Is Seabourn Adrift at Sea?

[Kane]

Having recently returned from a Seabourn voyage, I visited this forum to contribute what we experienced on our sailing both good and bad.  What I see on these boards make me wonder whether Seabourn could be adrift at Sea.  Basically, they have decided that Expedition sailing was the business model of the future and have gone "all in", but it does not seem to be working out.

 

They launched two new smaller Expedition ships and sold the Odyssey.  On our cruise (Quest), there was a big presentation of all the wonderful things about the Expedition ships.  Luxury cruising, but with smaller limited venues.  Daily presentations by the Expedition staff on the area in which the voyage was sailing in a new high-tech lounge.

 

Seabourn seems to have Antarctica nailed down, as our earlier Quest voyage there was well done.  Friends of ours recently returned from there on one of the new Expedition ships.  The visit was good, but the "luxury cruising" aspect was a bit lacking.

 

The boards now report some alarming developments:

 

1) Seabourn is chartering Expedition ships to 3rd party companies.  What is the deal with this?

2) Expedition voyages outside of Antarctica seem to be lacking in details such as planning and excursions.

3) World class expert "Conversation" speakers on areas visited seem to be missing.

4) Communications from Seabourn is close to absent.

 

What is going on, and will it improve?  I feel bad about this.  Is it possible that "Luxury cruising" and "Expedition" is an oxymoron?

[cruiseej]

13 hours ago, Kane said:

Seabourn is chartering Expedition ships to 3rd party companies.  What is the deal with this?

 

It seems all the luxury cruise lines nowadays will rent their ships for charters, sometimes disrupting customers who have previously booked. It's not confined to expedition ships, nor to Seabourn. It's not a great practice, but I think the cruise lines need to maximize their revenues however they can after their massive losses during the pandemic shutdown.

 

14 hours ago, Kane said:

World class expert "Conversation" speakers on areas visited seem to be missing.

 

We'll be doing our first expedition sailing with Seabourn later this year; we've done two expedition cruises with Silversea, and on those cruises, there were no guest lecturers beyond the expedition staff. (I don't know if Seabourn staffs it differently). The Silversea expedition team had people who are experts in various fields from history and culture or sea life to birds to the local region, and they delivered a large number of interesting talks on a wide variety of topics. 

 

14 hours ago, Kane said:

Is it possible that "Luxury cruising" and "Expedition" is an oxymoron?

 

I think it depends on what you look for in a "luxury cruise." I think that expedition cruises are intended to be very different experiences than classic ocean cruises. That includes a different pace for activities on and off ship, less entertainment on the smaller ship, fewer dining venues, etc, whil some things, such as the suites on the ship, are quite similar. Within the differences of expedition cruising, they're trying to deliver a somewhat familiar and luxury experience. We're looking forward to our first cruise on the Venture, but on our two Silversea expedition cruises (with their much older ships converted for expedition cruising), we never felt we had lost the thread of being on a "luxury" cruise.

[commodoredave]

A good indicator of the quality delivered on SB’s expedition ships might be the ratio of repeat cruisers. On our Amazon voyage in October aboard the Pursuit, the cruise consultant was very busy selling future cruises, including to us. 

[LNugent]

My husband and I cruised on the Venture. It was a very good experience and it felt like a luxury expedition cruise. The submarine was awesome. The one issue was there were excursions and zodiac trips in which people participated that were not physically able. If created problems/delays for the other guests. Tough situation for Seabourn. 

[DC Traveler244]

My husband and I recently concluded a Venture cruise from Málaga to Greenwich.  While it was pleasant, it was not a true expedition by any stretch of the imagination:  it visited European ports that any of Seabourn's non-expedition ships could have handled.  

 

Yes, it is on an expedition vessel, and the expedition staff was onboard (in many cases, performing tasks that typically would have been performed -- more ably IMO -- by SB Guest Services staff on non-expedition vessels).  And, perhaps because ours was designated as an "expedition" voyage, we were required to use zodiacs to go ashore in ports where it would have made more sense to use tenders.   

