Over the past months, including virtually every person who has called or emailed me about all the "free air" promotions that have been tossed about by the cruise lines...from Oceania to Seabourn to Silversea to, well you've got the picture, I have been saying "There is no such thing as free air."
In fact, I had some rather heated discussions with Seabourn marketing department - which were successful!!! - demanding that only lazy travel agents and uneducated clients would be duped into believing the air was "free", so don't insult us. Call it "Air Inclusive", but not free. See my article: Seabourn Offering Free Air. Is it Time? Does it Matter? Is it Free?
Similarly, I warned all that while you might think the credits for the "free air" told the whole story, you would be very wrong. That is because on top of the air price/credit are all those air-related taxes; hundreds of dollars of additional taxes.
It is this latter point that - as I knew would be the case - Oceania Cruises was just fined for omitting from its marketing materials. According to U.S. Department of Transportation, "The 'free' air fares, as advertised, do not provide adequate notice that certain taxes and fees, which properly may be stated separately from the advertised fare, must be paid by the traveler in order to obtain the 'free' air fare, nor of the amount of such taxes and fees".
Silversea Cruises had a similar practice addressed on the other side of the Atlantic and it was required to pull all of its freshly printed brochures to correct a very similar situation.
You will note that Regent Seven Seas also changed from its sickening mantra of "free", "free", "free" to "inclusive". And as so many of you have complained to me - regardless of the still lackluster quality of the line - its "inclusive" prices are simply outrageous. But, at least, it is correctly noting that nothing on a Regent cruise is "free", but rather is "included".
Now it seems that Iamboatman's comments over the past months, both publicly (here) and privately (with the cruise lines) were spot on. And, while it created substantially more work for me as a travel agent - I refused to pitch the improper "free air" line that so many lazy travel agents did (and, alas, were actually the ones pressuring Seabourn- as an example - to offer it to combat Regent's now known to be unlawful approach) - I continued to make sure my clients received the best value.
BTW, there are some excellent values in some of the "Air Inclusive" promotions - such as Seabourn's Asia itineraries on the Seabourn Pride - but unless you utilize a travel agent that actually is working for you and has the ability to do it properly, you may well be spending thousands of dollars more than you need to...all because of being pitched "free air" that just isn't "free".
As for Oceania: I still believe it is a wonderful product with great itineraries and a fantastic new ship, Marina, on the horizon. I endorse the product and am pleased that its marketing is now in line with the consumer receiving accurate information in addition to a solid product.
|
|
|||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
Showing posts with label regent seven seas. Show all posts
Showing posts with label regent seven seas. Show all posts
Friday, April 16, 2010
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
Apollo Management's Changes at Regent Seven Seas - Drinking the Kool-Aid
It has taken some time, but a change in philosophy by some and perceptions by others it seems is finally taking hold.
When Regent Seven Seas was purchased by Apollo Management and then folded into Prestige Cruise Holdings (which also owns Oceania Cruise Lines) there as uproar by Regent loyalists. "Hedge fund guys are going to destroy our beloved cruise line!" "There are going to be massive cut-backs!" "The crew are going to suffer with being underpaid!" and the list goes on.
To the contrary, Apollo Management saw that the prior management had virtually run Regent into the ground with poorly maintained ships, abused crew policies, poor food and declining levels of service. I first wrote about this in my June 2008 article, The Oceania-fication of Regent Seven Seas.
But then I saw the beginnings of a turnaround because, as I predicted, a year earlier Regent's new sister was a better run company with a better delivery of product (both cuisine and service). So, in June 2009 I wrote Oceania Cruises - More Like Regent Seven Seas Every Day...Or Is It The Other Way Around?
While this was going on, Apollo Management poured US$90,000,000 into improving the three ships, Regent Voyager, Regent Mariner and Regent Navigator. The improvements were both long overdue and very well received. More importantly, they were actually focused on doing what needed to be done: Fix the ships; especially the Regent Navigator (which has such systemic problems the feat of correcting them was nothing short of incredible).
Shall we digress? Why would a hedge fund spend $90,000,000 on fixing ships that were allegedly so wonderful? It takes a long time to make back that kind of investment. The reason was because it was the prudent financial thing to do. And, thus, it is clear that the complaints (at least by me) were well-and-truly justified. More importantly, they are a thing of the past. (Note: I do not believe the software is all of a luxury standard such as you find on Seabourn, but it most certainly is of a good standard and nothing that would cause one not to book a Regent cruise...as it might have in the past.)
With the provisioning and philosophy as to cuisine changing, there were/are grumblings that the dining choices were not as many as previously available and that some portion sizes were reduced (though I believe the portion in the Prime 7 alternative dining restaurant are far too large), the fact is that if your kitchen staff cannot produce proper quality and/or the diversity drives up costs and waste, the first thing to do is simplify the menu and each the staff to cook better. This remains a work in progress, but the complaints do seem to be subsiding.
Service has remained a sore point as well because of inconsistency. The concept of finding and latching onto a particular waiter is mind-boggling to me. Some guests brag of this technique, but in fact they are damning the vast majority of the servers actually declaring them of inferior and/or insufficient quality. I know Apollo has, now that the ships are fixed, focused more closely on the service issues.
And, alas, this is where the management onboard the ships just might be starting to "Drink the Kool-Aid". I remember watching management play their afternoon shuffleboard while chaos rained supreme at the front desk and the dining room; leaving second or third tier staff to "handle it" while they, when available, gave guests nothing more than lip-service...blaming the home office for the problems.
Well, folks, the home office is different now (you don't hear much from Mark Conroy anymore do you)...and the focus can't be shifted. In fact, the home office philosophy is for onboard management to own the problems and correct them.
I have clients departing on a long voyage on Oceania in a few days out of Valparaiso, Chile. With all of the uncertainty as a result of the tragic and devastating earthquake, Oceania has been excellent in providing emails and faxes with great explanations of what is happening and what is anticipated. It has created such good will, not only with my clients, but with me. Oh, for Regent to do such things!
(I will not comment on the "free", "free", "free" marketing approach by Regent. As a travel agent I do not see the value in it when you look at the pricing versus other lines, but it most certainly has increased sales for Regent that was suffering badly with empty suites and disgruntled guests. In the end that is the idea, right? To sell suites so that Prestige Cruise Holdings shows profits and, eventually, can be sold as a well functioning entity at a premium. (That affords Apollo to stay out of the day-to-day management for if it was involved there would be a discount rather than a premium.)
Well...on March 1, 2010 a poster on Cruise Critic (hondorner) wrote, in part and gently edited:
"I can't help but wonder why you would automatically assume it was "evil" Apollo's decision, especially in light of the fact that other than a couple of members of Prestige Cruise Holding's board of directors, Apollo keeps a strictly "hands off" approach to the cruise line decisions.
Under the new corporate management, the ships are sailing full, which I understand is different than under the previous management; the cruise line is showing a profit and has record bookings, and more than $90 Million has been pumped into improvements, and the staff to whom I spoke in January were universally in favor of the changes. That doesn't sound very "evil".
I've been hinting at this, but I have to be frank -- while I enjoyed the all-inclusive nature of Regent, I find the service on Oceania to be just as good, the food better, and the overall ambiance to be superior to Regent. Why is this relevant? Because the management of Oceania that has brought it from nothing to one of the most successful cruise lines in less than eight years is now the corporate management of Regent."
Yes, it seems Drinking the Kool-Aid just might be something that is happening.
To be sure I need to see more consistency in cuisine and service and I do have some problems with the pricing being far to high for what I consider value, but HUGE improvements have been made at Regent and I believe it will continue to get better. And, it seems, now there are guests that believe it too!
When Regent Seven Seas was purchased by Apollo Management and then folded into Prestige Cruise Holdings (which also owns Oceania Cruise Lines) there as uproar by Regent loyalists. "Hedge fund guys are going to destroy our beloved cruise line!" "There are going to be massive cut-backs!" "The crew are going to suffer with being underpaid!" and the list goes on.
To the contrary, Apollo Management saw that the prior management had virtually run Regent into the ground with poorly maintained ships, abused crew policies, poor food and declining levels of service. I first wrote about this in my June 2008 article, The Oceania-fication of Regent Seven Seas.
But then I saw the beginnings of a turnaround because, as I predicted, a year earlier Regent's new sister was a better run company with a better delivery of product (both cuisine and service). So, in June 2009 I wrote Oceania Cruises - More Like Regent Seven Seas Every Day...Or Is It The Other Way Around?
While this was going on, Apollo Management poured US$90,000,000 into improving the three ships, Regent Voyager, Regent Mariner and Regent Navigator. The improvements were both long overdue and very well received. More importantly, they were actually focused on doing what needed to be done: Fix the ships; especially the Regent Navigator (which has such systemic problems the feat of correcting them was nothing short of incredible).
Shall we digress? Why would a hedge fund spend $90,000,000 on fixing ships that were allegedly so wonderful? It takes a long time to make back that kind of investment. The reason was because it was the prudent financial thing to do. And, thus, it is clear that the complaints (at least by me) were well-and-truly justified. More importantly, they are a thing of the past. (Note: I do not believe the software is all of a luxury standard such as you find on Seabourn, but it most certainly is of a good standard and nothing that would cause one not to book a Regent cruise...as it might have in the past.)
With the provisioning and philosophy as to cuisine changing, there were/are grumblings that the dining choices were not as many as previously available and that some portion sizes were reduced (though I believe the portion in the Prime 7 alternative dining restaurant are far too large), the fact is that if your kitchen staff cannot produce proper quality and/or the diversity drives up costs and waste, the first thing to do is simplify the menu and each the staff to cook better. This remains a work in progress, but the complaints do seem to be subsiding.
Service has remained a sore point as well because of inconsistency. The concept of finding and latching onto a particular waiter is mind-boggling to me. Some guests brag of this technique, but in fact they are damning the vast majority of the servers actually declaring them of inferior and/or insufficient quality. I know Apollo has, now that the ships are fixed, focused more closely on the service issues.
And, alas, this is where the management onboard the ships just might be starting to "Drink the Kool-Aid". I remember watching management play their afternoon shuffleboard while chaos rained supreme at the front desk and the dining room; leaving second or third tier staff to "handle it" while they, when available, gave guests nothing more than lip-service...blaming the home office for the problems.
