Viking vs. Uniworld

[IT industry vet]

My husband and I were on a Viking Danube cruise last June with friends--right after the worst of the flooding. The only impact on us was that we had to switch to a sister ship to get around a broken lock. I would have preferred not to do that, and we missed a scenic part of the Rhine, but it was not Viking's fault that the lock was broken, and I don't think they had much advance notice. We packed up one morning, went on our morning excursion, and came back to another ship. It was all handled pretty smoothly.

 

None of us had cruised with another line, so I can't compare. However, none of us have low standards, and we all enjoyed the cruise. We are sailing again this year with family. Our friends are planning to book again, too.

[id est]

I am a CPA and my husband is a dentist. We have been on two Viking cruises...the Danube in 2012 and the Rhine in 2013. We enjoyed the first trip so much, we booked the second one and we enjoyed it so much we're booked on the Viking Star Ocean liner. We had read things about Viking on cruise critic and would probably not have booked our first cruise with them but another couple asked us to go with them and four other friends. The eight of us had a wonderful trip! The cabins, the food, the service were wonderful! If what we have experienced on Viking is " near the bottom" then I would love to experience what is the top. On my birthday, our chef took me with him on a shopping trip and I got to select the cheeses the ship would enjoy that night for dinner. Maybe all the cruise lines do that...I wouldn't know because like you, I have only cruised with one line and that is Viking. I would never try to compare Viking with other lines because I have not cruised with them but I have no problem vouching for the Viking experiences we have had. I don't think my friends and I are " near the bottom" of river cruise passengers and that is what was implied by the statement you made...we are neither easily impressed nor easily fooled.

It is a real disservice to offer opinions on a product you have never used.

I totally agree with you.

[4774Papa]

Prior to making a decision on a river cruise, analyze what you pay for what you get.

 

Do you get five star hotels? What tours are included, what are optional?

What is the daily price?

 

Uniworld has a great reputation, but is usually at the higher end of cost. Viking is not the cheapest.

 

We like Vantage and find they usually have the best prices for what you receive.

We did an AMA cruise ones and liked AMA, but their prices are usually higher than Vantage.

 

Also, take a look at which cruise likes really took advantage of their customers during the Central European floods last year. Some companies were awful. Just read some of the reviews.

[Ship's Wake]

I am a CPA and my husband is a dentist. We have been on two Viking cruises...the Danube in 2012 and the Rhine in 2013. We enjoyed the first trip so much, we booked the second one and we enjoyed it so much we're booked on the Viking Star Ocean liner. We had read things about Viking on cruise critic and would probably not have booked our first cruise with them but another couple asked us to go with them and four other friends. The eight of us had a wonderful trip! The cabins, the food, the service were wonderful! If what we have experienced on Viking is " near the bottom" then I would love to experience what is the top. On my birthday, our chef took me with him on a shopping trip and I got to select the cheeses the ship would enjoy that night for dinner. Maybe all the cruise lines do that...I wouldn't know because like you, I have only cruised with one line and that is Viking. I would never try to compare Viking with other lines because I have not cruised with them but I have no problem vouching for the Viking experiences we have had. I don't think my friends and I are " near the bottom" of river cruise passengers and that is what was implied by the statement you made...we are neither easily impressed nor easily fooled.

It is a real disservice to offer opinions on a product you have never used.

 

You make some excellent points.

 

It's one thing to be a fan of a cruise line you have sailed with (or be a detractor if your experience was not satisfactory).

 

It's a totally different dynamic to praise the cruise line you are a fan of and then slam another cruise line you have never cruised with.

 

Anyway, that's my view - no doubt others may disagree and argue that internet research passes for first hand experience.

[joanne2]

I wish we had a "like" button on CC.

[notamermaid]

Hello,

 

I wish we had a "like" button on CC.

 

Yes, sounds a nice idea.

 

I would not go so far as to feel offended by a "bottom " statement if I had cruised with Viking. I actually saw this more as the bottom of the very good ones that "do" the American market.

 

Sorry to stress the point that I am in Europe but I do have access to a partly different market and are targeted by other cruise lines on the market.

 

So if there is a cruise line that dares to deliver a service that is not satisfactory as a whole it is definitely not Viking. Comparing what I have read, heard and experienced that title would go to a European line. But do not ask I have not fully made up my mind. :D

 

So between the two lines there does not seem to be much difference, especially when everything goes according to plan (the floods last year where a once in a lifetime event). Below those there are defintely some more you have probably never heard about.

