So sad...Royal one star reviews

[slc22]

I am pleased you enjoyed your cruise and found Royal to be perfection actually 65% of those who cruise Royal are satisfied with their cruise not sure what the percentage is that find her cruising perfection.

 

What are your thoughts on those that find cruising Royal less then a perfect 5* and more of a 1*?

35% of those who post reviews apparently are not satisfied with her which places her as the poorest rated cruise ship in the Princess fleet.

Do you think their complaints about Royal having deficiencies, disappointing or not a good value unfounded?

 

Your post implies Royal has spoiled you and raised your expectations, will sailing the other ships in the Princess fleet from now on be less enjoyable?

 

Hi, Baldercash,

I can't speak to others reviews, as I wasn't on their sailings. I was just giving the feedback from my week, and my experience only. I respectfully let others have their own opinion.

 

I did look back at February and March reviews. Not sure why, but March has many more poor ratings (1 or 2) than The previous month. Wonder why? In comparison, reviews were very good in February. Interesting.

[pablo222]

I am so sorry to see all the one star CC reviews of the Royal Princess.

 

I guess if I were an executive at Princess, or one of the principal

designers of the ship, I would be sad.

 

But first, I would look at the per day revenue being generated,

compared to other ships and decide if I were really sad, or not.

 

Other than that, a cruise review is like any other product review

-- it is one person's opinion. Others may, or may not agree.

[JimmyVWine]

But first, I would look at the per day revenue being generated,

compared to other ships and decide if I were really sad, or not.

 

Per day revenue can be deceiving. Royal presents many more opportunities for guests to spend money, but if the fares have to be slashed to get people on the ship, the on board spending won't make up the difference. A $599 fare plus a trip to the Crab Shack isn't as good as an $899 fare and a trip to the MDR. Looking at the past per day revenue is only part of the equation. The 65% approval rating also has to be viewed with a firm eye on the future and what that portends for future bookings. It is difficult to imagine that bookings will remain strong on the fleet's lowest rated ship, especially when it is no longer shiny and new. When it is "just another ship" and remains a low outlier in terms of approval, that spells trouble. At that point, the fact that past passengers spent more per day than on other ships becomes irrelevant if many of those passenger fall into the "I didn't like the ship" or the "I thought she was fine but I have no desire to sail on her again" or the "I like the other ships better and will stick with them" categories. If repeat business is weak and negative word of mouth (or Internet) is common, past spending rates won't matter much. Imagine that you are the head of marketing and sales and you are in a meeting with two of your employees who are reporting on a new ship's performance. Minion #1 says: "Great news boss. The passengers who just got off the ship spent on average $30 more per day than on our other ships." Minion #2 says: "Yes. But our exit survey says that 40% of them will never return." As the boss, which statement concerns you most? It is still too early to know what impact will develop from the fact that Royal is Princess's lowest rated ship.

Edited April 13, 2014 by JimmyVWine

[janetz]

As of last night our 10 night repo, from NY to FLL, any balcony is offered 200 OBC. The cheapest, a balcony guarantee, is at 899pp.

At first, this was only available to previous guests and last week, the rate was available to all. The 200 is unseen until you pick a cabin or link for the guarantee. The sailing is not selling well. We have already had one price drop. This am, pricing is currently unavailable so I am waiting to see if there is another price drop

We have not sailed Princess in awhile. I ask myself, why are we sailing this ship? The amenities we enjoy would be the Enclave, at 199pp for a 7 day, what will the price be for a day? The Sanctuary, at 40 per day for a 10 day cruise? Why are these offering's priced so high? I know people will pay but I am disappointed that Princess does this.

My answer would be it is a new ship, a beautiful ship. The price is great for a 10 night sailing, I am sure it will drop in price again, and we are going to ports that are off the beaten track. That is our reason to sail the Royal.

Edited April 13, 2014 by janetz

[kendon]

Reviews, no matter which ship or line, are totally subjective. Some people seem to have extremely high expectations for service while others are just more "accepting" While I do read the reviews, most time I take the criticism with a grain of salt. Can't wait to experience Royal Princess in Feb of 2015.

 

I will add however that the OP is right in wanting to know why a 1* rating, I mean c'mon it's a cruise people.... I plan on making the best of it no matter... Your on a cruise, How bad can that possibly be....