Well, folks, the home office is different now (you don't hear much from Mark Conroy anymore do you)...and the focus can't be shifted. In fact, the home office philosophy is for onboard management to own the problems and correct them.
I have clients departing on a long voyage on Oceania in a few days out of Valparaiso, Chile. With all of the uncertainty as a result of the tragic and devastating earthquake, Oceania has been excellent in providing emails and faxes with great explanations of what is happening and what is anticipated. It has created such good will, not only with my clients, but with me. Oh, for Regent to do such things!
(I will not comment on the "free", "free", "free" marketing approach by Regent. As a travel agent I do not see the value in it when you look at the pricing versus other lines, but it most certainly has increased sales for Regent that was suffering badly with empty suites and disgruntled guests. In the end that is the idea, right? To sell suites so that Prestige Cruise Holdings shows profits and, eventually, can be sold as a well functioning entity at a premium. (That affords Apollo to stay out of the day-to-day management for if it was involved there would be a discount rather than a premium.)
Well...on March 1, 2010 a poster on Cruise Critic (hondorner) wrote, in part and gently edited:
"I can't help but wonder why you would automatically assume it was "evil" Apollo's decision, especially in light of the fact that other than a couple of members of Prestige Cruise Holding's board of directors, Apollo keeps a strictly "hands off" approach to the cruise line decisions.
Under the new corporate management, the ships are sailing full, which I understand is different than under the previous management; the cruise line is showing a profit and has record bookings, and more than $90 Million has been pumped into improvements, and the staff to whom I spoke in January were universally in favor of the changes. That doesn't sound very "evil".
I've been hinting at this, but I have to be frank -- while I enjoyed the all-inclusive nature of Regent, I find the service on Oceania to be just as good, the food better, and the overall ambiance to be superior to Regent. Why is this relevant? Because the management of Oceania that has brought it from nothing to one of the most successful cruise lines in less than eight years is now the corporate management of Regent."
Yes, it seems Drinking the Kool-Aid just might be something that is happening.
To be sure I need to see more consistency in cuisine and service and I do have some problems with the pricing being far to high for what I consider value, but HUGE improvements have been made at Regent and I believe it will continue to get better. And, it seems, now there are guests that believe it too!
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
Why You Need A Knowledgeable Travel Agent - Regent Seven Seas, Using "Fuzzy Math", Goes After the Premium, Not Luxury, Market
Read this article and you may save over $4,000 on your next cruise vacation!
For the past year I have urged you to consider Regent Seven Seas cruises as Premium, not Luxury, cruises. I based this on a number of factors including a significant, and often noted by many, slippage of service quality, decent though not outstanding cuisine/food, and the focus on ":free", "free", "free" rather than value, quality or experience. Noting that same is not a criticism, but rather a change in marketing and focus, I think a further analysis based upon the most recent Consumer flyer is worthy. But, possibly, not exactly the way Regent intended.
First, the flyer:
Now, comparing the Regent Seven Seas Mariner Cruise to the Celebrity Equinox is probably the most appropriate for my purpose because it has the greatest price difference, compares a true suite vs. a true suite and, as you know, I do not believe Princess is even marginally in the same class nor can Holland America provide the same quality (not that it is a bad product...just too different...and the SY is large, but doesn't come with suite amenities).
The first thing I noticed was that Regent decided to compare its 7 day August 19, 2010 sailing at $5,550 per person ($793 per day) to Celebrity's 7 day September 2, 2010 sailing and thought that was curious because not only is the month different, literally ever port is different. So, I looked to see what Celebrity's other September cruises were and saw that it was offering two 13 night cruises as low as $2,819 per person in a suite...over 33% less on a daily basis. Regent didn't point that out. (BTW, that is the same cruise I took last year and the prices are pretty consistent, so I did not selectively pick a better priced Celebrity cruise.)
Then I said, I probably should look for a Celebrity cruise with a similar itinerary at a more comparable time...say in August! And there is was: A 10 night cruise on August 6, 2010 with 4 identical ports + Dubrovnik vs. Split, Croatia + others for a base price of $2,979 per person + $78 in port charges = $3,057 per person vs. Regent's $5,550 per person...and the Celebrity cruise is 30% longer. This leaves me with a starting base per day cost of Celebrity - $306 vs. Regent - $793.
According to Regent, gratuities, drinks and liquor will add another $52 per day. Gratuities are $15 per day for suite guests, so that leaves me $37 per day for beverages; a fair figure for most people. Regent then claims I will dine in the Alternative Restaurants (there are four upscale options on Celebrity vs. two on Regent) three times in seven nights...which I will make four times since the cruise is longer, averaging $30 per meal (though that is on the high side in usage and pricing), or $120 per person, or $12 per day. So that brings my Celebrity daily cost up to $370 per day vs. Regent's $793 per day.
Now all I have left to deal with, according to Regent is tours and air fare. Regent claims the tours (included on Regent) will run me $556 on Celebrity for a seven day cruise, so on my ten day cruise, the cost would be $790 total, or $79 per day.
This now brings my total daily cost on Celebrity to $449 per day vs. Regent's $793 per day. So before dealing with airfare let's look at the hard numbers: Celebrity will cost me $4,490 for a 10 day cruise and Regent will cost me $7,930 for an equivalent 10 day cruise. Am I making this up or speculating? Nope! Regent has a 12 day cruise on the Seven Seas Mariner on August 6, 2010 which prices a Category H Suite at $8,760.
Now, Celebrity's airfare of $1,329, which includes transfers, is actually pretty close to the available individual pricing, so let's go with that to keep things simple. That brings my total cost for the Celebrity cruise up to $5,819 vs. $7,930 for an equivalent Regent cruise.
So I am struggling here to find the parity. I am going to spend $2,000 more per person ($4,000+ total!)for the Regent cruise; nothing close to what Regent claims in its flyer.
But there is more. A cruise is not just about the money. It is about the experience. I have provided some detailed information on my recent cruise on the Celebrity Equinox on the Goldring Travel website and the rest on this blog (just search Celebrity Equinox).
Suffice it to say, for this article, each ship has its benefits. I have found the cuisine (especially in the alternative dining venues) and the service on Celebrity to be consistently better than on Regent. The suites are, for the most part, comparable enough that the differences wouldn't make the decision for you. On Celebrity you are dealing with a large ship with many more guests, but other than if you want to lay out by the pool (and chair hogs have found their way onto Regent) there are many public spaces on the Celebrity Equinox that are equal to or superior to the Mariner's. Size may be a deal-breaker, but at least you know that the size difference will save you thousands of dollars. Children: Regent has a program, but Celebrity has an excellent one and many more options to keep the children happy. (We are comparing cruises during summer vacation aren't we?!)
The point is that an experienced travel agent that has your best interests at heart isn't going to plunk down a Regent...or any other cruise line's...brochure and let you make a decision.
I bet for some of you I just saved you over $2,000 per person...That is over $4,000 total...on your next cruise vacation.
Imagine what I can do for you if you are my client!
For the past year I have urged you to consider Regent Seven Seas cruises as Premium, not Luxury, cruises. I based this on a number of factors including a significant, and often noted by many, slippage of service quality, decent though not outstanding cuisine/food, and the focus on ":free", "free", "free" rather than value, quality or experience. Noting that same is not a criticism, but rather a change in marketing and focus, I think a further analysis based upon the most recent Consumer flyer is worthy. But, possibly, not exactly the way Regent intended.
First, the flyer:
The first thing I noticed was that Regent decided to compare its 7 day August 19, 2010 sailing at $5,550 per person ($793 per day) to Celebrity's 7 day September 2, 2010 sailing and thought that was curious because not only is the month different, literally ever port is different. So, I looked to see what Celebrity's other September cruises were and saw that it was offering two 13 night cruises as low as $2,819 per person in a suite...over 33% less on a daily basis. Regent didn't point that out. (BTW, that is the same cruise I took last year and the prices are pretty consistent, so I did not selectively pick a better priced Celebrity cruise.)
Then I said, I probably should look for a Celebrity cruise with a similar itinerary at a more comparable time...say in August! And there is was: A 10 night cruise on August 6, 2010 with 4 identical ports + Dubrovnik vs. Split, Croatia + others for a base price of $2,979 per person + $78 in port charges = $3,057 per person vs. Regent's $5,550 per person...and the Celebrity cruise is 30% longer. This leaves me with a starting base per day cost of Celebrity - $306 vs. Regent - $793.
According to Regent, gratuities, drinks and liquor will add another $52 per day. Gratuities are $15 per day for suite guests, so that leaves me $37 per day for beverages; a fair figure for most people. Regent then claims I will dine in the Alternative Restaurants (there are four upscale options on Celebrity vs. two on Regent) three times in seven nights...which I will make four times since the cruise is longer, averaging $30 per meal (though that is on the high side in usage and pricing), or $120 per person, or $12 per day. So that brings my Celebrity daily cost up to $370 per day vs. Regent's $793 per day.
Now all I have left to deal with, according to Regent is tours and air fare. Regent claims the tours (included on Regent) will run me $556 on Celebrity for a seven day cruise, so on my ten day cruise, the cost would be $790 total, or $79 per day.
This now brings my total daily cost on Celebrity to $449 per day vs. Regent's $793 per day. So before dealing with airfare let's look at the hard numbers: Celebrity will cost me $4,490 for a 10 day cruise and Regent will cost me $7,930 for an equivalent 10 day cruise. Am I making this up or speculating? Nope! Regent has a 12 day cruise on the Seven Seas Mariner on August 6, 2010 which prices a Category H Suite at $8,760.
Now, Celebrity's airfare of $1,329, which includes transfers, is actually pretty close to the available individual pricing, so let's go with that to keep things simple. That brings my total cost for the Celebrity cruise up to $5,819 vs. $7,930 for an equivalent Regent cruise.
So I am struggling here to find the parity. I am going to spend $2,000 more per person ($4,000+ total!)for the Regent cruise; nothing close to what Regent claims in its flyer.
But there is more. A cruise is not just about the money. It is about the experience. I have provided some detailed information on my recent cruise on the Celebrity Equinox on the Goldring Travel website and the rest on this blog (just search Celebrity Equinox).