 

notamermaid

[nordski]

I have travelledwith both - and would travel with both again. We also tend to book for itinerary- then price --> have have travelled with most major lines already, with our first Avalon cruise coming up in June.

 

We enjoyed our Viking cruise last April - and have another one booked with them next May.

 

Don't worry about being "near the bottom"... this is truly subjective.

 

Fran

 

Subjective indeed. My wife prefers Viking and I Uniworld.

 

At least we have sailed on both. :)

[Host Jazzbeau]

Here are two links to opinions from other cruisers of several lines, and Cruise Critic's official article comparing river cruise lines:

 

http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=2016547

 

http://pdf.cruisecritic.com/travel-guide/UltimateGuidetoRiverCruising.pdf?et_cid=1262487&et_rid=99616845

 

I am not making any judgments here: these are the most recent relevant threads I found by searching this forum with the term "compare". [There's also one comparing GCT and Vantage and one comparing Viking to Vantage, but Vantage doesn't seem to be the focus of this thread.]

[Arizonasunshine]

We have been on both Viking and Uniworld, and we prefer Uniworld over Viking. Haven't been on the new longships so our experience with Viking is a little dated. We just thought that there was more attention paid to the little details (that end up making a big difference by the end of the cruise) on our Uniworld cruise. We also thought that the food and wine was a little better on Uniworld. The pay up front additional costs on Uniworld, i.e. gratuities, alcohol, etc. is more to our liking. Some find this a negative because they don't take advantage of all the inclusive items. Do the research and pick what fits your style, both Uniworld and Viking have avid supporters.

[windsor26]

As to Viking's policies in other markets: sorry, I am a provincial Amurcan. But I also view CC as a basically American website, so you should expect that generally here.

 

 

As you are designated now a 'Host' I find this a very strange comment from you The Australians are huge in this website and not to be ignored in any way (I am not Australian) but think you really should watch these comments:confused:

 

It is really under the same constraints on the tours threads

 

Do not comment on a tour you have not taken part in!!!

Edited April 16, 2014 by windsor26

[Canal archive]

I feel top - bottom is an incorrect way to describe these companies. Subjectivity is the word. What each if us requires, expects and assumes is different. Vive la difference. How would all the river cruise companies exist if we all did not want something slightly different. I have never travelled with either company one reason being there has not been an itinerary that I interested me. One of the reasons I posted was that it was so interesting reading the comments and no one had really mentioned itineraries so maybe that's just my first way of choosing a cruise company.

So enjoy which ever company you choose you never know it might be another company altogether.

P.S. so interesting seeing the odd tic-tac American v Australia from the sidelines

Edited April 16, 2014 by Canal archive

[CPT Trips]

Top, Bottom . . . not much meaning in this cruise segment with so many high performing lines.

 

I give no more credence to a "host's" opinions than I give to the opinions of any other poster. This is regardless of the sub board. Some hosts are very helpful in tracking down facts from cruise lines, others are almost invisible; there are times I wish hosts had another screen name for their personal posts. BTW, these thoughts apply to any number of boards, not just CC.

[franski]

One of the reasons I posted was that it was so interesting reading the comments and no one had really mentioned itineraries so maybe that's just my first way of choosing a cruise company.

 

Actually, I did mention that in my post - and I have travelled with both companies.

 

I start with itinerary, then dates (as we usually have a specific reason for choosing a date....) then price.

 

Top to Bottom (or vice versa) is very subjective. I take in what people say - but don't let it make my final decision for me. If I did - I would never have travelled with Scenic or Viking --> and I would have missed out on some wonderful experiences.

 

Fran

[suspaul]

We too have traveled with both Uniworld and Viking (4th trip coming up). While I agree Uniworld is a bit more upscale we've found Viking as comfortable, tho maybe not as luxurious. That said, we find both to be very good in regards to the overall trip offered. As Uniworld has rolled out their new pricing with everything from no optional tour costs, unlimited alcohol, not just beer and wine at meal times and included gratuities, for us the higher price point doesn't add up. This is only my opinion and I don't want to step on any toes. As others have stated, which company we choose is governed by where we choose to visit.

 

As for Viking being at the low end of river cruises, I think this is incorrect. They provide comfortable ships, recently sailed on one of the long ships and while the cabins are small and rather stark, we liked the clean lines and found the cabin size perfect and the overall ship sleek and impressive. Food and wine, service and crew very good on all of our trips with them. Our experience with Uniworld was equally as enjoyable with maybe a touch more luxury.

