Land of the Rising Sun:Northbound March 29-April 11
This was our 15th international tour with Tauck, and although we usually take land tours, we were fully aware this was a land/cruise tour. We based our decision about taking this type of tour on our outstanding experience on Treasures of the Aegean on the Windspirit in 2008. On another thread I mentioned what I perceived to be the "new" Tauck business model, and I will try to clarify that in my post.
First, the positives...We loved the itinerary and activities in this tour! We visited smaller places that would be very challenging to visit on one land tour or on one's own. There was not one stop or activity that we did not love. Our Tour Director (and each TD...more here later) was beyond professional and embodied all of those superlatives that could be used to describe a great TD...fun, organized, informative, caring...etc.! If you are going on this tour, revel in the Okonomiyaki experience in Hiroshima! Delicious! Cherry blossoms? We were worried about not seeing any, for when we departed Kyoto they were still buds. On our last ship day we visited the Black Castle in Matsue. The blossoms were in full bloom and people were celebrating with food booths, hanamis (picnics beneath the trees to honor their beauty), and an incredible festive atmosphere. On our return to Kyoto, they were in full bloom and stunning! I could go on about the taiko drumming, the calligraphy, the Geiko performance, the sumo wrestlers and other experiences Tauck provided. So, with all of these wonderful experiences, why are we writing a letter to Tauck about this trip and not sure that Tauck is still our "go-to" travel company??
Originally we thought this would be a one-group tour on a ship where the rest were independent travelers, much like our experience on the Windspirit. At some point we thought it would be a 2-group trip. Upon our arrival in Osaka, as others were escorted to another hotel, we realized there would be 4 Tauck groups on this trip! This does not seem problematic until you consider the organizational logistics of the trip. The groups were divided into teams, groups 1 and 2 and groups 3 and 4. We were group #4.
At both the welcome dinner and farewell dinners we were the last to arrive. Both of these events were performance based, and our tables were relegated to the back of the room as those arriving earlier, naturally, were seated closer to the performance. At the welcome dinner there were 2 groups per venue and the farewell dinner seated all 4 groups, but we always were scheduled to arrive last. Perhaps reserving tables for each group would have been more equitable.
At the final lunch in Kyoto, prior to traveling to Osaka to board L'Austral, all 4 groups ate at the same restaurant. Again, we were the last to arrive, filling in empty seats that the other groups had left over. We were starting to feel like we were not valued, a feeling that was pervasive during the entire trip.
Once we boarded the ship (last, of course) we realized how the organization of the trip was to work. 4 groups would leave the ship at 10-15 minute intervals (we were not always the last to leave and the TD's tried to alternate departures), and there might be 4 sites to visit. Groups 1 and 2 would visit 2 sites in the morning (switching sites at the halfway point), and groups 3 and 4 would visit the other 2 sites. In the afternoon these visits would be flipped. When one thinks about the logistics of this, it is clear how limited the time is and how little time there might be for a longer visit to any one site. Combine that with a traffic snafu or a group that might take a little longer to walk through a site due to mobility issues or interest in a particular site, and you might see where the time at some sites becomes very limited for some groups. This seemed to happen on a number of occasions.
To complicate matters, there were some ports where we only had a 4 hour morning visit due to ship departure, and that time had to be divided by 4 groups. Figure that the last group leaving had 30 minutes less that the other groups. Fewer groups would leave more time at the various sites.
My biggest disappointment came on day 6 when we visited Hiroshima and the island of Miyajima. I had done my research and knew that the Itsukushima Shrine on Miyajima was a very special place. When the tide is in, the shrine seems to float on water. Sadly, groups 3 and 4 visited that in the morning when the tide was low. It would not be high tide until the afternoon groups, 1 and 2 would visit. One has to wonder if there were only two groups, would the tour be arranged so that guests would be able to see this magnificent shrine at its optimal view.
Another problem with having 4 groups was the quality of the local guides. I think it is difficult to provide 4 outstanding guides at each location (I believe Tauck contracts with a local company and they provide the guides), and we only had one guide at each location. In India last year we had two guides at most sites, and we were only a group of 21! In Kyoto we had a very poor guide for three days. I gave up trying to follow her commentary and know I missed some vital information. After that the TD's seemed to try to rotate the guides.
The reason that I am making such a point about the difficulty of managing 4 groups on this tour is that on the 2018 tour, Tauck will be having 6 groups on each tour! They will have the entire ship, but I cannot help but wonder how these special visits can be divided by 6 when we felt rushed and shorted by 4 groups!Imagine trying to find 6 outstanding guides next year!
This is the reason for my comment about the new Tauck. I understand that cruising is a viable trend in the travel industry, whether a traveler has less mobility, limited time to travel or just likes the comfort of settling in, and Tauck is responding to that. It is my sense that they are attempting up their game by trying to combine both types of tours into one and taking some of their fabulous land tours and creating land/cruises with large groups (Australia, Southeast Asia, the new Galapagos) for more of a profit margin sacrificing that feeling of immersion into the culture, history, etc. .
I suspect that on this trip the TD's are frustrated about keeping to the schedule rather than having the freedom to respond to guests' reactions to sites. Interestingly, we met some people who were mainly cruisers and first-time Tauck guests. Some were so angry about the trip, they vowed never to travel with Tauck again. I don't think it was the itinerary or the activities but rather the organization of trying to fit 4 groups into the day's sightseeing. I was saddened to hear this but understood why they felt that way.
