The Wall Street Journal published an article suggesting that Viking is a luxury cruise line simply because it is expensive. The public makes this mistake too – and it’s wrong.
Wall Street Journal’s Gushing Report
On September 3rd, 2025, the Wall Street Journal published a gushing report about Viking cruise lines’ ocean product. Its claim is that because Viking earns more on older equipment than contemporary cruise lines, then it is a) outperforming the best in the business, and b) is a luxury cruise line. In the coming sections, I will break down just how foolish this is (and embarrassing coming from the WSJ) but here’s some excerpts of the coverage.
“Climbing aboard a Viking ship tends to mean paying more than for many alternatives—Viking tickets range between $800 and $900 per night for one person, easily twice as much as the cost to board some larger cruise ships—but there will be “no nickel and diming” on ships, according to the company’s list of what’s banned on board.
Cruisegoers don’t pay extra for anything from laundry services and excursions to beer and wine at lunch and dinner, Wi-Fi and spa access. While extras such as a massage or enhanced excursions are an option, Viking says its staff won’t pressure guests to consider add-ons.
Viking has fine-tuned the economics of sailing to locations such as Amsterdam and Basel, Switzerland, while relying less than others in the industry on spending onboard, analysts said. For cruise giants Royal Caribbean Group, Carnival and Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings, spending on ships tends to account for roughly 30% of revenue. At Viking, it was less than 7% of overall revenue for the three months ended June 30.
Higher ticket prices make this financially feasible for Viking, as do relatively unchanged ship designs.” – WSJ (emphasis mine)
The article goes on to discuss how Viking doesn’t have to invest at all in its product and avoids doing so intentionally. Why not update their ships? Because then customers will want the new ships and avoid the older ones.
“Unchanged ships are good for revenue and margins, said Viking’s finance chief, Leah Talactac. Unveiling new ships with added amenities runs the risk of making the older options less appealing to would-be travelers. Viking ships, meanwhile, “maintain their earnings power,” she said.
“So a 2012 ship will have the same revenue-generating ability as a 2025 ship,” according to Talactac. ” – WSJ
It goes on to brag that their cabins only cost $225,000 to make vs up to $1MM on modern luxury ships. Is that a flex? The writer goes on to discuss how Viking is generating twice the nightly rate of “the largest cruise ship operators” which are neither high-end nor luxury.
Inaccurate Market Equivalency
The writer repeatedly compares Viking’s ocean product to the largest cruise line operator (Carnival) and newest products on the market (Royal Caribbean.) She claims that because it doesn’t charge for access to laundry facilities (not luxury), beer and wine at meal times (not luxury at all) and excursions (walking tours included) it’s “luxurious without being too opulent.”
That’s just not what the product is.
Viking is a tired product specifically in the ocean space, differentiating from its river product. Its model (with traditional main dining rooms) is focused on educational programs but its price point is equal to or above luxury providers. I found several dates that were above Seabourn. That brand offers a modern, larger, updated Verandah with white glove service, and on-demand caviar – no charge for alcohol whether it’s at dinner or lunch or not. Many of those dates, it’s well above Explora Journeys (as much as twice the price) which also includes all suites with walk-in closets, heated marble floors, and a full shower on brand new ships.
For Carnival, Viking would be equivalent on the hard product (room), but adds alcohol at lunch (even Carnival includes it at dinner), wifi, and historical walking tours – for approximately four times the price. Most Royal Caribbean products are half the cost leaving plenty of budget for the same excursions, adding wifi, premium restaurants, and modern cabins with far more amenities.
This is in some way representative of comparing a large ULCC like RyanAir to a dated flag carrier like Iberia but calling the latter a luxurious product because it’s more expensive, and then patting them on the back for having better per seat numbers.
Unacceptable From A Business Newspaper
I’ve written for industry publications highlighting that price does not equate to the level of service. Just because something is expensive doesn’t make it a luxury product, and in that article I was speaking to travel agency owners but the message apparently applies to the leading business newspaper in the United States and perhaps the world.
