You Paid and Princess Listened

[Lovetocruiseprincess]

I don't understand why all the fuss. They're going to raise their profit margin one way or the other & if the people who are calling room service 8 or 10 times a day want to pay for it, great. It'll keep my fare down to a reasonable amount.

[shredie]

Princess would probably be better off to change the name of Alfredo's and make the new place a specialty restaurant with charges.

 

 

That's not a bad idea.

[SeagoingMom]

I have not yet had time to read every post on this thread -- did anyone mention that the room service charge on Regal has been eliminated for the time being, according to this article on CruiseMates?

 

http://www.cruisemates.com/articles/feature/princess-tries-room-service-charges-150528.cfm

Edited May 29, 2014 by SeagoingMom

[timetobook]

I have read, and it seems reasonable to think it is true, that it is folks like you (and me, actually, except for the "one beer" :rolleyes:) that the cruise lines find are the least attractive cruisers, because we do not spend much money on board! Younger, less experienced cruisers want to try everything, and are drawn in by the hype that, for example, "It must be worth it to eat at the 'specialty' restaurant, because, after all, it is so 'special' and look how much they are charging for it! And how can we not spend time on that private sun deck, or in that high-end spa while cruising because it is so darn special and so exclusive -- we simply have to do it! And we know from the cruise line that if we don't use the cruise line excursions we take an enormous risk of missing the ship or being defrauded :eek: that we had better not book private excursions."

 

Mature, experienced cruisers understand that they are getting a great vacation without going wild doing (paying for) all the add-ons. Many of us did these things on our first few cruises, or whenever they became available, just to try them out (often because we, too, were taken in by the hype), and a lot us us have learned that they aren't necessary and often not even worth it. That understanding of cruising, coupled with the fact that older cruisers often must limit alcohol intake (thus bar bills) due to medications etc. (I am not referring to anyone in particular here) makes us a less desirable demographic to court than the newbies with stars in their eyes and high interest rate credit cards in their pockets.

 

So it may actually be we ourselves who are to blame for the increase in for-fee services and options, because we have learned to make our cruises more or less "all-inclusive" for ourselves, and with base fares so low (and our ability to find deals so high), this cruising style actually hurts the company's bottom line.

I think it is this same problem which results in complained-about cutbacks in loyalty perks (on Princess and many other lines), because the loyals are the ones who spend the least amount on board when they cruise, but cost the line in perks. It has even resulted in a policy which allows "greenhorns" to buy perks that loyals have waited years to "earn", which really steams loyals on cruise lines where this is an option.

 

Seems a dilemma.

 

Because I have no industry stats to confirm these speculations, they are simply that. Though they seem reasonable...

 

My son and new daughter in-law just returned from their honeymoon, 5 day Western Caribbean cruise...not Princess.

 

I'm pretty sure Princess would love to welcome them aboard.

Final bill...$3,000.00:eek: My jaw it the floor! Drinks, excursions, pictures, you name it!

Her first cruise and a honeymoon fund to cover it all:)

[shredie]

I don't understand why all the fuss. They're going to raise their profit margin one way or the other & if the people who are calling room service 8 or 10 times a day want to pay for it, great. It'll keep my fare down to a reasonable amount.

Maybe you missed all the drama about how Princess instituted the charges in the first place. There is a lot more to the story about "all the fuss."

 

I have not yet had time to read every post on this thread -- did anyone mention that the room service charge on Regal has been eliminated for the time being, according to this article on CruiseMates?

 

http://www.cruisemates.com/articles/feature/princess-tries-room-service-charges-150528.cfm

Yes

[SeaCBear]

Exactly. The business model for cruising has completely changed in the last few decades. A cruise was once NOT an inexpensive vacation option. For those who did take a cruise, for many it was a once in a lifetime holiday, and many of those who cruised were wealthy.

 

Now cruise prices have dropped to the point that many more people can and do enjoy them. Many here on CC cruise more than once a year, and I'm sure we're not all fabulously wealthy :)

 

The model now is to get you board, whatever it takes and however low the cruise lines need to price the cabins. Most cruise lines makes no profit from what you pay for your cabin (unless you're in a high end suite or cabin). The real revenue comes from excursions, the spa, drinks, gelato, etc.

 

You might hate these new charges, but you're not obliged to pay for anything extra above the cruise fare. But the reality is that these added charges bring the cost of cruising down for all of us.

