Why Regent and other luxury lines are a good value

[Ste. Michelle]

Regent has run its prices up to the highest in the industry. Example: August 2009 - One week on Navigator $5,495.00 in the lowest suite. One week on the brand new Seabourn Odyssey $5,180.00.

 

 

Your numbers are misleading. If you look at the Regent website, you will see that the fare you are quoting INCLUDES AIR, or you may take $1000 off the fare. Seabourn is AIR EXCLUSIVE. That would make one week on the Navigator $4495.00 in the lowest suite, as opposed to $5180 on the brand new Seabourn Odyssey. That would make the Regent Navigator $685 pp less.

[Travelcat2]

Regent has run its prices up to the highest in the industry. Example: August 2009 - One week on Navigator $5,495.00 in the lowest suite. One week on the brand new Seabourn Odyssey $5,180.00.

 

 

Your numbers are misleading. If you look at the Regent website, you will see that the fare you are quoting INCLUDES AIR, or you may take $1000 off the fare. Seabourn is AIR EXCLUSIVE. That would make one week on the Navigator $4495.00 in the lowest suite, as opposed to $5180 on the brand new Seabourn Odyssey. That would make the Regent Navigator $685 pp less.

 

Thank you for looking that up :D

[Iamboatman]

Regent has run its prices up to the highest in the industry. Example: August 2009 - One week on Navigator $5,495.00 in the lowest suite. One week on the brand new Seabourn Odyssey $5,180.00.

 

 

Your numbers are misleading. If you look at the Regent website, you will see that the fare you are quoting INCLUDES AIR, or you may take $1000 off the fare. Seabourn is AIR EXCLUSIVE. That would make one week on the Navigator $4495.00 in the lowest suite, as opposed to $5180 on the brand new Seabourn Odyssey. That would make the Regent Navigator $685 pp less.

 

I stand corrected, but let's use the actual figures including the unmentioned fees and taxes: Seabourn $5,247 vs. Regent $4,778. (Regent doesn't include port charges/fees while Seabourn does.) Seabourn is $469 more, but I would still maintain the argument is very much accurate.

 

For that minimal price difference, making it pretty much all things equal, the value still isn't there. Anyone want to argue that the Navigator is a better value? The point is Regent is at the top of the price range and quibbling over a few dollars (not thousands) would to most seem to be meaningless.

[Pam]

I never lost interest in this thread, although I did skim through some of the posts (I speed-read rather well) that didn't really interest me.

 

I am also concerned. I am not a travel agent, so I don't need to inform anybody except Mark and me (unless I am urging friends to join us). We have had such great experiences on the Regent ships, I would be devastated if things went downhill. We can go on a Regent ship and not care overly which ports we will be going into; we declared several ports as our own sea days last time and just relaxed. I was exhausted after several months' caring for a very ill son, and Mark was preparing for gastric bypass surgery, so we were looking for a very different setting from what we usually want. His diet was very strict and structured, and Seth and Bobby made sure he got what he could eat with as much flavor as possible. We were greeted by name constantly, with big smiles. We were checked on in Compass Rose, by several people, every evening at dinner.

 

We were on the week before dry dock, so we dismissed a couple of little things that needed to be corrected. They were corrected as much as possible while we were on, but we were told they would be addressed more fully during the next week.

 

All of this is worth paying extra for, in our opinions. We like feeling that we are 'home' on the ships, and that our 'family' is happy to see us. We drink very little, if at all, but if I decide I want a mai-tai in the casino, it's fun to just order it.

 

We have never sailed any of the other luxury lines, so I'm not in any way saying we wouldn't have the personal touch on them, too. I am just saying that we do like the personal touch and feel like it's worth a premium. However, there is a limit to the premium we are willing to pay, and that limit may very well stop our Regent cruising. I'd hate that, but life goes on.

[JunPOA]

Regent has run its prices up to the highest in the industry. Example: August 2009 - One week on Navigator $5,495.00 in the lowest suite. One week on the brand new Seabourn Odyssey $5,180.00.

