Cabin Category changes and Goldstein's Response

[leisuretraveler223]

Well, I guess it would definitely "solve it" for you, but certainly not for others who think they should have the ability to book the best suite available for their hard-earned money - instead of being restricted to only lesser suites for the same money.

 

Remember, RCI isn't restricting suites, just regular cabins with additional sleeping quarters.

 

Interesting thought, but I think I fall on the other side of the fence with this one. Cruising is inexplicably unique in the fact that you get to book a very specific room, and not just a category. I don't know of many land based resorts (other than maybe some very unique boutique or villa setups) that do this. And, I think in part as a result, people have understandably become a bit obsessed with room location. I'm heading to Vegas this Friday. I have a suite at The Wynn. There are numerous floors and locations where I can end up. Some are a bit more appealing than others, but in that category, none are really "terrible". Maybe the same should be true on cruise ships. Granted I LIKE my ability to choose a specific room (and I am doubtful we'll see this disappear. But it only behooves the cruise line to make sure they have the ability for big commitments. No land based resort would commit a room (even a suite) that is connecting to someone and then not be able to combine them if possible should someone be looking to do so.

[mark290]

Interesting thought, but I think I fall on the other side of the fence with this one. Cruising is inexplicably unique in the fact that you get to book a very specific room, and not just a category. I don't know of many land based resorts (other than maybe some very unique boutique or villa setups) that do this. And, I think in part as a result, people have understandably become a bit obsessed with room location. I'm heading to Vegas this Friday. I have a suite at The Wynn. There are numerous floors and locations where I can end up. Some are a bit more appealing than others, but in that category, none are really "terrible". Maybe the same should be true on cruise ships. Granted I LIKE my ability to choose a specific room (and I am doubtful we'll see this disappear. But it only behooves the cruise line to make sure they have the ability for big commitments. No land based resort would commit a room (even a suite) that is connecting to someone and then not be able to combine them if possible should someone be looking to do so.

 

On a cruise everybody checks in and out on the same day. A land based resort the guests check in and out on different days and stay different lengths of time. Much easier to block a specific room when every guest comes and goes on the same day.

[cle-guy]

On a cruise everybody checks in and out on the same day. A land based resort the guests check in and out on different days and stay different lengths of time. Much easier to block a specific room when every guest comes and goes on the same day.

 

Good point, makes it even easier to keep adjoiners open and guaranteed to families who need them or people who commit to booking 2 cabins to be side-by-side.

 

I had forgotten about the little difference between hotels where rooms change dynamically for stay-overs, early departures, last minute reservations, weather delays etc. whereas a cruiseship's room status is generally static.

[leisuretraveler223]

On a cruise everybody checks in and out on the same day. A land based resort the guests check in and out on different days and stay different lengths of time. Much easier to block a specific room when every guest comes and goes on the same day.

 

That's a good point.

 

I guess I just agree with the sentiment that there are only a finite number of combination cabins (i.e. connecting staterooms, suites, etc...) that are available. I don't see the wisdom in letting those get snatched up by individuals who have no use for that feature when there are other equivalent staterooms available.

[critterchick]

Just a quick check for the Serenade of the Seas. If you book now the aft cabins on deck 9 (including the coveted 9256) are all D 2 cabins. After the change in 2015 all those cabins become D 1 cabins. Also on deck 9 the hump cabins will become all D 1 cabins in 2015 whereas now there are some hump D 2 cabins on the hump, deck 9.

So you are saying my husband and I can no longer book hump or aft cabin on deck 9 on the Serenade?

 

This is the first and only ship I checked. Hope they aren't doing this on all the ships. Best real estate on the ship and you can't book it if you are a couple?

 

Game changer if true.

 

No. Although they are now D-1 cabins, they still show as only having two berths. Unless RCI changes out the sofas for sofabeds, they will only hold two people.

 

I suspect you are spot on.

 

As much as I dislike not being able to grab these coveted cabins - I will still sail if I have a regular one.

 

Perhaps the day is coming where they charge more for the coveted locations, like aft, and hump. I believe other cruise lines already do this - at least for aft. I believe the days are now over where we were able to book bigger balconies and better locations at the same price as the "standard" cabins. Heck, if I was in charge - I would up my price on the higher demand cabins .

 

I believe that day is already here. I wouldn't be surprised if they change the D-2s on OA/AL back to D-1s in short order since they have the better balconies.

[LetsGetWet!]