 

Cruise companies have a mandate to make profit for their shareholders. As cruising continues to be the fastest growing segment of the travel industry, the new business model appears to be working. I don't expect this to change anytime soon.

 

 

If you add the inflation calculation to your 1986 figures, it shows a true picture of the bargain we get on cruises now !!

 

You paid $1800 in 1986 and inflation makes that equal to $3893.52 in todays dollars.

[cruzsnooze]

Exactly. The business model for cruising has completely changed in the last few decades. A cruise was once NOT an inexpensive vacation option. For those who did take a cruise, for many it was a once in a lifetime holiday, and many of those who cruised were wealthy.

 

 

 

The model now is to get you board, whatever it takes and however low the cruise lines need to price the cabins. Most cruise lines makes no profit from what you pay for your cabin (unless you're in a high end suite or cabin). The real revenue comes from excursions, the spa, drinks, gelato, etc.

 

 

.

Did you not read RCL CEO who just recently gave a breakdown of where revenue comes from? 75% comes from cabin fares.

[Ethel5]

I may not have a big bar bill, buy pictures, spa treatments, ship excursions, pay for restaurants etc, but I guarantee you, my time in the casino makes up for it!

[Lovetocruiseprincess]

Maybe you missed all the drama about how Princess instituted the charges in the first place. There is a lot more to the story about "all the fuss."

 

 

Yes I did read it but would it have made much difference if people had known about it before hand? It's doubtful if even 1 or 2 would have change their plans knowing up front about the charges. It's just like the fuel charges that they can bring back at any time even if you didn't know yesterday.

[SeaCBear]

Well, many here are complaining about how much they preferred to cruise in the days when the cabin fare is really ALL they paid for when taking a cruise.

 

So, when there were few or no extra charges for specialty restaurants, etc. the percentage of cruise ship revenues from the cabin fare alone must have been much higher, and indeed fares were much higher. So far fewer people could afford to take a cruise vacation.

 

This article from 2001 might be of interest:

 

CYNDI WAGNER thought she scored a bargain, paying about $880 per person for a balcony stateroom on an eight-day Caribbean cruise during Thanksgiving week. Then her family of four spotted the photographers, a new specialty restaurant, bingo and other extra-cost attractions. By the time they returned home to Dallas they had dropped $1,200 beyond the price of their four tickets.

 

 

Did you not read RCL CEO who just recently gave a breakdown of where revenue comes from? 75% comes from cabin fares.

[Ship's Wake]

Many of us remember when the cruise lines attempted to deal with the rapid increase in the cost of fuel about 10 years ago by imposing fuel charges for every passenger (these surcharges were in addition to the price of the cruise fare).

 

Passengers moaned, whined, and complained to the point that the cruise lines did away with them.

 

The price of fuel (the largest expense by far in operating the ship) has not gone down.

 

Instead on providing the same type of experience, to cope with higher cost of fuel, cutbacks in quality and service plus adding more revenue opportunities is the way that the cruise lines have gone.

 

Now that they know many passengers will pay for what was formerly included in the price, we can expect more and more ways to spend beyond the base fare to get a quality experience.

 

It's the reality now and not going to change back to the way it was.

[billco]

Exactly. The business model for cruising has completely changed in the last few decades. A cruise was once NOT an inexpensive vacation option. For those who did take a cruise, for many it was a once in a lifetime holiday, and many of those who cruised were wealthy.

 

Now cruise prices have dropped to the point that many more people can and do enjoy them. Many here on CC cruise more than once a year, and I'm sure we're not all fabulously wealthy :)

 

The model now is to get you board, whatever it takes and however low the cruise lines need to price the cabins. Most cruise lines makes no profit from what you pay for your cabin (unless you're in a high end suite or cabin). The real revenue comes from excursions, the spa, drinks, gelato, etc.

 

You might hate these new charges, but you're not obliged to pay for anything extra above the cruise fare. But the reality is that these added charges bring the cost of cruising down for all of us.

 

Cruise companies have a mandate to make profit for their shareholders. As cruising continues to be the fastest growing segment of the travel industry, the new business model appears to be working. I don't expect this to change anytime soon.

I'm fine with that business model. We book through a TA, which is usually several hundred dollars less than the Princess fare. We get the elite benefits, which is worth quite a bit, considering what laundry and internet would cost without it. We generally start a cruise with around $800 in OBC and rarely owe more than $100 at the end of the cruise. All that might have something to do with why I didn't get too upset finding out about the unannounced charges on the Regal. Edited May 29, 2014 by billco

[pablo222]

Maybe you missed all the drama about how Princess instituted the charges in the first place. There is a lot more to the story about "all the fuss."