Suffice it to say, for this article, each ship has its benefits. I have found the cuisine (especially in the alternative dining venues) and the service on Celebrity to be consistently better than on Regent. The suites are, for the most part, comparable enough that the differences wouldn't make the decision for you. On Celebrity you are dealing with a large ship with many more guests, but other than if you want to lay out by the pool (and chair hogs have found their way onto Regent) there are many public spaces on the Celebrity Equinox that are equal to or superior to the Mariner's. Size may be a deal-breaker, but at least you know that the size difference will save you thousands of dollars. Children: Regent has a program, but Celebrity has an excellent one and many more options to keep the children happy. (We are comparing cruises during summer vacation aren't we?!)
The point is that an experienced travel agent that has your best interests at heart isn't going to plunk down a Regent...or any other cruise line's...brochure and let you make a decision.
I bet for some of you I just saved you over $2,000 per person...That is over $4,000 total...on your next cruise vacation.
Imagine what I can do for you if you are my client!
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Hello Oceania Marina...and, Quite Possibly: Bon Voyage, Regent Seven Seas.
I have wondered over the past year or so if the sister companies, Oceania Cruises and Regent Seven Seas Cruises will merge into one cruise line. I first wrote about this in June 2008 with my article "The Oceania-fication of Regent Seven Seas" and then, again in April 2009 in "Oceania Cruises - More Like Regent Seven Seas Every Day...Or Is It The Other Way Around?" While I was originally skeptical about the changes, or more accurately what has actually become the Oceania-fication of Regent, it is clear to me that it was both necessary and successful.
And now there is the Oceania Marina!
First some background: Regent Seven Seas was, in my opinion, a horribly run company. Millions of dollars were expended marketing the company to be "Six Star Luxury" (a term it fabricated) while its management allowed the ships to be poorly maintained, truly never updated anything, slashed its staffing and training and cut the per passenger food costs shockingly low. The reason to me it was obvious: Improve the bottom line by cutting costs and driving up prices so that it would look attractive to a buyer...and make sure the closets remained under lock and hidden...so the truth would not be known until after the sale was completed.
Old Regent succeeded and Apollo Management bought it...and then had to rebuild and restructure a failing cruise line. Its cruise line holding company, Prestige Cruise Holdings (PCH) did a number of radical things and it did them quickly. It quashed the tauted new ship. It poured tens of millions of dollars into the poorly maintained and rapidly becoming outdated ships. It stopped the wasteful marketing and ended the silly Six Star Luxury garbage. It eliminated the poor provisioning. It shook up the staffing. And it did more. (Alas, it is still a work in progress...but with so much to do, there is no way all of that could be completed by now.)
Keeping in mind that PCH is headed by Frank Del Rio, who is also the head of Oceania Cruises -which is a very fine product with very loyal clientèle and strong brand recognition/identity - many of the things that work for Oceania have been transitioned over to Regent, both operationally and marketing-wise. And while the public (that would be you and me) has struggled to keep Regent as one of the few "luxury" cruise lines, the fact is that PCH has been transitioning Regent away from the "luxury" sector focusing on "free" as in "free air", "free tours", "free drinks", etc. and also reducing the overall service levels to one which is overall acceptable, but not "luxury".
It is of note that, generally speaking, people are more satisfied with Oceania's service levels than they are Regent. The reason: The expectations of Oceania are not nearly as high as those which remain of Regent (due to the Six Star Luxury marketing and its prior focus). As old-timers dissipate and new passengers take over (who have no such expectations) the expected levels of service quietly are reduced and, not surprisingly, found to be acceptable.
Now for the BIG transition...and what I believe will be the eventual elimination of Regent Seven Seas as a cruise line: Oceania Marina.
Regent's "ace in the hole" as always been its suites. The are 300 square feet and up and very nicely laid out (with the possible exception of the bathrooms on the Regent Mariner...but those troublesome high tubs are being eliminated over time). On Oceania Marina the 444 Veranda Staterooms will be 282 square feet
and will come with a mini-refrigerator with unlimited soft drinks and bottled water, robes and slippers and full size bathtubs. Forty four (44%) percent of them will be Concierge Level which will add a laptop computer (internet will be extra), welcome bottle of champagne, upgraded toiletries, a private concierge lounge and various priorities (embarkation, luggage, reservations), etc.
I now pause and ask, "So what is it that is contained in the standard Regent Suites that the Oceania Marina doesn't have? I can't say, looking at the computer generated "photographs", that the furnishings are better or the style more upscale (possible less-so). The only thing I can perceive is that Marina will have many more cabins than the present Regent ships, but that relates to service levels; not accommodation standards.
So then I look at the Marina's suites and, of course, first ask, "If 282 square feet is not a suite, then why are the suites on Regent (Silversea and Seabourn...and Celebrity, etc.) called suites? But I digress, there will be 124 Penthouse Suites (420 square feet), 12 Oceania Suites (1,000+ square feet), 8 Vista Suites (1,200 - 1,500+ square feet), and 3 Owner's Suites (2,000+ square feet). These Suites include butler service, course-by-course dining from any of the six (6) restaurants, Bulgari toiletries, access to the Executive Lounge and more. Sounds pretty good!
Dining-wise, there will be six open seating restaurants (all without additional charge) ranging from the main Grand Dining Room to Jacques (Jacques Pepin's restaurant), Red Ginger (for Asian cuisine), Polo Grill (for steaks), Toscana (for Italian) and casual dining venues.
In addition to these venues, there will be two additional cost exclusive cost restaurants. Privee - limited to 10 guests per evening for a 7 course dinner; and, La Reserve - "an elegant wine tasting room" limited to 24 guests for food and wine paring dinners.
Add to this the various other expected (and some unexpected) venues and one must pause and ask, "So what is it that Regent ships have over the Oceania Marina?" The answer - at least at this point - comes down to "free air", "free tours" and "free alcoholic beverages". But, of course, we all know that nothing is "free" and those costs are buried into the cruise fare. These are not things which are not available on Oceania Marina (or its other ships); they are just charged ala carte.
One point of concern: I am not sure what the staffing levels or back-of-the-ship facilities are, but there are going to be some pretty high demands on the Marina staff to match the actual service level with that which is promised.
So with Oceania upping the ante on the size of the cabins, the amenities provided, the inclusiveness of the product, etc...and the levels of service being as good or better than Regent's, how or why would Prestige Cruise Holdings continue to market and operate Regent Seven Seas when the line between the products is so blurred and the benefits of competing with itself so limited? (Heck, I can't even see the benefit of keeping the tarnished Regent name at this point!)
I see myself saying "Bon Voyage, Regent". Maybe not today, but sometime soon.
What do you think? Join the discussion at The Gold Standard Luxury Travel Forum!
Interested in booking a cruise on the Oceania Marina? Cruises will open for booking in the next few days. Call me at (877) 2GO-LUXURY or email me at eric@goldringtravel.com.
And now there is the Oceania Marina!
First some background: Regent Seven Seas was, in my opinion, a horribly run company. Millions of dollars were expended marketing the company to be "Six Star Luxury" (a term it fabricated) while its management allowed the ships to be poorly maintained, truly never updated anything, slashed its staffing and training and cut the per passenger food costs shockingly low. The reason to me it was obvious: Improve the bottom line by cutting costs and driving up prices so that it would look attractive to a buyer...and make sure the closets remained under lock and hidden...so the truth would not be known until after the sale was completed.
Old Regent succeeded and Apollo Management bought it...and then had to rebuild and restructure a failing cruise line. Its cruise line holding company, Prestige Cruise Holdings (PCH) did a number of radical things and it did them quickly. It quashed the tauted new ship. It poured tens of millions of dollars into the poorly maintained and rapidly becoming outdated ships. It stopped the wasteful marketing and ended the silly Six Star Luxury garbage. It eliminated the poor provisioning. It shook up the staffing. And it did more. (Alas, it is still a work in progress...but with so much to do, there is no way all of that could be completed by now.)
Keeping in mind that PCH is headed by Frank Del Rio, who is also the head of Oceania Cruises -which is a very fine product with very loyal clientèle and strong brand recognition/identity - many of the things that work for Oceania have been transitioned over to Regent, both operationally and marketing-wise. And while the public (that would be you and me) has struggled to keep Regent as one of the few "luxury" cruise lines, the fact is that PCH has been transitioning Regent away from the "luxury" sector focusing on "free" as in "free air", "free tours", "free drinks", etc. and also reducing the overall service levels to one which is overall acceptable, but not "luxury".
It is of note that, generally speaking, people are more satisfied with Oceania's service levels than they are Regent. The reason: The expectations of Oceania are not nearly as high as those which remain of Regent (due to the Six Star Luxury marketing and its prior focus). As old-timers dissipate and new passengers take over (who have no such expectations) the expected levels of service quietly are reduced and, not surprisingly, found to be acceptable.
Now for the BIG transition...and what I believe will be the eventual elimination of Regent Seven Seas as a cruise line: Oceania Marina.
Regent's "ace in the hole" as always been its suites. The are 300 square feet and up and very nicely laid out (with the possible exception of the bathrooms on the Regent Mariner...but those troublesome high tubs are being eliminated over time). On Oceania Marina the 444 Veranda Staterooms will be 282 square feet
and will come with a mini-refrigerator with unlimited soft drinks and bottled water, robes and slippers and full size bathtubs. Forty four (44%) percent of them will be Concierge Level which will add a laptop computer (internet will be extra), welcome bottle of champagne, upgraded toiletries, a private concierge lounge and various priorities (embarkation, luggage, reservations), etc.
I now pause and ask, "So what is it that is contained in the standard Regent Suites that the Oceania Marina doesn't have? I can't say, looking at the computer generated "photographs", that the furnishings are better or the style more upscale (possible less-so). The only thing I can perceive is that Marina will have many more cabins than the present Regent ships, but that relates to service levels; not accommodation standards.
So then I look at the Marina's suites and, of course, first ask, "If 282 square feet is not a suite, then why are the suites on Regent (Silversea and Seabourn...and Celebrity, etc.) called suites? But I digress, there will be 124 Penthouse Suites (420 square feet), 12 Oceania Suites (1,000+ square feet), 8 Vista Suites (1,200 - 1,500+ square feet), and 3 Owner's Suites (2,000+ square feet). These Suites include butler service, course-by-course dining from any of the six (6) restaurants, Bulgari toiletries, access to the Executive Lounge and more. Sounds pretty good!
