Teddy123

For some reason, quoting doesn't seem to work for me here, but Margana says "If 15% of all passengers are smokers and 50% of them removed gratuities (unlikely), then that’s 7.5% of passengers removing gratuities.

But if only 10% of the 85% non-smoking passengers remove gratuities then that’s 8.5% of passengers.

So it’s likely that smokers actually contribute more than non-smokers. So the economics look better."

Suppose there are 1,000 passengers all potentially paying $100. There would be 150 smokers and in Margana's example, 75 would pay $100, giving $7,500. There would be 850 non-smokers, and 90%, or 765, would give $76,500.

The average smoker contribution is $7,500 / 150, or $50 and the average non-smoker contribution is $76,500 / 850, or $90.

So the assertion that "smokers contribute more" in the given example is false. Of course, there are fewer smokers removing the gratuity than non-smokers, but that's simply because they only represent 15% of the population.

In any case, I wasn't suggesting smokers were more or less likely to remove gratuities.

Yes, you are right to look after your money. Please feel free to address your rather polemic question to the ships company, not to passengers :confused:.

But it is (some) passengers who are asking for an additional facility which will undoubtedly cost money, simply so that they can indulge their habit, and it is reasonable to ask those making the request whether they would expect to bear the extra cost or would expect other passengers to share it.

I assume Churchills pays for itself (or at least offsets costs) through sales of cigars but I see no equivalent for a facility simply for people to smoke their own cigarettes - unless smokers are prepared to pay a fee of some kind.

Perhaps somebody will be prepared to explain how they think it would all work.

If you have chosen Freedom Dining and want a table for 2 for dinner, your options are: 1) start queuing outside the relevant restaurant about 30 minutes before it opens and eat when it opens OR eat about 90 minutes after it opens - there's very rarely anything in-between. Even for eating after 90 minutes you might need to turn up and get a pager around 30 minutes after opening. On my last cruise a few weeks ago, P&O had made some improvements, eg staggering the opening times of the two FD restaurants and giving couples exclusive use of tables for 8 or 10, but tables for 2 are still at a premium. Also, we never take afternoon tea, but the queues for that seem to start 30 minutes before opening too!

And expect the theatre to be full 30 minutes before the show starts.

Perhaps some of the smokers who are pressing for special accommodation could tell us about some of the practicalities.

Is this room to have additional filtering? If so, how is that paid for, both the capital (installation) cost and as a running cost (cleaning filters, etc)? Are smokers prepared to pay an additional fee for this somehow, or must all passengers contribute to the cost? (I note that the other "vices" mentioned here, alcohol and gambling, generate funds, not consume them, so are the opposite of a tax on all passengers).

Which staff member is supposed to enter this room and keep it tidy? (because even if it's only between cruises, somebody will have to). Will smokers give them an extra tip? (statistically, a proportion of the smokers will be those who remove the automatic gratuity and feel no need to tip anybody because "it's Cunard's job to pay staff"). Or are they just supposed to endure any lingering smoke without any additional reward?

No doubt there are more questions, but an answer to just these would be interesting.

And therein obviously lies the problem.

But at least the problem has been solved for readers of Cruise Critic!

Hard evidence is always very useful, of course. I always keep a record of what happened when and if possible take a recording on my camcorder (or a smart phone would probably do). It's the noise inside the cabin that's relevant so the recording only needs to be done there. Then I use the evidence when complaining, or if necessary when back home.

I haven't needed to use this technique to deal with noise from neighbours, but I have for loose fittings, etc and once got a very good discount on a future river cruise after I provided the evidence of a problem to the company (Viking) when I returned home.

The Ventura is a family ship, you have to expect and tolerate some noise from children. There are adult only ship for those not wishing to share their holiday with children.

The Ventura is a ship on which many - probably the vast majority - of passengers do not want to be disturbed by the noise made by children and parents must respect this and expect to take steps to minimise disturbance.

It's all in the interpretation Teddy! You go with yours and I'll go with mine.:)

There now seems a definitive answer in the Dress Code for Royal Court Theatre thread. Given that, I'm happy to accept your interpretation :)

Thank you John for getting that answer from Cunard. I for one am happy to take it as a definitive statement, whatever else is implied by Cunard's words elsewhere.

It's all in the interpretation Teddy! You go with yours and I'll go with mine.:)

I assume we can certainly agree it's ambiguous!

