Best of the big ships?

[BobCatter]

If we wanted to a really long cruise, essentially using the ship as a bus to go to different places, what's y'all's opinion of the difference between MSC/NCL/Celebrity/Princess? We have no interest in gambling, and we don't have kids. We would literally just be looking for a lower-cost way to see the world. 

[Shmoo here]

38 minutes ago, BobCatter said:

If we wanted to a really long cruise, essentially using the ship as a bus to go to different places, what's y'all's opinion of the difference between MSC/NCL/Celebrity/Princess? We have no interest in gambling, and we don't have kids. We would literally just be looking for a lower-cost way to see the world. 

 I don't see cruising (especially long ones) as a "lower-cost way to see the world".

 

I've been on several long cruises, and by day 25 I'm ready to be back home.  Of course, that hasn't stopped me from taking longer cruises than 25 days.....

[leaveitallbehind]

All of the cruise lines you mention have casinos on their ships.  Disney, however, does not.  Disney, however, along with Royal Caribbean, and NCL's primary demographics are families with children.  Princess, along with families, has more of an adult focus.  Celebrity's demographic is adults.  Celebrity would likely fit you best amongst those IMO.

 

What you need to look at is what is the global presence of each as some have more ships and more world regions covered than others.  You also need to look at repositioning cruises amongst those lines as the primary source for longer cruises as most itineraries are typically 7-night repeats. 
 

As far as a "bus to go to different places" and a "lower cost way to see the world", I'm not sure cruising would provide either.  It is, IMO, a fairly economic way to see the world v flights and extended land stays and touring might be, but it is not low cost. 

 

But as the lines you reference are not considered high end luxury lines, they would provide a more cost effective way to cruise.  However, some of the higher end lines would provide the longer itineraries that would better facilitate "seeing the world".

 

I would suggest contacting a travel agent who specializes in cruises and start there with your requirements and allow them to help determine the best fit for you.

Edited November 28, 2023 by leaveitallbehind

[BobCatter]

20 minutes ago, leaveitallbehind said:

All of the cruise lines you mention have casinos on their ships.  Disney, however, does not.  Disney, however, along with Royal Caribbean, and NCL's primary demographics are families with children.  Princess, along with families, has more of an adult focus.  Celebrity's demographic is adults.  Celebrity would likely fit you best amongst those IMO.

 

What you need to look at is what is the global presence of each as some have more ships and more world regions covered than others.  You also need to look at repositioning cruises amongst those lines as the primary source for longer cruises as most itineraries are typically 7-night repeats. 
 

As far as a "bus to go to different places" and a "lower cost way to see the world", I'm not sure cruising would provide either.  It is, IMO, a fairly economic way to see the world v flights and extended land stays and touring might be, but it is not low cost. 

 

But as the lines you reference are not considered high end luxury lines, they would provide a more cost effective way to cruise.  However, some of the higher end lines would provide the longer itineraries that would better facilitate "seeing the world".

 

I would suggest contacting a travel agent who specializes in cruises and start there with your requirements and allow them to help determine the best fit for you.

Thank you for your feedback.

I should clarify that we have cruised quite a bit - mostly on smaller ships like Lindblad to extreme-ish locations, and Viking for the World Cruise.  A big ship would certainly be more cost-effective than either of these lines.

MSC seems to have some interesting itineraries including some grand voyages, which is what got us thinking about the idea of a 'bus.'  In most areas of the world, we are perfectly capable and willing to book our own excursions. 

[BobCatter]

41 minutes ago, Shmoo here said:

 I don't see cruising (especially long ones) as a "lower-cost way to see the world".

 

I've been on several long cruises, and by day 25 I'm ready to be back home.  Of course, that hasn't stopped me from taking longer cruises than 25 days.....

25 days is short...😉

I should clarify that we have cruised quite a bit - mostly on smaller ships like Lindblad to extreme-ish locations, and Viking for the World Cruise.  A big ship would certainly be more cost-effective than either of these lines.

A big ship should be more economical than a 'luxury' small ship or flying everywhere.

[Spudd]

Most mainstream cruise lines tend to do "round and round" itineraries. Holland America is one that has longer more interesting voyages.

[Heidi13]

4 hours ago, BobCatter said:

25 days is short...😉

I should clarify that we have cruised quite a bit - mostly on smaller ships like Lindblad to extreme-ish locations, and Viking for the World Cruise.  A big ship would certainly be more cost-effective than either of these lines.

A big ship should be more economical than a 'luxury' small ship or flying everywhere.

 

When comparing the Premium/Luxury lines to a mega ship, the base cost of the fare on the mega ship will definitely be less. However, having completed World Cruises on both Princess and Viking, by the end of the cruise, the daily cost was virtually identical.

[Flatbush Flyer]

What exactly do you mean by “really long cruise?” For us, anything less than 4 weeks is a “boat ride.” 

That said, if you want a month+\- multisegment (minimum repeat ports) cruise, look to lines that specialize in that type of trip.

