Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

I haven't had a particularly productive day, I've been on the net
reading various things. I read dozens of reviews today and noticed
something. On the review sites, the ratings for the reviews for Carnival
and RCI exceed those for Celebrity, HAL, and Cunard.

Reading the comments on the latest ships it seems many went on HAL,
Celebrity, and Cunard expecting much more than on RCI or Carnival.
Carnival was really praised, for food, service, ambiance. Some didn't
love the decor but the meat of the product was liked by many. RCI had
plenty complaints about food but overall people were pleased. Celebrity
and HAL were notably noted for not really seeming to be a step up from
Carnival or RCI in any major way. People expected better food and
service than these lines provided. Cunard also took hits on the QM2 for
some pretty sorry sounding service, just OK food, poor communication and
other problems.

I think overall people have lower expectations of Carnival and RCI,
especially Carnival, and the ratings reflect these expectations as the
lines exceed expectations. The self-described higher rung products
aren't meeting expectations.


So, maybe the lines would benefit from toning down their descriptions.
Also, they can do something radical. Not just market to the higher level
of the mass market but step up their product in a real way. HAL's
signature of excellence and Celebrity's touch of luxury are just window
dressing on stained, scratched, dirty, and sometimes broken windows in
the minds of a significant amount of reviewers

Ben S.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

In article <cSH1e.7011$z.6011@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
Benjamin Smith <benjs@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

> HAL's signature of excellence

Did you notice that a lot of people choose to eat at the Pinnacle
Restaurant instead of the dining room?

--
Charles

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

"Benjamin Smith" <benjs@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:cSH1e.7011$z.6011@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>I haven't had a particularly productive day, I've been on the net reading
>various things. I read dozens of reviews today and noticed something. On
>the review sites, the ratings for the reviews for Carnival and RCI exceed
>those for Celebrity, HAL, and Cunard.

Ben , I don't think that I have gone on Carnival, with lesser
expectations..the only thing I have done is gone on expecting the decor to
be rather gaudy and colorful and many times ridiculously *way out*..But the
Carnival Pride I took in 2002 was much much better as far as food and
service than the eight previous Carnival cruises..The Carnival Conquest I
took in 2004, surpassed the Pride in food and service..
In fact, it had the best food of any cruise ship that we have taken and I
tend to be a bit of a *picky* eater...Carnival, although many do not want to
accept it, is improving vastly in those ways...If only they would have
different designer than Farcus...If they would stop making the interiors as
outlandish, they would be far more acceptable to many..The thing that lacks
most on Carnival is a pleasing ambiance..If you do not let the clashed
colors bother you, it is a very good cruise line to take..
The passenger mix is now that..a mix of all ages, unless you are going on a
less than 7 day cruise.

I have taken two HAL cruises and have another booked...Primarily because I
like the size and design of their ships..The ambiance is lovely and I love
all the large fresh floral arrangements throughout the ship and the music is
more to my taste..it is just not loud "noise"! The service is good but I
think Carnival's was better and the food was good but again not as good as
our last two Carnival cruises...As for RCI, their ships are lovely..good
taste in decor and color..Service is very good but the food except for a few
items, lacks sorely and needs improvement.
I find that going on a ship without any expectations, makes it easier to
evaluate what you experience.

So far, I have not been able to fairly evaluate Celebrity since we have just
taken one Celebrity cruise...With another booked in February, perhaps I will
be able to critique Celebrity with a more open mind and be happier with the
product..

> So, maybe the lines would benefit from toning down their descriptions.
> Also, they can do something radical. Not just market to the higher level
> of the mass market but step up their product in a real way. HAL's
> signature of excellence and Celebrity's touch of luxury are just window
> dressing on stained, scratched, dirty, and sometimes broken windows in the
> minds of a significant amount of reviewers

Toning down descriptions would not do me any good as I never believe the
*hype*..The proof of the pudding is actually seeing and trying it
yourself...

--Jean


> Ben S.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

Ben Smith. A sound and accurate analysis which presents a picture of
marketing against expectations of the experienced cruise segment. Jim

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

Charles wrote:

> In article <cSH1e.7011$z.6011@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
> Benjamin Smith <benjs@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
>
>>HAL's signature of excellence
>
>
> Did you notice that a lot of people choose to eat at the Pinnacle
> Restaurant instead of the dining room?
>

Pinnacle got good reviews for food. I didn't get a sense people spent
every night at the specialty restaurant vs. te main dining room.