 

I do think it's possible that Seabourn's  big commitment to "expedition" cruising isn't  working out as planned.  I noticed that the future cruise sales representative was offering very large (35% + the normal 5% onboard booking) discounts on  quite a few expedition cruises.

 

Nonetheless, there seems to be high demand for true expedition itineraries, like the Kimberley.

 

As much as we enjoyed Seabourn's true expedition cruises (Antarctica and Iceland/Greenland), we don't plan on booking another non-expedition voyage on one of SB's expedition ships.  

[Covepointcruiser]

When you take an expedition ship on a repositioning cruise you won’t get the expedition experience.  The expedition ships were made for expedition cruising and don’t have all the venues available on the 4 larger ships.   I would be surprised if the repositioning sailings did not cost less than the $1K per person per day that you regularly pay on actual expedition cruises.

[tv24]

I also know that many cruise lines charter their ships.  Azamara does this regularly, and we had one crossing on Silversea cancelled 2 years ago because Silversea wanted to use the ship for a private charter.  The cancellation was about 30 days before departure with a full refund, but no alternative suggestions.  We had to scramble to find a reasonable way to Europe.

[Kilroyshere]

I too have been wondering what is in SB's future?

 

With the sale of Odyssey (450 guests) and bringing on 2 Expedition ships (combined total of 528 guests), SB will have a net gain of only 78 possible guests, while arguably requiring twice the number of crew to operate and and arguably twice as much operating costs with 2 ships (Venture & Pursuit) versus 1 (Odyssey). This doesn't make sense to me.

 

Without purchasing an existing ship from another cruise line, it would take at least 5-years from decision to build, financing, design, letting contracts and construction to bring a new ship to SB's fleet.

 

Perhaps the best years of Ultra Luxury Cruising and what so many of us came to love with SB in particular, is becoming a thing of the past.

 

I hope I'm wrong about this.

 

 

Edited April 17 by Kilroyshere

[Kane]

My personal take is that it was a less than optimum business decision.  Expedition cruises sound very good and, I admit, our Antarctica cruise was a life experience.  The problem question is: would we be interested in a second Antarctica visit, or Greenland, or Northwest Passage?  Not especially because seeing additional frozen wilderness becomes pretty Meh, and a bit pricey.

 

So, what other  areas of the world would entice an Expedition voyage?  Tracking down the natives of Papua New Guinea jungles?  Would there be enough folks interested in that to fill up a few ships?

 

Animal expeditions accessible from ships?  Galapagos is well covered for that.  The really good animal viewing is by land safari.

 

The undersea is already pretty well included in the submarines found on the new Expedition ships.  To expand this, figuring out how to get hundreds of passengers down six-at-a-time might become a problem.  Scuba and snorkeling is easier but pretty well covered, and by ships that are not necessarily expedition equipped.

 

Seems to me that the Expedition market may already be full.  Oh well.

[frantic36]

40 minutes ago, Kane said:

The problem question is: would we be interested in a second Antarctica visit, or Greenland, or Northwest Passage?  Not especially because seeing additional frozen wilderness becomes pretty Meh, and a bit pricey.

 

I am not sure if I want to return to Antarctica as I dislike the cold, however to return for the scenery and wildlife is very tempting. We know people who have done this 2-3 times so everyone is different. We haven't done the northern Arctic region but will one day and again I know people who have done this region a few times.

 

We did a Kimberley cruise last year on True North an Australian Company and their prices are more per diem than Seabourn and alcohol generally isn't included and yet their sailings book out quite frequently a week in advance by return cruisers. We are doing a repeat on Pursuit later this year of the Kimberley because we loved the amazing scenery. Lots of people enjoy exploring places like Papua New Guinea, Indonesian islands etc.

 

Some of those well known conversationalists you mention are not as interesting, as informed or up to date as some of the Expedition Team who are well experienced in their field.

 

What I will agree with is the lack of details for non-Antarctic expedition cruises is a problem and hope that is rectified in the future. 

 

I personally am looking forward to our cruise on Pursuit as we enjoyed sailing on the smaller ships Pride, Legend and Spirit and will wait and see and make up our own mind.