Silver Shadow Fails Sanitation Inspection After Caught Hiding Filthy Conditions from

[Rally]

Are you comparing SS with the flunky joints that show seeks out to sensationalize for cable TV air time?

 

Really?

 

___‹~›__‹(•¿•)›__‹~›___

 

Not even close, but those are all restaurants supposedly inspected by one authority or another. There is a sister show about bars, too. :)

[Paulchili]

Why would I note that Oceana isn't on that list? Have I said something about Oceania . . . Ever???

 

See post #97

[Rally]

Why would I note that Oceana isn't on that list? Have I said something about Oceania . . . Ever???

 

Oh, you mean this, where YOU talked about O but I did not?

 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paulchili

You may be right but I can assure you nothing like this (either the food issue nor treatment of staff) goes on at Oceania - the cruise line I know best.

Maybe on NCL or Carnival.

How many loyal SS fans would have said the exact same thing last week? Unless one is an employee on the ship it may be naive to assert that "it can't happen here."

[Travelcat2]

As I posted on the other thread. This is not a joke. Why are some posters treating it as if it were? I personally would not pay attention to any poster who does not feel that this is an issue that needs to be addressed -- whether on Silversea or on all cruise lines. There comes a point where people making this a joke become what they are posting!

[Kilroyshere]

If the pix were real and the health inspection score as low as it was, I can see only 2 ways this happens:

 

1. Sabotage by disgruntled employee(s) who put those items where they were found and the rest of the food service area was fine.

 

or

 

2. Total failure of shipboard management and ultimately company management to deliver the most minimal food service health standards.

 

I want to believe the first reason is the only way this could have happened.

 

___‹~›__‹(•¿•)›__‹~›___

[Paulchili]

If the pix were real and the health inspection score as low as it was, I can see only 2 ways this happens:

 

1. Sabotage by disgruntled employee(s) who put those items where they were found and the rest of the food service area was fine.

 

or

 

2. Total failure of shipboard management and ultimately company management to deliver the most minimal food service health standards.

 

I want to believe the first reason is the only way this could have happened.

 

___‹~›__‹(•¿•)›__‹~›___

 

I would like to believe that as well but surely the offending staff member would have been found out by management and appropriately disciplined. The cruise line would not want to take the blame for such an event by a disgruntled employee and if that was the case they would be sure to let it be known that it was sabotage and the guilty partly has been dealt with.

[Travelcat2]

If the pix were real and the health inspection score as low as it was, I can see only 2 ways this happens:

 

1. Sabotage by disgruntled employee(s) who put those items where they were found and the rest of the food service area was fine.

 

or

 

2. Total failure of shipboard management and ultimately company management to deliver the most minimal food service health standards.

 

I want to believe the first reason is the only way this could have happened.

 

___‹~›__‹(•¿•)›__‹~›___

 

I have read your posts with interest and appreciate them. I definitely believe that this problem is due to "Total failure of shipboard management and ultimately company management to deliver the most minimal food service health standards". From what I understand, this has been an ongoing problem.

[TLCOhio]

Just caught up on this situation tonight. Lots of interesting questions comes from the Silversea "statement" shared earlier on this thread. Having had many decades of experience working with the news media and those in the PR/communications field, I can read the "words", but see what is really being said and not said. First, they don't deny or provide any evidence that "ALL" of these allegations are false and without any basis of fact. They are kind of asking, between the lines, to say . . . trust us, we' ll try not to do it again and/or we'll work hard to avoid getting caught in the future.

 

Personally, I would like to see more real honesty. Not just delayed "spin" and avoiding answers!!! Who did what, for how long and with what direction/push from the central offices in Monaco that controls the purse-strings and builds the indirect pressure for staff to cut corners, save money? What has changed? Was there earlier cheating done to hype up these earlier scores?

 

We've done cruises with Crystal, Seabourn, Celebrity and Silversea, as detailed below, for the Silver Cloud. During that Silversea Norway cruise we got to tour the galley, talked in detail multiple times with the Executive Chef and Hotel Director, etc. I was very, very impressed with the skills, honesty, quality, etc., for those top ship leaders. BUT, there was a "pressure" on them from the bosses in Monaco to control costs. They didn't say it directly, but you picked up those signals during various discussions with those two, the Captain, etc.

 

The bigger bosses in Monaco need to be more open and truthful. Silly "spin" statements they have pumped out are not effective, other than confirming the worst indirectly. Nobody is fooled by that type of shallow messaging. It is called in the PR profession as a "non-answer answer". Or, when you read that a corporate CEO left to spend more time with their family or to pursue other opportunities, we all know what really happened. They got fired or did something bad. Same here. When they are not more forthcoming, you naturally assume it is worst than they are trying to claim.

 

Finally, their game-plan appears to be based on ignoring any questions and hoping people will forget. Not smart, either. People are more savvy these days and don't forget these issues and questions. AND, the slow, lack of details and substance by top brass in Monaco, not Fort Lauderdale.

 

Don't forget, per their website: "The company's headquarters are based in Monaco." See more at: http://www.silversea.com/media-centre/backgrounders/corporate-profile/

 

THANKS! Enjoy! Terry in Ohio

 

For details and visuals, etc., from our July 1-16, 2010, Norway Coast/Fjords/Arctic Circle cruise experience from Copenhagen on the Silver Cloud, check out this posting. This posting is now at 112,672 views.

http://www.boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=1227923

[Keith1010]

Terry as usual, very well said.

 

I wanted to add that I truly believe that the allegations in the web site that first reported on this still need to be addressed by the executives at Silversea whether it is done in that press release or in some other communications. If it was my decision, it would go way beyond any type of press release.

 

Even a letter on their web site with an apology to their customers would have been a better start rather than a press release. This would be followed by interview(s) with those in the media and those in other areas of the cruise industry.

 

There are some companies that know how to deal with these types of situations and there are those who do not. In the end, it is far better to deal with it properly which includes detailing the mistakes as well as being specific on what actions (both near term and long term) are to be taken to address the issue and then to followup again.

 

People tend to be forgiving in this wonderful world we live in but we have learned from other events that before you can be forgiven you need to be forthcoming on what went wrong and what you will do to prevent it from occurring again.

 

Keith

[UKCruiseJeff]

Good morning all and greetings from the start of anothers sticky day here in the UK.

 

Whilst I agree overall with the sentiments expressed by Terry, with all due respect to him and his experience, I think he does seemed to have missed a fundamental PR point in how he thinks SS should handle it.

 

As you know from my previous postings on this topic, I also want to have some answers. However, the issue is that SS and CC posters are looking at the issue through different ends of the telescope.

 

To many people here this is a very big thing. From SS's point of view, at the current time very few of their customers know about this issue and are totally therefore unconcerned. They will continue to make their bookings and recommend the line to all their friends.

 

So, if you were SS, at this current time you would not be doing what Terry suggests but you would be waiting to see whether the story "has legs" and is picked up by the press and a wider audience. Whether it does or not might depend on whether any competitors are on the ball and start a social networking campaign to ensure maximum damage is heaped on SS! Therefore SS would not want to react until it is forced to and that will be when more of SS customers become aware of it from more sources. A fundamental PR student level lesson is "don't make things worst than they already are". Spooking all customers about something that few people know about is not a sensible PR thing to do.

 

This will sit and either go away or it will be picked up by a wider audience at which point SS will produce some responses closer to the detail we'd like to see - but don't hold your breath that it will ever be enough.

 

So personally, I neither expect to hear any more from SS or see any real honourable behind the scenes improvements or changes (except how to prevent being caught in the future) until they feel they really have to.

 

Not what people want to hear but that is my take of the situation.

[oregon50]

No kidding.....I count 36 real SS customers knowing about this. 95 past and maybe future booking customers and 176 potential customers learning about their misdeeds. Their reaction has been measured properly from a PR viewpoint. The blind will continue to book SS. New folks will continue to book, thinking they "have arrived" on a luxury product. When SS began making drastic changes around 2006, they knew many present day customers would abandon ship. Some within 1 year, some within 5 and some will never leave.

[whogo]

I hope that the delay in posting the inspection report is to allow for criminal charges to be filed.

[Keith1010]

Time will tell if this item finds its way into industry forums and newsletters that many of us get.

 

Even in corporations honesty and integrity is the best policy. In fact, from every disaster often a lot of good can come from it.

 

As I have said, I am not one who tends to overreact to things and I always look at things from both ends. Many know that I often try to give the perspective of the cruise

line and understand often why they make changes even though some don't care for it. I also have many years of senior level corporate experience. I do think the approach

that was taken so far to issue one very ambiguous press release which as of last night I didn't even see on their web site is not the right approach. Again, I am assuming the

allegations are correct. If they are not, then by all means they should dispute them.

 

Just my opinion.

 

Keith

[TLCOhio]

Whilst I agree overall with the sentiments expressed by Terry, with all due respect to him and his experience, I think he does seemed to have missed a fundamental PR point in how he thinks SS should handle it. So, if you were SS, at this current time you would not be doing what Terry suggests but you would be waiting to see whether the story "has legs" and is picked up by the press and a wider audience. Whether it does or not might depend on whether any competitors are on the ball and start a social networking campaign to ensure maximum damage is heaped on SS! Therefore SS would not want to react until it is forced to and that will be when more of SS customers become aware of it from more sources. A fundamental PR student level lesson is "don't make things worst than they already are". Spooking all customers about something that few people know about is not a sensible PR thing to do.

 

Appreciate the added comments from UKCruiseJeff, Keith, oregon50, etc. Very valid points and questions for how widely will this "issue" be covered. If Silversea can keep it fairly narrowly "contained", then why go too "loud" and wide in saying sorry, etc. Nor to making it worse by explaining ALL of the facts??? It's a trade-off and gamble!!! Time will tell what works and not. Most people are "busy" and not reading these boards. Good question for how the competition plays around with trying to spread the "cancer" via the digital world against their challengers for this upscale slice of the business.

 

THANKS! Enjoy! Terry in Ohio

 

For details and visuals, etc., from our July 1-16, 2010, Norway Coast/Fjords/Arctic Circle cruise experience from Copenhagen on the Silver Cloud, check out this posting. This posting is now at 112,739 views.

http://www.boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=1227923

[Kilroyshere]

...the issue is that SS and CC posters are looking at the issue through different ends of the telescope.

 

To many people here this is a very big thing. From SS's point of view, at the current time very few of their customers know about this issue and are totally therefore unconcerned. They will continue to make their bookings and recommend the line to all their friends.

 

I somewhat agree and somewhat disagree.

 

Agreeing with you; the recent incident of a Carnival ship losing power at sea with alleged horrid conditions aboard and the tragic Costa incident, haven't mothballed a single ship. Beyond the publicly traded stock price taking a hit, that cruise company hasn't seen much of a fall off in bookings that I know of.

 

Disagreeing with you; SS is a premium small ship cruise line. Big box cruise lines have single ships that takes more passengers out than the entire SS fleet.

 

The combined passenger rooms for all the premium cruise lines in total, is quite a small number of cabins. That's a lot fewer rooms for a respectable size audience.

 

I'd argue that premium cruise line customers tend to be older and are likely to be informed and concerned about a SS incident like this when choosing cruise lines. More so than might a family taking their first cruise, a younger crowd looking for a week vacation partying outta Miami at the lowest entry cost they can find or a massive, 1,000 plus group booking of USPS workers getting a government paid for junket.

 

When say, Conde Nast publications chooses their 'Worlds Best Small Ship Cruise Line of the Year" or Top 20 Cruise Gold Medal Cruise Lines, those mentions drive business. This SS incident will not ingratiate the editors at Conde Nast to name SS anytime soon, in my opinion, and that means lotsa lost cabin revs. Execs at SS take note of these things.

 

Conde Nast in print and on-line have millions of affluent eyeballs along with sista' publications GQ, Vanity Fair, Bon Apetit, New Yorker, Vogue, Brit Vogue, etc. Followers of those publications are the audience SS tries to reach out to.

 

Travel Leisure publications have 5 million eyeballs, they own 'Food and Wine' and all are a unit of American Express, who themselves are in the travel biz. Again, all the eyeballs SS, Seabourn, Regent and all other premium small ship lines are trying to attract state-side.

 

There are other print and social media outlets in the U.S. and abroad who exert a lot of influence driving premium cruise traffic.

 

CC's forum board is no small change...with 1 million subscribers to CC and this SS sanitation incident threads getting over 10,000 hits, more than a handful are taking note.

 

Again, SS Execs and marketing team know the damage this incident will cause to their reputation and bookings near term.

 

I suspect near term; SS's focus will be PR geared to media and not customers. They will IMO; be giving out a lotta 'fam tour' freebies to travel industry pros to show they've 'cleaned up their act' and, to fill empty cabins.

 

Sans a reasonable explanation from SS about this, SS is off our radar.

 

___‹~›__‹(•¿•)›__‹~›___

[CruisinGerman]

According to Jeff's post, not many people know about this.

 

Well maybe today I'll copy this whole thread and send it to the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, USA Today, CNN and the newswires.

 

Maybe then Silversea will be more interested in this very serious incident.

 

 

Kind regards,

 

Gunther and Uta

[UKCruiseJeff]

I somewhat agree and somewhat disagree.

 

Agreeing with you; the recent incident of a Carnival ship losing power at sea with alleged horrid conditions aboard and the tragic Costa incident, haven't mothballed a single ship. Beyond the publicly traded stock price taking a hit, that cruise company hasn't seen much of a fall off in bookings that I know of.

 

Disagreeing with you; SS is a premium small ship cruise line. Big box cruise lines have single ships that takes more passengers out than the entire SS fleet.

 

The combined passenger rooms for all the premium cruise lines in total, is quite a small number of cabins. That's a lot fewer rooms for a respectable size audience.

 

I'd argue that premium cruise line customers tend to be older and are likely to be informed and concerned about a SS incident like this when choosing cruise lines. More so than might a family taking their first cruise, a younger crowd looking for a week vacation partying outta Miami at the lowest entry cost they can find or a massive, 1,000 plus group booking of USPS workers getting a government paid for junket.

 

When say, Conde Nast publications chooses their 'Worlds Best Small Ship Cruise Line of the Year" or Top 20 Cruise Gold Medal Cruise Lines, those mentions drive business. This SS incident will not ingratiate the editors at Conde Nast to name SS anytime soon, in my opinion, and that means lotsa lost cabin revs. Execs at SS take note of these things.

 

Conde Nast in print and on-line have millions of affluent eyeballs along with sista' publications GQ, Vanity Fair, Bon Apetit, New Yorker, Vogue, Brit Vogue, etc. Followers of those publications are the audience SS tries to reach out to.

 

Travel Leisure publications have 5 million eyeballs, they own 'Food and Wine' and all are a unit of American Express, who themselves are in the travel biz. Again, all the eyeballs SS, Seabourn, Regent and all other premium small ship lines are trying to attract state-side.

 

There are other print and social media outlets in the U.S. and abroad who exert a lot of influence driving premium cruise traffic.

 

CC's forum board is no small change...with 1 million subscribers to CC and this SS sanitation incident threads getting over 10,000 hits, more than a handful are taking note.

 

Again, SS Execs and marketing team know the damage this incident will cause to their reputation and bookings near term.

 

I suspect near term; SS's focus will be PR geared to media and not customers. They will IMO; be giving out a lotta 'fam tour' freebies to travel industry pros to show they've 'cleaned up their act' and, to fill empty cabins.

 

Sans a reasonable explanation from SS about this, SS is off our radar.

 

___‹~›__‹(•¿•)›__‹~›___

 

 

Great to read your coments Kilroy!

 

In fact unless I have totally misunderstood you, we are in complete agreement. The only minor issue is one of timeline. All you say is true. Just not quite yet.

 

You only fight a fire when you actually see the flames. Otherwise in PR you are creating a fire that didn't previously exist. There aren't any fires quite yet. The two key measures they will (should) be closely monitoring apart from this internet stuff is forward bookings rates and cancellation rates. Everything else is irrelevant. They are less bothered about forward years than you think because current planning time horizon cashflow is the sole survival issue. You ascribe a level of sophistication that doesn't actually exist in reality. But what is true, is that you only react when you really have to, and that moment isn't quite now.

 

Anyway, great post .. and we will surely see!

 

Jeff

[TLCOhio]

This story is now out in the past hour on the more widely seen USA Today website and maybe in print tomorrow by their top, respected travel writer. They have this headline: "Cruise ship known for luxury fails health inspection" with these highlights in this story by Gene Sloan: "One of the world's most luxurious cruise ships has failed a health inspection conducted by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In what is a rare occurrence for modern day vessels, the U.S. health agency gave a failing score of 84 out of 100 to Silversea Cruises' 382-passenger Silver Shadow, an all-suite icon of luxury cruising that boasts rooms for two starting at over $1,000 a night."

 

The story goes on with six more paragraphs, added details, etc.

 

Full story at:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/news/2013/07/18/cruise-ship-health-inspection/2550051/

 

THANKS! Enjoy! Terry in Ohio

 

For details and visuals, etc., from our July 1-16, 2010, Norway Coast/Fjords/Arctic Circle cruise experience from Copenhagen on the Silver Cloud, check out this posting. This posting is now at 112,739 views.

http://www.boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=1227923

[UKCruiseJeff]

Excellent. Things warm up. Still early days ...

[Kilroyshere]

You only fight a fire when you actually see the flames. Otherwise in PR you are creating a fire that didn't previously exist. There aren't any fires quite yet.

 

I agree in that we've not seen (here in the U.S) a major news outlet do a hit piece (e.g; '60 Minutes' or NY Times) about this. In that regard, there are no fires or flames in the mass public for SS to address and doing so only attracts attention to an incident they'd prefer to not put the spotlight upon.

 

If a hit piece hits major media, then the game changes.

 

I'd argue that if I were editor of Conde Nast, Travel Leisure or related publications, I'd not wish to have named SS a "Gold Medal Cruise" or "Year's #1 Cruise Line" in light of this kinda incident.

 

I'd argue looking to future top cruise line accolades, these influential media outlets will stay away from SS for a while and in regards to SS PR, therein is their crisis.

 

The two key measures they will (should) be closely monitoring apart from this internet stuff is forward bookings rates and cancellation rates. Everything else is irrelevant.

 

SS is privately held by an Italian family in Rome, HQ'd in Monaco and with U.S. HQ in Fort Lauderdale. Outside of industry insiders, I doubt we'll ever know to what extent their bookings will or will not be effected by this.

 

If we see some deeply discounted SS cruises below the price point trend they've been at, that may signal near term financial pain as result of this.

 

The travel industry will be reluctant to bite the hand that feeds em...even if it means turning cheek to this. Individual TA's may have a slight effect...who knows?

 

You ascribe a level of sophistication that doesn't actually exist in reality. But what is true, is that you only react when you really have to, and that moment isn't quite now.

 

I believe that much of premium cruiser 'sophistication' is the positive media exposure SS and other premium cruise lines chum for, from the Conde Nast Publications, Travel Leisure (AMEX), CC and other media outlets. I believe it's their lifeblood that drive many cabin bookings.

 

SS may drop off media radar...or, those publications will be rewarded with better advert revs than heretofore seen to compensate for those (like us), who are avoiding SS in light of this incident.

 

I doubt the CDC will go much further beyond a scathing internal report (available on line) and increased scrutiny of SS ships when in U.S. ports.

 

The cruise ship industry is a massive source of revenue for ports visited and in particular, the provisioning of ships outta US. ports. A hefty fine or slap on the wrist is the most I'd expect from CDC.

 

And as we all know too well; any 'scuse for a U.S. government agency to show their raison d'être actually exists, is certainty that SS will be under the magnifying glass of inspectors boarding SS ship at U.S. ports for a long time !

 

Cheers,

 

___‹~›__‹(•¿•)›__‹~›___

[Travelcat2]

Great to see the article in USA Today. Hopefully they will follow up with the details when they become available. It would be nice it were picked up by a few more publications! There are important details that Silversea customers need to know!

[UKCruiseJeff]

You only fight a fire when you actually see the flames. Otherwise in PR you are creating a fire that didn't previously exist. There aren't any fires quite yet.

 

I agree in that we've not seen (here in the U.S) a major news outlet do a hit piece (e.g; '60 Minutes' or NY Times) about this. In that regard, there are no fires or flames in the mass public for SS to address and doing so only attracts attention to an incident they'd prefer to not put the spotlight upon.

 

If a hit piece hits major media, then the game changes.

 

I'd argue that if I were editor of Conde Nast, Travel Leisure or related publications, I'd not wish to have named SS a "Gold Medal Cruise" or "Year's #1 Cruise Line" in light of this kinda incident.

 

I'd argue looking to future top cruise line accolades, these influential media outlets will stay away from SS for a while and in regards to SS PR, therein is their crisis.

 

The two key measures they will (should) be closely monitoring apart from this internet stuff is forward bookings rates and cancellation rates. Everything else is irrelevant.

 

SS is privately held by an Italian family in Rome, HQ'd in Monaco and with U.S. HQ in Fort Lauderdale. Outside of industry insiders, I doubt we'll ever know to what extent their bookings will or will not be effected by this.

 

If we see some deeply discounted SS cruises below the price point trend they've been at, that may signal near term financial pain as result of this.

 

The travel industry will be reluctant to bite the hand that feeds em...even if it means turning cheek to this. Individual TA's may have a slight effect...who knows?

 

You ascribe a level of sophistication that doesn't actually exist in reality. But what is true, is that you only react when you really have to, and that moment isn't quite now.

 

I believe that much of premium cruiser 'sophistication' is the positive media exposure SS and other premium cruise lines chum for, from the Conde Nast Publications, Travel Leisure (AMEX), CC and other media outlets. I believe it's their lifeblood that drive many cabin bookings.

 

SS may drop off media radar...or, those publications will be rewarded with better advert revs than heretofore seen to compensate for those (like us), who are avoiding SS in light of this incident.

 

I doubt the CDC will go much further beyond a scathing internal report (available on line) and increased scrutiny of SS ships when in U.S. ports.

 

The cruise ship industry is a massive source of revenue for ports visited and in particular, the provisioning of ships outta US. ports. A hefty fine or slap on the wrist is the most I'd expect from CDC.

 

And as we all know too well; any 'scuse for a U.S. government agency to show their raison d'être actually exists, is certainty that SS will be under the magnifying glass of inspectors boarding SS ship at U.S. ports for a long time !

 

Cheers,

 

___‹~›__‹(•¿•)›__‹~›___

 

We'll see ..

 

On a minor point of clarity!

 

The company is entirely controlled by Manfredi who lives in Monaco - and a bit of his family lives in St Jean Cap Ferrat. Nothing is controlled by anyone based in Rome.

 

For what it's worth I can say with 100% personal conviction that for whatever financial pressures he might have placed on his management team, I am almost 100% certain he would be mortified by the sub-text of some of the hygiene and ancilliary issues. He is (or was) obsessive about customer satisfaction and the line's perceived place in the market.

[Keith1010]

Terry thanks for posting the USA Today information.

 

For those who think that the information on that Cruise Law web site will not make it to the media they are kidding themselves. As I've said if those allegations are true then it is a big to do and one not to be swept under the carpet with high level press releases and even the additional comment in the USA Today article that doesn't say anything. In the long run, it is better if true to accept responsibility, admit what went wrong, take corrective action to ensure it never happens again, and communicate all of that.

 

Keith

[Kilroyshere]

We'll see ..

 

On a minor point of clarity!

 

The company is entirely controlled by Manfredi who lives in Monaco - and a bit of his family lives in St Jean Cap Ferrat. Nothing is controlled by anyone based in Rome.

 

 

I had stated: SS is privately held by an Italian family in Rome, HQ'd in Monaco and with U.S. HQ in Fort Lauderdale.

 

Do I stand corrected that the Lefebvre family in Rome started and owns SS, notwithstanding "control" issues from HQ's in Monaco?

 

___‹~›__‹(•¿•)›__‹~›___

[UKCruiseJeff]

I had stated: SS is privately held by an Italian family in Rome, HQ'd in Monaco and with U.S. HQ in Fort Lauderdale.

 

Do I stand corrected that the Lefebvre family in Rome started and owns SS, notwithstanding "control" issues from HQ's in Monaco?

 

___‹~›__‹(•¿•)›__‹~›___

 

I clarified what you said ... not corrected it!

 

Loosen up. You are still a person of unparalleled wisdom and knowledge.:)