 

Really! I have been following this thread and all I hear now is blah! Blah! Blah!

 

Sorry but IMHO if your main concern is a wrap around promanade deck, or the lack of mid ship stairs.... Walk or jog to the aft or forward stairs.... There is your lack of exercise you didn't get.... Really that's a deal breaker! I just don't get it.... If you miss a 3 foot if that differnce on your balcony then you cruise way too much and don't appreciate it anymore and should probably do a land based vacation....

 

IMHO The Royal Princess offers so much more and and a different experience than other Princess ships and is not the same ole same ole... So What! It's a cruise....

 

Really No cruise or ship deserves a 1* period

 

If you think it does then How sad for you.... C'mon people enjoy life and enjoy that you are able to cruise, Life can be worse than lack of this and that on a ship... Life and vacation is what you make of it not the lack of certain things....

 

Just sayin' and IMHO

 

Great post!

[dmwnc1959]

Baldercash,

 

Assuming everyone delights in (requires?) the same things as you do on a cruise to enjoy themselves as you do, then I could probably see your point. But we don't. Not all of us.

 

 

So not acknowledging the impact on ones cruise experience caused by:

 

- tiny balconies (had an inside cabin)

- smaller rooms (it was bigger than the one I had last year)

- lack of pools (don't use them)

- small gym with traffic through it (don't use it)

- no windows in the spa, steam room & sauna for charge and poorly located (don't use it)

- no centre stairs (didn't need them, didn't use them last year either)

- no decent dance venue (don't dance)

- inadequate theater capacity with poor row access (seats 945, was fine from where I was sitting)

- small inadequate elevator capacity (never waited more than 60-90 seconds, tops)

- lack of promenade (pretty much only used it as a short cut to avoid after show and pre-dinner crowds)

 

 

....which are all measurable and real, is disingenuous.

 

 

I reviewed Royal Princess quite extensively post-cruise, pointed out things that I could see mentioned by others as 'design faults' when compared to other ships, or things that could be improved that may make the experience better for others. But the majority, if not all, of those 'design faults' did not affect my personal enjoyment of the cruise. What I needed, what I wanted, and what I enjoyed is probably different from the things you need, want, and enjoy. All of those things you consider as 'measurable' design faults, for the most part, did not affect my cruise at all.

 

Based on the two weeks I was aboard Royal Princess, the overall cruise experience in of itself was perfection. Especially when compared to the year prior on Ruby Princess, which by all accounts was an unmitigated disaster. But even then I would not have rated that cruise as a 1* by any stretch of the imagination.

 

With all of the differences between Royal Princess and the rest of the fleet, there are still those who have booked, cruised, and re-booked over and over, this class of ship. If the 'design faults' were that bad, affected their cruise that much, I could see all seasoned cruisers hating this ship, and cruising solely on a Solstice-class or one of the Grand-class. But they aren't. They'll mix it up, and will miss some things from Royal Princess on other ships, appreciate what other ships have that Royal Princess does not.

 

And I've never, ever, booked a cruise on a ship that I've felt 'glass half empty' about. I'm glad people can book cruises solely for the itinerary on a ship they will pretty much 'suffer' through because it goes to 'good' ports. That's all fine and dandy for them. But my expendable income would be better spent on a ship I felt really happy to be going on, not one that 'I'm 'hoping I might enjoy it, but it sure has a lot of problems'.

 

.

Edited April 13, 2014 by dmwnc1959

[baldercash]

Strange that people feel there is something wrong in believing you should get value for your money?

I wish I had the resources that I did not care what I got in exchange for my travel dollar.

 

"The lack of mid ship stairs.... Walk or jog to the aft or forward stairs"

 

Why would Princess not design the ship to be efficient and convenient for it's paying passengers? You realize there are many people on the ship that cannot walk let alone jog to the stairs?

 

"If you miss a 3 foot if that difference on your balcony then you cruise way too much and don't appreciate it anymore and should probably do a land based vacation...."

 

A nonsensical statement, that difference of 3 feet means you cannot enjoy your balcony which you paid full value for.

It is not wide enough to sit and face the sea comfortably which is the point of a balcony. The table is not large enough to hold the dinner plates for 2 people.

If you have more then 3 people in the room or guests they cannot use the balcony.