Ben S.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

In article <MDK1e.10405$S46.830@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
Benjamin Smith <benjs@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

> Pinnacle got good reviews for food. I didn't get a sense people spent
> every night at the specialty restaurant vs. te main dining room.

I read a couple of reports where the persons claimed they went to the
Pinnacle a few times a week because they were not happy with the dining
room.

--
Charles

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

Do you think a person who buys a Mercedes will have higher expectations than
a person who buys a Corolla?

The person with the Corolla might be pleased if the shop took care of the
warranty item when they dropped the car off the night before. While the
person with the Mercedes might be disappointed because the free loaner car
(that he got, but the Corolla guy doesn't get) smelled of ciggy smoke.

It's all a matter of perspective. People do have different expectations
with different products

--Tom


"Benjamin Smith" <benjs@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:cSH1e.7011$z.6011@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>I haven't had a particularly productive day, I've been on the net reading
>various things. I read dozens of reviews today and noticed something. On
>the review sites, the ratings for the reviews for Carnival and RCI exceed
>those for Celebrity, HAL, and Cunard.
>
> Reading the comments on the latest ships it seems many went on HAL,
> Celebrity, and Cunard expecting much more than on RCI or Carnival.
> Carnival was really praised, for food, service, ambiance. Some didn't love
> the decor but the meat of the product was liked by many. RCI had plenty
> complaints about food but overall people were pleased. Celebrity and HAL
> were notably noted for not really seeming to be a step up from Carnival or
> RCI in any major way. People expected better food and service than these
> lines provided. Cunard also took hits on the QM2 for some pretty sorry
> sounding service, just OK food, poor communication and other problems.
>
> I think overall people have lower expectations of Carnival and RCI,
> especially Carnival, and the ratings reflect these expectations as the
> lines exceed expectations. The self-described higher rung products aren't
> meeting expectations.
>
>
> So, maybe the lines would benefit from toning down their descriptions.
> Also, they can do something radical. Not just market to the higher level
> of the mass market but step up their product in a real way. HAL's
> signature of excellence and Celebrity's touch of luxury are just window
> dressing on stained, scratched, dirty, and sometimes broken windows in the
> minds of a significant amount of reviewers
>
> Ben S.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

Pinnacle Grill was new on Statendam when we went to Hawaii and available at
lunchtime to suite passengers.
As a general rule we do not eat either breakfast or lunch in the dining
room, but we decided to try it once and were pleased enough to make a
reservation for dinner.

The meal and service were outstanding, but since we never had a problem in
the dining room with either the food or the service we chose to eat the
remainder of our meals there.

When we booked Westerdam we looked forward to having a meal in Pinnacle and
once again we were not disappointed. It is well worth the extra charge both
for the food and the service and we look forward to dining there again on
our next cruise.
--
DG in Cherry Hill, NJ
videomaven1nospam@comcast.net


"Charles" <fort@his.com.remove.invalid> wrote in message
news:270320052226485735%fort@his.com.remove.invalid...
> In article <MDK1e.10405$S46.830@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
> Benjamin Smith <benjs@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> > Pinnacle got good reviews for food. I didn't get a sense people spent
> > every night at the specialty restaurant vs. te main dining room.
>
> I read a couple of reports where the persons claimed they went to the
> Pinnacle a few times a week because they were not happy with the dining
> room.
>
> --
> Charles

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

Hi, Ben,



"The self-described higher rung products aren't meeting expectations."


You said in one sentence exactly what I tried to communicate after our first
Celebrity cruise this past June 2004 (on the Millennium in the Med). I had
allowed myself to believe the Celebrity hype that after 9 cruises on such
mainstream lines as NCL, RCI and Princess, I would find Celebrity offered a
noticeably "premium" cruise experience. Our actual experience, while nice
enough, did not live up to our X-inspired premium expectations.
Interestingly, we had the opportunity to immediately compare and contrast
our Celebrity cruise with a small ship cruise experience (Abercrombie &
Kent's Sun Boat IV on the Nile), and the Nile cruise exceeded all
expectations. Without fanfare, A&K quietly delivered what everyone would
agree was a "premium" cruise experience, characterized by exquisite
attention to detail in every aspect of the cruise, a consistently high level
of quality in all things basic to a cruise (food, service, accommodations,
etc.), and such personalized treatment that we felt as if we were the most
important people aboard.