I’ll submit a restaurant example to support the dislocation between price and product or service. In most markets, at McDonald’s a Quarter Pounder meal with fries and a drink is $10.64. For the same sized burger, grilled fresh with better toppings, also with fries, a drink, and bottomless chips and salsa – Chili’s sells theirs for $9.99. There’s no question, Chili’s makes the better burger, delivers more value, and is the fresher, better experience, but does that make McDonald’s the elevated option just because it’s more expensive. The market would confirm that’s not the case as Chili’s is up 31% last year in same store sales vs down 1.4% in the US for McDonald’s.
In the airline business, it’s not uncommon to see Premium Economy sell for more than business class. It doesn’t make it a superior product, it just means that Premium Economy is selling better and competing against a different segment than Business Class is on the same flight, route, or market pair.
The Wall Street Journal, of all publications should know the difference but doesn’t.
Conclusion
The most disappointing part of this is not just the media’s lack of investigative effort, but the general public’s lack of market awareness. Viking does well not because it has a competitive product, it does well because it markets in a way that suggests it is the only option for adults who don’t want to be surrounded by neon-colored waterslides. Viking is incredibly expensive relative to what’s available on the market, and by its own admission, doesn’t update their product. But it’s inexcusable for a well-regarded financial paper to conflate price with service level. They should know better.
What do you think?
Correct me if I am wrong, but Viking caters to an aging population that enjoys the experiences that reflect what they have learned to expect from cruising. Likely have more disposable income, the don’t fret prices as long as the product delivered is consistent. Think Cracker Barrel of the Seas.
Iberia might not be the best example of a dated carrier. They operate some great A350s, lead the world in A321XLR implementation, have an above average intra-Europe product, and solid lounges in MAD. Air Europa is probably more apt to use in your comparison.
@Jerry – I accept this revision with one caveat, Air Europa isn’t really large enough to be reflective. Aeroflot might have been a fit but with its extended absence from the western market, I thought this might be too far away from recent memory. United coffin class is still alive and well but too much of United’s offering is updated for this to be reflective. Lufthansa flies a dated product in some markets, British Airways with it’s odd configuration in business is another one that might hold up.
Chris:
I have taken two Seabourn cruises and one Viking Ocean and one Viking River cruise, as well as two SIlversea and one Regent cruise. Altthough Viking is gnerally not considered a luxury cruisline, it has a more attractive design and serves much better food than Seabourn cruises. We would gladly pay more for a Viking cruise than a Seabourn cruise, which has very mediocre food and not great service. Both my wife and my sister think Viking is the best cruise line, regardless of price Peronally, I do prefer the newer Seilverasea and RSSC ships. I also think the WSJ article is great.
Another aspect: unrestricted capitalism in the age of misinformation. The corporation (not the customer) is always right, whatever the market will bear, smoke and mirrors, the rich get richer, the poor get poorer. Completely untethered to traditional supply and demand and competition driving overall prices lower, and comparable goods and services being priced comparably.
Great article. We have done one Viking Ocean cruise to Greece and we just did a 8 day Rhine River cruise. While both were totally fine, I enjoyed Celebrity which costs less than half. We like to skip the over-priced excursions and drink packages and book our own. I would never go on Viking again as it is a rip-off.
Totally agree. Viking’s demo is the heartland, white, old middle America while being all pretentious and uppity with their string quartets during happy hour for example. Boring. I don’t want to hear sad songs while I’m trying to have fun and get a buzz on. Not being racist here, we went on at least 8 Viking cruises and may have seen a total of eight people of color. I don’t blame them, why would they want to hang out with boring, old white people? LOL The Chef’s Table restaurant is an epic fail. It tries to be pretentious and uppity but the food is terrible and the dark, windowless room is depressing. They talk about no casinos. No one forces you to gamble on any cruise line so big deal. And everything is norwegian wood. Boring as hell, They make up for their free wine at lunch and dinner with their exorbitant highway robbery cost of drink packages and shore excursions.
Took a repositioning cruise (Cape Town to Rio) for about $3,800 per (bought a year in advance—price was double that a few months later) and it was well worth it. And a last-minute 4-night French Riviera cruise back in the ‘90s for under $1,000 for a single (somebody bought out the ship for 10 nights—so the remaining 4 nights were gravy for them).
Both were real luxury.
