I hate to say this, but I was wondering if maybe I contributed to that change at Seabourn. Pretty egotistical, I know. I honestly don't think I matter that much, except for all the wonderful publicity a certain blogger has been giving me. He seems to think my opinion matters a lot.
But when I read the Seabourn boards at "the other site" I don't see any mention of me or of that certain blooger who shall remain nameless.
I am really relieved to be seeing most people saying "It was overdue" and even "maybe now the food on Seabourn will get back to the way it used to be..."
That says two things:
- I had nothing to do with the internal decision at Seabourn (as far as I know, and if any it was small)
- I was basically right in my assessment - although no one was saying it, people on Seabourn were thinking the same thing I said in my article, "this may be haute cuisine, but I don't see the appeal."
The only problem with that is this - why weren't people saying it before they let him part ways? Now that he's gone suddenly its OK to criticize the food at Seabourn, but before it was not allowed? Really?
At least I can say I had the courage of my convictions, and the events prove that I was basically on target in my conclusions.