Instead of selling an amorphous concept experience like "premium," which I
simply don't think a mainstream line can provide on a large ship, what would
happen if these same cruise lines that disappoint for failure to live up to
expectations developed a specific, measurable marketing hook? The Westin
hotel chain has been very successful in this regard. What is the first thing
that comes to your mind when you think of Westin? The Heavenly Bed. That
marketing campaign worked because it created a specific expectation about
something as "boringly" basic as four legs, a platform and a mattress, yet
so crucial to a satisfying hotel stay, that every Westin every where could
meet every guest's expectations every time! So, of course, Westin extended
the Heavenly concept to their bath products and other amenities, all of
which are the "icing" on the cake of the Heavenly Bed. Now, a hotel shopper
thinks about a "Heavenly hotel stay" when they hear Westin.



I think it would be interesting to see something more focused like that in
cruise line marketing, an emphasis on a defined feature that cruisers are
sure to find on every ship in the line and that distinguishes the line from
the rest of the pack. Being able to pitch unique bells & whistles that can
be found at sea only on their Voyager-class ships has certainly worked for
RCI.



Take care,



Diana Ball

near Houston, TX

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

One thing's for sure...the Mercedes will see a lot more "shop time"
than the Corolla. Toyota leads in new care reliability with its Scion,
Lexus and Toyota brands in the top three spots. Mercedes is close to
the bottom. I have high expectations for Toyota and Honda and so far I
haven't been disappointed. And, I always thought I wanted a Mercedes.
The older ones seemed to be around forever. Then something happened.
Now it's the old Toyotas and Hondas I see still kicking.

Lindsay

Tom K Mar 27, 7:38 pm show options

Newsgroups: rec.travel.cruises
From: "Tom K" <tkani...@optonline.net> - Find messages by this author
Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 22:38:54 -0500

Do you think a person who buys a Mercedes will have higher expectations
than
a person who buys a Corolla?


The person with the Corolla might be pleased if the shop took care of
the
warranty item when they dropped the car off the night before. While
the
person with the Mercedes might be disappointed because the free loaner
car
(that he got, but the Corolla guy doesn't get) smelled of ciggy smoke.


It's all a matter of perspective. People do have different
expectations
with different products


--Tom

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

Tom K wrote:

> Do you think a person who buys a Mercedes will have higher expectations than
> a person who buys a Corolla?
>

At best, HAL is Cadillac and RCI perhaps Pontiac. Or HAL is a middle
level Acura, like TSX, and RCI is an Accord. Mercedes, in the cruise
world, is the luxury market. And, for the most part, Radisson, Crystal,
and Silverseas get very high ratings and consistently meet expectations
of their pax. Cunard's QM2 is not, it is like the Jaguar S class where
owners did not feel it was a proper Jag and had too much Ford content
the QM2 has too much foreign, un-Cunardlike content. (Jag has addressed
and fixed many of the issues with this class) I also read car reviews
and Mercedes, when not unreliable, impress their owners in areas where
they should--dynamic qualities, dealership service, luxury content,
build quality/fit and finish.


> The person with the Corolla might be pleased if the shop took care of the
> warranty item when they dropped the car off the night before. While the
> person with the Mercedes might be disappointed because the free loaner car
> (that he got, but the Corolla guy doesn't get) smelled of ciggy smoke.
>

I think there are picky folks in all economic strata.


> It's all a matter of perspective. People do have different expectations
> with different products
>

Fueling that expectation is overselling the product. HAL and Celebrity
partially oversell the product and patially live off of their laurels.
So, they need to fix their core product and tone down their promotional
materials.

Ben


> --Tom
>
>

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

"Benjamin Smith" <benjs@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message

>>I haven't had a particularly productive day, I've been on the net reading
>>various things. I read dozens of reviews today and noticed something. On
>>the review sites, the ratings for the reviews for Carnival and RCI exceed
>>those for Celebrity, HAL, and Cunard.

Ben, I have to agree with Jean. The food on Carnival has improved so
much, this may be the reason for the positive reviews you are reading.
They have the best lobster and prime rib, but what I like are their
lunch buffets.