Alas, regular rates are sky high.
@Randall Curwen – I see repositioning cruises on Explora for about the same (but Med to Caribbean) and there’s no comparison in the luxury aspect between the two, Viking doesn’t call themselves a luxury product at all. Some Seabourn or Silversea in the same range, Scenic will be about $1500 more expensive, again Med to Caribbean.
Higher prices mean the riff-raff cruise with another line. Their absence is a luxury in itself.
To me, Viking is good marketing of a meh product. Hapag-Lloyd, Regent, the reborn Crystal, Silversea and Seabourn all qualify as luxury lines, while Oceania and Ponant both offer more consistent high-end experiences than Viking. I haven’t been on Ritz-Carlton, and Four Seasons hasn’t launched yet, but I imagine they would top my list.
@Wally – Add Explora to that list. Scenic doesn’t have a casino but has 8-9 dining venues on the Eclipse I & II with just 200 pax often at the same price as Viking.
What are the alternatives if you don’t want casinos, waterslides, children etc? Is there better value-for-money on another line that offers a similar ambience? I really would like to know before I book a cruise.
@Jason – There are tons of options for this. For fun, sassy, and sexy – Virgin Voyages is kid-free and unapologetic. Seabourn, and Silversea are approx 600 pax ships that don’t cater to waterslides and kids. Explora Journeys is the newest line but Ritz-Carlton also takes up a modern more relaxed luxury approach countering the white glove service at Seabourn and Silversea. Scenic is marketed as a 6* luxury product and had to arrange for a child’s life vest for my son because they didn’t have any onboard at departure. That ship has two helicopters, two submersibles, and 8-9 dining venues on a 200 pax ship. Four Seasons, Aman, Waldorf-Astoria, and Orient Express all have products coming out in the next couple of years. Crystal Cruises is a refined product with zero waterslides as well.
Viking’s pricing buys silence and solitude on their Ocean ships. Just over 900 guests. NO CHILDREN. Spent 14days in the British Isles on Viking Neptune and could not have been happier. There were many times my Wife and I would be wandering the decks and truly felt like we has the ship to ourselves. Did I mention that there are NO CHILDREN.
@Kyle – Other products are adult-only either expressly or functionally with an updated product, higher level of service at or below Viking prices. Seabourn, for example, sails very few children annually and most ships without them at all. They price below Viking on many sailings, but offer better suites, smaller ships (600 pax), and caviar, white glove service. Why choose an inferior cabin, inferior service, on a bigger, older ship for more money?
Honestly …some of us feel the higher prices of Viking are worth not having to deal with other peoples’ “perfect angels” on vacation. It is truly as simple as that.
Since I don’t cruise for obsequious service or rich food but to explore and learn, while enjoying a nice gym and spa without children or a casino, it’s a perfect fit. To each his/her own.
Vacation choices are copious and aren’t we fortunate to have them?
@FrequentVikingCruiser – Absolutely! But many in the market aren’t aware that there are other options as this WSJ writer demonstrated.
No kids, no casinos, fully stocked minibars, impeccable service, no formal nights and included shore excursions all translate to luxury for me. The big guys pack more people on a ship than live in my whole town. 3 Viking cruises in and I’m a believer. And, yes, I’m a retired senior citizen with disposable income. I can choose any cruise line but I choose Viking, and the best suite on the ship. Bigger than my first house.
@George Eckert – But there are other better products that are either exclusively adult (most river) or functionally adult-only (children are not expressly forbidden but are rare and not catered to.) Large suites are more expensive and smaller than comparable options on the competition.
Kyle, which company would you say offers the best value when it comes to river cruises?
@Kat – Scenic and AMA Waterways are probably a better dollar for dollar value and far more elevated service.
I agree that Viking is not a luxury product, but unfortunately “luxury” is the cheapest word in the travel business. How many times have we seen a headline about a problem aboard a Carnival (or Norwegian or Royal Caribbean) cruise that uses the word luxury? That word is in the WSJ article because too many lazy writers use it as a shortcut to something they can’t describe creatively.