You paid additional for a balcony that does not deliver.

 

Yes if you cruise too much you likely have grown accustomed to certain standards and have expectations that your balcony will be usable for more then standing on.

 

Royal Carribean at least tells you what you are getting.

http://www.foxnews.com/travel/2014/01/31/royal-caribbean-unveils-virtual-balconies-on-its-ships/

 

I guess if the food was inedible you could say you need to loose weight anyways so forget about it your on vacation?

 

I agree it does not have to ruin your vacation bu it seems to disappoint thus the poorest rating in the Princess fleet for Royal.

 

Is it possible reviewers award 1* simply because they want others to be well aware of their displeasure and disappointment with Royal and they want to highlight it in bold?

It appears to be more effective then giving a 4 or 5 rating and saying you enjoyed your vacation but will never sail her again or recommend her.

 

This maybe it is this type of thinking that came up with this marketing.....

http://www.buzzfeed.com/copyranter/the-greta-ads-of-the-worst-hotel-in-the-world

Edited April 13, 2014 by baldercash

[dmwnc1959]

Is it possible reviewers award 1* simply because they want others to be well aware of their displeasure and disappointment with Royal and they want to highlight it in bold?

 

BINGO! We have a winner. ;)

[JimmyVWine]

I mean c'mon it's a cruise people.... I plan on making the best of it no matter... Your on a cruise, How bad can that possibly be...

 

IMHO The Royal Princess offers so much more and and a different experience than other Princess ships and is not the same ole same ole... So What! It's a cruise....

 

Really No cruise or ship deserves a 1* period

 

... But the majority, if not all, of those 'design faults' did not affect my personal enjoyment of the cruise.

 

These two comments point out a problem with the process more so than the outcome. When some people rate their personal cruise experience subjectively and others rate the ship objectively, you get an apples to oranges evaluation. A diner could go to a restaurant and order a single dish. The dish is decidedly average, but they didn't have to cook or clean that night. So c'mon! How could that be bad! 5*! A restaurant critic goes to the same restaurant with three other people and between the four of them they order and taste 3/4 of the menu. The critic might have an entirely diiferent view of the restaurant. The joy of escaping cooking and cleaning means nothing to him. Saying "Hey! It's a cruise! How could you have a bad time" is not a review of the ship. One can take three identical cruise itineraries on three different ships and have a great time on all three. But if asked to rate the ships, surely human nature would result in that person having a preference. And Dave, with all due respect, saying: " didn't use it" over and over doesn't lend itself to reviewing a ship objectively. All you can do is review your subjective enjoyment. Consider the passenger who never leaves their cabin, orders room service for every meal and never steps foot in a public area. That person could write a 5* review because they had a great time and the cruise met or exceeded their admittedly modest expectations. But so what?

 

In this day and age of self-reporting where everyone can (and does) publish their experiences on UrbanSpoon, Yelp, Zagats, Cruise Critic, CellarTracker, etc., we would all do well to consider that some people publish subjective trip reports under the guise of "reviews" while others try to channel Mimi Sheraton or Arthur Frommer and try to be "critics". When a person does the former, it is pointless (and comes across as rude) for others to try to tell them that they didn't experience what they think they did. And when one does the latter it is pointless to try to tell them that their impressions are wrong. When I read the 5* "reviews", I see mostly subjective trip reports. That's fine. When I read 1* "reviews", I see mostly objective comments on things the poster found to be wrong with the ship. Both of those reviews can peacefully coexist as they originate from two different places. One can have a great cruise on a ship with small balconies. And one can conclude that a ship with smaller balconies is less desirable than ships with larger balconies.

Edited April 13, 2014 by JimmyVWine

[dmwnc1959]

JimmyVWine - all excellent points and well said. My review was of my vacation, not a clinical dissection of the ship compared to every cruise I've taken in the last few years. So I guess in all of the 293 current reviews we have lots of apples and oranges.

 

I'd still like to know how someone can have lots of mid-ranged stars in their review and still rate it a 1*. Is the review and rating system faulty in that regards?

 

.

Edited April 13, 2014 by dmwnc1959

[JimmyVWine]

 

I'd still like to know how someone can have lots of mid-ranged stars in their review and still rate it a 1*. Is the review and rating system faulty in that regards?

 

.