In February I will be cruising on the MOAGC2 with Jean. We will both be
taking a second look at Celebrity. People in our group are friends, so
we will have a good time, no matter what. Most of the cruise lines are
similar, although there are some differences. I am sure we will have a
great time on Celebrity.

Becca <-----keeping positive thoughts...

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

Becca wrote:

> "Benjamin Smith" <benjs@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
>
>>> I haven't had a particularly productive day, I've been on the net
>>> reading various things. I read dozens of reviews today and noticed
>>> something. On the review sites, the ratings for the reviews for
>>> Carnival and RCI exceed those for Celebrity, HAL, and Cunard.
>
>
> Ben, I have to agree with Jean. The food on Carnival has improved so
> much, this may be the reason for the positive reviews you are reading.
> They have the best lobster and prime rib, but what I like are their
> lunch buffets.
>
> In February I will be cruising on the MOAGC2 with Jean. We will both be
> taking a second look at Celebrity. People in our group are friends, so
> we will have a good time, no matter what. Most of the cruise lines are
> similar, although there are some differences. I am sure we will have a
> great time on Celebrity.

I think, this time, you'll know what to expect from Celebrity.
Millennium, IMO, is even more mellow than Mercury. I'm sure you'll enjoy
the cruise. One thing, though, Celebrity seems to be slipping badly in
ship maintenance and that cleanliness you experienced on Mercury may not
be on Millennium. Hopefully, the Millie's captain is keeping her clean
but regaular replacement of worn furnishings has been noticeably cut
back, that is something mentioned pretty frequently in recent reviews.

Per Carnival, yes food is mentioned as a plus, but also service and the
ships not having a party, tacky feel that some were expecting.

Ben S.


>
> Becca <-----keeping positive thoughts...

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

Karen Segboer wrote:

> Benjamin Smith <benjs@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>People want Mercedes because of the image. I remember people when
>>actually riding in Mercedes not liking the European feel of it. They
>>found the ride hard, the seats hard, the doors having a heavy feel to
>>them, an overall different type of feel than expected. Once used to this
>>feel, Mercedes prove to have a unique robustness and an unperturbed by
>>nasty road situations feel about it. But, those expected pillow soft
>>Cadillac or Lincoln feel were very surprised by the German-feeling Mercedes.
>
>
> On the contrary, I love "plush," but I found the BMW to be a hard,
> sporty ride, one I didn't like at all, which is why I said okay to our
> first Mercedes.
>

Mercedes compared to BMW has a plusher ride. But, Mercedes compared to
big Cadillac or Lincoln feels hard. There's also different types of
Mercedes, some of the coupes ride firmer than the sedans, and the AMG
line are BMW taut. Some BMWs have firmish, though compliant rides. I'd
say overall that fine German cars are less perturbed by nasty bumps,
especially at speed, than other cars.

I still find the seats on Mercedes quite firm, but supportive. Just like
my Birkenstock sandles and Finn Comfort shoes.

You are used to the Mercedes, but I've heard people, especially coming
from Buicks, Cadillacs, Lincolns, describe Mercedes and other European
cars as having "hard, harsh" rides.

> When Hans first said he wanted a luxury car, I proffered a Jaguar, a
> car I've always admired for it's lines and design. Hans would not
> even go to the showroom and look at them, he was always so turned off
> by their engineering and unreliability. So, a Mercedes it was, and
> I'm glad, too. As I said above, I love that car, and I know
> absolutely nothing at all about the "guts" of a car, only the feel,
> the ride and the comfort.
>
>
Jags for years were nightmares. Hans is a wise man.

>>I think the newer Mercedes will last. The newest range are fine cars. A
>>few years ago quality slipped but it is back to Mercedes levels again.
>>The bad reliability figures are for a few models, and for some of them
>>with ambitious electronics. Most Mercedes cars are reasonably reliable.
>
>
> Personally, I think they're more than just reasonably reliable, but
> I'm a proud owner of a great one.
>
>

As I said to Tom, Mercedes owners are mostly quite impressed with their
cars, many quite proud.