Good point, makes it even easier to keep adjoiners open and guaranteed to families who need them or people who commit to booking 2 cabins to be side-by-side.

 

I had forgotten about the little difference between hotels where rooms change dynamically for stay-overs, early departures, last minute reservations, weather delays etc. whereas a cruiseship's room status is generally static.

 

I still say that Celebrity created their own problem here. After all, it was you who said that those suites are "much fancier than the others in the same category." If they're going to create two suites that are "much fancier" than all the others available for the SAME price, then OF COURSE those will go first, and shouldn't be held back. You 'need' adjoining rooms? Great, I'm sure there are plenty available. But now you're claiming special entitlement to 'needing' the Penthouse Suite along with one of the other most desirable suites on the ship. Sorry, I respectfully disagree - and apparently so does Celebrity.

 

I have a question - your first post was (purposefully?) vague. What did you want one or both of those adjoining suites for? Minor children, or is Celebrity supposed to reserve these prime suites for your adult friends?

 

Sent from my Galaxy S4 via Tapatalk

[Cliftoncruz]

So let me get this right. If I want a GS that has a connecting cabin, but I don't want the connecting cabin I should not get the GS. So I should choose another GS that does not have a connecting cabin even though I do not want the cabin under the overhanging whirlpool and tinted glass as on the Freedom Class. Or am I missing something.

 

Now I see it, the higher rated cabin determines accessibility and who can have the connecting cabin.

 

Oh, yes the suite some body else wants has a premium higher so I should not get the connecting room even though I can afford the connected suite. So those with higher ability to pay or prestige have the final say about who can purchase a connecting room or suite.

 

So I should give up my suite I have chosen, to be courteous to some one who needs my room to have friends closer.

 

If I don't get my way I will play the player piano loud to drive them out. Courtesy at its best.

 

So let me ask this when would this cabin musical chairs stop.

 

The one question that sparked this discussion focused on the Sky Suite 6145/6146 on the Celebrity M Class. Explain to me why I should not be eligible for that cabin, which is decorated diffidently than the other sky suites-different features my friend, not like the other sky suites.

 

So what will happen when some one with higher prestige or notoriety wants your penthouse suite. Do you think that person should get your cabin?

 

I want the ability to chose what cabin I want to rent for a week or more because I am entitled just as much as the next guy. If you want the adjoining room book it the day the bookings opened just like I did.

[leisuretraveler223]

So let me get this right. If I want a GS that has a connecting cabin, but I don't want the connecting cabin I should not get the GS. So I should choose another GS that does not have a connecting cabin even though I do not want the cabin under the overhanging whirlpool and tinted glass as on the Freedom Class. Or am I missing something.

 

Like I said, first I think the cruising industry created this problem by allowing people to reserve specific cabins instead of just a certain type (like most land resorts). As a result, people tend to put a lot more weight on factors because they CAN control them. Had this never been the case, I suspect most (there might be some exceptions) of the differences within a category would not be given as much importance as they are now.

 

Now I see it, the higher rated cabin determines accessibility and who can have the connecting cabin.

 

Oh, yes the suite some body else wants has a premium higher so I should not get the connecting room even though I can afford the connected suite. So those with higher ability to pay or prestige have the final say about who can purchase a connecting room or suite.

 

I think it's a very narrow interpretation to say it's about the "higher rated" cabin, or even "higher ability to pay". The reality is there are only so many cabins that have a connecting room. That is a HUGE asset for people booking that want that space, and a HUGE asset for the cruise line to be able to book them that way. So yes, I think it would be reasonable to at least hold back bookings on these until much closer to sail date.

 

So I should give up my suite I have chosen, to be courteous to some one who needs my room to have friends closer.

 

It's not necessarily about having friends closer. There are some very unique accomodations that can be made with the connecting cabins that just aren't the same without it. Again, it makes sense to maximize the potential of utilizing that space. Particularly when there are, in fact, equivalent alternatives available to the person booking just one of the rooms.

 

If I don't get my way I will play the player piano loud to drive them out. Courtesy at its best.

 

I think that was meant as a joke (I hope!).

 

So let me ask this when would this cabin musical chairs stop.

 

The one question that sparked this discussion focused on the Sky Suite 6145/6146 on the Celebrity M Class. Explain to me why I should not be eligible for that cabin, which is decorated diffidently than the other sky suites-different features my friend, not like the other sky suites.