 

I think it's hard to compare the two, each has their positives and negatives.

 

 

 

 

Sent using the Cruise Critic forums app

[DrivesLikeMario]

Why are you ignoring the fact that Viking wins Cruise Critic awards which are based on customer ratings? So a few Viking haters keep posting their prejudices at every possible opportunity. Why does that put them at the bottom? I just don't get it.

 

I've learned not to count on those ratings. Why? Because some of them are solicited ratings. For example, as a TA, I can't count how many times I've been asked to vote for this cruise line or that cruise line for this award or that award! :mad: They are almost always awards that state that such and such a cruise line is a "____ Favorite" (insert whatever you want there - reader favorite, cruiser favorite, etc.). I don't like being begged to vote for a cruise line I may have absolutely no cruising experience with and feel you end up with a skewed poll. Many people will vote purely on what they've heard, the cruise line that pays the most commission, or the reputation of the cruise line and not on actual experience.

 

I think everyone needs to read as much as possible, then decide what their priorities are. For my upcoming river cruise, my priorities were:

 

1. Comfort of the cabin (Viking's cabins are mostly 135sf vs. 200sf on Avalon's Suite Ships).

 

2. Placement of the bed within the cabin (for example: Viking's beds face the wall, Avalon's Suite Ships face the river and have an unblocked river view; Tauck's Cat. 3 on the Inspire had a barrier (big TV cabinet) in front of the river view).

 

3. Ship capacity (while Tauck carries 130, Avalon only carries 135 and Viking carries 190). The size of the ship makes a big difference when it comes to the tours and the feeling of intimacy.

 

4. Cost - I really wanted to try Tauck since a client had the most wonderful experience with them and how they were treated last June during the flooding, but I couldn't reconcile the cost (double Viking's price) with the product. I went with a line that was in between Viking and Tauck.

 

5. Dining - I want a casual buffet available at night time and Viking and AMA do not offer that. After a long day of touring, I want the ability to grab something quick & easy for dinner, then get back to my cabin for a shower and preparing for the next day's touring. Also, I looked at menus from the different cruise lines and as a very picky eater, I found the choices on AMA, for example, to be very limited.)

 

Make a list of what's important to you, then weigh it all out before deciding. ;)

Edited April 17, 2014 by DrivesLikeMario

[editor@cruisecritic]

Gosh, very sad to hear "top and bottom". The biggest change for river cruise lines in Europe over the past few years is that they have really made an effort to tell their own stories. Uniworld is different from Viking and from Ama and from Avalon, etc. They all have a role to play. We did a PDF (and are working to convert it to a story on the site) that compares hotel chains and mainstream cruise lines to the river lines, in the hope that it will help travelers match their own style of travel to the style (and budget, too) of river lines.

 

Each has its own personality. I haven't yet met a river cruise line I don't love -- but certainly, there are some that better fit my travel preferences than others.

 

Does that make sense?

 

I'm having trouble tonight with the link to the piece -- try this: click.email.cruisecritic.com/?qs=ef2465cb06e4bff7244edd61512fd2605bdab3dd12f5e58378901d82c01fbf8c383accba3fa02d92

 

Let me know if that doesn't work and we'll find a way around it. We also appreciate your feedback on it!

 

Carolyn

 

Carolyn Spencer Brown

Editor in Chief

Cruise Critic

 

I am a CPA and my husband is a dentist. We have been on two Viking cruises...the Danube in 2012 and the Rhine in 2013. We enjoyed the first trip so much, we booked the second one and we enjoyed it so much we're booked on the Viking Star Ocean liner. We had read things about Viking on cruise critic and would probably not have booked our first cruise with them but another couple asked us to go with them and four other friends. The eight of us had a wonderful trip! The cabins, the food, the service were wonderful! If what we have experienced on Viking is " near the bottom" then I would love to experience what is the top. On my birthday, our chef took me with him on a shopping trip and I got to select the cheeses the ship would enjoy that night for dinner. Maybe all the cruise lines do that...I wouldn't know because like you, I have only cruised with one line and that is Viking. I would never try to compare Viking with other lines because I have not cruised with them but I have no problem vouching for the Viking experiences we have had. I don't think my friends and I are " near the bottom" of river cruise passengers and that is what was implied by the statement you made...we are neither easily impressed nor easily fooled.

It is a real disservice to offer opinions on a product you have never used.

