cruising.mark.uk

I don't think you are comparing apples with apples. You booked a cruise with options for no-cost food and options for food at a cost. All they have done is made one of the multiple no-cost options into a cost option. They will still feed you as much as you like for the duration of your cruise for free.

Yes, I think you are right and that this is the total of covers closest to what @Windsurfboy is asking. But, I think things have moved on from the days when their interpretation of what P&O is promising was accurate, i.e. when there were only one or two alternative restaurants. And, I definitely don't think it applies to Arvia. What might not have moved on quite so quickly, however, is the expectation of many passengers. Their last post prompted me to try to identify what P&O's promise is. The closest I can get is here https://www.pocruises.com/onboard-activities/dining My reading of that is they promise a variety of food for free and definitely don't promise a waiter served free meal for every passenger every night. Others may read it differently.

I'd be very happy with that if they left the Plus package price as it is now. It would make buying the package even more of a no-brainer than it is for us already. However, I sense that this is almost certainly just an IT error which will doubtless be fixed on Monday.

I'd offer a slightly different suggestion - avoid the MDR on Arvia. It stands to reason that, with only two of them compared with 4 on Iona, demand is likely to exceed supply until and unless the mindset and expectations of more of its cruisers adjust to make them more open to the idea that they don't have to eat in a MDR. On our May cruise on Arvia, we didn't use a MDR for one meal in the 14 nights. And, the average evening wait in a queue we encountered was probably about 20 to 30 minutes (on the app or walk up), just enough time for a pre-dinner drink. On about half the nights, we went to an up-charge restaurant, but it would have been just as easy to eat in no cost alternatives to the MDR every night. And, unless the MDR food on Arvia has improved compared with any other P&O ship I've been on, I suspect that we ate better food in nicer surroundings virtually every evening than we would have done in the MDR.

A really interesting question, but I suspect much will depend on exactly how it is phrased. Are you wondering what the capacity of the 2 x MDR is, what is the capacity of the 2 x MDR and MDR equivalent non-cost restaurants (6th St and Olive Grove), the capacity of those 4 plus the other no-cost venues (incl Buffet and Quays) or the capacity of all of these plus all of the extra cost venues? It seems to me that if the answer to the last of those questions isn't that total capacity will allow the max passenger capacity to be fed at each meal, then that is a real problem. But, I'd be surprised if that was the case. From our experience on Arvia in Apr and from what I've read of others' experiences, I think congestion and long waits are more likely caused by a combination of two factors (other than the, apparently temperamental app and the reportedly clunky booking system): - More passengers than P&O expected preferring the MDRs over the other non-cost venues, both the MDR-equivalents (Olive Grove and 6th Street - especially on formal nights. On our cruise they changed after the first formal night and for the second put the formal night menu on in the Olive Grove as well as the MDRs in an attempt to mitigate the pressure) and the Quays / Buffet. - Not as many passengers as P&O planned for availing themselves of the many extra cost options.

@Georgia_Peaches Fantastic review. Thanks very much.

I agree that the sample size makes this almost meaningless. Only 1700 people were surveyed in total and some of the 'top' ratings are based on just over 30 responses. So, I wouldn't read anything into this at all. And, Which? has produced similarly unreliable findings on cruising in the past. It is a pretty good source of fairly impartial advice for UK consumers of many things, but cruising isn't one of them!

Thanks for a really entertaining and interesting travelogue, which I am following with interest. I can't help but wonder whether long waits / queues for dining on these ships are partly a result of erroneous assumptions about how long passengers would take over their meals. It would be very interesting to know when they were doing their throughput and flow calculations when designing these ships how long P&O estimated passengers would spend having dinner in one of the non-MDR 'casual' eateries, especially the no-cost ones. Perhaps they assumed that dinner in Olive Grove, the Diner etc would be on average a one hour event and based their calculations on that? If they did but, in reality, many passengers, like you, spend nearly two hours (roughly the same time as they would spend in the MDR?) the number of times they can turn over each table in these restaurants and thus the overall number of pax they can handle per evening would be reduced significantly. Hence the queues. This is in no way a criticism of your (or anyone else's) dining habits! But, it might explain some of the long waits for tables that still seem to be happening.