Dining-wise, there will be six open seating restaurants (all without additional charge) ranging from the main Grand Dining Room to Jacques (Jacques Pepin's restaurant), Red Ginger (for Asian cuisine), Polo Grill (for steaks), Toscana (for Italian) and casual dining venues.
In addition to these venues, there will be two additional cost exclusive cost restaurants. Privee - limited to 10 guests per evening for a 7 course dinner; and, La Reserve - "an elegant wine tasting room" limited to 24 guests for food and wine paring dinners.
Add to this the various other expected (and some unexpected) venues and one must pause and ask, "So what is it that Regent ships have over the Oceania Marina?" The answer - at least at this point - comes down to "free air", "free tours" and "free alcoholic beverages". But, of course, we all know that nothing is "free" and those costs are buried into the cruise fare. These are not things which are not available on Oceania Marina (or its other ships); they are just charged ala carte.
One point of concern: I am not sure what the staffing levels or back-of-the-ship facilities are, but there are going to be some pretty high demands on the Marina staff to match the actual service level with that which is promised.
So with Oceania upping the ante on the size of the cabins, the amenities provided, the inclusiveness of the product, etc...and the levels of service being as good or better than Regent's, how or why would Prestige Cruise Holdings continue to market and operate Regent Seven Seas when the line between the products is so blurred and the benefits of competing with itself so limited? (Heck, I can't even see the benefit of keeping the tarnished Regent name at this point!)
I see myself saying "Bon Voyage, Regent". Maybe not today, but sometime soon.
What do you think? Join the discussion at The Gold Standard Luxury Travel Forum!
Interested in booking a cruise on the Oceania Marina? Cruises will open for booking in the next few days. Call me at (877) 2GO-LUXURY or email me at eric@goldringtravel.com.
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
Regent Seven Seas Navigator - She Is Finally Looking Like A Luxury Cruise Ship.
For years I have shunned the Regent Seven Seas Navigator due to her excessive vibration, drab and quirky interiors, horrible maintenance and systems issues and, let me think...could there be anything else as far as hardware goes????? (OK, she has wonderful suites and excellent bathrooms, but those were marred by various systems and maintenance problems.) BUT it seems she is no longer the Ugly Duckling!
Prestige Cruise Holdings, stuck with an Albatross, decided to make a huge investment, both in time and money, to make the Regent Seven Seas Navigator a wonderful, if not perfect, luxury cruise ship. While I have not been onboard, I have some inside information and "hot off the press" photographs to share with you.
First, the biggest issue: The Navigator's vibration. Without getting too technical, structure was added to the stern of the ship which added length and width and also changed the geometry (and therefore waterflow). This underwater feature is sometimes referred to as a sponson or "duck tail". New propellers and rudders were also added. The result is, according to sea trial information, that the vibration has all but been eliminated. I am not sure than any cruise ship has no vibration and it is yet to be seen what vibration is left, but "all but eliminated" effectively tells me to put the vibration baby to bed.
Second, there have been overhauls of the electrical, HVAC and plumbing systems. While I am sure there will some issues that will come up when the ship has full guest loads (one can't just make it perfect in one shot), the system-wide problems with the electrical system (deadship conditions), freezing cold in one area and uncomfortably warm in others (like the suites), and brown water and faucets falling off should all be things of the past.
Third, the galleys and many service areas have been gutted and totally rebuilt. These areas, usually unseen by guests, are critical to providing excellent service. With these weak links virtually eliminated, I am confident that some of the sorely lacking service will improve. (But this is not about the software, so I will leave that for another post.)
Fourth, there have been structural changes in some of the public areas, including the addition of Prime 7, the hallmark Regent Steakhouse. Check it out:
While I would not call it over-the-top, I really like the understated elegance. Those chairs, look like I could sit back quite nicely and enjoy some wine and linger over a very nice dinner. (It is hard to see the entire layout in the photograph, but what I see I really like.)
Fifth, the fun stuff: The redesign and refurbishment of the public areas. For example, the former ugly and awkward Stars Lounge, now makes a statement. It may or may not be your taste, but it show style and should draw people into it - having lost its dudgeon-like decor:
The Navigator Lounge has also been vastly improved. Gone is the blue "waiting area" feel. It now feels, at least from the photo, like a very nice place to read in the day or have a drink before dinner:
The Compass Rose, main dining room, also has been upgraded. Again, you may not like the large chairs, but they add comfort and some style in a room that, to me, was nothing more than a boring peach place to get food. Now "dining" seems very viable, though I cannot tell if the lack of sufficient tables for two or the poor placement of the waiter stations has been addressed:
As you may know, the Portofino concept has been abandoned on Navigator. The main alternative dining venue, La Veranda, has been updated as well.
Sorry I do not have photographs just yet of the new Pool Grill and Pool Bar, but I hear they are really beautiful and much improved from what I always perceived them to be...afterthoughts.
I also have a photograph of one of my favorite areas - even with the vibration - the deck aft of Galileo's. I don't know what was done in the lounge itself, though:
I also know the suites are all receiving new carpeting and any wear issues were addressed.
Keep in mind that these photographs do not take into account all of the huge onloading of hotel items, loose furnishings, restocking, etc. that is being finished up as I write this.
I am sure there will be some shakeout over the next few cruises, but I am far more willing to consider the Regent Seven Seas Navigator today than I have been for years.
What do you think of the improvements? Join the discussion on The Gold Standard Forum!
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Regent Seven Seas Voyager and Silversea Silver Spirit - Why and How I Write This Blog
The past days have been very busy for me, personally, but also very interesting for me professionally.
It appears that some of my readers, I guess, read this blog because they perceive me as the Andy Rooney (curmudgeon) of the cruise blogosphere. While I may have earned that reputation through speaking my mind, I want you to understand that I actually do speak my mind and do not rant or criticize just to write or keep up readership. The Regent Voyager and Silversea Silver Spirit are two cases in point.
Regent Voyager - The Regent Voyager is on a Caribbean cruise and one of its engines has failed. This has not left the ship without power or services, but required one port to be skipped so that she could arrive early this morning in San Juan so that repairs could be made. It appears the guests have been kept fully informed, missing Antigua hasn't been a huge disappointment (and, regardless, Regent would have been within its rights to skip the port for a host of other reasons) and it appears that once the part(s) that are needed are installed the Regent Voyager will be on her way...on or close to schedule.
So when the problem occurred I started to receive emails asking me to write about how bad the ship is, what a terrible thing it is that Regent let down its guests again, claiming damage to the ship was clearly as a result of poor management, etc. Folks: SHIP HAPPENS! I won't write any of those things, because I don't believe it is fair, accurate or appropriate.
These emails told me a couple of things:
- First, Regent still has a lot of work to do. It has well and truly alienated a very vocal and significant portion of its client base. (Honestly, I think I probably fit into that category.) It must find a way - probably though hard work and simply consistently getting it right - to regain the shine of the previous management's self-declared "Six Star Luxury" moniker.
- Second, people have tagged me as being "Anti-Regent Seven Seas Cruise Line" when that simply is not the case. I do not get my jollies (sorry, Santa) bashing Regent. I have, quite vocally, expressed my frustration with so many of the prior management's decisions which - by design, IMHO - were to cheat the guests and make them feel special while picking their pockets. Its prior incarnation just kept that movie line in my head, "Son, fat, dumb and happy is no way to go through life."
But the new management of Regent Seven Seas Cruises has done much to improve the line, to change its focus to on value rather than the absurd Six Star Luxury fraud (albeit I really hate the find demeaning the "free", "free", "free" marketing approach). Yes, there is work to be done. Training still needs to be improved to the point that the curious "I need to dine where X is the waiter because his service is great" is gone (as service should be great everywhere!). Cuisine needs to be improved to the point where meals are consistently excellent everywhere, not "hit or miss" as reports in Prime 7 and Compass Rose have consistently shown. There are others, but you get the point.
So with literally every cruise line having an engine problem at some point, I cannot report the present Regent issue to be a disservice to its guests or its handling improper. If that changes I will let you know.
Silversea Silver Spirit - Why have I been so quiet about the new Silversea ship? Because I really don't know a darn thing worth reporting on. I have read the hype, the true marketing and the wishes, but I haven't seen any real information. As I remain very concerned about Silversea's financial situation and my inside information as to fit, finish and training of staff leave me nervous, I do not want to push a product I am not presently secure in supporting. But it is my hope and desire that Silversea weathers its financial storm, get is right with the Silver Spirit and that it succeeds, for in this business competition is a great thing.
Consider the changes in luxury ships over the past few years. Dining options have significantly expanded, spas have become destinations, fitness centers expanded beyond treadmills, entertainment options have improved, unique ports of call are the norm (oxymoron??), passenger space is even greater and suites are truly "sweet". Without the competition Seabourn would not have committed to building the Seabourn Odyssey, Seabourn Sojourn or Seabourn ???? (enter the contest!). Silversea would not have the Silver Spirit (or named it so similar to the Seabourn Spirit!). And Oceania and Azamara Club would not target those that might want a taste of the luxury, but don't want to pay the price...or need a suite....providing a higher level of service, cuisine, amenities and ports than the premium and mass market lines.
So you can depend on me to say what I think, whether you agree or disagree, and not to say anything when I really don't have anything to say. But, most importantly, if you are interested in booking a cruise remember that I, as your travel agent, will give you my honest, experienced and impartial opinion...not to push you to particular cruise line, but to assist you in your determination of what is the best cruise line, the best accommodation and the best itinerary for you -whether it be the top suite or inside cabin, a luxury or mass market ship, an itinerary in Asia or the Caribbean.
It appears that some of my readers, I guess, read this blog because they perceive me as the Andy Rooney (curmudgeon) of the cruise blogosphere. While I may have earned that reputation through speaking my mind, I want you to understand that I actually do speak my mind and do not rant or criticize just to write or keep up readership. The Regent Voyager and Silversea Silver Spirit are two cases in point.