Your numbers are misleading. If you look at the Regent website, you will see that the fare you are quoting INCLUDES AIR, or you may take $1000 off the fare. Seabourn is AIR EXCLUSIVE. That would make one week on the Navigator $4495.00 in the lowest suite, as opposed to $5180 on the brand new Seabourn Odyssey. That would make the Regent Navigator $685 pp less.

TO: Ste. Michelle-Your figures for Seabourne are impressive and have prompted me to backburner Regent while I go reserach a quote from Seaboune Odyseey.:)

For IAMBOATMAN-luv the lighthouse!...and thanks for chiming in - I was beginning to feel guilty (inappropraite post?) about bringing up the comparisons between Regent & HAL after reading travelcat2 post.

Just an FYI - I did just receive what appeared to be an appealing & likely competitive & enticing quote from a TA (electronically of cousre). She responded after a phone-did her figures and got back to me within 2hours. I am an obsessive frugal researching comparison shopper when it comes to costing out budget & quality.

For a 10 nite Navigator Mediteranean (Sept.'09) WITH AIR CAT. F she is offering:

• $7293.00/pax incl. PT & taxes & air + bonus $650/cabin OBC + AMEX platinum $150/pp.

I little more pallatble then some other quotes I had been browsing on-line, but the appeal of the new Odyseey could very well tempt me.:D

I'll continue to "lurk" around this most interesting discussion.

Leah

[Leejnd4]

For IAMBOATMAN-luv the lighthouse!...and thanks for chiming in - I was beginning to feel guilty (inappropraite post?) about bringing up the comparisons between Regent & HAL after reading travelcat2 post.

 

I'll continue to "lurk" around this most interesting discussion.[/color]

Leah

 

Don't feel guilty - it's all related to the topic. I don't believe this board is so strictly regimented that we cannot have discussions that are RELATED to, if not specifically ON, topic. :)

[Host Dan]

Hi All,

Although this is a thread that has been helpful and enjoyed by most, it has gone off topic several times, and has become a bit too "personal" for some. After spending quite some time "cleaning" it up, I have re-instated the thread. PLEASE stay on topic, and keep any personal comments, attacks, whatever off the board! I can't spend lots of time moderating just 1 thread. I look after several boards here on CC.

 

Thank you!

 

Host Dan

[Iamboatman]

Thanks, Dan!:D :D :D

 

Thanks, Leah...and please don't just lurk. Your question and input have been helpful not only to this discussion, but - as it should be - in figuring out what cruise works best for you.

 

Thanks, Pam - Your comment about the luxury of just being on the ship and wanting the pampering is a wonderful juxtaposition to the number crunching "value" we have been talking about.

 

Let's keep this great discussion going!:)

[ORV]

Thank you Host Dan for putting this back.

[DebbieH103]

First off, the OP's subject was that luxury IS a good value, and if I recall from way back when it was started, that poster was not questioning such. Others turned it into a debate.

 

Also, while I am impressed with the seemingly wonderful offerings of Seabourn Odyssey and plan on it being my intro into Seabourn, it can't be said that its features ARE better than Navigator's because Odyssey is vapor at this point. One might say it WILL be better, but it can't be said that it IS better. Not one person has sailed on it to report a real comparison.

 

We are paying the same per night on our Silversea cruise next week as we did 4 cruises and 2 years ago. That is a short time, and it is harder all the time to find a sale, but they do still exist.

 

If my husband stood in one of those mass market lines, he would tell me to go alone next time. I don't care how much I luxed it up.

[Leejnd4]

Debbie, I hope you are not suggesting that we must limit our replies in a thread to be in agreement with the OP. It is my understanding that Cruise Critic does in fact allow for differing views about a topic to be discussed within the topic. And that is what we've been doing - sharing our opinions as to whether or not each of us, from our own perspective, agrees that it is a good value. Some of us do, some of us don't, some are undecided. That's the nature of discussion boards.

