Regent going in the wrong direction

[OrpingtonT]

I took my first ever cruise on Regent (RSS Mariner) in May 2016 and have cruised many times on Mariner & Voyager since. Never tried Navigator but did try Seabourn on one occasion. Given that background I have to vehemently disagree with those who feel that Regent has gone downhill. IMO it has improved steadily in the total product over that time.

 

Food, always a contentious issue, is better in Compass Rose and though I liked Latitudes, Prime7 is held generally in higher regard. Signatures has held steady, if you like classic French cooking. The move from inclusive wines only at dinner to all-inclusive alcohol has, as others have said, filled the bars and opened up socialising. I know from talking with friends that included tours is a big selling point and passengers can and do turn to Regent because of them. I accept that it can be argued that they represent a downturn for some in the Regent experience.

 

The attitude of the staff has always been positive for me and their welcome has always been sincere. No diminution there.

 

So to stick to the thread, Regent is going in the right direction from the opinion of this old codger anyway.

[fizzy]

Could those who constantly reference "country club atmosphere" versus "Carnival atmosphere", please be more specific? Would these be private or public country clubs? There is apparently a huge difference and you might just be surprised. This always takes on such a snobby tone and may be bad for PCH marketing.

[tallship]

I took my first ever cruise on Regent (RSS Mariner) in May 2016 and have cruised many times on Mariner & Voyager since. Never tried Navigator but did try Seabourn on one occasion. Given that background I have to vehemently disagree with those who feel that Regent has gone downhill. IMO it has improved steadily in the total product over that time.

 

Food, always a contentious issue, is better in Compass Rose and though I liked Latitudes, Prime7 is held generally in higher regard. Signatures has held steady, if you like classic French cooking. The move from inclusive wines only at dinner to all-inclusive alcohol has, as others have said, filled the bars and opened up socialising. I know from talking with friends that included tours is a big selling point and passengers can and do turn to Regent because of them. I accept that it can be argued that they represent a downturn for some in the Regent experience.

 

The attitude of the staff has always been positive for me and their welcome has always been sincere. No diminution there.

 

So to stick to the thread, Regent is going in the right direction from the opinion of this old codger anyway.

 

Tom, I respectfully disagree. What keeps us coming back are many of the things you mention, staff attitude, etc. but while we notice the bars to be fuller we also notice many more folks inebriated mid-day, etc as well. This does impact the atmosphere. It is a "good" deal for those who drink a lot.

 

I still like the laid back nature of Regent (not having to sign for things) but so many of my friends who we have sailed with us tell me how superior the food is on Oceania and yes, Crystal...I have to believe them as we dine with these folks back here at home and we like and share their tastes.

 

Regent is simply not "consistently" luxury and the dilemma is that as prices have increased, so have our expectations.

 

The two "not so great" cruises we did on Navigator were at a cost of $25K in total for 2 persons. If I were to purchase a car and it was a "lemon", I would have recourse.....on a cruise, not so much.

[Travelcat2]

Excursions on Regent is an interesting topic. BTW, I find the excursions now the same as in previous years except that they are packed with people -- if not on one bus, then on 6 buses converging on the same location (including restrooms).

 

This is one area where I understand the direction but am not fond of it. First and foremost, Regent has to make money and included excursions is bringing new passengers. However, some "newbies" we have spoken with are disappointed in Regent because they had not done their homework (or, their TA did not explain the Regent atmosphere to them). As we know, some people travel with their families and want to see lots of activities going on all the time. Some travelers are young and simply want to party and have a great time until the early hours of the morning. Regent does not offer climbing walls, zip-lines (as I've seen advertised on television for another cruise line) or a lot of late-night partying. So, while included excursions brought them to Regent, they will not necessarily keep them. IMO, the solution is to educate the travel agents that are often onboard receiving tours and attending meetings specifically for TA's.

 

As many know, Beluga caviar was on its way to extinction. The days of freely handing out top shelf caviar on cruise lines is gone (not sure what is served on Seabourn but suspect that it is not top shelf). Regent does provide caviar at the Seven Seas Society party and the Gold and above party and we have never been limited to one spoon. A lesser quality is available every Sunday in both Compass Rose and La Veranda.