However, I disagree with many of your other points. Viking puts its cruises on sale at a certain price point and — usually — does not have to discount because there is built-in demand from a loyal and growing audience that finds the Viking product matches their needs. These people — mostly older, educated, upper-middle income — prefer not to be shouted at by over-caffeinated cruise directors to attend a port shopping lecture or a promotional pitch for weight loss products. Like them, I don’t need photographers telling me to smile so they can (wishfully) sell me the photo later; I don’t need 18% gratuities added to my bill so that a bartender can pop the lid off a bottle of beer I’d never choose at home. I don’t need glitzy decor, I don’t want frou-frou drinks, and I definitely don’t want to spend my vacation time standing in line for a show because there aren’t enough seats for the number of cruisers aboard.
Viking has found popularity among a certain crowd and their cruises (mostly) fill, they don’t need to resort to last-minute discounts. Most cruise lines aren’t profitable unless they’re sailing at close to capacity, which is what drives discounting. I have chosen lines like Seabourn and Silversea (and enjoyed them), but only when hefty discounts were available. And yes, they provide an experience closer to the “luxury” the author implies.
Are Viking’s fares too high on many departures? For me, yes, but they are rarely the “$800 and $900 per night” per person rates WSJ cites. Right now, a majority of Viking’s Caribbean itineraries for winter 2025-26 are selling for $400-$500/night; most Med itineraries next summer are $500-600/night. And when Viking’s rates are too high for a given region or date, a savvy shopper or a well-versed travel agent can almost always find alternatives that fit the cruiser’s temperament and budget.
Saying “Viking is a tired product” just means it’s not the right product for you, just as a mainstream cruise would be degrading and boorish for many of Viking’s customers. Writing that Viking’s hard product (room) is equivalent to Carnival is quite naïve.
Correct me if I am wrong but Viking does not use the word luxury in its marketing. Instead, Viking positions their brand as “the world’s leading small ship cruise line.” It doesn’t feel like hyperbole to me. Instead of trying to be all things to all people, as the mainstream brands seem to aim for, Viking has proven naysayers wrong over and over by positioning for a specific (and growing) demographic, sticking to its formula, and marketing the hell out of it.
Viking is a pretty amazing success story. And no, I’m not a shareholder!
At the end of the day, Viking is comparable in cost to others that charge for everything as an extra but most of the Viking ocean ships are relatively new and kept up at a much better rate.
@David – Both points are incorrect. Explora Journeys, Seabourn, Scenic and Silversea include everything (the first two don’t include the walking tours, the last two do) and they are all priced effectively in the same range but with a higher level of service and newer fleet. In the linked article, Viking management is quoted specifically as saying that they do not have the latest fleet and they do not update their ships so that clients don’t start choosing their newer product over the older.
@David – Not comparably to the rest of the market. Please provide an example of the line you’d compare Viking to that has a fleet as aged.
Silversea has four ships that are 25+ years old. Crystal’s two ships are 22 and 30 years old. All six of Windstar’s ships are more than 30 years old.
I have had some of my most memorable vacation experiences on these ships, traveling to extraordinary destinations with exceptional crew and cuisine.
I have had some of my worst cruise experiences on glitzy new ships. Won’t buy one of those again.
@DiscoDave – Crystal’s ships are old – this is absolutely true – but they have recently renovated them to a high standard. Meanwhile, in this WSJ article, the Viking executive is discussing the reasons for why they DON’T update their ships and bragging about how little they spend on accommodations. It’s a weird take.
All of Vikings ships that they use for ocean cruises are 2015 build or newer… Idk about it being ‘old’ equipment.
@GetReal – On the contemporary side, Royal Caribbean has put out three new megaships in the last three years, MSC has put out two. On the luxury side, Explora Journeys has ships from late 2023, late 2024, and their next ones are late 2026, and two in 2027. Ritz-Carlton’s entire fleet is 2022 and onward (two more), Silversea’s ocean product is mostly newer than Viking’s fleet, Seabourn’s expedition product is a pair of vessels from 2021 and 2022. Swan Hellenic has three all in the last four or five years. Consider what 2015 would be like in relation to today – wifi is dated and limited, restaurant model hasn’t taken ahold, USB (if equipped) is not USB-C, etc. Life cycle of a ship is 20 years so even at 2015 it’s halfway to death.