 

Me, I'm still undecided - but I'm taking the chance! :D

 

Dan, thanks for putting the thread back and getting it back in line and on topic! :)

[Travelcat2]

Debbie103, I was looking for the right word to describe the comparison of Seabourn's new ship (suppose to be quite lovely) and the Navigator. . . "vapor" was perfect!

 

I see two things happening -- currently there are some people looking for a less expensive cruise while keeping as much luxury as possible. There are dramatic price differences in main-stream vs. luxury. I see a possible big change on the horizon that could change perceptions of luxury value.

 

When the new Silversea, Seabourn and Regent ships enter the marketplace, the cost to sail on the new ships will be higher than ships currently sailing (once you get past the "specials" offered when you book a ship not yet completed -- more than a year away). Then the question will be, is it worth more money to be on a new ship -- similiar amenities, service and food. The price to sail, for instance, on the Navigator may become a bargain compared to the new ship, Mariner and Voyager (not just speculation -- have read and heard several things about pricing on the new luxury ships).

 

It appears that the booking the Seabourn Odyssey is the best luxury deal around at the moment. It is running extremely good specials for the middle to end of 2009. I would think that Seabourn customers would be booking the new ship instead of the other three -- how can it not be worth it?

 

I have read many reviews, polls, write-ups on the top main-stream cruise lines. HAL is way up there -- NCL at the other end. Whether or not a person used to luxury cruises will enjoy mass-market is really up to that person. . . some will..... some will not.

[Leejnd4]

When the new Silversea, Seabourn and Regent ships enter the marketplace, the cost to sail on the new ships will be higher than ships currently sailing (once you get past the "specials" offered when you book a ship not yet completed -- more than a year away). Then the question will be, is it worth more money to be on a new ship -- similiar amenities, service and food. The price to sail, for instance, on the Navigator may become a bargain compared to the new ship, Mariner and Voyager (not just speculation -- have read and heard several things about pricing on the new luxury ships).

 

Oh I HOPE that's true! The primary reason I ended up on a luxury cruise line to begin with was that when I did the apples-to-apples comparison back then - the "luxed up" mass-market cruise vs. the Regent cruise - they came out close enough in price that it didn't make senes to me NOT to go on Regent. As we've illuminated in this thread, there are some things on a mass-market cruise that we just can't luxe up no matter how much more money we throw at it. Unfortunately, that pricing comparison no longer holds true (on the itineraries I've been considering) so I'm forced to make that value judgement between the two types of lines...and fall in the other direction.

 

I would have no problem sailing on the older luxury ships in order to get a lower fare, in comparison to the new ones. From what I can tell, the luxury lines do a far better job of keeping their older fleets ship-shape, and not letting them deteriorate until they are crying out for a dry-dock.

[Iamboatman]

Seabourn is not running any "specials", so that is just misinformation. Seabourn has 3 essentially identical ships (what a new concept;) ) coming out over the next 3 years. It pricing is what it is...and as more new ships come into the market and the demand is determined, the pricing will be adjusted. (Seabourn is not going to undercut itself. Besides Seabourn guests tend to book a year + out, so by the time the Odyssey is launched the books will be long open on the second new ship.)

 

There is no "four year plan" though there are, obviously, projections. Cruise lines adjust their prices fairly regularly in reality...because factors such as economic strength, port popularity, dollar weakness (yuk!), passenger loads differing than expected, etc.

 

What I think may occur - though it hasn't happened yet - is that the older Seabourn triplets may have some real "value" for those wanting luxury service without all the bells and whistles...and they may visit some very unique ports. I may have some info later next month, but I don't know.

 

Silversea has had some excess capacity over the past couple of years (even offering travel agent rates during peak times), but with its shift to a more European market focus, if its success continues (it reported a 33% increase in passengers so far -either a good or bad thing with no new ships) those value rates may become a thing of the past; hopefully not, though.

 

With all the changes, I am confident that Regent is going to do something before 2011-12 when it - hopefully - will have its new ship. (I say hopefully because there has been no announcement and none is expected until the fall at the earliest.) With SS and SB increasing capacity on the top end and Oceania really increasing capacity just below Regent's market, adding value may well be the key to continued success. I cannot see it waiting around for 3-4 years without improving its product.