 

The stories of food being better on other cruise ships is not necessarily 100% true. We have sailed two other cruise lines....... some of the food was better - some definitely not -- depended upon the dining venues. As with everything, Regent customers have a choice. Perhaps customers that are disenchanted with Regent (for reasons other than money) should try sailing on another cruise line. Either you'll love it and switch or not (or, as we do, sail on Regent 90% of the time and take cruises on other lines when the itinerary suits us).

 

In any case, it is interesting to read different perceptions of the direction Regent is going.

[Responder]

 

In any case, it is interesting to read different perceptions of the direction Regent is going.

 

Yeah, but how many times are the same things being said over and over and over by the same people?

[JPR]

Wow, you'd think we criticized a poster's child! The only way to evaluate whether "Regent is slipping" is to compare its performance to that of the competition.

 

I believe all of us who posted are experienced Regent cruisers who are not posting because they want to "bash" Regent but because we care about the cruise line. I'm Platinum level too; why would I want to attack Regent gratuitously? I would prefer to cruise Regent...but not if I can get a superior experience for the same or a lower cost on another cruise line.

 

We would hope that Regent takes heed. You cannot continue to charge super-premium prices for a very good but not extraordinary product. That is the danger of "all-inclusive" pricing: the inevitable temptation to keep cutting costs for easy increased profits.

 

Conde Nast Traveler's current edition has a lead article on the return of separate luxury classes in cruise ships. Even Regent has increasing perks for repeat and higher suite passengers. It is a cycle, of course (and I prefer Regent at its best) but Regent needs to heed it and either reduce prices or up the quality...or both...in order to compete.

Already I'm seeing the larger Oceania ships seel out for 2014 on itineraries like Australia-New Zealand where the Regent ships still have ample availability.

[Travelcat2]

As you know, we have compared Regent to other "luxury" cruise lines for years (Silversea, Seabourn, Crystal in particular). The issue now is the constant comparing of sister ships - one of which is luxury all-inclusive and the other which is not. IMO, it does not help Regent, Oceania or the parent company to be putting the other cruise line down. Comparisons have been done repeatedly of Oceania and Regent. That is why I suggested a "sticky" so anyone can go to it at any time and look at what has been posted.

 

I'm not "picking" on Oceania -- a couple of years ago it was difficult to compare Crystal with Regent because it was not inclusive and had only set seating.

 

In terms of cutting cost...... I saw that a few years ago but not recently. In fact, when the Mariner ran out of cucumbers and was not near any port where they could get them, Regent headquarters sent a plane from Europe to deliver the cucumbers. This is cost cutting?

 

I really enjoyed reading your post........ until the last line. There are certainly reasons why one ship is full and the other isn't. The last I heard, both cruise lines were equally profitable -- that is what matters in the long run.

 

While still off-topic, I found your comment about luxury cruise lines becoming "separate" classes quite upsetting. But, that is a topic for another day:-)

 

P.S. Not sure I answered your question. When discussing food, service and like items, why does one have to compare to another cruise line? Good food is good food. If Regent ships have poor Italian food (which I don't think they do), I would specify that.... but would not ask for Regent's Italian food to be prepared like Silversea prepares it.

[Uncle D]

We are platinum with Regent and also noticed a decline in the past several years, as noted by other posts ITT. The most noted differences were in wine selections and service levels (including butlers) deteriorating.

Over the past year we have not cruised Regent but have sailed Crystal (too much smoking in main lobby area in what we referred to as Crystal Cough lounge. We have been on 2 Crystal cruises and got sick on both. We are healthy and in our 50's.), Silversea (very nice cruise, but just ok), and finally Oceania Riviera (gorgeous ship and suite, but the entertainment was the worst on any ship we cruised and signing for drinks was not for us).

It made us realize, no cruise line is perfect for everyone. Perspective sometimes can only be realized when you branch out. I do like the "feeling" on Regent. It has a country club feeling that we like, especially since we belong to several private clubs. Even though our recent experiences were not up to the high level of 6 or 7 years ago, it is still the best fit for us. We are booking again on Regent and looking forward to returning home.

[Travelcat2]

We are platinum with Regent and also noticed a decline in the past several years, as noted by other posts ITT. The most noted differences were in wine selections and service levels (including butlers) deteriorating.