You mean like how the public mistakes this author for a journalist?
As a maiden voyage traveler when the line launched with Viking Star, I want to explain what the author missed or misunderstood. The ships are incredibly tasteful in design and that makes for an elevated experience. They carry 925 passengers if memory serves me right so no “cattle” crowding. They attract a polite and mannered collection of cruisers. They hire excellent tour guides with tours executed in smaller group sizes and using top end transportation. Ships subsequent to Star have been continually tweaked siming to perfect the ship design and decor. Let’s stop with these items illustrating why Viking offers an elevated cruising experience. It’s not Viking’s failing that the cruise industry lacks a category between mass and luxury to adequately describe their cruise offering.
@LGS – Between mass market and luxury are two categories: Premium (Celebrity on the low end, Oceania/Regent on the high end) and Expedition. I am absolutely fine with Viking being a “learning” class of its own that is neither of these. But the price point is luxury and the product is not, the WSJ conflates the price with luxury offerings. That said, luxury products typically also have lectures by storied professors, authors, and artists with expertise pertinent to the itinerary. So if others have the learning aspect, price at the same or less, and offer more – why choose Viking?
Great article. Useful, informative, and enticing. Measured by the comments, there are many pro Viking travelers who recognize the cost/value concerns expressed, but, regardless, prefer the Viking model. I expected to see more comment on Regent cruises in both the reader comments and your replies. I have been on RC, Princess, and Viking ocean cruises and will dip into river cruising next year on Viking. But I have always been intrigued by Regent. Everyone I know who have traveled on Regent say it is the best. My friends travelling on Oceania say it is inferior to Viking. Your article and comment responses feature Oceania, Seaborne and Silversea most often, but not Regent. Is there a reason for that? Where might I get a good review and analysis like this article that covers Regent more comprehensively?
Thanks and cheers to you.
PS: All of my recent cruises have been on Viking. Next year, my wife and I, along with another couple, are back on a Princess cruise. Surprisingly, I do miss the chaos of crowds and kids.
@Charles Hardenburg – Regent and Oceania are in the premium space and I view them like the national prime steakhouse chains: Del Frisco’s and Capital Grille. They are both about the same price point, both are premium yet attainable (far above the price point for Longhorn, Texas Roadhouse, Salt Grass) but still not incredibly high end. Given the side-by-side choice, if one is passionate about Del Frisco’s over Capital Grille it’s likely a matter of preference. That’s Regent and Oceania in terms of market position. They still charge for extras that true luxury brands include and sometimes they price in the same range as those luxury brands. It’s simply a matter of market awareness.
I’m sorry what? Regent is absolutely luxury. It is way better and higher end than silversea and seabourn. It is absolutely at a higher lever than Oceania, Viking, etc
How much money did Carnival, Royal Caribbean, etc. pay you to post this? If the cruise lines who paid you to post this actually provided an even halfway decent product, they would be worth going on.
@John Miller – I know it’s cute to think that Carnival and Royal (who I am not kind to in this post) would write me a check to call out sloppy reporting by the WSJ of another brand, but that’s not really in their bag of tricks. Neither Royal nor Carnival consider Viking competition for their market because they focus on fun and family and Viking is the opposite. And if you read the article or comments, you’d also recognize that my real contention is the notion that the WSJ journalist positioned Viking as luxury despite bragging about not investing in their product and not knowing that there are other product in the market that do it better, offer more, and price at or below Viking for a true luxury product. But I’m sure you already know that because you read both pieces, right?
I only know you work for a blog. Your momma must be proud.
Thanks for posting Kyle. Although I read the WSJ, I did not read that article; I will now. All great input to consider from you as well as your responders. We are planning on a small-venue river cruise in France in 2027. Our main desire is to not have to wear a suit jacket for me and a dress for my wife to dinner, business casual is OK. Viking fits that bill but who else?
@Louis Rossi – What you’re looking for is what we call “approachable luxury” where a polo and slacks or nice jeans is entirely acceptable. That’s Ritz-Carlton Yacht Collection and Explora Journeys all day. Scenic was a little more formal but still no jacket required at dinner.