Regent Voyager - The Regent Voyager is on a Caribbean cruise and one of its engines has failed. This has not left the ship without power or services, but required one port to be skipped so that she could arrive early this morning in San Juan so that repairs could be made. It appears the guests have been kept fully informed, missing Antigua hasn't been a huge disappointment (and, regardless, Regent would have been within its rights to skip the port for a host of other reasons) and it appears that once the part(s) that are needed are installed the Regent Voyager will be on her way...on or close to schedule.
So when the problem occurred I started to receive emails asking me to write about how bad the ship is, what a terrible thing it is that Regent let down its guests again, claiming damage to the ship was clearly as a result of poor management, etc. Folks: SHIP HAPPENS! I won't write any of those things, because I don't believe it is fair, accurate or appropriate.
These emails told me a couple of things:
- First, Regent still has a lot of work to do. It has well and truly alienated a very vocal and significant portion of its client base. (Honestly, I think I probably fit into that category.) It must find a way - probably though hard work and simply consistently getting it right - to regain the shine of the previous management's self-declared "Six Star Luxury" moniker.
- Second, people have tagged me as being "Anti-Regent Seven Seas Cruise Line" when that simply is not the case. I do not get my jollies (sorry, Santa) bashing Regent. I have, quite vocally, expressed my frustration with so many of the prior management's decisions which - by design, IMHO - were to cheat the guests and make them feel special while picking their pockets. Its prior incarnation just kept that movie line in my head, "Son, fat, dumb and happy is no way to go through life."
But the new management of Regent Seven Seas Cruises has done much to improve the line, to change its focus to on value rather than the absurd Six Star Luxury fraud (albeit I really hate the find demeaning the "free", "free", "free" marketing approach). Yes, there is work to be done. Training still needs to be improved to the point that the curious "I need to dine where X is the waiter because his service is great" is gone (as service should be great everywhere!). Cuisine needs to be improved to the point where meals are consistently excellent everywhere, not "hit or miss" as reports in Prime 7 and Compass Rose have consistently shown. There are others, but you get the point.
So with literally every cruise line having an engine problem at some point, I cannot report the present Regent issue to be a disservice to its guests or its handling improper. If that changes I will let you know.
Silversea Silver Spirit - Why have I been so quiet about the new Silversea ship? Because I really don't know a darn thing worth reporting on. I have read the hype, the true marketing and the wishes, but I haven't seen any real information. As I remain very concerned about Silversea's financial situation and my inside information as to fit, finish and training of staff leave me nervous, I do not want to push a product I am not presently secure in supporting. But it is my hope and desire that Silversea weathers its financial storm, get is right with the Silver Spirit and that it succeeds, for in this business competition is a great thing.
Consider the changes in luxury ships over the past few years. Dining options have significantly expanded, spas have become destinations, fitness centers expanded beyond treadmills, entertainment options have improved, unique ports of call are the norm (oxymoron??), passenger space is even greater and suites are truly "sweet". Without the competition Seabourn would not have committed to building the Seabourn Odyssey, Seabourn Sojourn or Seabourn ???? (enter the contest!). Silversea would not have the Silver Spirit (or named it so similar to the Seabourn Spirit!). And Oceania and Azamara Club would not target those that might want a taste of the luxury, but don't want to pay the price...or need a suite....providing a higher level of service, cuisine, amenities and ports than the premium and mass market lines.
So you can depend on me to say what I think, whether you agree or disagree, and not to say anything when I really don't have anything to say. But, most importantly, if you are interested in booking a cruise remember that I, as your travel agent, will give you my honest, experienced and impartial opinion...not to push you to particular cruise line, but to assist you in your determination of what is the best cruise line, the best accommodation and the best itinerary for you -whether it be the top suite or inside cabin, a luxury or mass market ship, an itinerary in Asia or the Caribbean.
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
Azamara Club Cruises- Changes Are Coming...And I Like It Alot!
I have always struggled with Azamara Cruises because it had a pretty solid product, but no direction and nothing that made it distinguishable. Honestly, I have said to its parent, Celebrity Cruises, that with Oceania Cruises having such a solid product with consistently excellent delivery of cuisine, service and itineraries, there was little motivation to select the lesser marketed and unknown Azamara.
That has all changed...and I preface it by stating that Larry Pimental and his staff have picked over Oceania, Regent, Seabourn, Silversea, Crystal and SeaDream and pulled elements from each, tweaking their selected concepts in ways that they believe will provide a far improved cruise experience which touches upon, but does not pretend to be, luxury.
First Azamara is now Azamara Club Cruises. This is obviously a play off of the "country club" marketing of Oceania and the recent emphasis on "country club casual" by many lines.
Second, they have taken the approach of making the product more inclusive....something I have said was essential to distinguish it from Oceania - who operates identical ships. So now
1. Gratuities are included.
2. Wines with meals complimentary.
3. Bottled water, specialty coffees and teas are included.
4. Shuttle buses will be provided (where available) between the port and town at no charge. 5. Self-service laundries are complimentary.
6. Specialty restaurant dining will be complimentary for suite passengers.
These are pretty much the things that Oceania makes money on and (as you know I have told you) can make an Oceania cruise more expensive than a Seabourn cruise if you are traveling in an sort of suite accommodation.
Third, while Azamara has always had solid cuisine, it is, ala SeaDream, incorporating more of the cuisine of where the ship is visiting in its dining menus. Complimenting that is its emphasis on local wines - some of which are not readily available elsewhere because the vinters either do not have sufficient qualities or simply do not market for foreign distribution. (The other night I enjoyed a bottle of Slovenian wine I purchased on my last cruise. It was bittersweet because I know I cannot purchase it here in the U.S. and I want more of it...and it has great memories associated with it.)
Fourth, there will be many more overnight stays. This, to me, is a tricky one. For me, other than say Barcelona, Venice or Istanbul, there are not many ports that I - as a seasoned traveler - want to overnight in when embarking or disembarking. I may be in the overall minority, but there is great value for many knowing that if their flight is late they can still make the ship...and the need to purchase a pre- or post-cruise hotel or a very early private car to the airport on disembarkation becomes a real cost savings. Also, there will be a beefing up of shore excursions as the additional time will permit more unique and in depth experiences. (These will be at extra cost, however.)
What is refreshing is the Fifth point: Prices are going to be higher. All of this luxury comes at a cost. While higher prices may make Azamara Club unaffordable to many, the average target passengers are aged 45 to 60 with a household income of approximately $300,000 per year. One thing to keep in mind is that the vast majority of the accommodations are cabins with very small bathrooms (and tiny showers). As with SeaDream (Pimental's former baby), I am sure the focus is on making the rest of the onboard experience at a sufficiently high level as to reduce the impact of this shortcoming. Note: I firmly believe that being honest with the market and saying you are raising the prices to make this a more inclusive product is the way to go. The concept of "free, free, free" added to high prices, ala Regent Seven Seas Cruises, is to many offensive; especially the astute.
There is, alas, a Sixth point: Children. As with Oceania, Azamara Club specifically does not encourage children and touts that it has no facilities for children. However, children are welcome to book and, in a very significant difference, if there are a sufficient number of children on board, Azamara Club will provide youth counselors. This, to me is huge. Not only does this open up Azamara Club to many of the demographically targeted folks who have children, it provides a bit of protection for those who do not want to have children onboard with nothing to do disturbing their cruise.
Here is something to think about: December 14th is the day prices are going to increase. If you act quickly, you can lock in some really spectacular cruises in 2010 and 2011 that will have all these added amenities...and you can do so at the present lower prices. It is like receiving a very significant discount for doing today that which you might well do later.
That has all changed...and I preface it by stating that Larry Pimental and his staff have picked over Oceania, Regent, Seabourn, Silversea, Crystal and SeaDream and pulled elements from each, tweaking their selected concepts in ways that they believe will provide a far improved cruise experience which touches upon, but does not pretend to be, luxury.
First Azamara is now Azamara Club Cruises. This is obviously a play off of the "country club" marketing of Oceania and the recent emphasis on "country club casual" by many lines.
Second, they have taken the approach of making the product more inclusive....something I have said was essential to distinguish it from Oceania - who operates identical ships. So now
1. Gratuities are included.
2. Wines with meals complimentary.
3. Bottled water, specialty coffees and teas are included.
4. Shuttle buses will be provided (where available) between the port and town at no charge. 5. Self-service laundries are complimentary.
6. Specialty restaurant dining will be complimentary for suite passengers.
These are pretty much the things that Oceania makes money on and (as you know I have told you) can make an Oceania cruise more expensive than a Seabourn cruise if you are traveling in an sort of suite accommodation.
Third, while Azamara has always had solid cuisine, it is, ala SeaDream, incorporating more of the cuisine of where the ship is visiting in its dining menus. Complimenting that is its emphasis on local wines - some of which are not readily available elsewhere because the vinters either do not have sufficient qualities or simply do not market for foreign distribution. (The other night I enjoyed a bottle of Slovenian wine I purchased on my last cruise. It was bittersweet because I know I cannot purchase it here in the U.S. and I want more of it...and it has great memories associated with it.)
Fourth, there will be many more overnight stays. This, to me, is a tricky one. For me, other than say Barcelona, Venice or Istanbul, there are not many ports that I - as a seasoned traveler - want to overnight in when embarking or disembarking. I may be in the overall minority, but there is great value for many knowing that if their flight is late they can still make the ship...and the need to purchase a pre- or post-cruise hotel or a very early private car to the airport on disembarkation becomes a real cost savings. Also, there will be a beefing up of shore excursions as the additional time will permit more unique and in depth experiences. (These will be at extra cost, however.)
What is refreshing is the Fifth point: Prices are going to be higher. All of this luxury comes at a cost. While higher prices may make Azamara Club unaffordable to many, the average target passengers are aged 45 to 60 with a household income of approximately $300,000 per year. One thing to keep in mind is that the vast majority of the accommodations are cabins with very small bathrooms (and tiny showers). As with SeaDream (Pimental's former baby), I am sure the focus is on making the rest of the onboard experience at a sufficiently high level as to reduce the impact of this shortcoming. Note: I firmly believe that being honest with the market and saying you are raising the prices to make this a more inclusive product is the way to go. The concept of "free, free, free" added to high prices, ala Regent Seven Seas Cruises, is to many offensive; especially the astute.