[Travelcat2]

On August 1, 2009, a 7 night sailing in the same general area -- Seabourn Legend $4,970....... Odyssey $5,180. A difference of $110. The pricing of Odyssey vs. other Searbourn remains similiar throughout the summer of 2009 (didn't check out fall of winter).

 

For all of the expected luxury of the "vapor" ship, this must be the deal of this century -- real value! Nice to hear that these extremely low prices are not introductory. At this rate, the ships (at least the Odyssey and other new ships as they are built) will be running full and will have no competition from Silversea or Regent.

 

In terms of the Regent ships, wern't current Seabourn and Silversea ships built in the early 1990's? Regent's Voyager and Navigator are considerably newer. Worth the money? Again, subjective. . . Our cruise next month is 100% full -- so, there are 700 people that seem to find value.

[Pam]

I thought I was losing my mind! I looked for this thread this morning, it was gone (I couldn't figure out what had happened, because I thought it was moving along quite peacefully). Left for most of the day, came back and it was the top thread. Host Dan, I'm really getting too old for this, just sayin'

 

We aren't cruising this year; have two land trips (Scotland and S. Africa, YAY!!!) and a new house under construction. For 2009, we just have the one cruise booked on Navigator in March (JimB has a roll call going for that one, I think) and are waiting to see how Mark's health shakes out from this surgery. But I always keep a really close eye on a couple of cruise boards, so that I can feel informed if/when something looks good to us.

[Iamboatman]

I think you are seeing that Seabourn isn't, as first mentioned, playing games with pricing. It is good value.

 

I would also caution that pricing a cruise or value based upon the age of the ship is pretty dangerous. Until this utterance, as if to justify the higher Regent prices, the facilities (hardware) and services (software) as well as ports, added amenities, etc. were (and actually remain) the measure of luxury and value.

 

Particular cruises being full may be a factor, but you need to look at the entire picture; not a cruise. Heck, Seabourn's transatlantics are almost always sell-outs or nearly so, the Navigator this year is only about 25% full, as I understand it. Does that mean anything substantive? I really don't think so.

[JunPOA]

 

With all the changes, I am confident that Regent is going to do something before 2011-12 when it - hopefully - will have its new ship. (I say hopefully because there has been no announcement and none is expected until the fall at the earliest.) With SS and SB increasing capacity on the top end and Oceania really increasing capacity just below Regent's market, adding value may well be the key to continued success. I cannot see it waiting around for 3-4 years without improving its product.

Evening folks:)

As I said earlier - I've been lurking & sometimes chiming in when I feel I can offer a substantive contribution. Funny Iamboatman references Oceana, there's been a bit of chatter on the Celebrity (new Equinox) Cunard, & Azmara boards of novice cc'rs recently asking for reviews, comparisons, and of course "value". If they're asking they must be "shopping" for a luxury "value" cruise expereince. Needless to say Azmara is still getting its feet wet - testing the waters if you will. As I understand there are still some kinks but surely potential for growth if the itineraries, pricing, & customer service pans out to the level of what consumers define as "luxury". If they (Azmara & Equinox-both under the RCI, Ltd parent company)) are successful - then Oceana may have a close competitor on its hands.:D

If anyone has a market research background perhaps they can chime in and tell us if they have quatitaive evidence that consumers will choose a "reliable long standing product (ship) over a brand spanking new product (ship).

I do conduct health plan/drug plan research and we found evidence that consumers do rate a long standing reliable trustworthy product over a newer cellophane wrapped NIB product-when comparing/selecting plans. I cannot gurantee that this research is generalizable to the cruise market by any means - certainly getting accessable health care supercedes a cruise expereince.:rolleyes: However it does point to consumers values and beliefs system.

BTW - I am STILL comparing & shopping-ruled Odysee out - most itineraries I was interested required too many days off from work-let's see only 14 more years to retire.:rolleyes: Next stop-quotes on Seabourne.

