Children's Program

[zich6]

With all due respect there is a difference in the Passenger Bill Of Rights than in Marketing.

 

The goal of marketing is to promote sailing with Seabourn and to sell cruises.

 

The one thing I do agree with on this thread is that if a lot of children are going to sail on Seabourn then all would be better if Seabourn has some facilities from the children and an official children's program.

 

Keith

 

Keith, you missed my point. Since you brought up the fact that SB doesn't "...ever show the ship being pushed around in rough seas yet that is a possibility," SB is doing something about the effects of rough seas. As we've established, SB has not and literally can not do anything about large numbers of children, especially on the small ships. So while some negative impacts like rough seas aren't mentioned, they're addressed and mitigated. The negative impact (albeit in only some cases) are neither addressed, nor mitigated. It has nothing to do with the PBOR.

 

IMHO there is an answer to this issue and it is the mitigation of ill-behaved children on those it bothers. The devil is in the details regarding how to best achieve that solution.

[commodoredave]

Keith, you missed my point. Since you brought up the fact that SB doesn't "...ever show the ship being pushed around in rough seas yet that is a possibility," SB is doing something about the effects of rough seas. As we've established, SB has not and literally can not do anything about large numbers of children, especially on the small ships. So while some negative impacts like rough seas aren't mentioned, they're addressed and mitigated. The negative impact (albeit in only some cases) are neither addressed, nor mitigated. It has nothing to do with the PBOR.

 

IMHO there is an answer to this issue and it is the mitigation of ill-behaved children on those it bothers. The devil is in the details regarding how to best achieve that solution.

 

I like and agree with your thinking on this.

[Keith1010]

Keith, you missed my point. Since you brought up the fact that SB doesn't "...ever show the ship being pushed around in rough seas yet that is a possibility," SB is doing something about the effects of rough seas. As we've established, SB has not and literally can not do anything about large numbers of children, especially on the small ships. So while some negative impacts like rough seas aren't mentioned, they're addressed and mitigated. The negative impact (albeit in only some cases) are neither addressed, nor mitigated. It has nothing to do with the PBOR.

 

IMHO there is an answer to this issue and it is the mitigation of ill-behaved children on those it bothers. The devil is in the details regarding how to best achieve that solution.

 

I don't follow your recommendation.

 

What exactly are you proposing?

 

Keith

[zorro90068]

Keith, you missed my point. Since you brought up the fact that SB doesn't "...ever show the ship being pushed around in rough seas yet that is a possibility," SB is doing something about the effects of rough seas. As we've established, SB has not and literally can not do anything about large numbers of children, especially on the small ships. So while some negative impacts like rough seas aren't mentioned, they're addressed and mitigated. The negative impact (albeit in only some cases) are neither addressed, nor mitigated. It has nothing to do with the PBOR.

 

IMHO there is an answer to this issue and it is the mitigation of ill-behaved children on those it bothers. The devil is in the details regarding how to best achieve that solution.

 

 

Sure Seabourn Can do soemthing about the number of kids onboard below tha ages of 21. Princess and Hollland America all do it and put a CAP on the voyage amount of kids onboard...the same could be had...once those 20 kids are reached that's it...no more bookings are accepted save and except Waitlist bookings.

[commodoredave]

Sure Seabourn Can do soemthing about the number of kids onboard below tha ages of 21. Princess and Hollland America all do it and put a CAP on the voyage amount of kids onboard...the same could be had...once those 20 kids are reached that's it...no more bookings are accepted save and except Waitlist bookings.

 

An elegant solution.

[Capri73]

We were on Silversea .The Owner and his family were on board.They were the most obnoxious group of people.Children and adults thought they owned the ship.I guess they did.Adults took over the restaurant and kid ran up and down the halls.Kids playing in the spa.

Never took another Silversea cruise and never will.

[zich6]

I don't follow your recommendation.

 

What exactly are you proposing?

 

Keith

 

Clearly, the solution must be an acceptable integration of children and adults.

[Jim Avery]

We were on Silversea .The Owner and his family were on board.They were the most obnoxious group of people.Children and adults thought they owned the ship.I guess they did.Adults took over the restaurant and kid ran up and down the halls.Kids playing in the spa.

Never took another Silversea cruise and never will.

 

Sounds like SeaDream when the owner and his entourage was aboard.

[Jim Avery]

Sure Seabourn Can do soemthing about the number of kids onboard below tha ages of 21. Princess and Hollland America all do it and put a CAP on the voyage amount of kids onboard...the same could be had...once those 20 kids are reached that's it...no more bookings are accepted save and except Waitlist bookings.

 

Cunard reportedly does this. Books kids of different ages up to the capacity of the facilities for them. What a concept.