 

No. That is a person with an axe to grind. Which points out why the text of the review is more important than the final star count.

[dmwnc1959]

No. That is a person with an axe to grind. Which points out why the text of the review is more important than the final star count.

 

But it would seem that it is a sum of the final star counts which Cruise Critic is using as a "% Loved It" designation?

[JimmyVWine]

But it would seem that it is a sum of the final star counts which Cruise Critic is using as a "% Loved It" designation?

 

From what I can discern, final star counts of 4, 5 and 5+ count as "loved it". The others do not. So if you see a review that is consistently 4 or more stars but the final conclusion is 3 or less, that would skew the overall percentage. But I don't see that. If there are mostly 3s and 4s with a final rating of 2, while inexplicable, it wouldn't change the outcome had the final vote been 3 or 3 1/2.

Edited April 13, 2014 by JimmyVWine

[dmwnc1959]

And Dave, with all due respect, saying: " didn't use it" over and over doesn't lend itself to reviewing a ship objectively. All you can do is review your subjective enjoyment.

 

That's was in response to this statement by Baldercash:

 

"So not acknowledging the impact on ones cruise experience caused by (all those factors) which are all measurable and real, is disingenuous."

 

If those factors had no impact on my cruise experience, am I disingenuous in reporting my cruise was perfection in my eyes?

[dmwnc1959]

From what I can discern, final star counts of 4, 5 and 5+ count as "loved it". The others do not. So if you see a review that is consistently 4 or more stars but the final conclusion is 3 or less, that would skew the overall percentage. But I don't see that. If there are mostly 3s and 4s with a final rating of 2, while inexplicable, it wouldn't change the outcome had the final vote been 3 or 3 1/2.

 

Interesting. I wonder if someone can go back and count the 4, 5, and 5+ star final ratings and see of it matches up with what Cruise Critic states as the percentage that loved it.

 

I'm off to bed. Working 12hr shifts this weekend. Be back later.

 

:D

[Woobstr112G]

These two comments point out a problem with the process more so than the outcome. When some people rate their personal cruise experience subjectively and others rate the ship objectively, you get an apples to oranges evaluation. A diner could go to a restaurant and order a single dish. The dish is decidedly average, but they didn't have to cook or clean that night. So c'mon! How could that be bad! 5*! A restaurant critic goes to the same restaurant with three other people and between the four of them they order and taste 3/4 of the menu. The critic might have an entirely diiferent view of the restaurant. The joy of escaping cooking and cleaning means nothing to him. Saying "Hey! It's a cruise! How could you have a bad time" is not a review of the ship. One can take three identical cruise itineraries on three different ships and have a great time on all three. But if asked to rate the ships, surely human nature would result in that person having a preference. And Dave, with all due respect, saying: " didn't use it" over and over doesn't lend itself to reviewing a ship objectively. All you can do is review your subjective enjoyment. Consider the passenger who never leaves their cabin, orders room service for every meal and never steps foot in a public area. That person could write a 5* review because they had a great time and the cruise met or exceeded their admittedly modest expectations. But so what?

 

In this day and age of self-reporting where everyone can (and does) publish their experiences on UrbanSpoon, Yelp, Zagats, Cruise Critic, CellarTracker, etc., we would all do well to consider that some people publish subjective trip reports under the guise of "reviews" while others try to channel Mimi Sheraton or Arthur Frommer and try to be "critics". When a person does the former, it is pointless (and comes across as rude) for others to try to tell them that they didn't experience what they think they did. And when one does the latter it is pointless to try to tell them that their impressions are wrong. When I read the 5* "reviews", I see mostly subjective trip reports. That's fine. When I read 1* "reviews", I see mostly objective comments on things the poster found to be wrong with the ship. Both of those reviews can peacefully coexist as they originate from two different places. One can have a great cruise on a ship with small balconies. And one can conclude that a ship with smaller balconies is less desirable than ships with larger balconies.

 

Excellent post.....:):):)

 

Bob

Edited April 13, 2014 by Woobstr112G

[JimmyVWine]

 

If those factors had no impact on my cruise experience, am I disingenuous in reporting my cruise was perfection in my eyes?