 

We prefer Oceania particularly for the great crew and space ratios AND the excellent food/service.

In addition, we’ve done numerous bottom line comparisons of O with both mass market and luxury lines and found that the net daily rate of required and optionally desired added costs above the fare is far better on O.

[cruisemom42]

Any of them, depending on itinerary.

 

Based on what you’ve said, I would look for interesting itineraries that cover your areas of interest. Like others, I’d suggest adding Holland America to your list because of their longer, non-repeating itineraries.

 

After you find an itinerary you like, then look at the specific ship or cruise line ti determine if it will work for you. Just make a checklist of things to look for such as: which lines have longer times in port; which attract more children; or other things that matter to you.

[SelectSys]

15 hours ago, BobCatter said:

literally just be looking for a lower-cost way to see the world

If lost is truly what you care about, I would suggest that you consider MSC.  MSC is a line I have also considered as a means of "lower cost" cruise travel.  I haven't been on MSC personally, but some good friends we have cruised with have been on their ships.  One set went from South America to Italy for about 25 days if memory serves me correctly and they really enjoyed it.  The other went from Europe to Florida and were also happy on board.

 

14 hours ago, leaveitallbehind said:

"bus to go to different places" and a "lower cost way to see the world",

One other difference in MSC's model is that there is a lot more flexibility where passengers can get on and off the ship.  Maybe this help achieve your "bus" desires.is 

 

RCCL is somewhat embracing this model with their new round the world cruise which can also be purchased in segments.  Other lines do this as well, I believe.

 

15 hours ago, BobCatter said:

If we wanted to a really long cruise

One other option might be to investigate travel by freighters.  If you really just want to see the world, this might be ideal for you.  Lots of resources on line for investigating this option.

[leaveitallbehind]

27 minutes ago, SelectSys said:

RCCL is somewhat embracing this model with their new round the world cruise which can also be purchased in segments.  Other lines do this as well, I believe

The segment booking is not new to RCCL - or others, for example Celebrity - who do this routinely on certain repositioning cruises.  For example, Australia to Vancouver (and reverse) is sold in segments or as a whole.  Our 2019 RCCL Hawaii to Vancouver was one segment of that repositioning cruise. 

 

They have also done that in the past with new launches of a new class of ship, again as a positioning cruise to it's ultimate region for cruising. Quantum of the seas had a three + segment option with it's inaugural sailing. The RCCL world cruise you reference is a new itinerary that is a truly a round the world itinerary that is sold in four segments or as a whole.

 

You also reference MSC with optional boarding and departure ports. The interport boarding option is also something RCCL does on certain itineraries where passengers can board and depart at two separate ports of call within the same closed loop itinerary. The ports are selected with the initial booking and is locked in as such and you must complete the full closed loop itinerary. In this manner it is not an "on and off bus" concept, however. This, too, is not new for them.  Ex: Barcelona or Rome boarding and departure ports for one of their western Mediterranean itineraries.  

Edited November 29, 2023 by leaveitallbehind

[SoloAlaska]

This is something I’m looking at eventually doing as well. I met a couple who do this full time and they didn’t limit themselves to just one line. They hopped from ship to ship and line to line every once in a while. I’m looking at NCL primarily but am looking to try MSC and sprinkle in some Celebrity as well. It all depends who has the best deal and the right itinerary. For me it’s not about a vacation though so I wouldn’t be spending quite as much time in ports doing big excursions. I want experience the cities, visit shops that carry my product, get inspired for my work, see some museums etc. I’d be working from my stateroom for a chunk of each day making content, creating new products, and dealing with business stuff. The hardest part for me to figure out is prescription medication for long trips.

[Hlitner]

17 hours ago, BobCatter said:

If we wanted to a really long cruise, essentially using the ship as a bus to go to different places, what's y'all's opinion of the difference between MSC/NCL/Celebrity/Princess? We have no interest in gambling, and we don't have kids. We would literally just be looking for a lower-cost way to see the world. 

While we agree that using a cruise ship as a low cost way to "see the world" is not practical, we do understand the sentiment.  Most large cruise ships tend to have limited itineraries, which best fits their business plan model and the ability of places to even accept huge ships.  Traditionally, the most exotic itineraries (without lots of repeating) have been done by small to medium size ships.  

 

As to your list, consider that MSC does not currently operate in Asia, most of Africa, New Zealand, etc.  Their current operations are centered in Europe and, to a lesser degree, in Florida.  Celebrity and Princess do operate in many parts of the world, and they both have relatively large ships.  Holland America also has a long history of worldwide operations with interesting itineraries, and their newer ships are a good compromise in size (between huge and small).  Cunard also has some terrific longer itineraries, and if one books one of their lowest category inside cabins, the cost is reasonable.  