There is, alas, a Sixth point: Children. As with Oceania, Azamara Club specifically does not encourage children and touts that it has no facilities for children. However, children are welcome to book and, in a very significant difference, if there are a sufficient number of children on board, Azamara Club will provide youth counselors. This, to me is huge. Not only does this open up Azamara Club to many of the demographically targeted folks who have children, it provides a bit of protection for those who do not want to have children onboard with nothing to do disturbing their cruise.
Here is something to think about: December 14th is the day prices are going to increase. If you act quickly, you can lock in some really spectacular cruises in 2010 and 2011 that will have all these added amenities...and you can do so at the present lower prices. It is like receiving a very significant discount for doing today that which you might well do later.
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Regent Seven Seas - Shake Up and (Hopefully) Shake Out of the Navigator
When Prestige Cruise Holdings purchased Regent Seven Seas Cruises from Carlson it really had no idea how bad things were on one of the ships, the Navigator. And since that day it has struggled with pretty much unthinkable conditions ranging from "little things" like brown water to defective air conditioning, to total losses of power (known as a "dead ship" condition), pipes falling apart, etc. And then there is the shaking...aft on the ship presently shakes so badly that you can literally watch the bar counters flex, your drink walk across a table and feel your teeth shake.
That, however, is planned to be a thing of the past. The Navigator is shortly going into an extended drydock for an extensive "stem to stern" mechanical makeover. Folks, laying up a cruise ship for a month or more is very expensive, but in the case of Navigator it is long, long overdue. And, as a result, I do have a concern that - as happens all too often in the boat biz - when you open things up expecting X you find X, Y and (how can that be?) Z. But with such a long drydock I think PCH and Regent have anticipated there are going to be some unanticipated surprises.
Clearly PCH and Regent have taken the problem head on and shows there is now a long term commitment to make something good out of this ship and, therefore, it signals (at least to me) that Regent may be looking at expanding rather than contracting its fleet. But that is another topic for another day! (Maybe not a too distant day.)
Now, what is it that is going to be happening?
First, there has been a new stern designed for the ship, changing it to extend out and create more of a ducktail (think longer, tapered and rounded) with sponsons (underwater structures, port and starboard, projecting out and back to change waterflow). In addition, Navigator will be getting two new screws (propellers). By the way, there is tremendous engineering that goes into the design of propellers so that a certain amount of water is pulled through, at certain velocities, without creating the wrong kind of turbulence and without various harmonics wreaking havoc. The design is, hopefully, going to eliminate the seriously debilitating vibration issue. Even if it does not totally eliminate the vibration (and remember it is a ship, so no matter what there will be some vibration) there is going to be a vast improvement.
Second, every system from air conditioning to plumbing to electrical are going to be throughly inspected and corrected. As many of you may know, Regent has already identified quite a number of issues and has put some stop-gap measures in place (to prevent things like going "dead ship") and has been using the time up to the drydock to put a plan of action into place. To me this is a far greater challenge than the vibration. With the vibration issue you can engineer a solution and simply fabricate and weld on the solution. With these sort of old systems, you essentially are going to war with a beast! (Can you tell this sort of stuff gets me excited?!)
Third, and there has been a bit of misinformation on this posted around the internet on this subject, the interiors are going to be getting makeover, but really nothing of huge note other than the installation of Prime 7, Regent's signature steakhouse. And the rather drab interior is going to be getting a bit of a colorful uplift. More specifically:
Prime 7 will have a similar palate as do the Voyager and Mariner with green and golden hues, leather, polished granite and burnished woods.
Compass Rose (the main dining room) is going to get new armchairs, deep color carpets and draperies, and new china, silverware and glassware. (There is no mention of increasing the number of tables for two, which is a bit of a disappointment.)
La Veranda will remain La Veranda at all times (no more Portofino) and will serve a varied menu in the evening. It will remain the casual dining/buffet experience for breakfast and lunch. I am unsure if it will have waiter service in the evenings, but presume it will. It will receive new furniture (I am not sure if it is just chairs or if the variety of table sizes will be increased), carpets, drapes and dinnerware.
The Pool Grill will be expanded to become a legitimate grill with, you guessed it, a legitimate grill. (Note there has been published comment that this will be a new installation on Deck 11, which is incorrect. It will (ironically?) remain by the pool on Deck 10.) I am not sure if there will be expanded seating (which has always been in short supply).
The various bars and public spaces will also be getting facials (if not facelifts). The terribly underutilized Stars Lounge will no longer be a designated "disco", but will be given an upscale "estate" feel with new furnishings, carpets and curtains. (I am thinking akin to Celebrity's Michael's Club - a compliment). Galileo's (my favorite lounge if the vibration is eliminated...will be similarly updated and the deck aft of it (which is the best spot on the ship will be made more into a outdoor living room with sofas and chaises. The Navigator Lounge will also be similarly buffed up, as will the remaining public areas.
The Spa is being taken over by Canyon Ranch. Other than a new operator (and I was not impressed with its operation on the QM2 - not that any at sea spa operator does much for me) I am not sure that much will change, though I anticipate some new equipment even if only because it is proprietary to Canyon Ranch.
If all this goes according to plan, Regent may well have a ship that I can - as far as hardware - begin recommending rather than advising to avoid. I sure hope so...and I see no reason that should not be the case.
That, however, is planned to be a thing of the past. The Navigator is shortly going into an extended drydock for an extensive "stem to stern" mechanical makeover. Folks, laying up a cruise ship for a month or more is very expensive, but in the case of Navigator it is long, long overdue. And, as a result, I do have a concern that - as happens all too often in the boat biz - when you open things up expecting X you find X, Y and (how can that be?) Z. But with such a long drydock I think PCH and Regent have anticipated there are going to be some unanticipated surprises.
Clearly PCH and Regent have taken the problem head on and shows there is now a long term commitment to make something good out of this ship and, therefore, it signals (at least to me) that Regent may be looking at expanding rather than contracting its fleet. But that is another topic for another day! (Maybe not a too distant day.)
Now, what is it that is going to be happening?
First, there has been a new stern designed for the ship, changing it to extend out and create more of a ducktail (think longer, tapered and rounded) with sponsons (underwater structures, port and starboard, projecting out and back to change waterflow). In addition, Navigator will be getting two new screws (propellers). By the way, there is tremendous engineering that goes into the design of propellers so that a certain amount of water is pulled through, at certain velocities, without creating the wrong kind of turbulence and without various harmonics wreaking havoc. The design is, hopefully, going to eliminate the seriously debilitating vibration issue. Even if it does not totally eliminate the vibration (and remember it is a ship, so no matter what there will be some vibration) there is going to be a vast improvement.
Second, every system from air conditioning to plumbing to electrical are going to be throughly inspected and corrected. As many of you may know, Regent has already identified quite a number of issues and has put some stop-gap measures in place (to prevent things like going "dead ship") and has been using the time up to the drydock to put a plan of action into place. To me this is a far greater challenge than the vibration. With the vibration issue you can engineer a solution and simply fabricate and weld on the solution. With these sort of old systems, you essentially are going to war with a beast! (Can you tell this sort of stuff gets me excited?!)
Third, and there has been a bit of misinformation on this posted around the internet on this subject, the interiors are going to be getting makeover, but really nothing of huge note other than the installation of Prime 7, Regent's signature steakhouse. And the rather drab interior is going to be getting a bit of a colorful uplift. More specifically:
Prime 7 will have a similar palate as do the Voyager and Mariner with green and golden hues, leather, polished granite and burnished woods.
Compass Rose (the main dining room) is going to get new armchairs, deep color carpets and draperies, and new china, silverware and glassware. (There is no mention of increasing the number of tables for two, which is a bit of a disappointment.)
La Veranda will remain La Veranda at all times (no more Portofino) and will serve a varied menu in the evening. It will remain the casual dining/buffet experience for breakfast and lunch. I am unsure if it will have waiter service in the evenings, but presume it will. It will receive new furniture (I am not sure if it is just chairs or if the variety of table sizes will be increased), carpets, drapes and dinnerware.
The Pool Grill will be expanded to become a legitimate grill with, you guessed it, a legitimate grill. (Note there has been published comment that this will be a new installation on Deck 11, which is incorrect. It will (ironically?) remain by the pool on Deck 10.) I am not sure if there will be expanded seating (which has always been in short supply).
The various bars and public spaces will also be getting facials (if not facelifts). The terribly underutilized Stars Lounge will no longer be a designated "disco", but will be given an upscale "estate" feel with new furnishings, carpets and curtains. (I am thinking akin to Celebrity's Michael's Club - a compliment). Galileo's (my favorite lounge if the vibration is eliminated...will be similarly updated and the deck aft of it (which is the best spot on the ship will be made more into a outdoor living room with sofas and chaises. The Navigator Lounge will also be similarly buffed up, as will the remaining public areas.
The Spa is being taken over by Canyon Ranch. Other than a new operator (and I was not impressed with its operation on the QM2 - not that any at sea spa operator does much for me) I am not sure that much will change, though I anticipate some new equipment even if only because it is proprietary to Canyon Ranch.
If all this goes according to plan, Regent may well have a ship that I can - as far as hardware - begin recommending rather than advising to avoid. I sure hope so...and I see no reason that should not be the case.
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Regent Seven Seas - Combating Cancellations Through Aggressive Penalties
I have always felt that Regent Seven Seas' $200 "administrative fee" to cancel a cruise was an affront. Recently Regent softened its position by allowing the $200 to be applied as a future cruise credit. Now, that is the least of your concerns!
Today Regent announced a new, incredibly aggressive, penalty schedule for those who book and then cancel cruises in 2011 and beyond. More specifically:
Deposits, Final Payments and Cancellations
For cruises of 25 nights or less, a deposit of 15% is due within 7 days to secure the reservation, final payment is due 90 days prior to sailing, and the following cancellation penalties apply:
• More than 120 days prior: $200 per booking administrative fee (Future Cruise Credit applies)
• 91-120 days prior: 15% penalty
• 51-90 days prior: 50% penalty
• 31-50 days prior: 75% penalty
• 0-30 days prior: 100% penalty
For cruises of 26 nights or more, a deposit of 20% is due within 7 days to secure the reservation, final payment is due 150 days prior to sailing, and the following cancellation penalties apply:
• More than 150 days prior: $500 per booking administrative fee (Future Cruise Credit applies)
• 121-150 days prior: 25% penalty
• 91-120 days prior: 50% penalty
• 76-90 days prior: 75% penalty
• 0-75 days prior: 100% penalty
Let's review what this means.