 

I would never say that you were disingenuous. If anyone has been "genuine" in all of this, it has been you. What I would say is that you were reporting on your personal experiences which did not include exposure to many of the areas that others find deficient. No problem there. But it has to color the review. You had a 5* cruise on a ship that many people consider to be a 1*-4* product. I don't see why people have such a hard time believing that to be possible, on both sides of the aisle. "I had a 5* experience" ≠ "The ship is 5*" and "I rate the ship at 1*" ≠ "No one could have a 5* cruise on that ship." Pretty simple.

[sun14]

Can't wait to experience Royal Princess in Feb of 2015... I plan on making the best of it no matter... Your on a cruise, How bad can that possibly be... I have been following this thread and all I hear now is blah! Blah! Blah!

 

Sorry but IMHO if your main concern is a wrap around promanade deck... Walk or jog to the aft or forward stairs.... There is your lack of exercise you didn't get.... Really that's a deal breaker! I just don't get it.... If you miss a 3 foot if that differnce on your balcony then you cruise way too much and don't appreciate it anymore and should probably do a land based vacation....

 

Really No cruise or ship deserves a 1* period

 

Dogmatic statements such as these, especially when they are accentuated with the word "period" are meant to shut down discussion instead of stimulating it. This is particularly interesting when coming from a poster who has yet to cruise on the Royal. FYI Cruise Critic created the 1 to 5+ scale. They clearly believe that a reviewer can give a 1 just as much as a 5. If they did not think that a ship could deserve a 1 they would not have included it on the scale. I suggest that you open your mind a bit and be more tolerant of reviews no matter how different they may be from yours. :)

 

In contrast to your post, those by baldercash, JimmyVWine, and others, while not necessarily agreeing with each other or me, serve to promote further discussion, not shut it down.

[bluesea321]

Assuming everyone delights in (requires?) the same things as you do [referring to a post by baldercash] on a cruise to enjoy themselves as you do, then I could probably see your point. But we don't. Not all of us.

 

Quote:

- tiny balconies (had an inside cabin)

- smaller rooms (it was bigger than the one I had last year)

- lack of pools (don't use them)

- small gym with traffic through it (don't use it)

- no windows in the spa, steam room & sauna for charge and poorly located (don't use it)

- no centre stairs (didn't need them, didn't use them last year either)

- no decent dance venue (don't dance)

- inadequate theater capacity with poor row access (seats 945, was fine from where I was sitting)

- small inadequate elevator capacity (never waited more than 60-90 seconds, tops)

- lack of promenade (pretty much only used it as a short cut to avoid after show and pre-dinner crowds)

 

dmwnc1959,

 

You offered your comments inside parentheses in the post above and I have a question out of curiosity. What do you like to do on a cruise? Apparently you do not use balconies, pools, gym, spa, dance venues, or the promenade. If your preferences lean towards a nice Piazza, restaurants, and other inside venues, I can see how you would really like the Royal. In contrast I am one of those that really enjoy the items listed by baldercash and thus my low opinion of the ship. While I knew that the Royal was missing many of these features there is nothing like experiencing them for yourself to truly assess. I had a good time on the Royal despite what I perceive as serious shortcomings but I am not inclined to sail on her again.

[bluesea321]

This is an open question to anyone that sailed the Royal this past winter season. I was on the March 2-9 sailing and in most evenings from about 5:45 till 9:00 pm they had a band playing in the Piazza called "Party Band Goodtimes Inc." On my sailing this band was playing at very loud levels, so loud that it was difficult to carry a conversation in Alfredo's one deck up. I even heard a couple in Sabatini's (a good distance away) complaining. Did anyone experience this? If I recall correctly I think Pescado Amarillo mentioned this also and stated that it blasted people away. I am wondering if my experience was limited to that one week or did others encounter the same. :confused:

[kendon]

No. That is a person with an axe to grind. Which points out why the text of the review is more important than the final star count.

 

Really, that says it all. READ the review to see where the poster is coming from.

[Tuscan]

This is an open question to anyone that sailed the Royal this past winter season. I was on the March 2-9 sailing and in most evenings from about 5:45 till 9:00 pm they had a band playing in the Piazza called "Party Band Goodtimes Inc." On my sailing this band was playing at very loud levels, so loud that it was difficult to carry a conversation in Alfredo's one deck up. I even heard a couple in Sabatini's (a good distance away) complaining. Did anyone experience this? If I recall correctly I think Pescado Amarillo mentioned this also and stated that it blasted people away. I am wondering if my experience was limited to that one week or did others encounter the same. :confused:

 

We encountered the same on our 09/13 sailing. One night while waiting 5 minutes for a midship elevator (imagine that) to go to dinner, we could clearly hear the band in the Piazza, and we were on Deck 12 (Aloha).

