Viking Value Comparison- Opinions Wanted

[Piredmus]

We are contemplating booking some Viking cruises, but I would like some input from Viking regulars to help me understand the “value proposition” of Viking cruises.

 

When I complete apple to apple comparisons of Viking against competitors, I am trying to comprehend why Viking costs on a per passenger-day basis, are more than similar cruises on similar lines.  While I fully understand that there is not an identical cruise for which to compare, I have been able to analyze trips that would appear almost the same in duration and itinerary.  So this is not an exact science, but when looking at the numbers, Viking is in the range of 20 to 45% more on a per person-day basis.  I have read the inclusions for each line and leveled the numbers in this analysis, but cannot make sense of the greater cost Viking is charging.

 

I called Viking to have them justify this anomaly and the items they promote do not make sense for the difference.  For example, Viking brag that they offer included beer or wine at “meal time”, where the others offer full drink service 24/7, so Viking are behind on this.  Viking also tell me they include an excursion at each port, but when you read the description of the offer, their included excursion is typically a three hour or less mass bus tour.  Compare that for example to Silversea and their included excursions are a wider variety of longer more in-depth options, so again Viking’s claim of this value is not driving the number analysis.  And even though Viking promotes their offerings as “all included” they don’t include gratuities which most luxury or ultra luxury lines do…so another negative adjustment.

 

The Viking product appears to be very nice, but I am having trouble understanding this discrepancy.  While I have read a number of the CC articles about Viking, I was wondering what the latest is on this cost analysis from anyone that is able to offer an opinion.  Your feed back is appreciated.

 

Thank you.

 

 

Tim

Toronto, Canada

[OneSixtyToOne]

Much of what “value” Viking offers is totally subjective. What’s the value of no children, no casinos, and the quality of the lectures? I’d pay a high premium for a “no children” airplane flight. I doubt you will find your answer in a spreadsheet. My suggestion is if Viking offers you an itinerary of your liking, try it and see if you like their product.
 

 

[LindaS272]

28 minutes ago, Piredmus said:

We are contemplating booking some Viking cruises, but I would like some input from Viking regulars to help me understand the “value proposition” of Viking cruises.

 

When I complete apple to apple comparisons of Viking against competitors, I am trying to comprehend why Viking costs on a per passenger-day basis, are more than similar cruises on similar lines.  While I fully understand that there is not an identical cruise for which to compare, I have been able to analyze trips that would appear almost the same in duration and itinerary.  So this is not an exact science, but when looking at the numbers, Viking is in the range of 20 to 45% more on a per person-day basis.  I have read the inclusions for each line and leveled the numbers in this analysis, but cannot make sense of the greater cost Viking is charging.

 

I called Viking to have them justify this anomaly and the items they promote do not make sense for the difference.  For example, Viking brag that they offer included beer or wine at “meal time”, where the others offer full drink service 24/7, so Viking are behind on this.  Viking also tell me they include an excursion at each port, but when you read the description of the offer, their included excursion is typically a three hour or less mass bus tour.  Compare that for example to Silversea and their included excursions are a wider variety of longer more in-depth options, so again Viking’s claim of this value is not driving the number analysis.  And even though Viking promotes their offerings as “all included” they don’t include gratuities which most luxury or ultra luxury lines do…so another negative adjustment.

 

The Viking product appears to be very nice, but I am having trouble understanding this discrepancy.  While I have read a number of the CC articles about Viking, I was wondering what the latest is on this cost analysis from anyone that is able to offer an opinion.  Your feed back is appreciated.

 

Thank you.

 

 

Tim

Toronto, Canada

Don’t overthink it. Just try Viking, you might love it. Peruse Cruise Critic threads on Viking and you’ll find a lot of loyalists. We have taken six ocean cruises with them since 2019, and while it’s not our primary mode of travel, we’ve settled on one or two cruises a year and have no interest in trying other lines. 
 

Search for the thread “Tips for New Viking Ocean Cruisers” to get an idea.

