first time azamara cruise, thoughts

[Host Jazzbeau]

9 hours ago, federalexpress said:

 

You raise an interesting question, who does Azamara compete with. I wouldn't have HAL or Fred Olsen as the most obvious and when I was looking for my current cruise, those two were not on my list. Celebrity were, in terms of pricing/positioning but not when I relaised the extent to which they have gravitated towards 'party on a boat'.

 

In my case, it was a choice between Viking, Oceania and Azamara. Of the 3, Viking was the priciest, but not by much of you took their normal veranda cabin which isn't much smaller than a Club Continent suite. I just didn't like how they structured their airfares. Oceania would be the more direct competitor, but I found their pricing structure a bit confusing and their itineraries not quite as interesting. Not sure I've made the right choice, it's my first time with AZ(and only my second ever cruise), but I'll know by February...

I view Azamara as competing with Oceania [they share the same second generation Renaissance R-ships, although Oceania also has two newer ships and is now building yet another generation] and Viking [all new ships].

 

Oceania has the best food, but I agree their pricing is Byzantine and despite the best efforts of their fans on CC to explain it even they admit it is confusing.  And their itineraries are pretty much same old, same old.

 

Viking's ships are gorgeous, in an all-white Scandinavian way, and their food is very good.  But their itineraries are even more same old, same old.  I was glad to see in their latest brochure that they continue to add new itineraries as they add ships, so maybe someday they will get really adventurous, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

 

Azamara has absolutely the best itineraries [except for Noble Caledonia, which to me is tops in that area], good food, and the small ship ambience we prefer [although Noble's 100 passenger ships take that to another level].

 

Noble Caledonia sails two of the first-generation Renaissance ships, built in the early 1990s with ~100 passengers in all-outside cabins (and even the cheapest cabins have bigger showers than the non-suites on the Azamara/Oceania R-ships!).  Really adventurous itineraries (their ships are polar rated and small enough to dock anywhere).  Good food and acceptable wine, British club ambience, great lecturers, but little entertainment otherwise.  Shore excursions are included in every port (and always exactly what I would have chosen for a private excursion).  All tipping is included (including excursion guides and bus drivers).  Quoted fares include airfare from London to/from the ship, but a rebate is available if you want to fly direct on your own.  Pricey even by Azamara standards (100 passengers means no economies of scale...) but IMHO good value nevertheless.

 

So these are the four cruise lines we are willing to consider now.  Our earlier history (Costa, Celebrity (even the Retreat), MSC Yacht Club, Norwegian, Princess) is now in the dust bin.  But I understand that each of these lines, at every level of cabin, has fans who find good value there.

[JYDCruise]

13 hours ago, gsmt47471015 said:

We will sail with Azamara again however it will be no longer than 14 nights as we both agreed that due to the size of the ship evening variation would be used up in that length of time. We regularly go away for longer spells and having had two five-week, a four week and three upcoming of sixty, a one hundred and a sixty-five night feel the larger ships give more options, of course with the bigger ships come the downside of lesser personal space and less personal service 

I've far less experience cruising than pretty much anyone else here, but agree with your basic sentiment. We were very happy with our Azamara cruise to Iceland - great crew, loved the "casual premium" feel, pretty good food and I thought the entertainment was quite well done  - and we've already booked another for next summer. However, if the primary focus was on the cruising part per se (say, a transoceanic cruise) rather than the destination, we might well choose another line for the wider variety (and a pool in which you can actually swim).

[Host Jazzbeau]

5 minutes ago, JYDCruise said:

I've far less experience cruising than pretty much anyone else here, but agree with your basic sentiment. We were very happy with our Azamara cruise to Iceland - great crew, loved the "casual premium" feel, pretty good food and I thought the entertainment was quite well done  - and we've already booked another for next summer. However, if the primary focus was on the cruising part per se (say, a transoceanic cruise) rather than the destination, we might well choose another line for the wider variety (and a pool in which you can actually swim).

Yes, horses for courses.  Azamara ships are ideal for country-intensive cruising, where the small size is a real asset.  Not for transoceanic cruises, where the small size translates into fewer entertainment options – this was an area where Crystal used to shine, and may do again...