 

We did not enjoy the Royal at all. In fact, after 33 cruises with Princess, and throughout all classes in the fleet, this was our first disappointment . . . and it was solely due to the ship's design.

[PescadoAmarillo]

This is an open question to anyone that sailed the Royal this past winter season. I was on the March 2-9 sailing and in most evenings from about 5:45 till 9:00 pm they had a band playing in the Piazza called "Party Band Goodtimes Inc." On my sailing this band was playing at very loud levels, so loud that it was difficult to carry a conversation in Alfredo's one deck up. I even heard a couple in Sabatini's (a good distance away) complaining. Did anyone experience this? If I recall correctly I think Pescado Amarillo mentioned this also and stated that it blasted people away. I am wondering if my experience was limited to that one week or did others encounter the same. :confused:

We certainly experienced this on our 5-night cruise in October. When we returned for a few hours for a BVE in March, the party band was playing in the Piazza as passengers came on board. Standing, waiting for a mid-ship elevator, people were yelling back and forth about not being able to talk, let alone carry on a conversation.

 

This point, more than any other, has us scaling back our Royal Princess plans for next winter. I feel like the Royal Princess's best feature is its Piazza; the loud, nearly always present music renders it unusable. Happily, this is so easily corrected...but will it be?

[Loreni]

We certainly experienced this on our 5-night cruise in October. When we returned for a few hours for a BVE in March, the party band was playing in the Piazza as passengers came on board. Standing, waiting for a mid-ship elevator, people were yelling back and forth about not being able to talk, let alone carry on a conversation.

 

This point, more than any other, has us scaling back our Royal Princess plans for next winter. I feel like the Royal Princess's best feature is its Piazza; the loud, nearly always present music renders it unusable. Happily, this is so easily corrected...but will it be?

 

Sounds like Princess is trying to become Celebrity. According to what I read, they are notorious for loud music in the atrium. This is the main reason we have not tried them. The other reason is the drink packages. Certainly these "free" drink packages cause the cruise price to increase. We don't really drink. Not alcohol, coffee, or soda. I hope Princess does not follow the Celebrity model of increasing prices and the offering a "free" drink package.

[Mom33]

Baldercash,

 

Assuming everyone delights in (requires?) the same things as you do on a cruise to enjoy themselves as you do, then I could probably see your point. But we don't. Not all of us.

 

So True

 

I reviewed Royal Princess quite extensively post-cruise, pointed out things that I could see mentioned by others as 'design faults' when compared to other ships, or things that could be improved that may make the experience better for others. But the majority, if not all, of those 'design faults' did not affect my personal enjoyment of the cruise. What I needed, what I wanted, and what I enjoyed is probably different from the things you need, want, and enjoy. All of those things you consider as 'measurable' design faults, for the most part, did not affect my cruise at all.

 

Based on the two weeks I was aboard Royal Princess, the overall cruise experience in of itself was perfection. Especially when compared to the year prior on Ruby Princess, which by all accounts was an unmitigated disaster. But even then I would not have rated that cruise as a 1* by any stretch of the imagination.

 

With all of the differences between Royal Princess and the rest of the fleet, there are still those who have booked, cruised, and re-booked over and over, this class of ship. If the 'design faults' were that bad, affected their cruise that much, I could see all seasoned cruisers hating this ship, and cruising solely on a Solstice-class or one of the Grand-class. But they aren't. They'll mix it up, and will miss some things from Royal Princess on other ships, appreciate what other ships have that Royal Princess does not.

 

And I've never, ever, booked a cruise on a ship that I've felt 'glass half empty' about. I'm glad people can book cruises solely for the itinerary on a ship they will pretty much 'suffer' through because it goes to 'good' ports. That's all fine and dandy for them. But my expendable income would be better spent on a ship I felt really happy to be going on, not one that 'I'm 'hoping I might enjoy it, but it sure has a lot of problems'.

 

.

 

Thanks for this post. I agree completely.:)