 

So what will happen when some one with higher prestige or notoriety wants your penthouse suite. Do you think that person should get your cabin?

 

Again, this is not about individuals with "higher prestige", it's about maximizing what options there are for booking.

 

 

I want the ability to chose what cabin I want to rent for a week or more because I am entitled just as much as the next guy. If you want the adjoining room book it the day the bookings opened just like I did.

 

I respect that wish, because that is the way it has always been. But there is some wisdom from the cruise line's perspective in making sure that when someone comes along looking for major accommodations, they don't lose out simply because certain rooms are booked that are the equivalent of those elsewhere.

 

I do not believe they should EVER displace you out of your current room. But I would have no problem with them restricting what can be booked when.

[cle-guy]

But now you're claiming special entitlement

 

......

 

I have a question - your first post was (purposefully?) vague. What did you want one or both of those adjoining suites for? Minor children, or is Celebrity supposed to reserve these prime suites for your adult friends?

 

Sent from my Galaxy S4 via Tapatalk

 

First of all, enough with the word ENTITLEMENT. What ENTITLES YOU to the fancy cabin any more than I am ENTITLED to it. Nothing. This isn't at all about entitlement

 

I'm asking for common courtesy, for people to leave the unique cabins layouts for those with unique needs. The furnishings in the cabins don't meet any cruiser's NEEDS. The fact that they connect to the cabin next door do.

 

What matters is that I am a potential passenger looking for a suite with an adjoining cabin. I have a need for an adjoining cabin the purpose or reason for that need isn't important.

 

But to answer, It's for me and some business colleagues who are gathering to do some off-site meetings and long term planning and having the cabins together with one with a big board meeting table allows us to spend quality time together we can't normally do when separated across the country. Do we NEEEED the cabin connected, no, but it would be very convenient since it's there and was purpose-built for that very reason. I think we would get better use and enjoyment than a passenger sitting there admiring the woodwork and complaining about the noise coming from under the door.

 

You're right. Let's have X make them a new category. But then people will STILL book them without the need for the adjoining cabin. That solves nothing.

 

X blocks the family verandas from general sale for fewer than 5 PAX, they can block the cabins with adjoining cabins too. Just for now they don't and it's a crap shoot, even booking 11 1/2 months out to get necessary adjoiners.

 

I guess You will never agree that it's probably simpler to ask guests to leave the very few rooms that adjoin open for booking for those that have a real need for them.

 

In my mind the need/want/wish to have a room connected to mine seems to have a bit more weight that someone's desire to have a cabin that has 8 more inches of counter space in the bathroom and fancy woodwork on the walls. Of course to each his own. I realize that can be argued wither way but I'll leave it for the general public to determine for themselves which makes more sense.

 

It inconveniences me or anyone or any family who wants connecting cabins and can't get them, but I don't see how it inconveniences someone booking the cabin just because they know it's unique in its class and has different furnishings - who will then probably call guest services when they hear all the noise funneling in from under the connecting door from the suite (which I read about often in the cabin reviews for those cabins).

 

Sigh. It's all part of the game of cruising.

[cle-guy]

Like I said, first I think the cruising industry created this problem by allowing people to reserve specific cabins instead of just a certain type (like most land resorts). As a result, people tend to put a lot more weight on factors because they CAN control them. Had this never been the case, I suspect most (there might be some exceptions) of the differences within a category would not be given as much importance as they are now.

 

 

 

I think it's a very narrow interpretation to say it's about the "higher rated" cabin, or even "higher ability to pay". The reality is there are only so many cabins that have a connecting room. That is a HUGE asset for people booking that want that space, and a HUGE asset for the cruise line to be able to book them that way. So yes, I think it would be reasonable to at least hold back bookings on these until much closer to sail date.

 

 

 

It's not necessarily about having friends closer. There are some very unique accomodations that can be made with the connecting cabins that just aren't the same without it. Again, it makes sense to maximize the potential of utilizing that space. Particularly when there are, in fact, equivalent alternatives available to the person booking just one of the rooms.

 

 

 

I think that was meant as a joke (I hope!).

 

 

 

Again, this is not about individuals with "higher prestige", it's about maximizing what options there are for booking.

 

 

 

 

I respect that wish, because that is the way it has always been. But there is some wisdom from the cruise line's perspective in making sure that when someone comes along looking for major accommodations, they don't lose out simply because certain rooms are booked that are the equivalent of those elsewhere.

