Is on-board food really that bad

If food, which is included in the fare, is of good quality and
variety, why do they also have restaurants on board where you can eat
at an additional cost?

Is the food really that bad that you would willingly pay to eat
anywhere else?

bringyagrogalong wrote:
>
> If food, which is included in the fare, is of good quality and
> variety, why do they also have restaurants on board where you can eat
> at an additional cost?
>
> Is the food really that bad that you would willingly pay to eat
> anywhere else?

The simple answer is that the specialty restaurants have a
somewhat higher quality of food and/or preparation that some
people are willing to pay for. And it's not a matter of that the
dining room food is "bad" (except for NCL, IMHO), it's just that
the specialty restaurants are better, or at least different.
Some folks are happy to in the dining room for their entire
cruise and don't feel the need for anything else. Some people
would probably even be happy to eat at the pool grill. It's all
personal taste. Think of it as eating at Applebee's vs. eating
at a higher end restaurant when you're at home.

On Jul 22, 11:23 pm, bringyagrogalong <sof...@aapt.net.au> wrote:
> If food, which is included in the fare, is of good quality and
> variety, why do they also have restaurants on board where you can eat
> at an additional cost?
>
> Is the food really that bad that you would willingly pay to eat
> anywhere else?

Regular dining is fine ... The specialty restauants are extras mainly
for the ambience ... calmer quieter more intimate ... although also
the cuts of meat ... the size of the shrimp ... the choice of
desserts ... are somewhat better ... but nothing about regular dining
is bad ...

Food is, of course, a really subjective area. Some people love Brussel
Sprouts or liver - I find them revolting. The food on most ships in
most dining rooms is decent - some cruiselines have better food than
others, but again, it's a subjective taste. The specialty restaurants,
however, give you a choice to have a change of venue for dining, not
to mention a special food. For instance, NCL's french restaurant has a
chocolate fondue that is really amazing.

Dining room has always been fine for me, although I usually end up in
the buffet because I don't like to spend huge amounts of time on meals
on my trips. I've also discovered that the buffet usually has the same
food (at least on NCL) as the main dining room, so I feel I'd rather
spend the time enjoying a mai tai in a quiet corner listening to the
ocean than sitting and waiting for the food to be served. Not going to
the dining room for most meals has the added benefit of gaining little
or no weight on a cruise.

On Jul 23, 8:06 am, Kurt Ullman <kurtull...m> wrote:
> In article
> <41fba54a-197b-4f88-884d-f9886906f...@m3g2000hsc..com>,
>
>  number6 <snumb...@> wrote:
> > On Jul 22, 11:23 pm, bringyagrogalong <sof...@aapt.net.au> wrote:
> > > If food, which is included in the fare, is of good quality and
> > > variety, why do they also have restaurants on board where you can eat
> > > at an additional cost?
>
> > > Is the food really that bad that you would willingly pay to eat
> > > anywhere else?
>
> > Regular dining is fine ... The specialty restauants are extras mainly
> > for the ambience ... calmer quieter more intimate ... although also
> > the cuts of meat ... the size of the shrimp ... the choice of
> > desserts ... are somewhat better ... but nothing about regular dining
> > is bad ...
>
>    Kay & I eat at least once in the specialties. After awhile the main
> dining becomes "home" and we like to go "out" once a week. We like the
> change of environment, pace, etc.

Exactly as we look at it ... On our transatlantic/Iberian peninsula
cruise earlier this year ... 3 specialty restaurant meals blended
nicely with the 13 day cruise ... and 7 sea days overall ...

Bill wrote:

Think of it as eating at Applebee's vs. eating
> at a higher end restaurant when you're at home.

Er. . . we "top out" at Applebee's when it comes to find dining with the
Nonnys. Are you saying that there can be something better?

--
Nonny

Nonnymus
I'm not who you think I am. I'm not who
I think I am. I am what I think you think I am.

On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 09:17:31 -0400, GadgetWorld@ wrote:

>HAL gave a free dinner in an optional restaurant to their high-level
>Mariners Club members, once a cruise, but I think that this has bit the
>dust.

NCL claims to give a free dinner in Le Bistro to Platinum Latitudes
members (14 or more cruises).

Given NCL's general administrative incompetence, I suspect that
sometimes that benefit gets lost.

On board food is whatever you want it to be.

Optional extra cost restaurants were so greatly rejected initially that
NCL dropped their charge for Le Bistro, but soon brought back the charge
and it has become a staple.

HAL gave a free dinner in an optional restaurant to their high-level
Mariners Club members, once a cruise, but I think that this has bit the
dust.

Optional restaurants do give a nice venue to celebrate special occasions
for long dinners and an opportunity to "show-off" for those who cruise
for that purpose.

Ferry ships in Europe offer everything a la carte including the show,
the cabin, and food choices from gourmet to fast food.

Easy Cruise does al la carte cruising in the med and caribbean, but I
don't think that this is what Americans want in cruising and Europeans
prefer all inclusive
pricing including tips and wine and beer.

Inspector Gadget

[Default] Thus spake Bill <billrubin@>:

>bringyagrogalong wrote:
>>
>> If food, which is included in the fare, is of good quality and
>> variety, why do they also have restaurants on board where you can eat
>> at an additional cost?
>>
>> Is the food really that bad that you would willingly pay to eat
>> anywhere else?
>
>The simple answer is that the specialty restaurants have a
>somewhat higher quality of food and/or preparation that some
>people are willing to pay for. And it's not a matter of that the
>dining room food is "bad" (except for NCL, IMHO), it's just that
>the specialty restaurants are better, or at least different.
>Some folks are happy to in the dining room for their entire
>cruise and don't feel the need for anything else. Some people
>would probably even be happy to eat at the pool grill. It's all
>personal taste. Think of it as eating at Applebee's vs. eating
>at a higher end restaurant when you're at home.

We have only had one complaint in food. Our first cruise was a
Carnival 5 day on the Celebration. After the 3rd night, the lettuce
left something to be desired. Since then, it seems that most of the
lines have been taking on short term perishables at various ports.

And on something like a 14 day East West PC cruise, you can't stuff
enough food into the freezers and fridges.

On Jul 24, 7:00 am, "LVTravel" <n...@noone.com> wrote:
>
> IMHO, the specialty restaurant food is what you got in the main dining room
> 10-15 years ago.  All the lines have made their main dining menus less
> appetizing and the specialty restaurants are to bring in more money for the
> cruise lines.  Again, JMHO but I really think accurate after cruising
> regularly for the last 30 years.

Well said!



> "bringyagrogalong" <sof...@aapt.net.au> wrote in message
>
> news:c6865dbd-1ae4-43f6-9dc2-9864e897dd9e@t12g2000prg..com...
>
> > If food, which is included in the fare, is of good quality and
> > variety, why do they also have restaurants on board where you can eat
> > at an additional cost?
>
> > Is the food really that bad that you would willingly pay to eat
> > anywhere else?