You want Tauck River cruises for your France trip. The best river cruises
Kyle, I’m going to give you the highest compliment (I think) I can offer: I have bookmarked this post as one of the most invaluable pages on cruising I’ve ever read. Wow! Bravo! Kudos!
The question everyone has for travel is: value for money. As simple as that. From THIS article, I now know where to spend for luxury (if I’m ever into that) or simply a higher end experience than the “waterslide” crowd without paying much more. Thank you!
I noticed that I got a lot of Viking snail mail brochures and wondered, as always, that whoever can afford mass paper mailings usually demands a premium for doing so.
@PolishKnight – Thank you!
Being on the boat or in a fancy room isn’t really the point of going on a Viking cruise. They get you in and out of all the famous places you’ve always wanted to visit in comfort and teach you more history than you really wanted to know on the way. The room and food are great if not oozing luxury and caviar but again the point is comfortable transport and skilled scheduling of access to the excursions to the actual destinations. The experience is also driven by the obsessively attentive and helpful staff. If you want to spend all your time on the boat gambling in a casino or sitting by a pool full of noisy kids – or even sitting an a room decorated with dark wood and marble, Viking is the wrong choice, but. that’s not why I travel.
@Les Mikesell – I guess the point is that they aren’t alone in those distinguished itineraries, several luxury lines operate the same, include the tours, and incredible staff. I guess the point is this: Viking is like choosing to fly economy or, at best, premium economy over business class for the same price but with the argument that the timing of the flight was convenient and it came with an included meal. Well yes, but so do these others for the same money but in a far better experience – how do you pick any economy product over business class for the same money?
@ Kyle — Substitute “Delta Airlines” in the story and it reads the same. People believe the marketing bs!
@Gene – I won’t argue.
My highest criteria is reliability and trust and in this regard I rate Princess, NCL and Viking Ocean low based on handling itinerary changes, passenger follow up, delivering what they promised and deliberately misleading passengers. On Princess we almost had a riot as they sailed with two inoperable lifeboats/tenders which came to passenger attention when there was a need to tender to an island and the ship could not clear the disembarkation que. Security was called as the scene almost turned into a brawl. I have never sailed Princess again. The most ports I have ever missed have been on NCL for arbitrary or phony reasons. I have sailed on them 3 times, but no more. The crew were fine, but the management were deceptive. Viking had issues handling a change of embarkation ports (and really was not on the ball, although they offered decent compensation. I am sailing Viking again, but only to ports I have already been to – they are on probation.
Took silversea last year and it was a major disappointment. Ship itself was nice and I liked the destinations. However food was uniformly mediocre and a huge letdown. Everybody on the ship who’d been on it before said things had gone down since Royal
Caribbean bought it.
I’m reading this, oddly enough, from my Viking Ocean cruise ship in what they call a Penthouse Junior Suite, 405 sq.ft. in size including the balcony. My previous Viking Ocean cruises were in a Penthouse Veranda, quite similar but slightly smaller at 338 sq. ft. I tried this one, which would be a waste of money at the brochure price, but got one of their frequent special offers which has happened on three of my last four cruises. Long story short, my spouse and I got the larger cabin, the beverage package, included gratuities, six guaranteed specialty restaurant reservations, free airfare (domestic and international which I skipped for a first & business class award redemptions) and the other included amenities Viking offers to all as well as the valet laundry with this cabin. Expensive? Again, the brochure price for just the cabin, gratuities and booze package would have been $1,400 per couple per day. Our cost at $17,200 for twenty-two nights is a tad less than $800 per night all-in. Yes, I considered the other luxury and near luxury lines (Viking has never marked their cruises as “luxury”) and came closest to Oceania after looking into Explora Journeys. The Oceania sales person was vey persistent-in a positive way-but couldn’t come close to Viking’s offering. Explora Journeys looked great but didn’t sail to any place I hadn’t already been or wanted to go. It’s odd to hear that their ships are old and tired looking when we sailed not that long ago on twenty-five years old Celebrity Millenium with it’s scratched and worn furniture and exterior rust visible from nearly everywhere on deck. I’d say one is only better by comparison. As for Viking, after four cruises with them, I’ll probably be back. Familiarity doesn’t always breed contempt.