The general public has decided that they are to be regarded as lepers and/or carriers of the Zombie Apocalypse virus.

I think it's more that the general public has decided they don't want to share smokers' ill-smelling and carcinogenic smoke.

although the board was revised later in the afternoon to

'Casual

No jacket required [no shorts or jeans]' [which as an aside would indicate shorts are permitted on a normal 'casual' code :)]

Or it says to those who think that a "casual" code in the restaurant allows jeans and shorts, that they are wrong :)

The various arguments for going to the trouble of removing the current default charge do not hold water and increasing the brochure price would indeed be best for staff and passengers alike.

Is it really asked too much if Cunard did the same and provided an interior room, in addition to the aft of deck 7 of QM2?

Yes, it is. Space on any ship is finite and it is not reasonable to deny space to other people just so that those who from their own free will (albeit that they are addicted) can engage in a habit which, unlike alcohol and gambling, has a negative impact on others. (And please, nobody reply that excessive alcohol consumption can be a nuisance - of course it can, but a "normal" level of alcohol consumption isn't a problem to others while "normal" smoking is).

Don't get me started on balcony smokers, they are the most inconsiderate of all in my opinion!

Smoking on balconies is not allowed. On our last two Ventura cruises on D Deck, where the balconies are open from above, we had cigarette ends (first time) and a match (second time) throw down - not while we were on the balcony. We complained and the staff took it very seriously - no doubt because of the fire hazard.

Sound insulation between cabins is generally poor - and from corridors even worse - and it never ceases to amaze (and irritate) me that people think it's acceptable to walk along corridors late at night having full volume conversations, laughing and joking, waking countless people up with a start as they pass by their cabins. Some folk are sadly so self centred they don't even think about others and that some people may be on holiday to have a rest and not all of us are late night revellers. The same can be said of parents who allow their kids to run along corridors, which sounds like someone hammering on your door when you are asleep. And don't get me started on people who insists on slamming cabin doors late at night!

 

We are always acutely aware of neighbours, don't talk loudly, keep the tv volume reasonable, don't slam doors, don't have full volume conversations in walkways etc and always insisted the same of our children when they were young. But, sadly, many people don't give a passing thought to any of these things.

I absolutely agree.

Luckily, the only real problem I have had on about 20 cruises was on the very first when people in the cabin across the corridor from us persisted in standing outside their (and so, our) door late at night having full-volume chats with their friends. After a few nights I got out of bed and tackled them, to be told "we've paid for this cruise" - to which my reply was "so have I but I don't go round keeping everybody else awake". They were more quiet after that. Now, though, I try to book cabins that don't have a facing cabin anywhere near.

If I had the problems of the OP, I'd be complaining at Reception for as long as it took to get some result (and keeping a record to complain when I got back if it wasn't resolved satisfactorily).

I don't go on holiday to be treated less well than the dogs in the kennels....

This is a meaningless comment that does not stand up to any sort of intelligent analysis or scrutiny.

I'm somewhat confused by the original post since the Cunard website says smoking is allowed on Deck 7 (not 8), and that's how I recall it.

The facilities for smokers seem to suit the vast majority of passengers very well, although personally I would prefer to be able to do circuits of Deck 7 and enjoy the fresh air all the way, without having to weave my way past the smokers and go through their smoke.

From the NYT article: "One feature will allow guests to watch live entertainment in ship lounges on their stateroom televisions — and the performers will know who is watching and will be trained to do shout-outs. (“Hello to Brooks, tuning in from his bed on the Promenade Deck!”)."

I'm particularly looking forward to this aspect!!!!

The whole thing is a classic case of doing something because it can be done and trying desperately to come up with something new, if you ask me. I can't see the majority of Cunard passengers being convinced.

(I spent my working life in high-tech industries so I'm not a Luddite).

where this "trend" will take us. What's next, dogs eating with their owners at the restaurants onboard? For those who think I'm exagerating (actually I'm a little bit), I have seen dogs at food courts in local malls.

Attitudes to dogs - and animals in general - differ around the world. I'm glad to say I've been to many eating establishments in the UK and elsewhere where dogs are welcome. Generally, they pose less risk and are less of a nuisance than other adults or children.