[editor@cruisecritic]

I couldn't agree more, Canal Archive. Thanks for your insight.

 

Carolyn

 

I feel top - bottom is an incorrect way to describe these companies. Subjectivity is the word. What each if us requires, expects and assumes is different. Vive la difference. How would all the river cruise companies exist if we all did not want something slightly different. I have never travelled with either company one reason being there has not been an itinerary that I interested me. One of the reasons I posted was that it was so interesting reading the comments and no one had really mentioned itineraries so maybe that's just my first way of choosing a cruise company.

So enjoy which ever company you choose you never know it might be another company altogether.

P.S. so interesting seeing the odd tic-tac American v Australia from the sidelines

[editor@cruisecritic]

For whatever it's worth, Cruise Critic does two different "ratings" awards. The first, in late winter, is solely based on CC readers who have written reviews. There's no skewing of the numbers; it's totally scientific, again, based on member reviews.

 

The Editors' Picks Awards, which occur in the fall, are based on my team's experiences onboard the ships. We get out, in any given year, to every line out there...both new ships and "older" ones. Then we sit in a room and debate.

 

What do we look for? We look for value-for-money (i.e. do you get what they're promising, whatever the price point?). We look at innovation. We look at comfort, and service, and food, and hospitality. We're increasingly interested in which lines are offering more dynamic shore excursions (both included in fare and for an extra fee). And service, particularly when times are tough (low water, high water, etc.) for those on impacted cruises, is absolutely important.

 

For two years, we've been hard pressed to argue why Viking River shouldn't receive the best overall award. Forget about how much the company spends on marketing, how many ships it has, what a behemoth it is. What we hear from readers, and what we've experienced ourselves, is that by and large, Viking has been the most consistent when it comes to innovating both onboard and on shore, at a really good price point. It's not to say other lines don't do great work.

 

We start every year fresh, open to learning anew about river cruising. I can't predict -- yet -- what our Editors' Picks will settle on in 2014, but I will tell you that every member of our editorial staff -- 12 strong -- is already out there, visiting and re-visiting all of the major river lines. For me -- I was lucky to be able to spend a month in Europe during river cruise launch season, sampling Viking, Uniworld, Ama and Scenic's new Emerald Waterways. It's been crazy, and it's been marvelous.

 

River cruising, whichever line suits you best, is magic. I'm just saying :)

 

Carolyn

 

Carolyn Spencer Brown

Editor in Chief

Cruise Critic

 

Why are you ignoring the fact that Viking wins Cruise Critic awards which are based on customer ratings? So a few Viking haters keep posting their prejudices at every possible opportunity. Why does that put them at the bottom? I just don't get it.

[seabreezer]

Carolyn, thanks for your remarks and clarification of CC's ratings. The link to the Hotel/River Cruise Ship comparison isn't working for me. Perhaps it could be a sticky on the River Cruise forum? It was posted somewhere here before but

I cannot locate it right now. I recall reading it and finding it very useful. It sounds like most companies are very good but I am interested to know how they compare in terms of luxury. It is an important metric to some cruisers along with all the other categories of comparison. The article gave very clear comparisons in that respect. Thank you.

[joanne2]

For whatever it's worth, Cruise Critic does two different "ratings" awards. The first, in late winter, is solely based on CC readers who have written reviews. There's no skewing of the numbers; it's totally scientific, again, based on member reviews.

 

The Editors' Picks Awards, which occur in the fall, are based on my team's experiences onboard the ships. We get out, in any given year, to every line out there...both new ships and "older" ones. Then we sit in a room and debate.

 

What do we look for? We look for value-for-money (i.e. do you get what they're promising, whatever the price point?). We look at innovation. We look at comfort, and service, and food, and hospitality. We're increasingly interested in which lines are offering more dynamic shore excursions (both included in fare and for an extra fee). And service, particularly when times are tough (low water, high water, etc.) for those on impacted cruises, is absolutely important.

 

For two years, we've been hard pressed to argue why Viking River shouldn't receive the best overall award. Forget about how much the company spends on marketing, how many ships it has, what a behemoth it is. What we hear from readers, and what we've experienced ourselves, is that by and large, Viking has been the most consistent when it comes to innovating both onboard and on shore, at a really good price point. It's not to say other lines don't do great work.