Excuse my verbosity.:o

[Leejnd4]

Excuse my verbosity.:o

That? Verbosity? Compared on the way some of us post, that was downright succinct! I claim an excuse for my verbosity, tho...I'm a writer. (Not really a good excuse, but at least an explanation.) ;)

 

Do keep us informed as to how your comparison shopping is going.

[Travelcat2]

Don't think anyone is playing games with Seabourn pricing. As with any new product (hotel, cruise ship, restaurant), there is usually incentive pricing to entice people to give it a try. Once Odysseyis sailing, it will be interesting to see the pricing. Again, can't see why anyone would make a decision to sail one of the other Seabourn ships when the new one is "almost" the same price -- for apparently so much more!

 

Apollo has repeatedly stated that Oceania is their high end (but not luxury) level. With the economy in a somewhat questionable position, Apollo seems to be looking towards the next 2-5 years -- pushing Oceania is probably a good thing.

 

My comments regarding the age of Regent's ship was solely in response to a few references made about Regent not introducing a new ship in the near future. All I meant by this comment was that they already have "newer" ships in their fleet and probably are not pressured to build their new one. . . perhaps it is a wait and see attitude.

 

Re: the Navigator crossing, it may not be 100% full, but my sources indicate that is by no means 25%. . . they price transatlantic cruises at a price competitive to main-steam cruise lines. . . really well worth it.

 

Interesting to learn that there is a writer in our midst (it does show -- in a good way). I've been searching the internet since it's began -- presumed to be the unofficial "TA" amongst friends across the U.S. Although writing is not my forte, research definitely is. This is an interesting thread -- lots of things to research and verify. Keep it coming:)

[Leejnd4]

Don't think anyone is playing games with Seabourn pricing. As with any new product (hotel, cruise ship, restaurant), there is usually incentive pricing to entice people to give it a try. Once Odysseyis sailing, it will be interesting to see the pricing. Again, can't see why anyone would make a decision to sail one of the other Seabourn ships when the new one is "almost" the same price -- for apparently so much more!

 

Apollo has repeatedly stated that Oceania is their high end (but not luxury) level. With the economy in a somewhat questionable position, Apollo seems to be looking towards the next 2-5 years -- pushing Oceania is probably a good thing.

 

My comments regarding the age of Regent's ship was solely in response to a few references made about Regent not introducing a new ship in the near future. All I meant by this comment was that they already have "newer" ships in their fleet and probably are not pressured to build their new one. . . perhaps it is a wait and see attitude.

 

Re: the Navigator crossing, it may not be 100% full, but my sources indicate that is by no means 25%. . . they price transatlantic cruises at a price competitive to main-steam cruise lines. . . really well worth it.

 

Interesting to learn that there is a writer in our midst (it does show -- in a good way). I've been searching the internet since it's began -- presumed to be the unofficial "TA" amongst friends across the U.S. Although writing is not my forte, research definitely is. This is an interesting thread -- lots of things to research and verify. Keep it coming:)

 

Why thank you! I'm also the unofficial "TA" amongst my friends...mainly because when I'm not actually on a trip, I'm researching my next one...or on some travel-related message board discussing every picayune detail about it! :D

 

I would love to do a Regent transatlantic some day. The pricing really is a great value (speaking of value...see? I'm on topic! ;)) For me, a transatlantic pretty much blows out the opportunities to "luxe up" a mass-market cruise, and I wouldn't consider taking one on anything other than a luxury line. Unfortunately, there are just too many places we want to see, and we never feel like we have the extra vacation time to just lounge at sea. Maybe someday when we've checked a few more places off our wish lists....

[Dolebludger]

One factor that is much in favor of booking a lux line is what I perceive to be a decline in the mass market experience over the past ten years or so. The decline I've observed has been so marked that frankly, I'd rather stay home than go on one!