Edited March 26 by LindaS272

[Breckski]

Your analysis is what drove us to book cruises on other lines after using Viking products exclusively for the past 5 years.  We currently have cruises booked with Seabourn, Regent and Windstar with the understanding that Windstar may a bit down-market as compared to Viking.  But just wanted to try the smaller ship.

 

I'm assuming you compared similar cabin types when comparing Viking's cost to lines like Silversea, Regent and Seabourn because I think Viking is less expensive if comparing the lowest cost option for each line.  But since we normally book a PS stateroom category (roughly 75% premium to a V category), we've came to the conclusion Viking is a bit overpriced.  But if you are of the mindset that a V or DV stateroom is sufficient as you're never in the room, then I think Viking still offers a viable, competitive option.  Essentially saying you would put no value in the larger staterooms on the ultra-luxury lines.

 

I would like to hear opinions of others who stay in higher category staterooms. 

 

Of course, we may find out that the grass isn't always greener???

[Breckski]

To provide hard pricing data on a cruise to Japan we have booked.  

 

Viking 15 days, Hong Kong to Tokyo with 2 sea days and staying 2 days at both of Hong Kong and Tokyo.  PS3 was $1,333 pp pd.

 

Regent - 11 day cruise, 2-day pre-cruise extension in Tokyo.  1 sea day on docked at Kyoto 2 days.  Slightly larger suite $1,055 pp pd.  Calculated using 11 days so extension was "free" in my comparison.

Edited March 26 by mwike

[Jim Avery]

Ok, let's be clear, no cruise is a "good investment".  You take a cruise for only two reasons.

1.  You want to .

2.  You can.

Simple.  If you like what you see and can afford it, take it.  Stop worrying about saving a nickel here or there.

[SantaFe1]

52 minutes ago, Jim Avery said:

Ok, let's be clear, no cruise is a "good investment".  You take a cruise for only two reasons.

1.  You want to .

2.  You can.

Simple.  If you like what you see and can afford it, take it.  Stop worrying about saving a nickel here or there.

I’d like to,”like” this three times.  Yes!  We are coming to the end of our big travel years, and Viking just fits us so well. 

Edited March 27 by SantaFe1

[Mich3554]

There is a certain something that keeps us at Viking.  The no children, no casinos, no hard sell is a big chunk of it, but the other part is when we got onto the ship yesterday, the second Viking employee on the ship said ‘I know you!’.  Dinner last night, at least 3 waitstaff welcomed us aboard, they had been staff on previous cruises we have been on.  
 

We could cruise cheaper, inevitably.  But we are happy for what we receive and are comfortable with the familiarity.  If stuff happens where we feel we aren’t receiving what we want, we may look elsewhere.  Right now, not really interested.

[Breckski]

1 hour ago, Jim Avery said:

Ok, let's be clear, no cruise is a "good investment".  You take a cruise for only two reasons.

1.  You want to .

2.  You can.

Simple.  If you like what you see and can afford it, take it.  Stop worrying about saving a nickel here or there.

I don't think the OP was calling a cruise an investment, and I certainly don't consider a 20-45% savings would be considered saving a nickel here or there.  

 

Most folks have a vacation budget or at least a maximum amount they are comfortable spending on vacation.  Why not cross-shop for the best experience for them?  And I think the OP is trying to decide if he/she does indeed like what he/she is seeing.  

 

I think this is a legitimate question for discussion given Viking's recent price increases and deserves a more thoughtful and informative answer especially from someone with much experience.  

[SantaFe1]

2 minutes ago, mwike said:

Most folks have a vacation budget or at least a maximum amount they are comfortable spending on vacation. 

 

2 minutes ago, mwike said:

I don't think the OP was calling a cruise an investment, and I certainly don't consider a 20-45% savings would be considered saving a nickel here or there.  

 

Most folks have a vacation budget or at least a maximum amount they are comfortable spending on vacation.  Why not cross-shop for the best experience for them?  And I think the OP is trying to decide if he/she does indeed like what he/she is seeing.  

 

I think this is a legitimate question for discussion given Viking's recent price increases and deserves a more thoughtful and informative answer especially from someone with much experience.  