I'd amend the sentence 'terminals are not fit for i.e. big enough for mega ships a little' to read 'terminals are not big enough to process a mega ship load of passengers all at the same time'. I think that is because they don't have to. A cruise terminal is very different from an airport terminal. The latter is designed to get people through check in and security as quickly as possible so that they can spend money in restaurants, bars and shops. The former is designed to get the max pax load checked in, through security and onto a ship, starting when the ship is ready to receive new passengers and spread out across the available boarding window to make the operation as smooth and convenient as possible for port staff, passengers and the ship. I know that there have occasionally been problems caused by Customs / late debarkation etc, but other than that I haven't heard of Arvia / Iona routinely encountering problems in getting all their passengers onboard in the embarkation window. If that is the case and these ships routinely depart on time or thereabouts, then the terminals can clearly handle embarkation / debarkation of these ships. So, there is neither a need nor an incentive for the port / Carnival / P&O to invest more in (very expensive) staff and security and other infrastructure to speed the process up. If it isn't broken, they don't need to fix it. What can break it temporarily is thousands of people arriving at the same time. So, they are trying to discourage that. And it seems to be working.

I understand from across on the Princess boards that Princess has done away with arrivals times altogether from 1 Aug. If that is true for their departures from Southampton this Summer, it will be interesting to see whether passengers self-regulate arrival times or all arrive at the same time and expect to be let on straight away. Given that they'll be using the same infrastructure that P&O does - and assuming that P&O staggers arrival times to spread the passenger load out over 4 or 5 hours - having them all turn up at once might pose some difficult challenges.

Fair point, but I suspect P&O's IT isn't sophisticated enough to revise boarding times allocated by its algorithm for those who are arriving by coach. And, while the scenario you describe might mean there'll be one less person allocated 1230, it won't result in anyone having to stand in the naughty queue if everyone turns up at the time they were allocated (unless the whole boarding process is delayed for some reason). What I find most perplexing about this alleged problem is that it is only a problem (other than in exceptional circumstances) where passengers don't follow simple instructions and don't learn from their own experience and that of others. I sense from earlier threads on the same issue that P&Os procedures for dealing with those who need special assistance to board are pretty good. So, if other passengers turn up more than 30 minutes or so early, they are doing that through choice. While they used to be allowed to check in anyway, that clearly isn't the case these days. And it's not like this hasn't been widely publicised. And yet some seem wedded to the idea of turning up when they want and then complain when they are made to queue so as not to disadvantage the passengers who are doing as instructed. It seems to me that this is their problem, not P&Os.

... Or if they find their train arrives hours in advance of their boarding time, they get their luggage to the terminal and hand it in before leaving to experience the many attractions of Southampton before returning to the terminal at the time they were allocated.

It also costs nothing for passengers to arrive at the time they are told to. If they choose not to do that, they may have to wait outside so as not to delay / inconvenience passengers who turned up at the correct time. That sounds fair to me.

If they want to invest to do that, then my recommendation would be that they spend the few hundred thousand pounds it would take to make the app more user friendly and allow effective advance booking of restaurants and entertainment using OBC. I sense that would have a far more wide-reaching and positive impact on customers compared with the more expensive infrastructure measures that you are proposing, which would reward those who can't adhere to their boarding time while disadvantaging those that do (and any benefit of which would probably have been forgotten about by the vast majority of passengers once they'd been on the ship for half an hour).

Yes, but did Elite passengers get priority for the toilet paper? Or did they get 150 minutes free use of it per cruise? Or could they swap out their mini bar for 2 rolls of toilet paper? Or did they get it laundered for free? Is this another Elite amenity that has been eroded?

It seems to me that the matter at the heart of this discussion is fairly binary: Either cruise lines can educate / train their passengers to turn up at assigned boarding times that are aligned with the capacity of the terminal processes; or They can invest further £millions in creating more check-in / security facilities to increase the number of pax they can process per hr and thus allow everyone to turn up whenever they like. My experience suggests that many P&O passengers are learning from the way the line operates at Southampton and will modify their travel plans to arrive close to the time they have been given. If that is true, what incentive is there for P&O (or others) to make further multi-million £ investments in the current financial climate to, so far as I can see, address a (perceived) problem that will continue to reduce over time as more and more passengers learn not to turn up hours early?