 

I do not believe they should EVER displace you out of your current room. But I would have no problem with them restricting what can be booked when.

 

Hard to say it better.

 

And yes, the piano playing is a joke. But even if I wash't joking why can't i use it when I want to. The neighbor chose the room with the slot to the noise next door. No different than moving onto a old community and bitching when a golf ball hits your house.

[Debde]

I want the ability to chose what cabin I want to rent for a week or more because I am entitled just as much as the next guy. If you want the adjoining room book it the day the bookings opened just like I did.

 

Unfortunately-that has changed. You will however be able to get the room you like, just not the exact one. The reason for this thread, and the answer from corporate has been made clear and they have changed the ability as to what you can and can not do from now on of day one when booking opens.

 

BTW-cle-guy, I believe Royal answered the call of folks exactly like you who have the actual need and desire to book certain cabins that has often been a problem for you.

Edited February 17, 2014 by Debde

[cle-guy]

 

Now I see it, the higher rated cabin determines accessibility and who can have the connecting cabin.

 

Oh, yes the suite some body else wants has a premium higher so I should not get the connecting room even though I can afford the connected suite. So those with higher ability to pay or prestige have the final say about who can purchase a connecting room or suite.

 

So I should give up my suite I have chosen, to be courteous to some one who needs my room to have friends closer.

 

If I don't get my way I will play the player piano loud to drive them out. Courtesy at its best.

 

So let me ask this when would this cabin musical chairs stop.

 

The one question that sparked this discussion focused on the Sky Suite 6145/6146 on the Celebrity M Class. Explain to me why I should not be eligible for that cabin, which is decorated diffidently than the other sky suites-different features my friend, not like the other sky suites.

 

So what will happen when some one with higher prestige or notoriety wants your penthouse suite. Do you think that person should get your cabin?

 

I want the ability to chose what cabin I want to rent for a week or more because I am entitled just as much as the next guy. If you want the adjoining room book it the day the bookings opened just like I did.

 

I'm not at all suggesting musical chairs or cabin changes after booking. So no worries about being booted due to someone with more notoriety or prestige. I don't assign notoriety or prestige o anyone sailing in suites anymore than I'd call those in inside cabins 'steerage'. We are all passengers looking for varied cruising experiences for varied reasons.

 

I'm proposing that any cabins that have unique cabin combinations to each other be held from booking unless someone meets those needs, based on the higher cabin category relative to those unique cabin combinations, of course. Just like holding Handicap Accessible cabins back or those with the real need to utilize those cabin's unique features.

 

That is of someone has the penthouse, they may need the adjoiner. If once the PH is booked, and it didn't also book the lesser adjoined cabin, THEN release that cabin for general sale. And release ALL cabin mixes for sale closer to sailing, but before final payment. But the suite to lesser cabin combo is really a very small part of the overall discussion, its really about ANY adjoining cabin to any adjoining cabin.

 

Someone booking the 'lesser' adjoined has no need for the penthouse, or they would have booked it to start with.

 

And yes, you SHOULD give up your cabin (or not booked it to begin with) that adjoins another to be courteous to someone who really wants/needs 2 rooms to share. But you can do as you feel appropriate.

 

In the case of 2 of the same category suites that connect to each other, if ALL the suites in the category work that way, then it's not necessary to hold back (since there's no unique cabin combination, they are all the same), if some do, then SOME need held back under the unique cabin layout scheme noted before.

[cle-guy]

So let me get this right. If I want a GS that has a connecting cabin, but I don't want the connecting cabin I should not get the GS. So I should choose another GS that does not have a connecting cabin even though I do not want the cabin under the overhanging whirlpool and tinted glass as on the Freedom Class. Or am I missing something.

 

I believe RCI should make those not bookable on-line and have to call to book, like they do with some of the upper suites with other booking restrictions.

 

Leave the unadjoining cabins open for sale, the special ones, hold back from on-line booking and call so the call center can best utilize the cabin inventory. Release them closer to sailing.

[LetsGetWet!]

What matters is that I am a potential passenger looking for a suite with an adjoining cabin. I have a need for an adjoining cabin the purpose or reason for that need isn't important.

 

But to answer, It's for me and some business colleagues who are gathering to do some off-site meetings and long term planning and having the cabins together with one with a big board meeting table allows us to spend quality time together we can't normally do when separated across the country.