Bluemarble,

 

I see the statement Teddy is referencing from your workaround link. However, no cruiser should be expected or be required to weed through the cruise critic forums to find this. The responsibility rest 100% with Cunard to update the cunard.com website. Given the fact they have not bothered, no other cruisers can self righteously proclaim that people are bucking the system and ignoring the rules. It is beyond ridiculous that any finger pointing is directed at someone in the States that can only access the information available at cunard.com and vp.cunard.com. If people dont want see shorts in the MDR at breakfast and lunch, then I would kindly tell them to write to Cunard to update the cunard.com guidance to match the UK guidance so there is no ambiguity.

 

I am sure there are 1000's of cruisers that book, go to the company website for guidance and get on the ship without having ever gone to cruisecritic.com, and who can blame them? All information deemed pertinent and relevant by the cruise line should be there.

This response says those in the US can only reasonably be expected to use info available in the US, then rants at those in the UK who, quite reasonably, make comments based on what's available in the UK. I prefer discussions based on facts and logic so won't be adding more here.

PS. I've said for a long time that it's a good job Cunard cruises are better than their website!

This definitely has turned into a more spirited debate then I thought it would.

 

Scottygirl,

 

I was never able to find the reference to casual wear being required in the MDR. If it is what is required and shorts are not allowed, I would think Cunard would put it in the voyage personaliser for individuals that have booked and are setting sail. I mean the voyage personaliser is for people who have booked to help them plan on what to pack, you shouldn't have to search the website for it if its that big of an issue. As you stated, no where does the voyage personaliser talk about casual wear in the MDR during the day, and there is no "however".

 

I think i will leave the cargo shorts at home and just wear my regular shorts so as to not upset anyone. With everything that is going on in the world, I am glad we are getting these important issues ironed out. ;-)

If you go into the VP and click on FAQs, then Life On Board, then 'Is there a Dress Code?', you get to the words I have quoted - complete with "however". So people can choose not to follow the pretty clear statement about shorts, but there can be no valid argument that it doesn't exist - it does and is available in the VP.

As I said, there is an ambiguity to the daytime casual dress interpretation.

 

You have quoted ''however'' from online FAQs. Skip to the Cunard brochure, either actual or the online version, and there the FAQs at the end of the brochure makes no mention of the ''however'' etc.and neither does the Voyage Personaliser as Highlands quoted, under the drop down 'what to wear',

You said earlier "unless I've been looking in the wrong places, no where does it state shorts cannot be worn in the main restaurants during the day". I have pointed out where it does say it.

.. unless I've been looking in the wrong places, no where does it state shorts cannot be worn in the main restaurants during the day

Cunard say "The main restaurants require a casual wear dress code for breakfast and lunch, however you may wear shorts in either the Kings Court or Lido Restaurant." Not explicit, I agree, but the use of the word "however" clearly implies shorts are not appropriate in the main restaurants.

The dictionary definition of "however" says it is "used to introduce a statement that contrasts with something that has been said previously". So, shorts are OK in Kings Court, but this contrasts with their inappropriateness in main restaurants.

Whether this pretty clear code is adhered to, or enforced, is another question of course.

I agree this is rather annoying. Usually, "early morning" means about 08.00, "afternoon" means about 16.00, "early evening" means about 18.00 - but it's not precise. I think cruise lines avoid being specific because if they quote a time and deviate from it by 10 minutes, some passengers whine like mad. I have found the best - but tedious - way to get an indication is to look at the web site of the port being visited (using Google's translation mechanism if necessary).

I've been following this and am getting pretty confused. Here is what the Cunard website tells me is suitable during the day:

 

"During the day

 

Casual shirts, shorts, trousers and beachwear are ideal. The main restaurants require a casual wear dress code for breakfast and lunch, however you may wear shorts in either the Kings Court (Queen Mary 2) or Lido Restaurant (Queen Victoria & Queen Elizabeth)."

 

So my husband can wear "casual shirts and shorts" but then it says that there is a "casual wear dress code for breakfast and lunch".

 

Could someone tell me what the casual wear dress code is? It is not specified anywhere. Thanks :)

"Casual wear dress code" means trousers and a shirt. The word "however" above shows shorts are not appropriate for the main restaurants. This doesn't mean they will necessarily be rejected (elsewhere I have pointed out I have seen jacket-less [gentle]men wearing baseball caps in the theatre after 6pm and nothing was done) but they are not appropriate and anybody wishing to respect the code and their fellow passengers will avoid them.