Over the past year we have not cruised Regent but have sailed Crystal (too much smoking in main lobby area in what we referred to as Crystal Cough lounge. We have been on 2 Crystal cruises and got sick on both. We are healthy and in our 50's.), Silversea (very nice cruise, but just ok), and finally Oceania Riviera (gorgeous ship and suite, but the entertainment was the worst on any ship we cruised and signing for drinks was not for us).

It made us realize, no cruise line is perfect for everyone. Perspective sometimes can only be realized when you branch out. I do like the "feeling" on Regent. It has a country club feeling that we like, especially since we belong to several private clubs. Even though our recent experiences were not up to the high level of 6 or 7 years ago, it is still the best fit for us. We are booking again on Regent and looking forward to returning home.

 

You said it much better than I did:-) Unfortunately, one can not experience the "feeling" without actually being on the ships.

[funny26]

The last I heard, both cruise lines were equally profitable -- that is what matters in the long run.

 

 

Not sure where you got your information that both Oceania and Regent were equally profitable?? Am providing links to the last two Regent Financial Statements that are available on the Regent Web site and from what I can see, Regent has lost money on Operations the last two quarters. Can't provide the same for Oceania as cannot find their Financial Statements on their site. You can find the loss on page 6 of both pdf's.

 

http://www.rssc.com/media/hostedfiles/investors/Financial-2013-Q1-.pdf

 

http://www.rssc.com/media/hostedfiles/investors/PressRelease-2012-Q4.pdf

 

If I am misreading this data, am sure someone will point that out Perhaps there is a reason for this loss. Am not Regent bashing, simply providing data from Regent that is in the public domain.

[newlondon]

Wow Funny26, Please learn to read a p&l. I have a great deal of trouble with your comments about Regent but your inability to see that on an operating basis Rssc is quite profitable leads me to say "cool it"

TC you are way off base in your die hard defense of all things Regent, at least imo.

The food is not what it was 4 years ago. The service depends on who you get. Should be consistent.

[funny26]

OK newlondon, I did say that I wasn't sure and was open to someone who could clarify the financials. I looked at page 6 and for the 4th quarter of 2012 stated that the net loss was ($14.5)M and for the first quarter of 2013 the net loss shows as ($5.0)M. The title of the page is CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME (LOSS). What does this mean if not that there were losses in the last quarter of 2012 and the first quarter of 2013??

 

What is it that I am missing?? Would really like to know what I am misreading and what the true profits are.

 

Thanks,

[Travelcat2]

Cannot reveal my source but I should have said that they earn close to the same amount of money. What you are reading is what you are reading..... my source is impeccable.

 

Most importantly, I am gone for 2 hours - come back and instead of posting about the topic, posters would rather argue with me. Well, argue with yourselves as I am interested in the thread rather than debating.

 

OrpingtonT: Somehow I missed your post earlier. Well said and I completely agree.

[newlondon]

What you are missing is the difference between operating profits and losses created by write offs or debt used for acquisitions. If you look closely you will see that operating profit was up q v q both years and quite substantially in q1 2013. This is imo a crucial financial statistic and if different would make me very suspicious of RSSC strategy.

[HanaleiSailor]

Funny,

 

To answer your inquiry more directly, what you should pay most attention to on a P&L, at least in my experience as a small business person, is the Operating Income, found on page 6 in the quarterly report linked above, and EBITDA, found on page nine above. Both of these numbers show significant positive growth.

 

EBITDA is important because EBITDA is essentially net income with interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization added back to it, and can be used to analyze and compare profitability between companies and industries because it eliminates the effects of financing and accounting decisions.

 

Basically, EBITDA puts things that are basically "expenses on paper," but not expenses paid with cash, back into the net income for the business. Most common of these are depreciation and amortization expenses.

 

 

Hope this helps.

 

Aloha from Hanalei,

 

Mark

[HanaleiSailor]

Aloha TC:

 

You write: Cannot reveal my source but I should have said that they earn close to the same amount of money. What you are reading is what you are reading..... my source is impeccable.

 

By this, I hope that you are not implying that the financials posted by Regent on their site are inaccurate.