Ben (likes the Audi A6 and Volvo s80)


>

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 14:09:48 GMT, Benjamin Smith wrote:

> Linsifer wrote:
>
>> One thing's for sure...the Mercedes will see a lot more "shop time"
>> than the Corolla. Toyota leads in new care reliability with its Scion,
>> Lexus and Toyota brands in the top three spots. Mercedes is close to
>> the bottom. I have high expectations for Toyota and Honda and so far I
>> haven't been disappointed. And, I always thought I wanted a Mercedes.
>> The older ones seemed to be around forever. Then something happened.
>> Now it's the old Toyotas and Hondas I see still kicking.
>>
>
> This is part of rec.travel.cruises.automobilesidetrack

Completely OT. Somebody should spank her hiney.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 23:28:07 -0600, D Ball wrote:

> Hi, Ben,
>
> "The self-described higher rung products aren't meeting expectations."
>
> You said in one sentence exactly what I tried to communicate after our first
> Celebrity cruise this past June 2004 (on the Millennium in the Med). I had
> allowed myself to believe the Celebrity hype that after 9 cruises on such
> mainstream lines as NCL, RCI and Princess, I would find Celebrity offered a
> noticeably "premium" cruise experience. Our actual experience, while nice
> enough, did not live up to our X-inspired premium expectations.

This is interesting to hear you say that since you certainly should have
known better. That's a backhanded compliment; you're savvy and well read
enough but you fed yourself an expectation that, in your heart, you knew
could not be true.

> Interestingly, we had the opportunity to immediately compare and contrast
> our Celebrity cruise with a small ship cruise experience (Abercrombie &
> Kent's Sun Boat IV on the Nile), and the Nile cruise exceeded all
> expectations. Without fanfare, A&K quietly delivered what everyone would
> agree was a "premium" cruise experience, characterized by exquisite
> attention to detail in every aspect of the cruise, a consistently high level
> of quality in all things basic to a cruise (food, service, accommodations,
> etc.), and such personalized treatment that we felt as if we were the most
> important people aboard.

Again, interesting. Why is that you were surprised? My guess is that there
is very little about AK on RTC and very little marketing done; hence, your
expectations were gilded.

> Instead of selling an amorphous concept experience like "premium," which I
> simply don't think a mainstream line can provide on a large ship, what would
> happen if these same cruise lines that disappoint for failure to live up to
> expectations developed a specific, measurable marketing hook? The Westin
> hotel chain has been very successful in this regard. What is the first thing
> that comes to your mind when you think of Westin? The Heavenly Bed.

LOL Our Westin experience was heavenly all right.

http://www.loscabosguide.com/beaches/nudbeach.htm

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

"Benjamin Smith" <benjs@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:cSH1e.7011$z.6011@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> I haven't had a particularly productive day, I've been on the net
> reading various things. I read dozens of reviews today and noticed
> something. On the review sites, the ratings for the reviews for Carnival
> and RCI exceed those for Celebrity, HAL, and Cunard.
>
> Reading the comments on the latest ships it seems many went on HAL,
---snip---

Quality of food. Or quantity of food?
So many restaurants claim fame to the "all you can eat", and seems to me
that the majority of Americans agree. So, in this thread on quality, and
food being mentioned as one of the driving features, what does food quality
mean to you?

It's almost a rule now when my wife and I go out to eat, that we order one
meal and split it simply because the servings are so huge. Yet when we go to
a $30 a plate pasta Italian high-class joint the meal is measured in
tablespoons and the taste no better than out of the bottle at home.

So... how do you evaluate quality of food? I am sincerely curious and I'm
sure others in the newsgroup might find this interesting.

Wayne

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

Wayne Lundberg wrote:
> Quality of food. Or quantity of food?

I've never been on a cruise where quantity, or lack thereof, was ever
an issue, so my food comments are always based on actual quality -
freshness, flavor, variety, preparation, etc.

> So many restaurants claim fame to the "all you can eat", and seems to
me
> that the majority of Americans agree.

My husband loves "all you can eat" but understands that the quality of
the food may not be as high as he'd get at a nice restaurant where the
food is plated in the kitchen. I guess they're two different dining
experiences, with a place for both, at least in our family.

On a cruise, it's a given that I can eat as much as I please, so I
focus more on the food, less on the quantity.

> It's almost a rule now when my wife and I go out to eat, that we
order one
> meal and split it simply because the servings are so huge.

We order our own, but bring home half to heat up for the following
day's meal.

> a $30 a plate pasta Italian high-class joint the meal is measured in
> tablespoons and the taste no better than out of the bottle at home.