 

I guess You will never agree that it's probably simpler to ask guests to leave the very few rooms that adjoin open for booking for those that have a real need for them.

 

In my mind the need/want/wish to have a room connected to mine seems to have a bit more weight that someone's desire to have a cabin that has 8 more inches of counter space in the bathroom and fancy woodwork on the walls. Of course to each his own. I realize that can be argued wither way but I'll leave it for the general public to determine for themselves which makes more sense.

 

Thanks for your honesty - as I suspected, you don't have a NEED for those suites any more than anyone else does. I'm Lifetime Platinum on AA with almost 3 million miles, so can certainly attest from extensive experience that adjoining hotel rooms are not a NEED to hold successful business meetings.

 

You have a WANT, certainly not a need. Sounds basically like you WANT to show off for your buddies, "look at my Penthouse AND the top-end suites I was able to get for you!" And then THEY could enjoy the same amenities that everyone else wants those suites for. You'll be able to hold exactly the same meetings at exactly the same large table - you just won't be able to brag about quite as much "pull" with your colleagues.

 

You NEED adjoining suites... Yeah, right... :rolleyes:

 

Sent from my Galaxy S4 via Tapatalk

[Aggiebuttercup]

I agree with the response to the email.

 

I don't think anyone should feel entitled to book a certain cabin, no matter how many times you've sailed on that line. I'm a little surprised that someone would refuse to sail on a line because they can't book a particular cabin or a particular area. I might refuse to sail if I was only allowed to book, say, on deck 2...but that's not what is happening here. If your vacation will be ruined because you can't get a specific cabin, then you are much more particular than I.

 

It does sound like RCL no longer fits with what the OP wants for their vacation. Perhaps a cruise on another, more higher-end, cruise line would fit better.

 

I don't think it is fair for us to expect that all the services and things we take for granted will always be there. Companies reposition themselves. They cut costs. Etc etc etc. It's up to each of us to weigh what the company is currently offering and whether that fits with our vision of what we want to get for that amount of money.

[LetsGetWet!]

Unfortunately-that has changed. You will however be able to get the room you like, just not the exact one. The reason for this thread, and the answer from corporate has been made clear and they have changed the ability as to what you can and can not do from now on of day one when booking opens.

 

BTW-cle-guy, I believe Royal answered the call of folks exactly like you who have the actual need and desire to book certain cabins that has often been a problem for you.

 

Except they didn't, Royal's new policy doesn't affect suites, does it?

 

Sent from my Galaxy S4 via Tapatalk

[cle-guy]

Thanks for your honesty - as I suspected, you don't have a NEED for those suites any more than anyone else does. I'm Lifetime Platinum on AA with almost 3 million miles, so can certainly attest from extensive experience that adjoining hotel rooms are not a NEED to hold successful business meetings.

 

You have a WANT, certainly not a need. Sounds basically like you WANT to show off for your buddies, "look at my Penthouse AND the top-end suites I was able to get for you!" And then THEY could enjoy the same amenities that everyone else wants those suites for. You'll be able to hold exactly the same meetings at exactly the same large table - you just won't be able to brag about quite as much "pull" with your colleagues.

 

You NEED adjoining suites... Yeah, right... :rolleyes:

 

Sent from my Galaxy S4 via Tapatalk

 

wow. Just simply wow. Such condescension.

 

We don't need to start comparing travel either. I'm similar status on United and Marriott generally spending more time traveling for work than at my home each year. My vacations are important to me, and I like to enjoy my space. Last thing I want is another room with a bed in the middle of it and TV at the foot of the bed with a tiny side chair and small work desk when I'm on vacation. I book with Amex Platinum, and use Pay With Points to pay for many of our cabins. Yes it uses a butt-load of points to pay for a cruise suite. Our business pays for ANYTHING it can with the amex to accrue the points for tis reason.

 

My business colleagues are years-old friends and we like to spend time together when we can. I'm sorry for wanting to be able to have a gathering place for our group of friends. One even takes the crappy sofa bed in the living room of the suite so we can all hang together. Forgive me for such a fancy display of "look a me look at me." And the ones that are not entitled to suite benefits would not enjoy them, other than if a dinner were hosted in the cabin, But I won't insist they get the captains club coupons, or captains table invites, or elite gathering invites, or send the butler to their cabin. No I won't do that.

 

By your logic, ANYONE who wants suite is a real jerk. Let's just take them all off the ship, and make 1 big hall of bunk beds and all will then be equal.