 

Aloha,

 

Mark

[funny26]

Thanks for the explanation newlondon, I looked back at the documents and see what you are saying. On an operating basis, Regent made money, it was the non-operating costs that net them out at a loss. Isn't it important that the operating profit exceeds the non-operating costs and for the company to show a net profit?? Seems like if a company is losing money even though they are profitable on an operating basis, eventually there will be issues if they can't increase operating profits and decrease non operating costs since on a total basis they will be losing money?? By the way, appears that the biggest portion of the non-operating costs are interest meaning, I think that Regent is borrowing money which makes sense since they are building a new $450M ship. Not sure how this plays into the profit analysis and hoping that there will be enough operating profits to offset the non-operating costs.

 

And thanks Hanalai Sailor for the further information. Good that operating and EBITDA numbers are improving. I was looking at the bottom line that truly does show a loss although the comments seem to say that isn't a problem, at least at this time.

 

And, TC, I didn't argue with you, simply posted a question and showed the published financial data which on a total basis as newlondon corrected me shows losses with profits on an operating basis.

 

How can a post be off topic if responding to your on topic post regarding profits?? Appears that you can post what you like and it is on topic while others can post on the same subject yet be off topic. Sounds like a double standard.

[Travelcat2]

And, TC, I didn't argue with you, simply posted a question and showed the published financial data which on a total basis as newlondon corrected me shows losses with profits on an operating basis.

 

 

I know that you weren't arguing with me. I did used the word "profit" when I meant earnings (at least I think I mean earnings). Obviously this is not my forte.

 

My frustration was that a simple exchange between you and I brought the "group" onto the thread who will likely spend a while discussing profits, losses, etc. I was simply trying to put the Oceania/Regent topic to bed. I was told that they were both earning around the same $$$. So, admittedly, I put the thread off topic once again.

 

Sorry for the misunderstanding. Now, I'll wait until the financial analysts are done pontificating.:o

[newlondon]

funny26, Please be aware that non-operating losses don't always mean cash out the door. Depreciation as an example is a non-cash charge.

Mark's comments are actually relevant for both small and large companies.

[Lindawphb]

This June I sailed on regent for the first time. Loved it. Yes, the butler was disappointing, but all in all it was a spectacular cruise and enjoyed the country club ambiance. When I read all the banther back to back it reminds me of children arguing. Everyone looks for different things on a cruse. It's like saying who has the best gelato.or which is the best football team. Lets stop the banter and trying to proof your point. It's a no win conversation. Cruise where you are comfortable and stop bashing the competition. Stop acting like kids.

[funny26]

funny26, Please be aware that non-operating losses don't always mean cash out the door. Depreciation as an example is a non-cash charge.

Mark's comments are actually relevant for both small and large companies.

 

Now am more confused by your comments. You say that non-operating losses don't always mean cash out the door however in Regent's case, the majority of the non-operating losses are identified as interest expense and that is money out the door as interest payments and in the last two quarters, interest expense is greater than the operating profits.

 

In the fourth quarter of 2012 depreciation is less than the loss so there was a cash loss in the fourth quarter and in the first quarter of 2013 the depreciation was more than the loss so there was a cash gain. With more borrowing coming on line for the new ship, would expect the interest expenses to increase significantly.

[Lindawphb]

Again. Why does this all matter.

[Travelcat2]

Again. Why does this all matter.

 

Not sure why all of the financial information matters but the rest of it does to some of us. The CEO of Prestige Cruise Holdings (parent company of Oceania and Regent) and the President of Regent and Oceania read these boards and learn a lot from them.

 

So, if Regent were heading in a direction that the majority of posters felt was incorrect, they would want to know. Not sure what you mean by bashing other cruise lines as I have not seen that on this thread. Perhaps you mean Oceania??? No one is bashing Oceania (in fact, I loved our cruise on the Riviera). Oceania has it's own posting board and sometimes it gets frustrating when Oceania is brought into every discussion that Regent customers are trying to have.

 

In terms of fighting........ well, this was going on before I joined CC several years ago (some different posters but the same type of debates/arguments). Unfortunately, some posters prefer to put down people who disagree with them instead of debating their posts.

 

Really glad to hear that you enjoyed your first Regent cruise. When we took our first, we had no idea that we would still be cruising on Regent 9 1/2 years later:)

[Wendy The Wanderer]

Whenever the accountant-talk gets too abstruse for me, I just plug my ears and say, "la, la, la, la"!

[RachelG]

Whenever the accountant-talk gets too abstruse for me, I just plug my ears and say, "la, la, la, la"!

 

Where is the"like"button?