I know what you mean, and it makes me crazy. I remember a meal I had
pre-theater, at a very busy, upscalish place across from Lincoln
Center. Pasta was n the $25-30 a plate range (of course, not all you
could eat) and the serving was, I'm sure, less than 4oz. It was a good
dish, but I never felt so ripped off in my life. They served it in this
huge bowl - this measly, scrawny mound of pasta at the bottom.

> So... how do you evaluate quality of food?

Kind of went into my criteria, above, but each food is judged
differently. How does it feel in my mouth? Too chewy, mushy or tough?
Does the flavor have any depth or is the first taste the end taste? How
is it seasoned? Over salted? Can I detect any seasoning other than
salt? How's the temperature. Would the dish improve if it was hotter or
colder? Do I detect ice in my ice cream? Does my flourless chocolate
cake have a grittiness to it? Is the fruit ripe and flavorful? Do the
garnishes complement or detract from the dish?

Now, I'm not consciously going through all this each time I taste
something served to me in the dining room, but if something is "off" to
my taste, I'll mentally acknowledge it, and then just as quickly forget
it and move on. Haven't been served anything (okay, maybe a few things)
that I haven't wanted to finish. And, a nice bottle of wine with the
meal tends to hide many faults :-).

Lee

I am sincerely curious and I'm
> sure others in the newsgroup might find this interesting.
>
> Wayne

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

Capt Mary Kidd wrote:

> The message <S4V1e.10567$S46.10059@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>
> from Benjamin Smith <benjs@ix.netcom.com> contains these words:
>
>
>>As I said to Tom, Mercedes owners are mostly quite impressed with their
>>cars, many quite proud.
>
>
> You must get different versions in the US to the UK then.

We don't get the A car and most of the US Mercedes are leather trimmed
and automatics.


Ben S.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

"LeeNY" <leeschw@campmor.com> wrote in message
news:1112026196.659421.288030@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>Passengers that have low
> expectations at home when choosing a restaurant or hotel chain will be
> very pleased with a cruise product that those with more discriminating
> taste at home will not be satisfied with at all. I mean, if I regularly
> ate at Applebees or Olive Garden, then of course, I'd be very impressed
> with Carnival food - it would exceed expectations. But, since I don't
> eat at these kinds of places, Carnival food (at least what I've had)
> doesn't impress. Having eaten at some pretty fine restaurants in NYC,
> I'm, for the most part, pretty unimpressed with cruise food flavor. I
> think they do a terrific job at feeding 2000 people a week, don't get
> me wrong. But, the quality, to me, has never (or rarely) exceeded a
> decent banquet meal at the local wedding factory.

Lee,
We don't often frequent Applebees or Olive Garden...think we have stopped in
after shopping in both for lunch no more than twice in our lives and mostly
because they are near our mall....Not that there is anything wrong with
them, they are just not our favorites for dinners..But your comment caught
my eye...how long is it since your last Carnival cruise and which ship did
you take? Because I was really impressed with the improvement that Carnival
has made with the quality and freshness of their food since Sept. 2001..On
our last two Carnival cruises in Nov.2002 and 2004,( Pride & Conquest), I
saw a vast difference in quality from the other Carnival cruises we had
taken prior to those dates. Presentation was lovely, too.

Since then we have taken RCI, Celebrity, HAL and NCL and none of their food
compared quality wise to the Carnival.
Celebrity and HAL came the closest.
Just curious if your Carnival cruises were back when Carnival food was
nothing to write home about...more like what was served on the Rhapsody and
Radiance cruises that we were on last year.

--Jean

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

Karen Segboer wrote:

> Benjamin Smith <benjs@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

>>>
>>
>>Mercedes compared to BMW has a plusher ride. But, Mercedes compared to
>>big Cadillac or Lincoln feels hard.
>

I don't care for them. Soft seats, strangely placed instruments. Floaty
ride, they'll drift from lane to lane. No feedback in steering. Great
for going slow around town. However, new Cadillac STS is a serious road
machine and very different than Sedan de Ville. Licoln STS is a decent
sporty sedan. Body solidity isn't there yet vs. European marques.

>
> I've never wanted to try either Cadillac or Lincoln (Hans would never
> buy either car), so I wouldn't know.
>
>
>>There's also different types of
>>Mercedes, some of the coupes ride firmer than the sedans, and the AMG
>>line are BMW taut. Some BMWs have firmish, though compliant rides. I'd
>>say overall that fine German cars are less perturbed by nasty bumps,
>>especially at speed, than other cars.
>
>
> The "S" class is supposed to be the ultimate luxury Mercedes.