It means that unlike, for example, Seabourn Cruise Line, you are being hit with a penalty as far out as 150 days (five months) prior to sailing! And, folks, we are not talking about World Cruises or World Cruise Segments. Most other lines have a 25% penalty at 90 days, or at 120 days for World Cruises and Segments.
But let's leave, for the moment, the longer cruises and focus on what the vast majority of people book: Cruises of 25 days or less. Regent now hits you for 15% 120 days prior and 50% at 90 days prior versus the mainstream such as Seabourn which has a 25% penalty at 90 days.
The reason for this seems obvious to me. (I have yet not been able to verify it though.) It says to me that all the "record breaking" sales have lead to record breaking cancellations. And those cancellations are happening so close to sailing that Regent doesn't have enough time to effectively market the newly available suites to the public. By making the penalties further out and painfully steep, it does two things: Causes those that want to cancel to do it earlier and those that might be willing to take a smaller penalty hit of a late decision to take the cruise because of the larger penalty.
While I cannot fault Regent for implementing the new policy (for, as I explained, it seems to be necessary). What I can do is wonder why Regent has become so attractive to a market segment that appears to be so fickle.
Personally, the steep penalties (and the administrative fees) make it clear to me that rather than a travel agent pushing a Regent cruise as the best option, one might need to first look into the personalities of the clients to be sure that administrative fees and penalties don't become the subject of the conversations ending the agent/client relationship. In other words, the policy might make travel agents and clients to hesitate a bit more before booking a Regent cruise.
Today Regent announced a new, incredibly aggressive, penalty schedule for those who book and then cancel cruises in 2011 and beyond. More specifically:
Deposits, Final Payments and Cancellations
For cruises of 25 nights or less, a deposit of 15% is due within 7 days to secure the reservation, final payment is due 90 days prior to sailing, and the following cancellation penalties apply:
• More than 120 days prior: $200 per booking administrative fee (Future Cruise Credit applies)
• 91-120 days prior: 15% penalty
• 51-90 days prior: 50% penalty
• 31-50 days prior: 75% penalty
• 0-30 days prior: 100% penalty
For cruises of 26 nights or more, a deposit of 20% is due within 7 days to secure the reservation, final payment is due 150 days prior to sailing, and the following cancellation penalties apply:
• More than 150 days prior: $500 per booking administrative fee (Future Cruise Credit applies)
• 121-150 days prior: 25% penalty
• 91-120 days prior: 50% penalty
• 76-90 days prior: 75% penalty
• 0-75 days prior: 100% penalty
Let's review what this means.
It means that unlike, for example, Seabourn Cruise Line, you are being hit with a penalty as far out as 150 days (five months) prior to sailing! And, folks, we are not talking about World Cruises or World Cruise Segments. Most other lines have a 25% penalty at 90 days, or at 120 days for World Cruises and Segments.
But let's leave, for the moment, the longer cruises and focus on what the vast majority of people book: Cruises of 25 days or less. Regent now hits you for 15% 120 days prior and 50% at 90 days prior versus the mainstream such as Seabourn which has a 25% penalty at 90 days.
The reason for this seems obvious to me. (I have yet not been able to verify it though.) It says to me that all the "record breaking" sales have lead to record breaking cancellations. And those cancellations are happening so close to sailing that Regent doesn't have enough time to effectively market the newly available suites to the public. By making the penalties further out and painfully steep, it does two things: Causes those that want to cancel to do it earlier and those that might be willing to take a smaller penalty hit of a late decision to take the cruise because of the larger penalty.
While I cannot fault Regent for implementing the new policy (for, as I explained, it seems to be necessary). What I can do is wonder why Regent has become so attractive to a market segment that appears to be so fickle.
Personally, the steep penalties (and the administrative fees) make it clear to me that rather than a travel agent pushing a Regent cruise as the best option, one might need to first look into the personalities of the clients to be sure that administrative fees and penalties don't become the subject of the conversations ending the agent/client relationship. In other words, the policy might make travel agents and clients to hesitate a bit more before booking a Regent cruise.
Friday, October 16, 2009
Conde Nast Traveler Awards - If You Didn't Believe They Were A Joke Before, You Will Now!
For years I have noted, complained and even ranted that the Conde Naste awards were worthless "awards" which were nothing more than the result of the explicit stuffing of the ballot boxes with the knowing consent of Conde Nast Traveler Magazine. This year it makes the elections in Iran and Afghanistan seem legitimate.
The results for the for Best Small Ship Cruise Line:
1. Sea Cloud 2. Yachts of Seabourn 3. Regent Seven Seas
I pause and ask, "How many of you have even heard of Sea Cloud?" and then I ask, "How many of you know that this very small line has two sailing ships and two river boats?" I am not saying Sea Cloud is not a good product, but if the votes are from those that have actually sailed on the line, one must wonder...seriously wonder. Each ship carries no more than 64 passengers.
So, I must ask, "Who voted and how many times?"
But then I got to wondering, "Where the heck is SeaDream Yacht Club?" "Where is Silversea?"
And then I pondered, "How does Regent Seven Seas qualify as a 'Small Ship Cruise Line'?"
I could go on...but why should the facts get in the way of a sham. What a shame. Heck, aren't the three best hotels in Hawaii all Four Seasons?????????????????
The results for the for Best Small Ship Cruise Line:
1. Sea Cloud 2. Yachts of Seabourn 3. Regent Seven Seas
I pause and ask, "How many of you have even heard of Sea Cloud?" and then I ask, "How many of you know that this very small line has two sailing ships and two river boats?" I am not saying Sea Cloud is not a good product, but if the votes are from those that have actually sailed on the line, one must wonder...seriously wonder. Each ship carries no more than 64 passengers.
So, I must ask, "Who voted and how many times?"
But then I got to wondering, "Where the heck is SeaDream Yacht Club?" "Where is Silversea?"
And then I pondered, "How does Regent Seven Seas qualify as a 'Small Ship Cruise Line'?"
I could go on...but why should the facts get in the way of a sham. What a shame. Heck, aren't the three best hotels in Hawaii all Four Seasons?????????????????
Regent Seven Seas Dress Code Downgrade - Relying on Cruise Critic: A Mere Ploy. But What Is the Value Of It All?
When Regent Seven Seas Cruises posted a poll on Cruise Critic seeking out preferences as to dress code I smirked. I "knew" the decision has already been made to go casual. That poll was, to be sure, more like a lawyer looking for support for a position than a scientist looking for data. And, alas, any good lawyer knows to never ask a question if you don't already know the answer.
Let me explain: Cruise Critic may be the largest community for cruisers in the world, but it represents far less than one (1%) of the cruising population. Just take a look at the poll itself. As of today there were only 443 votes...less than the number of guests found on the Voyager or Mariner at any time (even including if occupancy is little more then half full)...and about what you might find on the Navigator. So there can be 1,850+ guests (plus 3rd and 4ths) on three ships at any time. Then consider that the poll was conducted and the decision decided in little over a month; so figure conservatively 3 voyages x 1,850 guests = 5,550 guests stays in the month. The poll represents less than 1% of the sailing guests over that brief period.
But it is actually less relevant than that. Why? First, because there is no way to know that everyone that voted has (a) actually sailed on Regent; and, (b) actually has any intention of sailing on Regent in the relevant future. And I am sure there are those with multiple sign-ins.
Of course the biggest reason to question the 66% in favor of a "causal only" dress code is because the demographics of who even knows about Cruise Critic vs. those that only lurk vs. those that actually post vs. those that actually cruise on Regent essentially renders the statistical validity of the query worthless. (Of course it also seeks to justify offending 34% of the CC voters who want formal nights...and in this market offending such a large population is generally avoided at all costs.)
And then, of course, is the announcement on Cruise Critic by Mark Conroy, President of Regent. He states, in part, "Most importantly, the recent poll on Cruise Critic showed that the majority of current guests and those that are considering sailing with us support a slightly less formal dress code – two thirds of those who voted are in favor of an Elegant Casual evening dress code." Wait a minute, 293 people voting on Cruise Critic are the "most important" factor in making the decision. Sorry, I am not drinking that Kool-aid.
By now you must be wondering, why all the statistical mumbo-jumbo. Because the "justification" comments are just silly. If Regent really wanted to know what its guests thought, they already knew what to do: Have some focus groups onboard and in local events (like they did when designing the now abandoned new ship) or have a brief telephone poll.
Please understand that I am not protesting the Regent decision. I think it is part of a plan that is long over due...and, for what it is worth, I support it. I think Regent is quickly becoming an inclusive Oceania-type product and that result will be many more happy guests, less frustrations for management and guests, and a much easier time marketing an actually achievable product to an audience that is very receptive to "free" being a better thing than "value".
While there are less and less people that compare Seabourn and Regent (due to the change in product), a July 10, 2010 11 night cruise on the 700 passenger Mariner departing from Rome starts at $8,060 per person (or $732 per day) per person. A July 3, 2010 14 night cruise on the 200 guest Seabourn Legend departing from Rome in a French balcony suite starts at $8,549 (or $610 per day) per person. So for the 11 days a guest is paying $1,342 more for the Regent cruise (11 days x $122 per day higher rate). Right now the airfare for those cruises, booked privately, is under $1,000. Throw in a couple of "free" tours and you are essentially paying the same price for the Regent cruise as you are the Seabourn cruise.
Remember, though, on Seabourn you are on small ship with higher level of personalized service, a finer level of cuisine, a more refined cruise experience (of course, with formal nights), no lines and access to smaller ports and/or locations in town rather than being bussed to it.
Now does that mean that you should book Seabourn over Regent? No! It means that you now have two decidedly different products to choose from. Just don't think because Regent says things are "Free, Free, Free, Free" there is actually any "value" in excess of what, for example, Seabourn offers.