 

3 minutes ago, mwike said:

Most folks have a vacation budget or at least a maximum amount they are comfortable spending on vacation

I think many who travel with Viking are long past thinking of cruises as vacations, although they may have a budget.  Once retired, we just travel, hopefully not at peak times.  Do we have a budget, sure, but in retirement, we have determined what is most important to us.  It is traveling. We have 8 VO cruises under our belts, with three more and a river trip coming up.  Viking must be doing something right.  

[Jim Avery]

8 minutes ago, mwike said:

I don't think the OP was calling a cruise an investment, and I certainly don't consider a 20-45% savings would be considered saving a nickel here or there.  

 

Most folks have a vacation budget or at least a maximum amount they are comfortable spending on vacation.  Why not cross-shop for the best experience for them?  And I think the OP is trying to decide if he/she does indeed like what he/she is seeing.  

 

I think this is a legitimate question for discussion given Viking's recent price increases and deserves a more thoughtful and informative answer especially from someone with much experience.  

The OP asked for opinions. I gave mine. Why are you bothered by that?

[Peregrina651]

If it were just a matter of $$, we'd be sailing on Carnival or NCL. Thank you, no. We'd rather stay home.  

 

Then Viking opened its Oceans division. It was more expensive than the mainstream lines but under a 1000 pax, no casinos, no kids, free internet, included excursions, no formal nights, no ties & jackets and port heavy itineraries aimed at our age demographic were a big draw.

 

It is the intangibles that keep us coming back.

 

 

[SJD117]

2 hours ago, mwike said:

I think the OP is trying to decide if he/she does indeed like what he/she is seeing.

Judging from Tim’s post, it appears he’s already decided which cruise line he likes best (as you’ve decided, too). And that’s great! “To each his or her own” as the old saying goes. 

 

Edited March 27 by SJD117

[CDNPolar]

Hard to put into words, but we just like Viking for all the positive statements above.

 

Most of all NO kids.  Not a cruise line that is adult focused, but a cruise line with NO kids.

 

I have tried to do analysis of different cruise lines in price and it is difficult.  No two are close enough to really make that decision.

 

Personally, we look at the itinerary, then the cost, and ask if the cost fits our budget.  If it fits the AVAILABLE budget for travel this year, we do it.

 

There are Viking cruises that we have not done yet because the itinerary is too expensive now.  Does not mean that we won't do it later.

 

We are however biased as we have completed 10 Viking cruises and keep booking them.

 

 

[sharkster77]

10 hours ago, Peregrina651 said:

If it were just a matter of $$, we'd be sailing on Carnival or NCL. Thank you, no. We'd rather stay home.  

 

Then Viking opened its Oceans division. It was more expensive than the mainstream lines but under a 1000 pax, no casinos, no kids, free internet, included excursions, no formal nights, no ties & jackets and port heavy itineraries aimed at our age demographic were a big draw.

 

It is the intangibles that keep us coming back.

 

 

AND---no extra charge for special dining venues, all cabins with a verandah, a more cerebral and less hedonistic vibe (trying NOT to sound snobby, but some of us aren't into the heavy drinking/party scene)

[WanderingBrit]

When I've done the side by side cost comparison Viking has been pretty evenly priced when I consider all the aspects we value:

- No children
- No formal nights
- No assigned dining time or location
- A simple, low effort, dining option any time that's all we have the energy for (The World Cafe on Viking)
- No casino, or art auction
- No additional charge for "specialty" dining, or using the spa
- Included drinks, in cabin and at meals
- An included excursion and onboard enrichment talks

If an alternative cruise line doesn't match those criteria we're not likely to consider them, and so the cost comparison is not one that arises. If there's one that's a close match we should consider, please suggest it!

[natshala]

We just completed our first VO cruise—Ft.Lauderdale to Rome after many, many Celebrity cruises. We’re hooked and booked 4 onboard! Too many reasons to count…upscale, peaceful, interesting fellow pax, fabulous food, enrichment, etc. We’ll never go back to mass market.