Yes, but they've top that. I just went to the auto show. The S is fine,
it's been around in its form for awhile. Look for it to be replaced in
two years or so. Mercedes makes Maybach, an incredible sybarite's
delight full of excess and is incredibly well crafted. Starting at about
340 grand, it's an investment. I don't think they make many of them.

I think
> our "E" class is the best I want to do. When you get up to the "S"
> class and all the plushness and the great ride that it is, I still
> can't justify spending that kind of money on a car. I'd rather have a
> few cruises for the money and just keep our "E".


E is the best one, IMO. Best value. Great size for 4 people. Superb
handling and brakes with fluid European-luxury ride. I don't like the
new Mercedes sedan/coupe based on the E. They've chopped the window area
down in half and the car has very poor visibility. I sat in it, the
quality is superb, but it is a styling exercise. It's $72,000.
>
>
>>I still find the seats on Mercedes quite firm, but supportive. Just like
>>my Birkenstock sandles and Finn Comfort shoes.
>
>
> Maybe it's my perpetually bad back that grew to love the Mercedes. I
> can definitely tell the difference between the Honda CRV and the "E".
>

Sitting in them today, they are definitely firmer than Audi seats or
plush but still firm Volvo seats. I'd say they are very firm. They have
excellent low back support, thigh support is strong. The S is definitely
the most plush, E in the middle, C is the firmist. BMWs also have firm
seats. Go to the Japanese lux cars, Lexus, Infinity, and Acura, and the
seats are plush and reasonably supportive, but less so than the Europeans.

>
>>You are used to the Mercedes, but I've heard people, especially coming
>
>>from Buicks, Cadillacs, Lincolns, describe Mercedes and other European
>
>>cars as having "hard, harsh" rides.
>
>
> Not so much hard or harsh, but I'd say ( and this is only my opinion)
> that the ride is sure and sturdy. Holds the road and takes the turns
> so nicely.
>

Absolutely. I like that bumps are momentary. Hit a big bump, the wheel
thumps, the car moves very little and only where the bump is, and it is
over. The bumps don't intrude because the body is so solid and there's
so much wheel travel. On a big Cadillac, the whole car oscillates a few
cycles, even if the bump impact is less.

>

>
>>Ben (likes the Audi A6 and Volvo s80)
>
>
> Both great cars!
>

Audi just introduced an all-new A6. I sat in it at the auto show. Nice,
but visibility isn't great. Volvo is coming up with an all-new s80 for
the next model year.

Ben

> Karen
>
>
> __ /7__/7__/7__
> \::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::...
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> http://www.cupcaked.com/reviews ®
> (...and leave off the "potatoes" to e-mail)

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

Shouldn't have to pay extra to get good food and service. What they give you
in the specialty restaurants they should be doing in the main dining room.

Ron

"Benjamin Smith" <benjs@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:MDK1e.10405$S46.830@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> Charles wrote:
>
>> In article <cSH1e.7011$z.6011@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
>> Benjamin Smith <benjs@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>HAL's signature of excellence
>>
>>
>> Did you notice that a lot of people choose to eat at the Pinnacle
>> Restaurant instead of the dining room?
>>
>
> Pinnacle got good reviews for food. I didn't get a sense people spent
> every night at the specialty restaurant vs. te main dining room.
>
> Ben S.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

LeeNY wrote:

> Karen Segboer wrote:
>
>>On the contrary, I love "plush," but I found the BMW to be a hard,
>>sporty ride, one I didn't like at all
>
>
> And, that hard ride is one of the reasons I went with BMW. I'm one of
> those drivers that likes to feel the road when I drive. Put me in one
> of those Caddy or Lincoln boats and I'm instantly car sick.
>

It is a comfortable hard ride that is not really stiff, just stuck to
the road and composed. I'm very impressed with the 3 and 5 series BMWs.
I'm sure the 7 is fine, haven't been in a new version of this series.
The styling inside and out on the new 5 and 7 is hard to get used to.
Inside, the 5 series seems a bit stark, but clean and modern.