[Jim Avery]

Clearly, the solution must be an acceptable integration of children and adults.

 

I do not want to be "integrated" with other people's children. I will go elsewhere or pay extra for child free zones on ships.

[zich6]

I do not want to be "integrated" with other people's children. I will go elsewhere or pay extra for child free zones on ships.

 

Even with child free zones, children will be on board. You'll see them and therefore you and they will either be successfully integrated, or not. Even with other measures like separate floors SB has shown no indication that they intend to make children "invisible."

 

Children on board are not going away. You always have the right to spend your cruising dollars elsewhere.

[wripro]

I would go one step further. Each child booked must go through a psychological profile to determine his/her tendencies toward disrespectful behavior.

[Keith1010]

And all of the adults, too. This might be an added challenge to fill the ships. :cool:

 

Keith

[Sea Lord]

I do not want to be "integrated" with other people's children. I will go elsewhere or pay extra for child free zones on ships.

 

I'm sure you won't mind watching my angels while I'm in the casino.

[MrsWaldo]

You can always lock them in the car as is done here :)

 

IMHO 21 is too old..

 

by 15 most are human... they might grunt a bit but if pushed they can grunt in two tones

[commodoredave]

Sounds to me like we have a majority in favour of no kids aboard Seabourn and SeaDream. Now if we could only convince those cruise lines to adopt this as their policy.:rolleyes:

[Jim Avery]

I'm sure you won't mind watching my angels while I'm in the casino.

 

How many chips will you give me.:eek::D

[Keith1010]

Majority really means nothing. It's a business. They are not going to sell to those who want to pay.

 

Keith

[GoingLikeElsie]

The debate about children on board Seabourn should not be sullied by irrelevant comments about child haters. It is simply a matter of whether these ships are suitable for young children, and clearly they are not. They have not been designed with children's facilities, so that the only way that youngsters can be even minimally catered for is by having them take over existing areas which would otherwise be used by adults, such as the card room, which becomes a games club, and the whirlpools which become the children's playpools. If this is what Seabourn guests are prepared to tolerate, then the company will continue to take bookings from young families. If loyal Seabourn guests are not happy with this development, then they need to let the company know. It is not enough to vote with your bookings; that takes too long before its impact is felt, and by then the change will insidiously have happened, and not only in August.

 

Allowing a premium brand to become diluted is just a bad business decision. Yes, Seabourn can chase profits by going after a new demographic, but the long-term risk of losing its loyal customer base makes it a dangerous decision. How many young families, however wealthy, will actually choose to cruise on Seabourn? Only a small percentage who do not really care whether it is the best possible vacation for their children, and also do not care about the sensitivities of other passengers. Meanwhile, given the murmurings of many passengers on board right now, traditional Seabourn fans will gradually become more disaffected and eventually jump ship. Loyal customers are by far the most valuable to any company. Read "the Loyalty Effect" by F. Reichheld if you do not believe me, (and if you are a Seabourn Executive!). Loyal customers are less expensive to maintain; you need little marketing for them, they are more price tolerant, they recommend new clients, and year on year they increase their spend. They are less likely to switch companies, and they are more appreciative of employees, leading to greater staff satisfaction.

 

So, loyal passengers, it is up to you to make your voices heard, and encourage others to do the same. If you love Seabourn the way it always has been, then let them know. Otherwise, prepare yourself.......

[zich6]

They are not going to sell to those who want to pay.

 

Keith

 

I don't understand.

[zich6]

The debate about children on board Seabourn should not be sullied by irrelevant comments about child haters. It is simply a matter of whether these ships are suitable for young children, and clearly they are not. They have not been designed with children's facilities, so that the only way that youngsters can be even minimally catered for is by having them take over existing areas which would otherwise be used by adults, such as the card room, which becomes a games club, and the whirlpools which become the children's playpools. If this is what Seabourn guests are prepared to tolerate, then the company will continue to take bookings from young families. If loyal Seabourn guests are not happy with this development, then they need to let the company know. It is not enough to vote with your bookings; that takes too long before its impact is felt, and by then the change will insidiously have happened, and not only in August.

 

Allowing a premium brand to become diluted is just a bad business decision. Yes, Seabourn can chase profits by going after a new demographic, but the long-term risk of losing its loyal customer base makes it a dangerous decision. How many young families, however wealthy, will actually choose to cruise on Seabourn? Only a small percentage who do not really care whether it is the best possible vacation for their children, and also do not care about the sensitivities of other passengers. Meanwhile, given the murmurings of many passengers on board right now, traditional Seabourn fans will gradually become more disaffected and eventually jump ship. Loyal customers are by far the most valuable to any company. Read "the Loyalty Effect" by F. Reichheld if you do not believe me, (and if you are a Seabourn Executive!). Loyal customers are less expensive to maintain; you need little marketing for them, they are more price tolerant, they recommend new clients, and year on year they increase their spend. They are less likely to switch companies, and they are more appreciative of employees, leading to greater staff satisfaction.