[oskidunker]

Oceania better wine and excursions included. 

[WanderingBrit]

22 minutes ago, oskidunker said:

Oceania better wine and excursions included. 

But when I compare like for like itinerary and cabin level, Oceania is the same price as Viking and doesn't "tick all the boxes" that we value with Viking, so for us there's no motivation to switch.

Back to the OP: I haven't found a truly comparable offering that is 20%-45% less expensive than Viking.

[Piredmus]

OP'er here.  Thank you to everyone for your feedback.  As was to be expected, there is no concrete answer to the question.  I concur with the sentiments offered as to why any cruise may be more desirable than others and realize that cost analysis comparison is not an exact science.

 

That said, we were looking at Australia & SE Asian itineraries of long duration (30 days or so) wherein the Viking numbers were in the $1200 per person-day range, followed by Silversea & Seabourn in the $900 range and for comparison sake, Celebrity was around $500 albeit with an inferior itinerary.  There is no doubt that the value one puts in the selection of a cruise is totally subjective and is not only based on the hard numbers, but the many intangibles that are difficult to assign a value to.

 

As stated, the Viking offering looks very nice and I have no doubt that we will book one of their trips soon.  The only reason for the initial question was to see if I was totally missing something in my analysis, which doesn't appear to be the case.

 

Thanks and happy cruising...see you on the ships.

[DrKoob]

19 hours ago, mwike said:

Your analysis is what drove us to book cruises on other lines after using Viking products exclusively for the past 5 years.  We currently have cruises booked with Seabourn, Regent and Windstar with the understanding that Windstar may a bit down-market as compared to Viking.  But just wanted to try the smaller ship.

There it is right there. I don't compare Viking to Seabourn, Regent and Windstar. I compare Viking to Azamara and Oceania and when you do that, those are about right on the money.

[CCWineLover]

Sometimes spreadsheets and analysis don't do the trick - you have to try them out.  There are so many non-dollar subjective aspects to Viking (mentioned in many posts) so for us it is NOT a dollar thing but an emotional experience thing.   

Heck - if we were just comparing $$$ to fly from US to Europe or wherever, we'd always fly economy and never fly business class.  And we'd never eat at an upscale restaurant - food is food.  It is the subjective experieces.  What was the famous ad . . .   the cost for xyz . .  "Priceless"

[pavementends]

I've been on both Viking and Silversea. I have another cruise booked on Silversea. I am not planning to do Viking again. (I like the more-inclusive pricing and found the dining substantially better. Included drinks- and I might say not weak drinks- is another thing).

 

I think the discrepancy in cost between cruise lines is a fair bit less than it first appears. A big complication in comparing- in addition to differences in what is included- is the existence of sales and promotions. I've decided that if I can get a cruise I'm interested in at an acceptable price on Silversea I will buy it.

 

Viking does lots of elegant promotions that create an aura of luxury. This seems to work with most of their clientele. Maybe most move up from mass-market as opposed to looking for better value than luxury lines.

 

They also send a phenomenal amount of mail, sometimes more than one in a day.

[rmalbers]

OP:  I think what you are seeing with those other cruise line prices, in those areas of the world, is that those areas of the world are not VO's main focus.  I think you have the analysis figured out. You can't go wrong with any of those lines.  Seems like you have found some nice pricing with other lines so just go for it.  If they are too pricey go with Celebrity, but not their newest E class ships (if they sail them there). 

Edited March 27 by rmalbers

[Pam]

I have never cruised Viking although a good friend did.  I got caught up in both 'live from' threads from the world cruisers; i was amazed that Viking had enough passengers to fill two WC ships, then saw that one wasn't totally all WC'ers.  Now they are having the same problem all cruise lines are having with the Red Sea area unrest.

 

But I am reading on both those threads that Viking HQ is changing tours that were paid for with nonrefundable OBC, over to saying they were paid for with refundable OBC and the people are getting very little if any cooperation in their protests.  That is a red flag for anybody  reading along on several cruiselines' WC threads.  Or, that is my opinion.