board.

In the unlikely event we have to cancel we will be refunded in cash, not a voucher. I have read horror stories of people who have tried to get refunds from Viking's insurance after having to cancel because of illness.

 

When we go on an Ocean Cruise, it is not Carnival. I am getting the impression that Viking is the Carnival of the River Cruise industry.

 

These were the driving factors in making our decision.

 

Some of you may say that you can do without the extras, and that is fine, I like them and I am willing to pay for them. I am also giving my business to a company that appreciates their clientele and knows how to go the extra mile to make them happy.

Terri

[MaxBuck]

I have to say I'm a bit confused by the responses of some folks here to the Viking CEO's comments. Would I want to share a glass of wine with the guy? Probably not, but that's immaterial to the question of whether I'd want to take a trip on his boats. My decision there would be based entirely on the actual travel experience on Viking.

 

We haven't traveled on Viking, and likely won't because Uniworld so far meets our needs and wants. But if Viking came up with a great itinerary not offered by Uniworld I'd take it in a minute. No indications that Torsten Hagen clubs baby seals, handles hazardous wastes improperly or abuses his staff. So what's the problem?

[id est]

... booking our river cruise with Tauck. We found that Viking's lower price was non-inclusive and there was a lot of "nickel and diming" after one boarded the ship. I have some dietary restrictions and found that Tauck was the only line that could guarantee they would meet those needs. In researching the included tours, again Tauck stood out above the rest--not only by being all-inclusive, but also in the quality of the tours. Tauck also offered transfers whether or not you booked air with them. We are arriving in Budapest by train and they are meeting us at the station at no extra cost. All gratuities are included in the initial price and no options are sold on board....

There is one minor thing though: Tauck usually charges 2-3 times more than Viking for the same itinerary :)

[Cruz-OR]

MaxBuck, Seems Torsten Hagen has created so much demand for his cruises that he can't take all the bookings with his fleet of boats. He has created an "excess demand" and made the unpardonable sin of calling the part he can't fill with his boats "crumbs". Instead of "crumbs" he should have called the excess demand "gold nuggets". "Gold nuggets" that he couldn't carry from the mine because he was already carrying all the gold he could physically carry. A refernce to "gold nuggets" might not stir up such bad feelings and in a business sense allude to the money his compnay is missing out on.

[Ozjohnno]

There is one minor thing though: Tauck usually charges 2-3 times more than Viking for the same itinerary :)

 

It's always the same argument everytime Tauck is mentioned - they're so expensive. Well I'm sorry but once again you are wrong. Please look at these prices and show me where Tauck is 2-3 times more expensive.

 

Viking "Portraits of Southern France" 8 days - $5295.AU

Tauck "French Waterways" 10days - $5840.AU

 

These are almost Apples for Apples cruises and Tauck's is all-inclusive including all on-board alcohol 24/7.

 

I know these prices to be true because I'm in the early stages of planning our 2014 trip. If you want to sail with Viking then do so but please don't try and show they are better than Tauck et al because they are cheaper when that is one argument that is just not sustainable.

[Cruzin Terri]

It's always the same argument everytime Tauck is mentioned - they're so expensive. Well I'm sorry but once again you are wrong. Please look at these prices and show me where Tauck is 2-3 times more expensive.

 

Viking "Portraits of Southern France" 8 days - $5295.AU

Tauck "French Waterways" 10days - $5840.AU

 

These are almost Apples for Apples cruises and Tauck's is all-inclusive including all on-board alcohol 24/7.

 

I know these prices to be true because I'm in the early stages of planning our 2014 trip. If you want to sail with Viking then do so but please don't try and show they are better than Tauck et al because they are cheaper when that is one argument that is just not sustainable.

 

You beat me to the punch. I was just sitting here comparing two cruises to see the difference. Tauck is far from 2-3 times more.

 

Tauck is a few hundred more, but you get so much more. No one is telling you not to go with Viking, but when you count in all the extras you get, the price will be the same as Tauck, if not more, and you will get less.