 

So, loyal passengers, it is up to you to make your voices heard, and encourage others to do the same. If you love Seabourn the way it always has been, then let them know. Otherwise, prepare yourself.......

 

Wow, joined in 3/11 and 1st post in 8/13. Although your post is well thought out, I hope you weren't composing it all this time.:)

 

Welcome to the forums.

[ravenclaw]

Wasn't aware or came across of this "Kids program" and use of the card room for such...probably because we cruise Seabourn in the "off-children-season".

Interesting posts and comments on Seabourn's efforts to explore/encourage this demographic.

Perhaps if it's successful and the returns are handsome, a huge multi-colored water slide might be contemplated as an added attraction on Deck 10, adjacent to a new downsized Serene Area.:rolleyes::eek:

[commodoredave]

The debate about children on board Seabourn should not be sullied by irrelevant comments about child haters. It is simply a matter of whether these ships are suitable for young children, and clearly they are not. They have not been designed with children's facilities, so that the only way that youngsters can be even minimally catered for is by having them take over existing areas which would otherwise be used by adults, such as the card room, which becomes a games club, and the whirlpools which become the children's playpools. If this is what Seabourn guests are prepared to tolerate, then the company will continue to take bookings from young families. If loyal Seabourn guests are not happy with this development, then they need to let the company know. It is not enough to vote with your bookings; that takes too long before its impact is felt, and by then the change will insidiously have happened, and not only in August.

 

Allowing a premium brand to become diluted is just a bad business decision. Yes, Seabourn can chase profits by going after a new demographic, but the long-term risk of losing its loyal customer base makes it a dangerous decision. How many young families, however wealthy, will actually choose to cruise on Seabourn? Only a small percentage who do not really care whether it is the best possible vacation for their children, and also do not care about the sensitivities of other passengers. Meanwhile, given the murmurings of many passengers on board right now, traditional Seabourn fans will gradually become more disaffected and eventually jump ship. Loyal customers are by far the most valuable to any company. Read "the Loyalty Effect" by F. Reichheld if you do not believe me, (and if you are a Seabourn Executive!). Loyal customers are less expensive to maintain; you need little marketing for them, they are more price tolerant, they recommend new clients, and year on year they increase their spend. They are less likely to switch companies, and they are more appreciative of employees, leading to greater staff satisfaction.

 

So, loyal passengers, it is up to you to make your voices heard, and encourage others to do the same. If you love Seabourn the way it always has been, then let them know. Otherwise, prepare yourself.......

 

Thank you for an excellent post and great advice. Too many people are prepared to accept things they don't like because they believe "that's just the way it is and we have to live with it." Thanks to your encouragement, there will be more of us that are no longer willing to do that.

[Keith1010]

I really don't often keep commenting but it is not going to change.

 

Why would any cruise line give up passengers.

 

Places such as the Mediterranean has become so very popular with families in the summer. If it wasn't then cruise lines wouldn't be there. I took my family there in 1997 and back then there were very few ships doing the Med and most were old. No worries, we took Princess.

 

Fast forward and you even had Disney doing the Mediterranean.

 

You can tell Seabourn you don't like this but those who post here make up a very small percentage of those sailing Seabourn. In addition there are some who do post on the luxury boards who do take their children on board. You will likely see few posting here because they don't want the push back.

 

I am not sure about most of you but even at luxury city hotels that don't have children's facilities you see more and more children.

 

Again, this is a business and Seabourn like each cruise line will do what makes the most sense for the business.

 

And, I can't think of any luxury line that does not have children on board.

 

Keith

[commodoredave]

I really don't often keep commenting but it is not going to change.

 

Why would any cruise line give up passengers.

 

Places such as the Mediterranean has become so very popular with families in the summer. If it wasn't then cruise lines wouldn't be there. I took my family there in 1997 and back then there were very few ships doing the Med and most were old. No worries, we took Princess.

 

Fast forward and you even had Disney doing the Mediterranean.

 

You can tell Seabourn you don't like this but those who post here make up a very small percentage of those sailing Seabourn. In addition there are some who do post on the luxury boards who do take their children on board. You will likely see few posting here because they don't want the push back.

 

I am not sure about most of you but even at luxury city hotels that don't have children's facilities you see more and more children.

 

Again, this is a business and Seabourn like each cruise line will do what makes the most sense for the business.

 

And, I can't think of any luxury line that does not have children on board.

 

Keith

 

That's the kind of defeatist attitude that companies love people to take.