[Edinburghgirl1]

13 hours ago, boxman52 said:

We went on our first Azamara cruise this summer and have two more booked so we are obviously fans

However I think you make good points. We noticed the lack of atmosphere around the pool, and the entertainment was sometimes really poor. It seemed to display a lack of imagination and quality 

We will go on Azamara when the deal is good and use it as a floating hotel for interesting port intensive routes

The issue the line has is it must have been losing money as part of RCI. That's clear from the details of the transaction. They are not going to turn it around by offering the same offer to the same people 

The market for people who want to go on holiday in silence around a pool is limited but of course it's there.

It's going to be a fine balance for Azamara to retain loyal customers while expanding the numbers & increasing revenue on board. They have competitors who are investing, so do they want to be Holland & America or Fred Olsen. Currently their price point is often taking all into account below those two lines.

I look at the deals I've had and to be frank once a factor in all I get for the price & the OBC it's not the price of a luxury line

I could live with the music if they banned speaker phones and chair hogs at the pool!

Totally agree with your comments. This cruise is our 5th cruise this year and we may have booked another with Azamara as there are aspects of the ship we like but on sea days and in the evenings we just find it all a bit boring. Their current fan bar will start dying  off so they need to attract new cruisers.    For those of you who commented on me possibly being younger I’m not I’m 63 so no spring chicken (must have been a good light when my photo was taken earlier this year). 

[Grandma Cruising]

7 hours ago, Host Jazzbeau said:

Yes, horses for courses.  Azamara ships are ideal for country-intensive cruising, where the small size is a real asset.  Not for transoceanic cruises, where the small size translates into fewer entertainment options – this was an area where Crystal used to shine, and may do again...

Don’t agree that Azamara is not good for transoceanic cruises. We’ve done one transatlantic with Azamara & have another booked for March 2023. We’ve also done the Athens to Dubai route 4 times, which is similar to a transoceanic cruise as it has a lot of sea days. We love the ambience on board, the service, the food etc. We don’t need to be entertained all the time - we love relaxing on a sun bed with a good book, chatting to interesting people (& Azamara”s passengers are mostly well travelled & interesting to talk to) etc so lots of sea days suits us just fine.

[combine]

Sometimes its not  what’s  offered on the ship , its how the cruise guests use these facilities and interact with other guests. Atmosphere and entertainment is often guest driven.

 

 We did a B2B in 2018. Same crew ,same entertainment staff, same chef, same weather and the difference in the 2 weeks was very noticeable. First week was a very sociable cruise, great interaction, a lot of laughs on the ships tours,  several late nights in the Living Room and it  made for a fun cruise. The staff picked up on that and it was a really good week, with the core values of Azamara at the heart and a lively but not raucous ship! Always quieter areas available for those who preferred . 

 
The second week, although a good few of us remained on board , it was  a totally different cruise.  There was not much interaction amongst guests. For whatever reason  that reflected on the  social events on board and the entertainment staff had their work cut out with lack of enthusiasm in a lot of areas.  Whilst  we still enjoyed the food, the ports etc. it was a different vibe on board , but hasn't stopped us sailing with Azamara and we are playing catch up this year.

 

Its a lottery with the mix of guests you will have on any cruise but I think they dictate how a cruise pans out. 

Edited December 8, 2022 by combine

[boxman52]

There are people who like Azamara I'm one as I've got a number booked

That's fine but the current model can't be viable for the owners. You can clearly see that in the sale detail as it can't have been making a return 

They have aging ships with no real wow factor. Having been on both I can't see how Azamara on a ship experience is comparable to Viking. The Viking offer is much superior on the "hard offer"

If rely on the ambience then that can be hit or miss. I was disappointed with the chair hogs and facetime calls that I couldn't get away from on Azamara

All that aside the line can't continue without change and if they have no new ships on the horizon or dramatic refits of the current they need to evolve onboard offer to attract new customers

 I really think there is a limit for the amount of new passengers who will be attracted by silence around a pool (it's not because peoples phones are going) chit chat and the hope that other guests will step up & make it entertaining

I like the current offer but I'm realistic to understand it has to evolve for them to survive 

[marinaro44]

37 minutes ago, boxman52 said:

There are people who like Azamara I'm one as I've got a number booked

That's fine but the current model can't be viable for the owners. You can clearly see that in the sale detail as it can't have been making a return 

They have aging ships with no real wow factor. Having been on both I can't see how Azamara on a ship experience is comparable to Viking. The Viking offer is much superior on the "hard offer"

If rely on the ambience then that can be hit or miss. I was disappointed with the chair hogs and facetime calls that I couldn't get away from on Azamara

All that aside the line can't continue without change and if they have no new ships on the horizon or dramatic refits of the current they need to evolve onboard offer to attract new customers

 I really think there is a limit for the amount of new passengers who will be attracted by silence around a pool (it's not because peoples phones are going) chit chat and the hope that other guests will step up & make it entertaining

I like the current offer but I'm realistic to understand it has to evolve for them to survive 

I think you're very wrong.

[boxman52]

28 minutes ago, marinaro44 said:

I think you're very wrong.

That's fine

I just look at the financial transaction when they were sold 

They have a choice to either evolve & grow or charge more from the people who like their offer for the same thing

[Edinburghgirl1]

1 hour ago, boxman52 said:

There are people who like Azamara I'm one as I've got a number booked

That's fine but the current model can't be viable for the owners. You can clearly see that in the sale detail as it can't have been making a return 

They have aging ships with no real wow factor. Having been on both I can't see how Azamara on a ship experience is comparable to Viking. The Viking offer is much superior on the "hard offer"

If rely on the ambience then that can be hit or miss. I was disappointed with the chair hogs and facetime calls that I couldn't get away from on Azamara

All that aside the line can't continue without change and if they have no new ships on the horizon or dramatic refits of the current they need to evolve onboard offer to attract new customers

 I really think there is a limit for the amount of new passengers who will be attracted by silence around a pool (it's not because peoples phones are going) chit chat and the hope that other guests will step up & make it entertaining

I like the current offer but I'm realistic to understand it has to evolve for them to survive 

Totally agree. The ship we are on, the Quest , is looking very tired. To survive they will need to attract new customers and I can’t see this happening with the current offering and state of the ships. We have spoken to 3 other first time Azamara couples  who can’t wait to get off and will never sail with them again. 

[federalexpress]

49 minutes ago, boxman52 said:

That's fine

I just look at the financial transaction when they were sold 

They have a choice to either evolve & grow or charge more from the people who like their offer for the same thing

 

I'm not convinced the transaction details, to the extent they are public, reveals much about the viability of specific customer segments. It looked to me like a fairly opportunistic transaction. RCCL was bleeding cash. Strategically, AZ struggled to justify a place in its portfolio because it is so small. RCCL wants scale. It makes sense to shift a brand that somewhat overlaps with two much bigger brands in Celebrity and Silversea and then focus resources- not just investment cash- into those two. 

 

The impairment charge of $170m merely reflects historic book values prior to the pandemic. Old cruise ships were not going to sell for book value, their value plummeted post March 2020. It seems to me that Sycamore drove a decent bargain with RCCL but only one that reflected the realities of the business environment at that time.

 

Whatever else AZ now do, I believe the last thing they need to do is copy or follow what the big brands are doing. Even if they doubled their fleet capacity, they are a minnow, a tiny market share of way less than 1%. They are and will always be a niche and as I said before, the issue is whether there is a market in that niche. I can't answer that but they have no choice but to differentiate as much as they possibly can. For sure they will have to evolve and certainly on hardware, Viking has raised the bar and if they don't go for new builds, they are definitely going to need to upgrade the current ships over time. Personally I think on customer segments, they have a point of difference on itinerary and ship size that could work for them on the scale they will be operating on. Making money from it is a bit tougher. In a way, the 5000 passenger ships have a much easier business model, the economies of scale are significant.

[boxman52]

2 hours ago, federalexpress said:

 

I'm not convinced the transaction details, to the extent they are public, reveals much about the viability of specific customer segments. It looked to me like a fairly opportunistic transaction. RCCL was bleeding cash. Strategically, AZ struggled to justify a place in its portfolio because it is so small. RCCL wants scale. It makes sense to shift a brand that somewhat overlaps with two much bigger brands in Celebrity and Silversea and then focus resources- not just investment cash- into those two. 