I'd be surprised if there's much difference at all in the cost to Princess of providing a MDR meal and the cost of providing a meal in Alfredos. So, it matters not to them in terms of cost whether people eat in the MDR or Alfredos. But, every time someone without a package eats a meal in Alfredo they are going to make $15 in additional revenue. And everytime someone with a Plus package eats there more than twice on their voyage, they're going to make an additional $15. That will soon add up, even if most pax on no package choose not to eat in Alredos and most pax with the Plus package only have the 2 included meals there.

I hear what you are saying (although I don't agree!). Best of luck with your complaint. I hope it is resolved to your satisfaction. Even if it is not, I hope you end up having a fantastic cruise anyway.

Thank you. This is a really clear explanation. But it takes me back to my earlier comment (where someone thought I was mocking you, but I was not). I have never seen in my contract / invoice / conditions of travel etc any mention of being able to eat for free in a specific restaurant / dining venue. Unless that is in there specifically it seems to me as a non-lawyer that it would be difficult to counter the argument that the contract with Princess was that they would feed you for free and that is what they have done. And I guess the reasons you've explained are the reasons why they don't make specific promises in their 'contracts' with passengers - setting aside this discussion over prices, what happens if you feel you've paid to eat in Alfredos every day and when you go on your cruise it is closed for the duration because they haven't got the staff to run it or there's major equipment failure or similar?

I'm not a lawyer, but for me the crux of it is that they are not charging anyone more for the basics of a cruise - everyone will continue to get a cabin, plentiful free food and water and access to multiple other amenities and facilities. So, when people argue that their cruise will cost more than when they booked, I sense that, if that is the case, it is because they have chosen to make it the case. Any additional expenditure resulting from these changes is discretionary, not compulsory. It will remain possible to have a fantastic cruise and eat and drink as much as you want, see all the entertainment, visit all the ports etc etc without incurring any additional charge as a result of the change. And, in my opinion the same test also applies to whether they should have communicated this better. If they change something significant like the ship or the itinerary, then I don't think there is any doubt that they need to communicate with all passengers. But, I think the picture is a lot less clear when changes mean that discretionary spend might rise. I know many book cruises two years in advance. So, where does one draw the line of communication - should they send emails every time the price of a drink goes up by 50c, or only when the price of an inch of gold goes up by $5 or only when the cost of a specialist restaurant goes up by $20 or only when a couples massage increases in price by $100. All these - and many more - are discretionary. All are more than likely to increase in price between the time a cruise is booked and the time it is sailed. When passengers become aware that the prices of such discretionary items have risen, they can choose whether or not they purchase them (as we probably do every month at the moment when we go grocery shopping or for a meal out or to a sporting or social event). What could / should a cruise line communicate to its passengers and what should it not?

Perhaps you could explain why in words that a non-lawyer can understand?

I wasn't mocking him. I was asking him why he thought he had paid for pizzas and room service. It seems to me from reading cruise line T&Cs (not just PCL) that what someone is actually paying for when they buy a cruise is: a cabin (which the line can change) on a ship (which the line can change) on an itinerary (which the line can change) on which they will provide food, some free and some at additional charge (and the line can change those charges and the food offers that attract a charge), drink, some free and some at additional charge (which the line can change) and entertainment, facilities and amenities at a cost or at no cost (all of which the line can change). Major changes (e.g. to itinerary) may allow cancellation after final payment and some might even be compensated. Others won't. I sense that what some think they are paying for when they buy a cruise and what they are actually buying are sometimes two different things. But that is a cruise-line thing, not a PCL thing (see, e.g. threads on NCL advertising ports they don't go to, Celebrity doing away with butlers in some suites etc etc etc). New2Cruise might be able to add usefully to this given they are a contract lawyer!

Am I wrong in thinking that the terminals used by the cruise lines are owned and operated by ABP? So, changing the passenger flow, infrastructure and layout of the terminal would be their responsibility, although it would no doubt be paid for indirectly by the cruise lines. I think that, given how many lines use these terminals, the design is almost inevitably going to be a compromise between the different requirements of all of the different cruise lines.

So your invoice specifically says that you've paid for pizza and room service, does it?

And I'm sure most Brits would agree with you. But, I can't help but think Princess wouldn't push these packages so hard if everyone who bought one extracted the maximum value from it. Only PCL will know the stats, but I suspect many buy them primarily for convenience and end up under utilising them. My wife and I may fall in that category. But, we get what we want and we more than break even. So long as the individual passenger is happy with what they get then, as drwbrt said above, the packages should be a win-win, both for the majority of the passengers who buy them and for Princess and its bottom line.