 

Back in the mid - 90's we used to cruise RCI on ships like the Grandeur of the Seas when she was fairly new. While ships like this never offered anywhere near the level of luxury and personal attention as the lux lines do now (and presumably did then), a cruise on the Grandeur definitely was not a "negative experience" back then. With a "full" passenger load of 1800, ships in this class were manageable as to lines and crowds -- unlike the 3000 passenger monsters of today. Back then, the food in the dining room on such ships was really pretty good, as was the service. Drinks at the bar were extra, but reasonably priced -- then. Room bottles weren't furnished, but passengers were welcome to bring their own from any port, and the ship's store sold liquor bottles at duty-free prices for in-room consumption. Big change in that now! Back then, lines like RCI offered much longer excursions with much more content at much lower prices. Room service menus were not as limited as today.

 

Bottom line, all one needed to do was to stay away from the belly flop contest and art auction, and one could have a decent (though not lux) cruise for a very low cost. Now, a cruise on a line like RCI has evolved into a mess of lines and crowds and restrictions and limitations. Again, many would just rather stay home.

[Iamboatman]

You need to know the products and understand the demographics of the guests before commenting on why someone wouldn't want to cruise on a particular ship.

 

Guests on Seabourn love the intimate feel and personal service found on a 104 suite ship with a near 1:1 passenger:crew ratio. Many of those guests could care less about a fancy spa or four dining rooms. They want more of a quiet, yachtish, experience and to travel to ports where larger ships cannot go. To them the value is in that kind of luxury. The newer ship, with more facilities, may be nirvana for one person, but exactly what someone else doesn't want. It is a pretty simple concept.

 

I also would note that while I would not encourage someone to be on the maiden voyage of a new ship, there is absolutely no reason to assume that after its initial few sailings things will not be running quite well. In Seabourn's case, there will be a few shake down cruises because its guests are paying top dollar to be on the maiden voyage and Seabourn wants to provide the value to its guests...not a debacle. (I am sure there will be hiccups, however, and anyone booking it should expect them.)

 

Alas, for some the value and luxury of a maiden voyage is huge. For others it is in the tried and true. It is a wonderful thing that there are both options...and many in between.

 

As to Richard's observations, the lines have always been on the mass market lines. It is just as we refine our cruising needs/desires and mature we find there is a great value in not having them, so lines like Regent become so much more attractive.

 

The liquor thing does bother me (and I do remember the onboard purchases of a bottle for the cabin), but I guess the best way to deal with it is to just figure in the cost of purchasing what you want as a gift sent to the cabin before you cruise. Thinking about how the luxury lines deal with it, it is a bit of price gouging, but we willingly pay a premium for Regent to place two bottles in our suites. Is it really that much different? Are we just upset that it used to be different (and more cost effective)? Why is it a valuable aspect of luxury on Regent (even before it was liquor inclusive) and an authoritarian ripoff on mass market lines?

 

I never really thought of it that way until just now. Whaddayathink?

[Minn.cruisers]

Concerning liquor in the room, we ordered prior to cruising to be placed in our room before embarkation. To us that was a luxury, more personal and private. We also enjoyed spirits in the diningroom, beside the pool,on deck, and at events the ship held in other locations. Service was great. We thought once, 'are we saving money having this wine, and other spirits ordered prior', or 'would it have been similar ordered singly.'? Who cares, we're on vacation.

We seldom experienced lines, that is waiting in lines, for any meal as we were directly escorted to our table where our group gathered. No lines in the buffet either, walked in and started putting food on our plates to enjoy either in the buffet room or out on deck. Enjoyed private room service several times that was prompt and delicious out on the balcony in the sea air. Pure luxury.

[Dolebludger]

All:

 

I do feel that the lines and crowds have always been part of mass market cruising. What I referred to is the matter of degree. For example, when we cruised the 1800 passenger Grandeur of the Seas a decade ago, there was never a serious line to re-embark from a port stop. But I've seen re-embarkation lines on ships twice that size that stretched for blocks. But even on the Grandeur back then, there were still lines to big for me to like right before the dining room opened, and at the tour desk at times.