 

The impairment charge of $170m merely reflects historic book values prior to the pandemic. Old cruise ships were not going to sell for book value, their value plummeted post March 2020. It seems to me that Sycamore drove a decent bargain with RCCL but only one that reflected the realities of the business environment at that time.

 

Whatever else AZ now do, I believe the last thing they need to do is copy or follow what the big brands are doing. Even if they doubled their fleet capacity, they are a minnow, a tiny market share of way less than 1%. They are and will always be a niche and as I said before, the issue is whether there is a market in that niche. I can't answer that but they have no choice but to differentiate as much as they possibly can. For sure they will have to evolve and certainly on hardware, Viking has raised the bar and if they don't go for new builds, they are definitely going to need to upgrade the current ships over time. Personally I think on customer segments, they have a point of difference on itinerary and ship size that could work for them on the scale they will be operating on. Making money from it is a bit tougher. In a way, the 5000 passenger ships have a much easier business model, the economies of scale are significant.

You make some very good points I certainly think Sycamore were opportunistic. The rate at which RCI were losing money this sale made no difference & they had funding far greater than this is place. Orders for new ships were progressing for example

I tend to think they took the chance to get some cash for something that was a liability rather than an asset. That is without having to invest in a brand they didn't believe in

More than willing to accept you are correct and I'm wrong, who knows

Where we agree is something has to either evolve or change 

 

[marinaro44]

22 minutes ago, boxman52 said:

You make some very good points I certainly think Sycamore were opportunistic. The rate at which RCI were losing money this sale made no difference & they had funding far greater than this is place. Orders for new ships were progressing for example

I tend to think they took the chance to get some cash for something that was a liability rather than an asset. That is without having to invest in a brand they didn't believe in

More than willing to accept you are correct and I'm wrong, who knows

Where we agree is something has to either evolve or change 

 

Attempting to change Azamara by adding elements of the mass-market experience you desire would be a mistake.

[federalexpress]

37 minutes ago, boxman52 said:

You make some very good points I certainly think Sycamore were opportunistic. The rate at which RCI were losing money this sale made no difference & they had funding far greater than this is place. Orders for new ships were progressing for example

I tend to think they took the chance to get some cash for something that was a liability rather than an asset. That is without having to invest in a brand they didn't believe in

More than willing to accept you are correct and I'm wrong, who knows

Where we agree is something has to either evolve or change 

 

 

I'd broadly agree that they had little appetite to invest or even manage a brand they didn't believe in, but I don't think that means that other investors, with different circumstances, would not believe in it. PE often makes a success of brands large conglomerates dispose of. Maybe that is where we disagree. 

 

RCI have their hands full trying to steady their massive ship, in every sense, so the fewer distractions the better. Of course all the Covid re-financing dwarves the $200m cash received but all the same, it reduces the debt a little and given interest payments are now running at about $1.3bn a year, every little helps!

[Host Jazzbeau]

It's very easy to lose all your loyal customers before you attract the new ones you're looking for.  IMO Azamara should stay the course, make incremental  improvements to the soft product (wine list for starters), and research whether they can make a business case for new ships that can still dock in the small ports Azamara's itineraries are known for.  If they can't make that business case, Sycamore has little enough cash sunk in the project that they can just let it tread water with these four lovable old ships – after all, that's basically what RCG* did for almost all of Azamara's history.  There are other small cruise lines that are doing exactly this (Noble Caledonia, Windstar for examples).

 

* and my take is that RCG disposed of Azamara because once they had bought Silversea there was no longer a space for Azamara between the Celebrity Retreat and Silversea.  It had nothing to do with Azamara's future prospects – without Silversea they could easily have given Azamara the new ships that Silversea has gotten since the takeover.

 

edited to add:  Don't think that Azamara would have been better off staying part of RCG, even if they hadn't bought Silversea.  Look at this recent report from Silver Whisper:

On 10/24/2022 at 10:42 AM, JOPA28 said:

The beverage situation was really shocking.  On day one there were many libations not available:  bourbon, Grand Marnier, Chardonnay, and others.     We ended up in Boston for three days due to the storm, some of these could have been purchased.    I know there are corporate buying policies/contracts, but there was so much not available.     It became comical when we ordered from the cocktail menu: “Sorry we don’t have all the ingredients”, a second would be ordered “Oh we can’t make that either”.