> I went from two Hondas, to a VW Passat to a Subaru to a BMW (325xi).
> While I loved the reliability of the Hondas (not as much with the
> Subie, but fantastic in snow), I missed the German engineering that
> made the Passat, and so far the BMW (only 5 weeks old) much more
> exciting to drive, at least for me. Good thing there are so many
> choices out there, to suit everyone's tastes, just like in cruising.
>

I really like the Passat. I find it much nicer than the Buick-like Camry
and a little nicer than Accord. Accord doesn't feel as robust, the
Passat is Audi-like, though less refined.



> I enjoyed your original post, Ben. I think you made some great points.
> But, everything about a cruise that people are critical about (meaning
> critique, both favorable and unfavorable) is so subjective, that it's
> impossible to say (at least in my eyes) which cruise lines/ships don't
> meet, meet or surpass expectations. Passengers that have low
> expectations at home when choosing a restaurant or hotel chain will be
> very pleased with a cruise product that those with more discriminating
> taste at home will not be satisfied with at all. I mean, if I regularly
> ate at Applebees or Olive Garden, then of course, I'd be very impressed
> with Carnival food - it would exceed expectations. But, since I don't
> eat at these kinds of places, Carnival food (at least what I've had)
> doesn't impress. Having eaten at some pretty fine restaurants in NYC,
> I'm, for the most part, pretty unimpressed with cruise food flavor. I
> think they do a terrific job at feeding 2000 people a week, don't get
> me wrong. But, the quality, to me, has never (or rarely) exceeded a
> decent banquet meal at the local wedding factory. Overall, food is
> under seasoned or over salted, generally bland. I'm impressed with
> selection and freshness, but underimpressed with taste. However, I LOVE
> the dining experience on cruises - the social aspect, the service
> (usually good), the ambience, etc. I think all of the other factors
> involved in the overall dining experience make the food seem better
> than it is. It's all about the presentation, and not just the
> presentation on the plate.
>



> How people live their lives when not on a cruise has great bearing on
> what people expect out of a cruise. If you dine regularly at The Four
> Seasons or Daniel, drive (or are driven in) a Rolls, stay at the Ritz,
> then I don't think there's a cruise on a mass market line that will
> impress. If you enjoy McDonalds, find EconoLodge accomodations okay for
> a week's stay, etc., then you're going to be impressed with virtually
> any mass market cruise. Most people fall somewhere in the middle - will
> be impressed by some, not so by others. On my O-dam cruise on March 12,
> we became friendly with a couple who were cruising for the very first
> time. While my expectations were met on this cruise (not exceeded - I
> knew the product, knew what to expect), their's were well exceeded, yet
> they don't plan to cruise again. The HAL product wasn't a great fit for
> them - food was too fancy, service was too good, ambience was too
> formal. It was just more cruise than they were expecting, and it didn't
> suit them.
>


Fit is absolutely crucial. People make mistakes when they pick by
itinerary or price and don't consider the cruise line's style. For some
people I know, Celebrity or HAL would be too formal and RCI would be
around the right amount of formality.

I think what I've found is those used to high quality venues are not
finding HAL and Celebrity to live up to their hype with too much of the
cheesy factors they didn't want in the "lower rung" lines and found the
experience not as upscale as desired. I would think these are people
used to dining in and patronizing high-middle rung establishments. Then,
there are those that have tried Carnival and other lines that don't find
Celebrity and HAL to feel like big upgrades.

It seems there's more dissatisfaction with HAL and Celebrity than there
used to be. There are still a good amount of positive reviews for these
two lines, but I found less overall than with RCI and Carnival. There's
a problem with their "premium" category, people really don't know what
to make of it.




> I think it would be great if some of the cruise hype was toned down, so
> expectations would be more readily exceeded. Don't think it'll happen,
> though.
>

No, advertising is what it is.

> Lee
>

Ben S.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

"Benjamin Smith" <benjs@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:S4V1e.10567$S46.10059@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
>
> Ben (likes the Audi A6 and Volvo s80)
>
>

I want the Volvo SUV.

--Tom

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

Yeah! :-) At least wait until there's less OF it.

Lindsay


>On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 14:09:48 GMT, Benjamin Smith wrote:

>> This is part of rec.travel.cruises.automobilessidetrack

Chrissy wrote:

>Completely OT. Somebody should spank her hiney.

Karen replied:

You stay away from Lindsay's hiney.

Karen

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged