Children's Program

[wripro]

I will really miss the triplets. Parents rarely brought their kids on to them because they knew they'd be responsible and could not dump them in the card room.

[Jim Avery]

If the luxury cruise lines are so eager to fill cabins why don't they offer a senior or AARP rate?

 

Good idea. If they contact me with a sweetheart rate, I will usually take it.:D

[Keith1010]

I will really miss the triplets. Parents rarely brought their kids on to them because they knew they'd be responsible and could not dump them in the card room.

 

You got it.

 

I think the one you won't see children might be Sea Dream.

 

The larger the ship, the more chance for children and that will be the case going forward.

 

Keith

[Kilroyshere]

If the luxury cruise lines are so eager to fill cabins why don't they offer a senior or AARP rate?

 

Well healed seniors with lotsa money to burn on luxuries and time to take cruises are premium cruise line's bread and butta', not your average AARP'ster.

 

The key for a premium cruise line; is grooming 30's, 40's and fiddy year olds from mass market ships and up onto premium ships as their incomes rise, so that when they turn retired seniors, they'll be longtime loyal cruisers with that cruise line.

 

So many of the 30 to fiddy crown have kids and this is a dilemma. How do you get them aboard ship without their kids?

 

My answer is SB is but one property in the Carnival cruise line portfolio. I believe if Carnival marketed their various properties to different target audiences e.g; families, swingles, younger, large group bookings, etc, they'd do better to differentiate themselves from the other cruise lines and, eventually steer the more affluent cruisers who wish to not bring along the brood, to SB.

 

As for adult only cruises, there are many full ship takeovers for adult only proclivities and activities various that restrict children from cruising on. This is the other end of the adult spectrum...

 

I'm with those who don't want Seabourn to encourage children aboard. The fewer amenities and activities they offer, the fewer parents with kids will choose Seabourn and thus keeping us who don't want rugrats on the ship...no matter how wonderful you think YOUR kids are.

 

___‹~›__‹(•¿•)›__‹~›___

[Jim Avery]

You got it.

 

I think the one you won't see children might be Sea Dream.

 

The larger the ship, the more chance for children and that will be the case going forward.

 

Keith

Way wrong on that one Keith. Fully half of our SeaDream trips have had lots of noisy kids on board. One had 30 kids out of a total passenger load of 98!:eek: Not fun I assure you. Ice cream socials in the pool (no longer available for adults) Kid movies in the Main Lounge making that area and the adjacent card room non useable. I could go on but what is the point. Moneyed parents take their darlins wherever they please and the rest be damned.:eek: Part of the problem at SD was the owner who tended to cruise a lot and treated the ships as his personal yacht by bringing his kids, friends, their kids, etc. So, ship size is no guarantee of getting what you pay for either. :D

[wripro]

Kilroy,

 

My tongue was firmly planted in my cheek when I suggested a senior rate. That would be like suggesting a children's rate at Chuckee Cheese.

[CraftyEC]

On the last page someone stated that it was a legal right to be able to take children on a ship (paraphrasing). This person was not from the U.S. To my knowledge there is no such law in the U.S. or Canada. Kindly correct me if I'm wrong.

 

I didn't mean to suggest that there was a specific law enshrining the right of a parent to take their child on a specific cruise, but only that if a cruise line allows children to travel on their ships, and has not specifically designated a sailing as adults only, then they do have the 'legal' right to bring their children, of whatever age or social skills, on board. I then contrasted that with the 'ethical' or 'moral' obligations (too often ignored) to ensure that the activities of their family do not adversely impact on their fellow cruisers. I don't think there is a world of difference between the UK and the US in that.

[gillianrose]

Hi Keith. I have to disagree too. I have sailed SeaDream with 30 kids.:eek: Several other SeaDream voyages were marred by lesser numbers of rowdy kids. They DO show up on small ships. And price does not seem to be any deterrent. Many people (parents) just do not care what their kids do to others. It only takes a few of these on your cruise to make you question the next one.

 

I think price would be a deterrent if children (and or thirds and fourths in a cabin) were fairly charged full fare. The problem is really that they are not charged full fare. If every person on a cruise (booking at the same time) were charged the same identical fare, then there would be fewer children (and interliners, etc.) on board. I dislike subsidizing any passengers and don't like to see children actively encouraged to cruise by them getting to sail free or very cheaply. It is simply not fair.

[worldspan]

Appears the "child haters" have moved over from Oceania to Seabourn!

 

 

Worldspan

132 cruises strong

[gillianrose]

Appears the "child haters" have moved over from Oceania to Seabourn!

 

Wanting to enjoy an adult environment does not in any way make a person a child hater, and your constant posts calling people child haters are very tiresome.

[Chairsin]

Worldspan,

I am sorry if you have misinterpreted the remarks of many of the posters on this thread as child haters. I would be surprised if that were true in most cases. As I can only speak for myself I would say that I am certainly not anti-children.. In December we are taking our granddaughter and her parents to Walt Disney World.No matter how well behaved I think she is we feel that it is much better fit for her than Seabourn.

 

While we have hashed over the topic of children on board SB repeatedly, what is new about this thread is the prospect of a formal program on SB for children.If they do this only time will tell if this hurts or helps SB.

[worldspan]

Wanting to enjoy an adult environment does not in any way make a person a child hater, and your constant posts calling people child haters are very tiresome.

 

 

Tiresome, maybe, but true! The content contained in the majority of the responses to this thread speaks for itself.

 

Worldspan

132 cruises strong

[Jim Avery]

Yes, very tiresome. And sophomoric at best in thinking.

[commodoredave]

Yes, using the term "child hater" for people who would like to enjoy a small luxury ship without it being overrun by too many unruly children is ridiculous at best, and ignorant at worst. Almost all of us who have posted about this have children and we have cruised with them. We've done our parenting and would like to take a vacation without having to parent other people's children. We still love children, but would like to be able to get away from them and enjoy an adult environment once in a while.

[Keith1010]

Jim, that is interesting about Sea Dream. I would never had guessed that.

 

I guess what this tells me is there are really not ships where you will not find children unless you sail long voyages and do this in non-summer months.

 

Keith

[Jim Avery]

Jim, that is interesting about Sea Dream. I would never had guessed that.

 

I guess what this tells me is there are really not ships where you will not find children unless you sail long voyages and do this in non-summer months.

 

Keith

 

True. My DW has already informed me that if there is a kid issue on our upcoming Costa Rica voyage on SeaDream, it is our last SeaDream.:eek: We have kept coming back due to the other half (kid free cruises) being the very best ever. Location doesn't seem to matter but time of year, as has been discussed, can play a part but one of the "kiddie trips" was the Med in late October.:eek:

[CraftyEC]

worldspan, I find your description of 'the majority of responders' of this thread as 'child haters' veryoffensive.

 

I, like many others, do not feel that a Seabourn cruise is an appropriate place for large numbers of children who alter the ambience, or for small numbers of children who do not have their needs met. I have not (unlike you) attached any derogatory terms to them.

 

Again like others, I have travelled to a variety of places, in a variety of hotels and on a variety of ships. I have travelled with children, and cruised with teens. I have seen my teenage son join in official programmes on large ships, and my teenage daughter quietly fill her day with crafts and reading. Did they behave on board in an entirely civilised manner? Yes. Would I have then taken them, at that age, onto a Seabourn sailing? No. NOT because I would expect them to be disruptive, but because their needs would not have been being met. Their father and I would have had a luxurious and relaxing vacation, but they would be have been bored.

 

From infancy we have travelled with them, and taken them out to eat. I do not subscribe to the view that children should only been seen in fast food restaurants, and they learnt to behave appropriately in various venues from an early age. With half their classmates at a birthday party at Pizza Hut they (or at least my DS!) contributed to the general rowdiness! At the same age, however, we would eat at lunchtime in a family friendly Italian restaurant and they would behave impecably. But I would not have taken them to a sophisticated French cordon bleu restaurant in the evenings.

 

We have travelled abroad, and stayed in simple cottages or family-friendly hotels. We have visited theme parks where their interests were paramount (really, how exciting is 'It's a small world' the third time round?) and as they got older we gradually exposed them to more culture in more formal settings. At 16 DS was enthralled by the ancient sites we saw in Pompeii, Olympia etc. They love browsing around foreign food markets as much as relaxing on a beach - more so, actually.

 

Parents are the prime educators of their children. This includes educating them in social skills, especially the ability to gauge what behaviour is appropriate in what setting. Putting them, for a prolonged period, into a setting where their needs are not met, and where they will be bored and uncomfortable, is far from kind. They will be miserable, and so may be those with whom they are in contact. I am proud of my young adult offspring. My DS recently volunteered to represent us at a family funeral which neither I nor my husband could attend. He went primarily to support my mother, his 92 year old grandmother. He had never been to a funeral before, but he did have the social graces to behave impecably in a new situation. I am proud of him, and pleased that we raised him to be confident in such a social setting. We did not do this by making him endure prolonged periods of his vacation 'on best behaviour' constantly, or by allowing him to disrupt the experience of others. He was far from a perfect child (the lovable rogue, often the naughty one) but I hope that we had his (and his sister's) best interests at heart when we chose how to spend our vacation and free time.

 

So yes, I am very offended by your description of me as a 'child hater'.

[zich6]

I think price would be a deterrent if children (and or thirds and fourths in a cabin) were fairly charged full fare. The problem is really that they are not charged full fare. If every person on a cruise (booking at the same time) were charged the same identical fare, then there would be fewer children (and interliners, etc.) on board. I dislike subsidizing any passengers and don't like to see children actively encouraged to cruise by them getting to sail free or very cheaply. It is simply not fair.

 

I think you're overlooking a reasonable cost comparison. No adult is subsidizing children. First, they shouldn't be allowed to consume adult beverages which are clearly near or at the top of a ships operating expenses. Secondly, children under 10, a considerable percentage of children who do sail don't eat nearly the amount of an adult. Add to that the fact that children typically don't weigh as much as adults could be used to argue that the actual fuel costs associated with operating the ship are also much reduced.

 

So, while I see both sides of this argument and personally would prefer the ships be free of children when we sail, we'll make do on our upcoming cruise. But, I don't see any subsidizing of children and hence no "fairness" issue.

[commodoredave]

worldspan, I find your description of 'the majority of responders' of this thread as 'child haters' veryoffensive.

 

I, like many others, do not feel that a Seabourn cruise is an appropriate place for large numbers of children who alter the ambience, or for small numbers of children who do not have their needs met. I have not (unlike you) attached any derogatory terms to them.

 

Again like others, I have travelled to a variety of places, in a variety of hotels and on a variety of ships. I have travelled with children, and cruised with teens. I have seen my teenage son join in official programmes on large ships, and my teenage daughter quietly fill her day with crafts and reading. Did they behave on board in an entirely civilised manner? Yes. Would I have then taken them, at that age, onto a Seabourn sailing? No. NOT because I would expect them to be disruptive, but because their needs would not have been being met. Their father and I would have had a luxurious and relaxing vacation, but they would be have been bored.

 

From infancy we have travelled with them, and taken them out to eat. I do not subscribe to the view that children should only been seen in fast food restaurants, and they learnt to behave appropriately in various venues from an early age. With half their classmates at a birthday party at Pizza Hut they (or at least my DS!) contributed to the general rowdiness! At the same age, however, we would eat at lunchtime in a family friendly Italian restaurant and they would behave impecably. But I would not have taken them to a sophisticated French cordon bleu restaurant in the evenings.

 

We have travelled abroad, and stayed in simple cottages or family-friendly hotels. We have visited theme parks where their interests were paramount (really, how exciting is 'It's a small world' the third time round?) and as they got older we gradually exposed them to more culture in more formal settings. At 16 DS was enthralled by the ancient sites we saw in Pompeii, Olympia etc. They love browsing around foreign food markets as much as relaxing on a beach - more so, actually.

 

Parents are the prime educators of their children. This includes educating them in social skills, especially the ability to gauge what behaviour is appropriate in what setting. Putting them, for a prolonged period, into a setting where their needs are not met, and where they will be bored and uncomfortable, is far from kind. They will be miserable, and so may be those with whom they are in contact. I am proud of my young adult offspring. My DS recently volunteered to represent us at a family funeral which neither I nor my husband could attend. He went primarily to support my mother, his 92 year old grandmother. He had never been to a funeral before, but he did have the social graces to behave impecably in a new situation. I am proud of him, and pleased that we raised him to be confident in such a social setting. We did not do this by making him endure prolonged periods of his vacation 'on best behaviour' constantly, or by allowing him to disrupt the experience of others. He was far from a perfect child (the lovable rogue, often the naughty one) but I hope that we had his (and his sister's) best interests at heart when we chose how to spend our vacation and free time.

 

So yes, I am very offended by your description of me as a 'child hater'.

 

Well said!

[Keith1010]

I think price would be a deterrent if children (and or thirds and fourths in a cabin) were fairly charged full fare. The problem is really that they are not charged full fare. If every person on a cruise (booking at the same time) were charged the same identical fare, then there would be fewer children (and interliners, etc.) on board. I dislike subsidizing any passengers and don't like to see children actively encouraged to cruise by them getting to sail free or very cheaply. It is simply not fair.

 

Children represent a very small cost and bring with them one to two paying adults and in most cases two adults. If they are breaking even on the children they are certainly making money on the adults; essentially the same amount if the children were not on board. And if the adults could not bring the children they wouldn't cruise.

 

You are not subsidizing them.

 

Keith

[MrsWaldo]

This would allow teachers and others who can only take vacation at this time of the year to have a children-free vacation. There are many educators that work with children every day and love their work. Don't they deserve some time away from children. /QUOTE]

 

 

Too true,

 

It also reduces the risk that you may actually be travelling with one of you students. For my land based holidays I choose an island that is 12+ restricted to avoid the issue of kids. It takes just 80 guests, one dining area. Imagine my horror when a family from work with an 8yo turned up. They had clearly lied to management about the child's age.

 

I think with regards to taking kids, my 2 were 11 and 15? when they did their first Silversea cruise. The both raved about it. Yes it was port intensive and never would i have chosen a lot of sea days. We also travelled in School Term. I knew they would like it and they did.

They were the driving force for me booking Seabourn when SS couldn't fit into their University schedule. They didn't want a mass market ship with too many people.

 

I doubt if the experience had been so bad they would have even contemplated a return.

 

We had about 15 kids on board, no issues except as mentioned before for the screaming baby by the pool, wouldn't it have been nice to be in the cabin next door? and the same parents hogging the washing machine and drier to launder cloth diapers.

 

As for the 3rd occupant, if that is the case then they should not charge a single supplement, my 18yo is not allowed to drink so maybe that is a fair call, but as there are 3 of us we are stuck between a rock and a hard place. When we were 4 we had 2 rooms. Even now if cost effective I will book 2 rooms in a hotel.

[gillianrose]

Children represent a very small cost and bring with them one to two paying adults and in most cases two adults. If they are breaking even on the children they are certainly making money on the adults; essentially the same amount if the children were not on board. And if the adults could not bring the children they wouldn't cruise.

 

You are not subsidizing them.

 

Keith

 

Children come in all sizes and on some lines (Crystal, I think) they consider a high school footballer under 18 to be a child, regardless of how much he eats.

 

Yes, I am subsidizing them. Children require facilities, food, staff, etc. and there should be a charge for them. Always.

 

A cruise line makes more money on two adults who do not bring children than two adults who DO bring children. Simple math.

 

Growing bodies demand food. A lot of food.

 

 

 

"I have a 6-foot-2-inch 14-year-old boy who embraces a scorched-Earth eating style and leaves nothing behind," says Carole Lynch of Jacksonville, N.C. It's not necessarily expensive foods, it's just the quantity that teenagers pack away on any given day.

 

"Food is expensive and has put one heck of a hole in our budget," says Lynch, who is also the mom of a teenage girl."

[Keith1010]

Well we are subsidizing each other too. Adults require many things that I don't including a lot more food then I do.

 

If you can bring on two adults with one child at a lower cost that easily pays for itself.

 

The cruise lines don't do this to be charitable.

 

It's a business.

 

Keith

[wripro]

I admit it. I hate children on a Seabourn cruise though I love them anywhere else. What I hate even more is the childrens' entitled, selfish, neglectful parents who think it's okay to impose their unruly progeny on fellow passengers.

[Jim Avery]

I admit it. I hate children on a Seabourn cruise though I love them anywhere else. What I hate even more is the childrens' entitled, selfish, neglectful parents who think it's okay to impose their unruly progeny on fellow passengers.

 

Good job Wripro. "Unruly progeny" sounds so much better than little ba*****s.:eek::D:D