 

There was just as much drama when princess raised the price

of the chef's table.

 

The price stuck, and people still complain about having to rush

onboard to make their reservations right away.

 

Cruise critic is a magnet for complainers.

[cruzsnooze]

Well, many here are complaining about how much they preferred to cruise in the days when the cabin fare is really ALL they paid for when taking a cruise.

 

So, when there were few or no extra charges for specialty restaurants, etc. the percentage of cruise ship revenues from the cabin fare alone must have been much higher, and indeed fares were much higher. So far fewer people could afford to take a cruise vacation.

 

This article from 2001 might be of interest:

 

CYNDI WAGNER thought she scored a bargain, paying about $880 per person for a balcony stateroom on an eight-day Caribbean cruise during Thanksgiving week. Then her family of four spotted the photographers, a new specialty restaurant, bingo and other extra-cost attractions. By the time they returned home to Dallas they had dropped $1,200 beyond the price of their four tickets.

your article was 2001 mine was 2014 so no comparison. There needs to be happy medium between the mass marker cruise ship fare and the all inclusive such as regent. The disparity is so great. If someone could come up with a fare between the two that was more inclusive I think people would flock to them.

Edited May 29, 2014 by cruzsnooze

[PescadoAmarillo]

There needs to be happy medium between the mass marker cruise ship fare and the all inclusive such as regent. The disparity is so great. If someone could come up with a fare between the two that was more inclusive I think people would flock to them.

Thank you! I think $50 per person per day more for everyone on the ship, drinks included, would be perfect. Don't drink? Well, enjoy the better food and entertainment it would provide. People who truly want a la carte cruising can choose a different cruise line. Something has to halt the race to the bottom that Princess is currently caught up in.

[SeaCBear]

Yes, I said the article was from 2001, and all I said was that it might be of interest. I found it interesting because it talks about the direction cruise lines were heading, which is where we find ourselves now.

 

your article was 2001 mine was 2014 so no comparison. There needs to be happy medium between the mass marker cruise ship fare and the all inclusive such as regent. The disparity is so great. If someone could come up with a fare between the two that was more inclusive I think people would flock to them.

[Ethel5]

Thank you! I think $50 per person per day more for everyone on the ship, drinks included, would be perfect. Don't drink? Well, enjoy the better food and entertainment it would provide. People who truly want a la carte cruising can choose a different cruise line. Something has to halt the race to the bottom that Princess is currently caught up in.

 

I have to disagree. At your rate of an extra $50/day per person a 10 night cruise would be an additional $1000 per couple. This is fine for those who have deep pockets but would severely limit the average person who truly enjoys cruising. If one wants an all inclusive expensive cruise, there are lines more than willing to accommodate.

[caribill]

Thank you! I think $50 per person per day more for everyone on the ship, drinks included, would be perfect. Don't drink? Well, enjoy the better food and entertainment it would provide. People who truly want a la carte cruising can choose a different cruise line. Something has to halt the race to the bottom that Princess is currently caught up in.

 

And if the cruise line did receive $50/person/day more, what makes you think that current food and entertainment would be improved?

 

As the airlines added fee after fee after fee along with increased base fares, I do not think you can find anyone outside of the airline industry who says that anything improved. The opposite occurred.

[Times Prince]

Thank you! I think $50 per person per day more for everyone on the ship, drinks included, would be perfect. Don't drink? Well, enjoy the better food and entertainment it would provide. People who truly want a la carte cruising can choose a different cruise line. Something has to halt the race to the bottom that Princess is currently caught up in.

I agree that Princess needs to maintain and grow the high quality of the cruising experience in all areas.

 

As a CCL shareholder I believe there is an issue when cost cutting and added prices in small things results in a general customer dissatisfaction (not that the opinions of a few Cruise Critic members is an indication of such). I once worked for a company that earned a reputation for bad quality in a single year (before I worked there) which took over 10 years, Chapter 11 reorganization, and a complete overhaul of corporate culture and products to overcome. I hope that Princess never has this problem.

 

However, PescadoAmarillo, your example of $100/day per cabin represents a clear 50+% increase in the base cost of cruising for a minimum cost balcony cabin, and would force many, ourselves included, to seek other cruise lines or vacation opportunities. Looking at our own cruise history we can see that for a 7 day cruise that $100/day cost was typical of our entire onboard spending when we first started cruising, buying photos, gifts, drinks, art, and paying more than the recommended gratuities. Now our onboard expenses are less than a third of that, and having reached retirement is about what we can afford. The only way a large increase in cabin costs would work is if it included all gratuities, and everything that is currently an OBC can be credited against the upfront basic cost of the cabin, reducing its cost.

