New HAL smoking policy

[eh2zed]

Nothing like a smoking post to get things revved up. I must say I am personally disappointed the restrictions don't at least include the balcony. I can avoid the casino and other permitted areas but the balcony is a paid for space I can only avoid by simply not going outside if in fact there is smoke in the air. Some cruises there is and some not.

However a bigger concern is that HAL may become the cruise line of choice for more and more smoking cruisers who will leave other more restrictive lines, specifically in regards to balconies. This is a very slippery slope for HAL. I am sure they have considered this but from personal experience I know these less restrictive policies can have short term benefits but be a long term disaster. I am elected to a municipal Council that brought in a very restrictive smoking bylaw that banned smoking in public places. There was a year's notice provided but some establishments switched immediately while others waited to the end. Those that switched immediately did not see their sales decrease. They lost some customers but new ones arrived because of their switch. Those establishments that waited initially also did not suffer at first. They lost non smokers to those establishments that switched early but gained disaffected smokers. But as a result their clientele became a higher % of smokers and shortly they started a sharp decline due to non smokers leaving in droves and they suffered badly.

Now there is no equivalent law that has to be adhered to in HAL's case but my concern and the concern HAL should have is that their % of smoking clientele does not increase significantly to the point their overwhelming non smoking majority becomes more and more confronted by smoking objections (particularly on balconies) and they have set themselves on a downward spiral seen in other hospitality industries. Maybe they only have 18% smokers now but will it become 30% like some of the establishments I referred to earlier? If it does then there may be an exodus of faithful clients much greater than the influx of new clients.

Empirical data on this issue from around the world clearly suggests that in the long term more restrictions is simply good business.

[Sea42]

Nothing like a smoking post to get things revved up. I must say I am personally disappointed the restrictions don't at least include the balcony. I can avoid the casino and other permitted areas but the balcony is a paid for space I can only avoid by simply not going outside if in fact there is smoke in the air. Some cruises there is and some not.

 

However a bigger concern is that HAL may become the cruise line of choice for more and more smoking cruisers who will leave other more restrictive lines, specifically in regards to balconies. This is a very slippery slope for HAL. I am sure they have considered this but from personal experience I know these less restrictive policies can have short term benefits but be a long term disaster. I am elected to a municipal Council that brought in a very restrictive smoking bylaw that banned smoking in public places. There was a year's notice provided but some establishments switched immediately while others waited to the end. Those that switched immediately did not see their sales decrease. They lost some customers but new ones arrived because of their switch. Those establishments that waited initially also did not suffer at first. They lost non smokers to those establishments that switched early but gained disaffected smokers. But as a result their clientele became a higher % of smokers and shortly they started a sharp decline due to non smokers leaving in droves and they suffered badly.

 

Now there is no equivalent law that has to be adhered to in HAL's case but my concern and the concern HAL should have is that their % of smoking clientele does not increase significantly to the point their overwhelming non smoking majority becomes more and more confronted by smoking objections (particularly on balconies) and they have set themselves on a downward spiral seen in other hospitality industries. Maybe they only have 18% smokers now but will it become 30% like some of the establishments I referred to earlier? If it does then there may be an exodus of faithful clients much greater than the influx of new clients.

 

Empirical data on this issue from around the world clearly suggests that in the long term more restrictions is simply good business.

 

You make a very good point. Because 2 of our group of six smoke we cancelled our Princess cruise and switched to HAL because they allow smoking on the balconies. I think you are going to find more smokers on the lines with the least restrictive policies. Smoking doesn't bother me much especially outdoors but I think HAL is going to see an exodus of non- smokers until they also discontinue smoking on balconies.

[1 HappyCruiser]

Nothing like a smoking post to get things revved up. I must say I am personally disappointed the restrictions don't at least include the balcony. I can avoid the casino and other permitted areas but the balcony is a paid for space I can only avoid by simply not going outside if in fact there is smoke in the air. Some cruises there is and some not.

 

However a bigger concern is that HAL may become the cruise line of choice for more and more smoking cruisers who will leave other more restrictive lines, specifically in regards to balconies. This is a very slippery slope for HAL. I am sure they have considered this but from personal experience I know these less restrictive policies can have short term benefits but be a long term disaster. I am elected to a municipal Council that brought in a very restrictive smoking bylaw that banned smoking in public places. There was a year's notice provided but some establishments switched immediately while others waited to the end. Those that switched immediately did not see their sales decrease. They lost some customers but new ones arrived because of their switch. Those establishments that waited initially also did not suffer at first. They lost non smokers to those establishments that switched early but gained disaffected smokers. But as a result their clientele became a higher % of smokers and shortly they started a sharp decline due to non smokers leaving in droves and they suffered badly.

 

Now there is no equivalent law that has to be adhered to in HAL's case but my concern and the concern HAL should have is that their % of smoking clientele does not increase significantly to the point their overwhelming non smoking majority becomes more and more confronted by smoking objections (particularly on balconies) and they have set themselves on a downward spiral seen in other hospitality industries. Maybe they only have 18% smokers now but will it become 30% like some of the establishments I referred to earlier? If it does then there may be an exodus of faithful clients much greater than the influx of new clients.

 

Empirical data on this issue from around the world clearly suggests that in the long term more restrictions is simply good business.

 

Another thing to be considered is the fact that once you lose a customer to another line they're not as likely to return unless there's a compelling reason. Once they build up cruise credits elsewhere they usually stay there.

People become very loyal to a brand and are unlikely to change unless something actually drives them away.

[Jemima]

HAL is moving consistently towards less and less smoking. The new policy of no cabin smoking is a huge step in this direction. While some cruise lines are more restrictive, there are others who are less so. The new poilicy puts HAL sort of mid in smoking restrictions. While some smokers will move from Princess to HAL, some HAL smokers will move to lines that still permit cabin smoking. Other smokers may just choose other types of vacations or travel.

 

We've been sailing HAL for 9 years. In that period there have been big changes in smoking policy and there have also been big changes in smoking views posted on this board.

Nine years ago there was smoking in all the lounges, on all the outside areas, in the lido pool area, and of course in cabins and balconies. In 2002 there were still even occasional posts from those unhappy that smoking was no longer allowed in the MDR. CC posts back then that objected to smoking received mostly negative reponses.

 

We plan to continue sailing HAL unless there really is a big increase in smoking. We think/hope the no cabin smoking rule will keep that from happening and also expect that HAL will further restrict smoking in the future.

[HeatherInFlorida]

While the perks that come with loyalty to one cruise line seem particularly important to many who post in this forum, I don't think it's nearly as important to the overall cruising population. So perks alone won't keep someone cruising on a particular cruise line ... loving the food, the service, the itineraries, the overall feel of that line is what keeps people coming back. The perks just aren't really that big a deal to most people.

 

Also, while there will be some who may gravitate to HAL because of their smoking policy, they won't stay with HAL unless everything else lives up to what they have loved about the cruise lines they have cruised in the past. Otherwise they may try HAL because the smoking policy is more lenient, but they'll return to what they know and love.

 

If someone is particularly fond of a specific line, they will continue to sail on that line. The smoking policy alone (unless the ship is completely smoke free) is not going to push most people to another cruise line ... especially if they find out they don't like that line that much.

 

It's a balancing act, a question of priorities. The only people who will move because of smoking as a #1 priority in their lives. Everyone else may not like some restrictions, but they'll adjust because that's what we all do every day. Nothing is perfect.

[cruisemom42]

I don't find the cruiseline's perks to be all that central to my decision-making process for upcoming cruises.

 

I've cruised with all the mainstream cruise lines except one (and a couple that aren't), and although people wax very poetic about why one line is so much better than another, in reality I find few quantifiable differences. I think some just need to have a "love affair" with their line of choice while others are more, shall we say, clear-eyed.

 

I cruised with Princess happily for a number of years because I like their itineraries and it was my son's line of choice as a kid. However, now that I'm sailing without him, Princess' poor mattresses were enough to make me think twice about sailing them again. Not that I wouldn't for a good itinerary and price.

 

So......I have to feel just a wee bit skeptical about all those who swear up and down that being exposed to just the TINIEST bit of smoke is absolutely unacceptable for them. Yet they continue to sail on a line or lines that allow it and say (equally vehemently) that no other line will do for them.

 

Sometimes you have to prioritize.....

[gillianrose]

My priority is as smokefree a cruise line as possible, in addition to other important aspects of cruising. I wish HAL would have included a ban on balcony smoking, but they didn't, so I will cruise on other lines where I won't smell any smoke whatsoever while I am out on my balcony.

[gillianrose]

Nothing like a smoking post to get things revved up. I must say I am personally disappointed the restrictions don't at least include the balcony. I can avoid the casino and other permitted areas but the balcony is a paid for space I can only avoid by simply not going outside if in fact there is smoke in the air. Some cruises there is and some not.

However a bigger concern is that HAL may become the cruise line of choice for more and more smoking cruisers who will leave other more restrictive lines, specifically in regards to balconies. This is a very slippery slope for HAL. I am sure they have considered this but from personal experience I know these less restrictive policies can have short term benefits but be a long term disaster. I am elected to a municipal Council that brought in a very restrictive smoking bylaw that banned smoking in public places. There was a year's notice provided but some establishments switched immediately while others waited to the end. Those that switched immediately did not see their sales decrease. They lost some customers but new ones arrived because of their switch. Those establishments that waited initially also did not suffer at first. They lost non smokers to those establishments that switched early but gained disaffected smokers. But as a result their clientele became a higher % of smokers and shortly they started a sharp decline due to non smokers leaving in droves and they suffered badly.

Now there is no equivalent law that has to be adhered to in HAL's case but my concern and the concern HAL should have is that their % of smoking clientele does not increase significantly to the point their overwhelming non smoking majority becomes more and more confronted by smoking objections (particularly on balconies) and they have set themselves on a downward spiral seen in other hospitality industries. Maybe they only have 18% smokers now but will it become 30% like some of the establishments I referred to earlier? If it does then there may be an exodus of faithful clients much greater than the influx of new clients.

Empirical data on this issue from around the world clearly suggests that in the long term more restrictions is simply good business.

 

Excellent post. Very well-written, and I only wish HAL had the good sense to at least have the same policy as Princess, which still allows more smoking in public areas than I would hope for.

[COLLEYBERRY]

Nothing like a smoking post to get things revved up. I must say I am personally disappointed the restrictions don't at least include the balcony. I can avoid the casino and other permitted areas but the balcony is a paid for space I can only avoid by simply not going outside if in fact there is smoke in the air. Some cruises there is and some not.

 

However a bigger concern is that HAL may become the cruise line of choice for more and more smoking cruisers who will leave other more restrictive lines, specifically in regards to balconies. This is a very slippery slope for HAL. I am sure they have considered this but from personal experience I know these less restrictive policies can have short term benefits but be a long term disaster. I am elected to a municipal Council that brought in a very restrictive smoking bylaw that banned smoking in public places. There was a year's notice provided but some establishments switched immediately while others waited to the end. Those that switched immediately did not see their sales decrease. They lost some customers but new ones arrived because of their switch. Those establishments that waited initially also did not suffer at first. They lost non smokers to those establishments that switched early but gained disaffected smokers. But as a result their clientele became a higher % of smokers and shortly they started a sharp decline due to non smokers leaving in droves and they suffered badly.

 

Now there is no equivalent law that has to be adhered to in HAL's case but my concern and the concern HAL should have is that their % of smoking clientele does not increase significantly to the point their overwhelming non smoking majority becomes more and more confronted by smoking objections (particularly on balconies) and they have set themselves on a downward spiral seen in other hospitality industries. Maybe they only have 18% smokers now but will it become 30% like some of the establishments I referred to earlier? If it does then there may be an exodus of faithful clients much greater than the influx of new clients.

 

Empirical data on this issue from around the world clearly suggests that in the long term more restrictions is simply good business.

 

 

Thank you for posting.... the most insightful contribution to the thread.:)

[Rutland Gate]

My priority is as smokefree a cruise line as possible, in addition to other important aspects of cruising. I wish HAL would have included a ban on balcony smoking, but they didn't, so I will cruise on other lines where I won't smell any smoke whatsoever while I am out on my balcony.

 

Good for you!

[Charles4515]

HAL is moving consistently towards less and less smoking. The new policy of no cabin smoking is a huge step in this direction. While some cruise lines are more restrictive, there are others who are less so. The new poilicy puts HAL sort of mid in smoking restrictions. While some smokers will move from Princess to HAL, some HAL smokers will move to lines that still permit cabin smoking. Other smokers may just choose other types of vacations or travel.

 

We've been sailing HAL for 9 years. In that period there have been big changes in smoking policy and there have also been big changes in smoking views posted on this board.

Nine years ago there was smoking in all the lounges, on all the outside areas, in the lido pool area, and of course in cabins and balconies. In 2002 there were still even occasional posts from those unhappy that smoking was no longer allowed in the MDR. CC posts back then that objected to smoking received mostly negative reponses.

 

We plan to continue sailing HAL unless there really is a big increase in smoking. We think/hope the no cabin smoking rule will keep that from happening and also expect that HAL will further restrict smoking in the future.

 

I agree. No smoking in the cabin was the major step. Particularly since it is the inside smoke that is going to circulate inside the ship. Ending cabin smoking will do a lot of good. I will continue to book HAL although I may not do a balcony if it turns out to be a big issue. More restrictions on smoking will come. The balconies and casinos will become smoke free.

[gillianrose]

HOST: Please shut this down, as it is getting decidedly nasty. Reading all of this would convince me I did not want to be trapped on a ship with many of these judgemental individuals.

 

I disagree. When you come across a post that appears to be nasty or insulting, just click on the caution button and request the host remove that one. (It's up to the host to agree or disagree.)

 

If you can't stand the heat of a particular subject, then merely go on to another topic. So easy.

[gillianrose]

I agree. No smoking in the cabin was the major step. Particularly since it is the inside smoke that is going to circulate inside the ship. Ending cabin smoking will do a lot of good. I will continue to book HAL although I may not do a balcony if it turns out to be a big issue. More restrictions on smoking will come. The balconies and casinos will become smoke free.

 

Why should nonsmokers not be able to first of all book a balcony cabin and then enjoy the balconies they paid for free of smoke, especially cigar smoke?

 

Cutting out the cabin smoking was just a baby step, not a major step at all.

[Charles4515]

Why should nonsmokers not be able to enjoy the balconies they paid for free of smoke, especially cigar smoke?

 

Cutting out the cabin smoking was just a baby step, not a major step at all.

 

They should be able to enjoy it. I have had balconies and maybe I am lucky but I never had one I could not enjoy because of smoking on the balconies. And I am sensitive to second hand smoke. I have had balconies I could not enjoy because it was too darn cold, not because of smokers. It is the inside smoking that has made some cruises not enjoyable. Particularly two Carnival cruises. I consider it a major step because it is the inside smoke that I will end up breathing. Even if you don't go near a smoking area it is going to be circulating in the ventilation system. It is a health hazard. The outside smoke I put in the catagory of irritant. It is not going to get sucked into my lungs like the second hand smoke inside the ship. Evil, but a lessor evil than inside smoking.

[gillianrose]

Cigarette smoking 10 balconies DOWNWiND might be a mild irritant.

The odor of cigars makes me extremely nauseated, and is not simply a mild irritant.

[prescottbob]

...(specifically HAL) is being sorted out on this thread regarding the future (Jan. 2012) smoking policy.

 

I'm not a typical HAL poster / cheerleader but I feel on a business model basis they have it about right.

 

And, as mentioned, if the folks desire a total smoke-free existence then other alternative cruise lines are available.

 

Bon Voyage & Good Health!

Bob:)

[peaches from georgia]

...(specifically HAL) is being sorted out on this thread regarding the future (Jan. 2012) smoking policy.

 

I'm not a typical HAL poster / cheerleader but I feel on a business model basis they have it about right.

 

And, as mentioned, if the folks desire a total smoke-free existence then other alternative cruise lines are available.

 

Bon Voyage & Good Health!

Bob:)

A voice of reason on all points.

[Irish Eyes Are Sailing]

Didn't notice much smoking on the Zaandam Alaska cruise we just completed. Saw one person light up in the casino, that's it. I guess the age demographic (majority of passengers seemed to be the average age of mid sixties) might have something to do with it. I guess the doctors have taken the cigarettes away from most of the older folks! Didn't notice any smoking on balconies either. Maybe we were lucky. My husband and I are former smokers, and like all former smokers, really hate the smell of cigarettes now. Didn't notice any odors in the room or anywhere else other than the casino. Maybe if the itinerary were the Caribbean instead of Alaska, and there were more younger folks on board, it might have been different, I don't know.

[m steve]

and smokers come over to HAL, Carnival Corp. still makes money. I can't believe that you can smell smoke 10 balconies away. If I leave a building where smokers congregate around an exit, I don;'t smell it when I move a few feet away.

[Charles4515]

Didn't notice much smoking on the Zaandam Alaska cruise we just completed. Saw one person light up in the casino, that's it. I guess the age demographic (majority of passengers seemed to be the average age of mid sixties) might have something to do with it. I guess the doctors have taken the cigarettes away from most of the older folks! Didn't notice any smoking on balconies either. Maybe we were lucky. My husband and I are former smokers, and like all former smokers, really hate the smell of cigarettes now. Didn't notice any odors in the room or anywhere else other than the casino. Maybe if the itinerary were the Caribbean instead of Alaska, and there were more younger folks on board, it might have been different, I don't know.

 

Holland America appeals to a more upscale demographic. Most have given up smoking or never started. So the casino area is where you notice the most smoke. If they had banned smoking on the balconies I think the lost business would have been a speck. On Carnival the second hand smoke is a lot worse. That should change with their new restrictions.

[Marebear]

We have solved the problem of smoking on Hal Ships - we haven't sailed with them for about 8 years now. We have moved to Oceania where there is very limited smoking and really enjoy it!

[sail7seas]

Nice to see you here on the HAL Board. Welcome. :)

 

[m steve]

When they don't sail on HAL? I might look at other boards but wouldn't post if I don't use that line and know little about it currently. I haven't sailed X, NCL, or Carnival in several years and really don't need to say something there, especially negatively.

[lovescruisingbc]

As long as smoking is still legal Cruiselines, Resorts etc have to compromise in order to accomodate all passengers and this is what HAL have tried to do. I, too, have tried Celebrity - unfortunately our (balcony) stateroom was very close to one of the few smoking areas where the smoke was heavy most of the day and evening. Given that there are fewer and fewer smokers out there, I would much prefer that they are spread over the entire (exterior) of the ship rather than concentrated in one place. Way to go HAL!

[HeatherInFlorida]

..................The odor of cigars makes me extremely nauseated, and is not simply a mild irritant.

 

Me, too! And the smell of cigars somehow does carry a very long way.

 

Holland America appeals to a more upscale demographic. Most have given up smoking or never started. ....................

 

And this information comes from where????? It certainly hasn't been my experience that it is any more or less "upscale" than any other line in a similar price range (if, in fact, money has anything to do with whether someone is "upscale" or not).

 

Exactly what is an "upscale demographic" is:) and why is it they don't smoke:o.