Terri

[royal29]

I agree with both of you. We did a lot of research prior to booking our river cruise with Tauck. We found that Viking's lower price was non-inclusive and there was a lot of "nickel and diming" after one boarded the ship. I have some dietary restrictions and found that Tauck was the only line that could guarantee they would meet those needs. In researching the included tours, again Tauck stood out above the rest--not only by being all-inclusive, but also in the quality of the tours. Tauck also offered transfers whether or not you booked air with them. We are arriving in Budapest by train and they are meeting us at the station at no extra cost. All gratuities are included in the initial price and no options are sold on board.

In the unlikely event we have to cancel we will be refunded in cash, not a voucher. I have read horror stories of people who have tried to get refunds from Viking's insurance after having to cancel because of illness.

 

When we go on an Ocean Cruise, it is not Carnival. I am getting the impression that Viking is the Carnival of the River Cruise industry.

 

These were the driving factors in making our decision.

 

Some of you may say that you can do without the extras, and that is fine, I like them and I am willing to pay for them. I am also giving my business to a company that appreciates their clientele and knows how to go the extra mile to make them happy.

Terri

 

Tbrein: I agee with you completely and in an earlier post made the same reference to Carnival. Also, many of you have said these comments should not impact your decision about a Viking cruise. However, there is a matter of principle. For years, we patronized a local restaurant and one night the owner was totally rude to my party of eight people, and gave no apology. Well, we no longer go there. Do we miss the food? Yes. Is the restaurant hurting? Unlikely. BUT -- no way will we spend any of our hard earned dollars there. Plenty of good restaurants around. Similarly, PLENTY of outstanding river cruise lines. Viking, based on the perspectives of this CEO and other reports I've read, is not one of them. Thankfully, we discovered AMA last year and will be cruising with them again this year.

[id est]

It's always the same argument everytime Tauck is mentioned - they're so expensive. Well I'm sorry but once again you are wrong. Please look at these prices and show me where Tauck is 2-3 times more expensive.

Viking "Portraits of Southern France" 8 days - $5295.AU

Tauck "French Waterways" 10days - $5840.AU

Not sure maybe there is a different pricing for aussies. Just checked Tauck website: "French Waterways" 10 days starts from $4590 US pp. Viking - from $1856 pp. So 2.47 times more. Not to mention Viking air which is usually a good deal almost any time of year.

[Ozjohnno]

Not sure maybe there is a different pricing for aussies. Just checked Tauck website: "French Waterways" 10days starts from $4590 US. Viking - from $1856. So 2.47 times more. Not to mention Viking air which is usually a good deal almost any time of year.

 

Given the strength of the Aussie Dollar I doubt there are special deals for Aussies. Please check out this Viking site ...

 

http://www.vikingrivercruises.com.au/rivercruises/europe-south-france-rhone-2014/datesprices.aspx

 

and then compare cabins with cabins and you'll see what I saw plus the Tauck is 10 days and the Viking cruise 8. Then add in all the extras you have to pay to get the equivalent of a Tauck cruise including transfers even if you don't use Tauck air bookings and then show me where you make a huge saving cruising with Viking. Again I have no problem with whatever river cruise company people choose but I am becoming a bit sick and tired of reading that Tauck is just so expensive when here in Australia they are not.

 

Rod

[Nippy Sweetie]

Having read about this Hagen guy I`m all the more glad that we`re booked with Viking. Its great to hear about someone who is really in charge (owns 95% of the business) and has put his money where his mouth is. I suppose a key aspect not considered by posters so far is that he`s most likely not a native English speaker. I`m sure his English is excellent but the subtle nuances may well be missing. Also people from Northern Europe (and I count myself as one) tend to be more direct in what they say. He calls a spade a spade and you know exactly where you are with him it would seem. Fine by me. I`d much prefer that to a lot of the flowery talking up of alternative products.