As a travel agent I am thrilled that there is now a defined difference. I feel far more comfortable selling Regent because it is making it known what it really is all about. Please, though, do us all one last favor (and I promise I won't ask for much more): Try to just be straight with us. Say, "Regent has decided to modify its product (and target market)...and don't do silly things like say 293 Cruise Critic posters (whether they have ever sailed on Regent or not) decided it.
Now, there are "values" out there. Folks, now is a great time to relearn the differences between the cruise lines, decide which flavor you prefer and book!
Let me explain: Cruise Critic may be the largest community for cruisers in the world, but it represents far less than one (1%) of the cruising population. Just take a look at the poll itself. As of today there were only 443 votes...less than the number of guests found on the Voyager or Mariner at any time (even including if occupancy is little more then half full)...and about what you might find on the Navigator. So there can be 1,850+ guests (plus 3rd and 4ths) on three ships at any time. Then consider that the poll was conducted and the decision decided in little over a month; so figure conservatively 3 voyages x 1,850 guests = 5,550 guests stays in the month. The poll represents less than 1% of the sailing guests over that brief period.
But it is actually less relevant than that. Why? First, because there is no way to know that everyone that voted has (a) actually sailed on Regent; and, (b) actually has any intention of sailing on Regent in the relevant future. And I am sure there are those with multiple sign-ins.
Of course the biggest reason to question the 66% in favor of a "causal only" dress code is because the demographics of who even knows about Cruise Critic vs. those that only lurk vs. those that actually post vs. those that actually cruise on Regent essentially renders the statistical validity of the query worthless. (Of course it also seeks to justify offending 34% of the CC voters who want formal nights...and in this market offending such a large population is generally avoided at all costs.)
And then, of course, is the announcement on Cruise Critic by Mark Conroy, President of Regent. He states, in part, "Most importantly, the recent poll on Cruise Critic showed that the majority of current guests and those that are considering sailing with us support a slightly less formal dress code – two thirds of those who voted are in favor of an Elegant Casual evening dress code." Wait a minute, 293 people voting on Cruise Critic are the "most important" factor in making the decision. Sorry, I am not drinking that Kool-aid.
By now you must be wondering, why all the statistical mumbo-jumbo. Because the "justification" comments are just silly. If Regent really wanted to know what its guests thought, they already knew what to do: Have some focus groups onboard and in local events (like they did when designing the now abandoned new ship) or have a brief telephone poll.
Please understand that I am not protesting the Regent decision. I think it is part of a plan that is long over due...and, for what it is worth, I support it. I think Regent is quickly becoming an inclusive Oceania-type product and that result will be many more happy guests, less frustrations for management and guests, and a much easier time marketing an actually achievable product to an audience that is very receptive to "free" being a better thing than "value".
While there are less and less people that compare Seabourn and Regent (due to the change in product), a July 10, 2010 11 night cruise on the 700 passenger Mariner departing from Rome starts at $8,060 per person (or $732 per day) per person. A July 3, 2010 14 night cruise on the 200 guest Seabourn Legend departing from Rome in a French balcony suite starts at $8,549 (or $610 per day) per person. So for the 11 days a guest is paying $1,342 more for the Regent cruise (11 days x $122 per day higher rate). Right now the airfare for those cruises, booked privately, is under $1,000. Throw in a couple of "free" tours and you are essentially paying the same price for the Regent cruise as you are the Seabourn cruise.
Remember, though, on Seabourn you are on small ship with higher level of personalized service, a finer level of cuisine, a more refined cruise experience (of course, with formal nights), no lines and access to smaller ports and/or locations in town rather than being bussed to it.
Now does that mean that you should book Seabourn over Regent? No! It means that you now have two decidedly different products to choose from. Just don't think because Regent says things are "Free, Free, Free, Free" there is actually any "value" in excess of what, for example, Seabourn offers.
As a travel agent I am thrilled that there is now a defined difference. I feel far more comfortable selling Regent because it is making it known what it really is all about. Please, though, do us all one last favor (and I promise I won't ask for much more): Try to just be straight with us. Say, "Regent has decided to modify its product (and target market)...and don't do silly things like say 293 Cruise Critic posters (whether they have ever sailed on Regent or not) decided it.
Now, there are "values" out there. Folks, now is a great time to relearn the differences between the cruise lines, decide which flavor you prefer and book!
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Regent Seven Seas - Upscale But Not Luxury...Its In The New Dress Code
Like its sister brand, Regent Seven Seas is going casual. Gone are formal nights for any cruise less than 16 days. In other words, other than World Cruise and World Cruise Segments, formal nights will be a rarity.
This is the language used by Regent when making the announcement. Read it carefully:
Effective with the 2009/2010 New Year's cruises, guests are respectfully requested to adhere to the following guidelines:
Daytime Dress Code (until 6 p.m.) - During the day, resort style clothing (including shorts, warm-up suits, jeans and sneakers) is acceptable in all public areas. Bare feet are acceptable only on the Pool Deck. Note: Bathing suits, while acceptable at the Pool Bar and Grill, are not considered appropriate in any indoor venue.
Evening Dress Code (after 6 p.m.) - Two types of dress code have been established for evenings in public areas: Elegant Casual and Formal Optional. The number of Formal Optional nights is dependent upon the length of the cruise, as follows:
• Cruises of fifteen nights or less will be Elegant Casual for the duration
• Cruises of sixteen nights or more will have two Formal Optional nights
Elegant Casual: Skirt, or slacks (no jeans) with blouse or sweater, pant suit or dress for ladies; slacks (no jeans) and collared shirt for gentlemen. Sport jackets are optional. Note: Jeans, T-shirts, baseball caps, shorts, sneakers and bathrobes are not considered appropriate in any public area after 6 p.m.
Formal Optional: While guests are welcome to dress each evening as per the Elegant Casual dress code, during Formal Optional evenings, guests may opt for a more formal choice of clothing including gowns and cocktail dresses for ladies; tuxedos, dinner jackets or dark suit with tie for gentlemen.
The first thing I did when I read this was pause at the instructions regarding bare feet. Are there really that many people that cruise Regent that need to be instructed that bare feet are not acceptable other than at the pool?
Then I read the repeated use of the term "jeans". Once again, I paused and wondered from where did the issue of wearing jeans become an issue on a luxury line?
It was then time to read about bathrobes not being acceptable in the public areas in the evenings, but only bathing suits are not acceptable at indoor venues at any time. So I pondered, where would one where a appropriately wear a bathrobe when inside the ship?
All of this leads me to be wonder who it is these rules are focused on addressing. The rules themselves are fair enough and I know there are many that will applaud the "no formal nights" policy, but I do wonder about the need and focus on rather questionable practices...questionable on most all cruise lines.
BTW, I am aware there are already disputes and discussion about whether a tennis or polo shirt qualifies as a collared shirt. And, as I have written and cautioned about before, the "slippery slope" has now been stepped onto.
So with FREE air, FREE drinks, FREE gratuities, FREE tours and an explicit NO JEANS and NO FORMAL NIGHTS policy, I have to ask myself what the heck happened to the philosophy that luxury travelers seek value and style? I believe the answer is that Regent is abandoning its desire to focus on luxury, but rather is focusing on providing an upscale experience. You know, like it sister Oceania does.
And if you think I am being negative, I am not. I believe that is exactly the market Regent should be focused on. It is a market they can exceed the expectations of...and Regent can stop spinning its wheels trying to be that which it is not.
Now, if Regent would only bring its pricing down a bit.
This is the language used by Regent when making the announcement. Read it carefully:
Effective with the 2009/2010 New Year's cruises, guests are respectfully requested to adhere to the following guidelines:
Daytime Dress Code (until 6 p.m.) - During the day, resort style clothing (including shorts, warm-up suits, jeans and sneakers) is acceptable in all public areas. Bare feet are acceptable only on the Pool Deck. Note: Bathing suits, while acceptable at the Pool Bar and Grill, are not considered appropriate in any indoor venue.
Evening Dress Code (after 6 p.m.) - Two types of dress code have been established for evenings in public areas: Elegant Casual and Formal Optional. The number of Formal Optional nights is dependent upon the length of the cruise, as follows:
• Cruises of fifteen nights or less will be Elegant Casual for the duration
• Cruises of sixteen nights or more will have two Formal Optional nights
Elegant Casual: Skirt, or slacks (no jeans) with blouse or sweater, pant suit or dress for ladies; slacks (no jeans) and collared shirt for gentlemen. Sport jackets are optional. Note: Jeans, T-shirts, baseball caps, shorts, sneakers and bathrobes are not considered appropriate in any public area after 6 p.m.
Formal Optional: While guests are welcome to dress each evening as per the Elegant Casual dress code, during Formal Optional evenings, guests may opt for a more formal choice of clothing including gowns and cocktail dresses for ladies; tuxedos, dinner jackets or dark suit with tie for gentlemen.
The first thing I did when I read this was pause at the instructions regarding bare feet. Are there really that many people that cruise Regent that need to be instructed that bare feet are not acceptable other than at the pool?
Then I read the repeated use of the term "jeans". Once again, I paused and wondered from where did the issue of wearing jeans become an issue on a luxury line?
It was then time to read about bathrobes not being acceptable in the public areas in the evenings, but only bathing suits are not acceptable at indoor venues at any time. So I pondered, where would one where a appropriately wear a bathrobe when inside the ship?
All of this leads me to be wonder who it is these rules are focused on addressing. The rules themselves are fair enough and I know there are many that will applaud the "no formal nights" policy, but I do wonder about the need and focus on rather questionable practices...questionable on most all cruise lines.
BTW, I am aware there are already disputes and discussion about whether a tennis or polo shirt qualifies as a collared shirt. And, as I have written and cautioned about before, the "slippery slope" has now been stepped onto.
So with FREE air, FREE drinks, FREE gratuities, FREE tours and an explicit NO JEANS and NO FORMAL NIGHTS policy, I have to ask myself what the heck happened to the philosophy that luxury travelers seek value and style? I believe the answer is that Regent is abandoning its desire to focus on luxury, but rather is focusing on providing an upscale experience. You know, like it sister Oceania does.
And if you think I am being negative, I am not. I believe that is exactly the market Regent should be focused on. It is a market they can exceed the expectations of...and Regent can stop spinning its wheels trying to be that which it is not.
Now, if Regent would only bring its pricing down a bit.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