 

But as a life long world traveler, I would caution that wanting to see the "world" is best done on land (with perhaps some cruises in the mix).  Consider that a large majority of Europe, Asia, and Africa and not within range of port days :).  While we love to cruise (and do it about 100 days a year) we also have enjoyed our extended land trips (often via rental car).  

 

I do not know if the OP has much experience with longer cruises, but we would strongly suggest trying a longer cruise (i.e. over a month) to see if that lifestyle is something that you find satisfying,  We have been on many longer cruises and met many folks who realize that being on a ship for weeks or months is not quite what they had expected.   Many folks do not like the many consecutive sea days that often are part of long exotic cruises.  We once took a TransPacific cruise where 12 of the first 14 days were at sea (the only intervening port was Honolulu).  Many on that cruise were restless/unhappy with that many sea days...while others (including us) did not even care about getting off the ship in Hawaii.

 

Hank

[leaveitallbehind]

54 minutes ago, Hlitner said:

I do not know if the OP has much experience with longer cruises, but we would strongly suggest trying a longer cruise (i.e. over a month) to see if that lifestyle is something that you find satisfying, 

 

17 hours ago, BobCatter said:

25 days is short...😉

I should clarify that we have cruised quite a bit - mostly on smaller ships like Lindblad to extreme-ish locations, and Viking for the World Cruise.  A big ship would certainly be more cost-effective than either of these lines.

A big ship should be more economical than a 'luxury' small ship or flying everywhere.

@Hlitner note the comments by the OP earlier in the thread.  It appears as though they have experience with longer itineraries and it seems to me that they are thinking that larger ships (on larger cruise lines) may have a more favorable scale of economy for their plans for continued long itinerary travel

 

The issue, as has been well pointed out, is that most of the lines they've identified don't have the longer point to point itineraries and concentrate their scale of economy on shorter repeat closed loop itineraries.  The alternative to this would be with their repositioning and very few world cruise itineraries.

 

As also has been pointed out, it is typically the smaller ship (and typically smaller cruise line) higher end offering that also has the longer itineraries they seek, thus in general negating the perception of the economies they are after.  

Edited November 29, 2023 by leaveitallbehind

[Hlitner]

2 minutes ago, leaveitallbehind said:

 

@Hlitner note the comments by the OP earlier in the thread.  It appears as though they have experience with longer itineraries and it seems to me that they are thinking that larger ships (on larger cruise lines) may have a more favorable scale of economy for their plans for continued long itinerary travel

 

The issue, as has been well pointed out, is that most of the lines they've identified don't have the longer point to point itineraries and concentrate their scale of economy on shorter repeat closed loop itineraries.  The alternative to this would be with their repositioning and very few world cruise itineraries.

 

As also has been pointed out, it is typically the smaller ship (and typically smaller cruise line) higher end offering that also has the longer itineraries they seek, thus in general negating the perception of the economies they are after.  

Missed that part.  We routinely cruise on everything from 400 passenger luxury ships to 4000 passenger big ships.  While we enjoy all of our cruises, there is something very special about being on smaller vessels that is lost on the huge ships.  There is a reason why nearly all the true luxury ships carry less than 1000 passengers.

 

Hank

[Essiesmom]

I agree that you should mix and match the cruise lines and ships.  And sometimes the older, smaller ships will be doing the more interesting itineraries.  Find a cruise that intrigues you.  Then go to a site like cruisetimetables.com and see who might be sailing from the end port of that cruise, going on another interesting itinerary.  You might have to stay a day or two on shore in order to catch the next ship.  Or take a train or ferry to the next embarkation port.  Depending on where the cruise is, you might be able to arrange to leave a ship a port early in order to catch the next one.  I don’t think you can do the Phineas Fogg thing because according to @chengkp75freighters have not resumed carrying passengers since Covid.  EM

[jsn55]

I'm a planner and love researching travel, So I'd start to look at itineraries and consider different cruiselines/ships for segments.  Know how you feel about sea days ... lots or few.  Cobble together the length of trip you want.  Find a travel advisor who is also a cruise expert; there are all kinds of things available to a good TA on a long cruise.  

 

[gerryuk]

Costa are probably the cheapest way to go Cruising. They do world cruises, transoceanic, world cruise segments and the like. Just because they are cheaper than most, does not mean their product is bad.

[SelectSys]

On 11/29/2023 at 8:32 AM, Essiesmom said:

freighters have not resumed carrying passengers since Covid.

Interesting, but not too surprising given the risks and rewards of carrying paid passengers.  I guess the only "working freighter" carrying passengers would be the Aranui 5 which is also a cruise ship too.

 

Anything else out there like the Aranui 5?

[Host Kat]

4 hours ago, SelectSys said:

Interesting, but not too surprising given the risks and rewards of carrying paid passengers.  I guess the only "working freighter" carrying passengers would be the Aranui 5 which is also a cruise ship too.

 

Anything else out there like the Aranui 5?

 

@SelectSys

 

Please feel free to research the Special Interest Cruising - Freighter and Other Non-Traditional Cruise Travel forum.