 

[QueenP]

Before cruising at all, I researched all the cruise ships in the market and chose Azamara as our best fit. I was proved right, it was the perfect fit for us. I was around 40 then, I'm 50 now. The niche Azamara provides is not an age based niche imho. It is appealing to a certain market, and irrespective of age there are plenty of people who want a quiet ship that goes to great ports, has good food, some excellent guest entertainers and a ship on which you do not have to wait in queues! Add to that a happy staff and warm, inviting ambience and you have our desired product.

[Grandma Cruising]

10 hours ago, QueenP said:

Before cruising at all, I researched all the cruise ships in the market and chose Azamara as our best fit. I was proved right, it was the perfect fit for us. I was around 40 then, I'm 50 now. The niche Azamara provides is not an age based niche imho. It is appealing to a certain market, and irrespective of age there are plenty of people who want a quiet ship that goes to great ports, has good food, some excellent guest entertainers and a ship on which you do not have to wait in queues! Add to that a happy staff and warm, inviting ambience and you have our desired product.

Excellent description of Azamara - chimes with us perfectly.

[Edinburghgirl1]

Looks like Azamara pay attention to these boards. There was piped background music in the Den for our last 3 nights until the piano player started. Made for a much better atmosphere in my opinion and took away the feeling you were in a library!

[marinaro44]

22 minutes ago, Edinburghgirl1 said:

Looks like Azamara pay attention to these boards. There was piped background music in the Den for our last 3 nights until the piano player started. Made for a much better atmosphere in my opinion and took away the feeling you were in a library!

Depressing.

[federalexpress]

I wonder if there is a little nuance involved here. What I don't want is music blaring away non stop  by the pool a la Celebrity or so loud in all the bars that you can't have conversations without raising your voice. I'm fine with a bit of background (in the true sense of that word) music or a live pianist at a reasonable volume. Moreover I think it is possible to adjust this around the ship. If you go to a show, then obviously you are there to listen so the volume is louder. Equally I could see the merit in having a bar that is a bit 'livelier' for those in the mood. I just don't want it everywhere around the ship. I want there to be 'a library' atmosphere in some parts of the ship, free of banal pop music.

 

That is what makes cruise lines like AZ different to alternatives like Celebrity. From what I can tell, it seems the latter have had to resort to different classes onboard in order to deliver in part for those wanting a quieter space. I don't think AZ should be following that model and I don't believe its appeal will suffer if it doesn't.

[Mackdogmolly]

4 hours ago, Edinburghgirl1 said:

Looks like Azamara pay attention to these boards. There was piped background music in the Den for our last 3 nights until the piano player started. Made for a much better atmosphere in my opinion and took away the feeling you were in a library!

They did that anyway on my last cruise. 

[Edinburghgirl1]

Only happened on the last 3 days of ours and made such a difference. Wasn’t loud just background music so you could still converse but at least didn’t feel you were walking into an old folks home after dinner. 

[boxman52]

42 minutes ago, Edinburghgirl1 said:

Only happened on the last 3 days of ours and made such a difference. Wasn’t loud just background music so you could still converse but at least didn’t feel you were walking into an old folks home after dinner. 

I agree with you that it's not a choice of either total silence or non stop rave music playing. There is something very sensible in-between to keep all guests happy

Do Azamara advertise the ship is silent other than low volume performers? If so I must have missed that, if not the customers who want a little atmosphere within reason have as much right to that as those who want to spend their time in silence

It surely a compromise 

[uktog]

Every day on Onward either in the Cabaret Lounge, Poolside or Living Room the sound in excess of 90db gets triggered on my watch repeatedly. They could easily dial down a notch and make it far more pleasant for everyone 

[Ithikan]

1 hour ago, Edinburghgirl1 said:

Only happened on the last 3 days of ours and made such a difference. Wasn’t loud just background music so you could still converse but at least didn’t feel you were walking into an old folks home after dinner. 

I find this an interesting comment.  If by "old folks home" you are referencing senior living or assisted living communities, you might research how music therapy is happily embraced by staff.

So, my vote goes to no piped in music in The Den.  But then, I also enjoy libraries so to each her own : )