 

We start every year fresh, open to learning anew about river cruising. I can't predict -- yet -- what our Editors' Picks will settle on in 2014, but I will tell you that every member of our editorial staff -- 12 strong -- is already out there, visiting and re-visiting all of the major river lines. For me -- I was lucky to be able to spend a month in Europe during river cruise launch season, sampling Viking, Uniworld, Ama and Scenic's new Emerald Waterways. It's been crazy, and it's been marvelous.

 

River cruising, whichever line suits you best, is magic. I'm just saying :)

 

Carolyn

 

Carolyn Spencer Brown

Editor in Chief

Cruise Critic

 

Thanks for the clarification. Sometimes the Viking bashing by people who have not cruised with Viking seems to scare first time cruisers (myself included). Joanne

[Ozjohnno]

For whatever it's worth, Cruise Critic does two different "ratings" awards. The first, in late winter, is solely based on CC readers who have written reviews. There's no skewing of the numbers; it's totally scientific, again, based on member reviews.

 

The Editors' Picks Awards, which occur in the fall, are based on my team's experiences onboard the ships. We get out, in any given year, to every line out there...both new ships and "older" ones. Then we sit in a room and debate.

 

What do we look for? We look for value-for-money (i.e. do you get what they're promising, whatever the price point?). We look at innovation. We look at comfort, and service, and food, and hospitality. We're increasingly interested in which lines are offering more dynamic shore excursions (both included in fare and for an extra fee). And service, particularly when times are tough (low water, high water, etc.) for those on impacted cruises, is absolutely important.

 

For two years, we've been hard pressed to argue why Viking River shouldn't receive the best overall award. Forget about how much the company spends on marketing, how many ships it has, what a behemoth it is. What we hear from readers, and what we've experienced ourselves, is that by and large, Viking has been the most consistent when it comes to innovating both onboard and on shore, at a really good price point. It's not to say other lines don't do great work.

 

We start every year fresh, open to learning anew about river cruising. I can't predict -- yet -- what our Editors' Picks will settle on in 2014, but I will tell you that every member of our editorial staff -- 12 strong -- is already out there, visiting and re-visiting all of the major river lines. For me -- I was lucky to be able to spend a month in Europe during river cruise launch season, sampling Viking, Uniworld, Ama and Scenic's new Emerald Waterways. It's been crazy, and it's been marvelous.

 

River cruising, whichever line suits you best, is magic. I'm just saying :)

 

Carolyn

 

Carolyn Spencer Brown

Editor in Chief

Cruise Critic

 

I'm sorry to disagree but if you call what you do scientific then we have a serious different opinion of the definition of "scientific". Based on your "scientific approach" no other cruise company can ever be judged better than Viking. I'm so glad I don't pay attention to your decisions.

Edited April 18, 2014 by Ozjohnno

[Got2Cruise]

There is something that I didn't see mentioned that is different between the two. Decor. The decor on Uniworld is unique. Look at the photographs very carefully.Some folks appreciate Uniworld's decor and others do not.

[Stratheden]

Uniworld, no doubt provide a wonderful cruise, but I could not travel with the decor. It is just so 'over the top' I would be very uncomfortable.

 

I have looked at the brochures of the other river cruise companies and I think I would be happy to travel with AMA, Viking, Avalon or Scenic's decor.

[editor@cruisecritic]

Ozjohnno: The Members' award is scientific, as I said, based solely on the ratings you all give in your own cruise reviews.

 

Carolyn

 

I'm sorry to disagree but if you call what you do scientific then we have a serious different opinion of the definition of "scientific". Based on your "scientific approach" no other cruise company can ever be judged better than Viking. I'm so glad I don't pay attention to your decisions.

[editor@cruisecritic]

Hi, seabreezer. Try this one: http://view.email.cruisecritic.com/?j=fe9115727366007572&m=fe911570736003797d&ls=fe201077736d0175741073&l=ff5913777d&s=fe4f1d79736502757111&jb=ff971272&ju=fe5e15727d66007e7212&et_cid=1262487&et_rid=99616845&r=0

 

We're working to convert it to a regular story on the site :)

 

Carolyn

 

Carolyn, thanks for your remarks and clarification of CC's ratings. The link to the Hotel/River Cruise Ship comparison isn't working for me. Perhaps it could be a sticky on the River Cruise forum? It was posted somewhere here before but

I cannot locate it right now. I recall reading it and finding it very useful. It sounds like most companies are very good but I am interested to know how they compare in terms of luxury. It is an important metric to some cruisers along with all the other categories of comparison. The article gave very clear comparisons in that respect. Thank you.