 

I'm very sorry you've met such terribly entitled people along the way and have come to feel that anyone traveling in a suite is the same. That's not me. :rolleyes:

[cle-guy]

Except they didn't, Royal's new policy doesn't affect suites, does it?

 

Sent from my Galaxy S4 via Tapatalk

 

It does't necessarily have to given existing policy.

 

Certain Suites DO require booking by phone and not on-line and require meeting certain booking restrictions in order to reserve them.

[Debde]

Except they didn't, Royal's new policy doesn't affect suites, does it?

 

Sent from my Galaxy S4 via Tapatalk

 

Correct- probably does not effect suites but not sure how the connecting and suite thing is going to work. Time will tell on that one.

[Debde]

You NEED adjoining suites... Yeah, right... :rolleyes:

 

I actually did once!!

[LetsGetWet!]

By your logic, ANYONE who wants suite is a real jerk. Let's just take them all off the ship, and make 1 big hall of bunk beds and all will then be equal.

 

I'm very sorry you've met such terribly entitled people along the way and have come to feel that anyone traveling in a suite is the same. That's not me. :rolleyes:

 

Not at all. Now maybe anyone traveling in a suite who whines that that should give him special entitlement to reserve other top suites for his buddies, that's different. I have business colleagues and personal friends I've known for a long time & enjoy traveling with too - but I guess the difference is that I don't try to claim that gives me a NEED for adjoining top-end suites, and whine that everyone else should therefore be prohibited from booking them until I've decided whether I want one or two or three of them for myself and my adult buddies.

 

I agree with an earlier post - if someone wants multiple suites for themselves and their adult buddies - its well known the exact day that cruise opens for bookings, everyone has the same chance.

 

Sent from my Galaxy S4 via Tapatalk

[LetsGetWet!]

By the way, cle-guy has just provided a great example of a big problem with restricting booking of adjoining cabins. It's easy to claim some NEED for adjoining cabins, and if the most coveted cabins are adjoining ones, the potential for abuse will be huge in order to snag those cabins by claiming a NEED.

 

Any bets as to how quickly we'll start seeing CC posts looking for someone to pair with to call & snag that pair of highly desirable cabins?

 

Sent from my Galaxy S4 via Tapatalk

[Debde]

LetsGetWet!-are you saying that some people on CC will try and work and manipulate the system for their own personal needs!!!?:eek:

[cle-guy]

Not at all. Now maybe anyone traveling in a suite who whines that that should give him special entitlement to reserve other top suites for his buddies, that's different. I have business colleagues and personal friends I've known for a long time & enjoy traveling with too - but I guess the difference is that I don't try to claim that gives me a NEED for adjoining top-end suites, and whine that everyone else should therefore be prohibited from booking them until I've decided whether I want one or two or three of them for myself and my adult buddies.

 

I agree with an earlier post - if someone wants multiple suites for themselves and their adult buddies - its well known the exact day that cruise opens for bookings, everyone has the same chance.

 

Sent from my Galaxy S4 via Tapatalk

 

I never said I NEEDED, I said I wanted, I said it would be convenient, I even said specifically I DON'T NEED IT!!!

 

Not sure how you allege i'm whining about wanting the cabin, yet your desire to have the same one isn't equally whining.

 

I've itemized how there are multiple logical, logistical, and practical reasons for the suite to have that connecting cabin, and haven't heard anything other than "I want it because I don't like the entitled guy in the suite getting it instead of me and the cabin is just a bit different than the others in the category so I have to have it" from the other side.

 

I've never gotten personal with you, you seem to be all about making this personal somehow. A practical discussion on the practical effects of reserving limited unique cabins is helpful here. That's really what the thread is about.

 

And that RCI has started to implement such plans, seems to imply it's a large enough desire from guests to do so, and will most likely allow them to better fill the ship to capacity by enforcing occupancy restrictions on higher capacity cabins leading to higher profits for the shareholders which is always the most important part of any decisions RCI makes..

[cle-guy]

Any bets as to how quickly we'll start seeing CC posts looking for someone to pair with to call & snag that pair of highly desirable cabins?

 

Sent from my Galaxy S4 via Tapatalk

 

The statistical probability of this actually having any sort of overall impact on the process would not warrant trying to prohibit it.

 

To help enforce it, Require bookings to be with same credit card. This would lessen further the number of people who would be willing to square up with strangers after putting themselves out there.