 

But, bottom line, we're not looking for an "all inclusive" vacation, as these are way out of our price range. Instead we are more than happy to pay for the amenities, and quantity of extras that suit us, and leave the higher costs to those who use the services or bars more than we do.

Edited May 30, 2014 by Times Prince

[PescadoAmarillo]

And if the cruise line did receive $50/person/day more, what makes you think that current food and entertainment would be improved?

 

As the airlines added fee after fee after fee along with increased base fares, I do not think you can find anyone outside of the airline industry who says that anything improved. The opposite occurred.

Of course there is no guarantee. But if Princess at $50pp per day was not a step up from a line such as RCCL with its ubiquitous extra charges, then Princess would not survive, which is strong incentive to do the right thing.

 

If I was paying $50pp per day more and still being approached about wine tastings, and still hearing BINGO and art auction and spa seminar announcements, I certainly wouldn't return. But it would be well worth $50pp per day to not only get unlimited drinks (which would still yield Princess a huge profit) but also to have a more upscale, all inclusive cruise experience (though I would still expect Chefs Table and specialty restaurants...heck, Seaborne has a specialty restaurant).

 

For those who can't or don't want to pay it, there are several other cruise options....but don't be surprised when nickel and diming is even more prevalent there.

[SeaTheWorldBySea]

I have to disagree. At your rate of an extra $50/day per person a 10 night cruise would be an additional $1000 per couple. This is fine for those who have deep pockets but would severely limit the average person who truly enjoys cruising. If one wants an all inclusive expensive cruise, there are lines more than willing to accommodate.

 

I agree. It is much better for those who use alcohol, spa services, the sanctuary, specialty restaurants, etc. etc. to be the ones to pay for those things. We don't want our fare increased to cover the things we can do without to keep our cruise affordable. Don't they now have a $49 per person per day to cover unlimited drinks for those who want them?

 

Agreed - the quality of food and entertainment has declined on Princess but we are still happy to cruise as Elite passengers, shareholders, and past military to enjoy those benefits. Any meal I don't have to plan, shop for, cook and clean up after is a good meal! I could do without a few meals anyway. We like to play cards and feed the casino a little so can make our own entertainment of we don't like what is going on around the ship.

Edited May 30, 2014 by SeaTheWorldBySea

[PescadoAmarillo]

I agree. It is much better for those who use alcohol, spa services, the sanctuary, specialty restaurants, etc. etc. to be the ones to pay for those things. We don't want our fare increased to cover the things we can do without to keep our cruise affordable.

 

But apparently there are many others, I'm not certain if it's a minority or majority but it's a vocal group, who feel differently. I'm not inclined to make a list of names, but I feel quite certain that some here arguing against higher cruise fares were also up in arms about Alfredo's and room service fees. And that's the rub...there is a whole population of cruisers who really aren't looking to cruise for $50 (or $75) pp per day, and are willing to pay more, but there is no other cruise line to move to which is not significantly (like 4 times) more.

[Ethel5]

I would caution that one should be careful of what is wished for.......

 

A good example of raising revenue would be to limit the current OBCs allowed to only one per cabin. No more stacking shareholder, FCC, military longevity OBC's-you get to pick just one. It is not unheard of for a couple to have $700/$800 in OBC per cruise. That covers a lot of drinks, shore excursions, specialty restaurants etc.

[bhopal21]

I would caution that one should be careful of what is wished for.......

 

A good example of raising revenue would be to limit the current OBCs allowed to only one per cabin. No more stacking shareholder, FCC, military longevity OBC's-you get to pick just one. It is not unheard of for a couple to have $700/$800 in OBC per cruise. That covers a lot of drinks, shore excursions, specialty restaurants etc.

 

I agree and think that would be a great starting point.

 

And btw I am a stockholder and a veteran.

 

I keep reading posts from cruisers who have $800+ of OBC and then brag about getting a refund at the end of their cruise. There is something wrong with that scenario.

 

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to deduce that you can't allow someone in an inside cabin to have $800 OBC and even come close to breaking even much less making a profit.

 

Mike:)

[PescadoAmarillo]

I also think that eliminating the ability to stack OBC would do the trick (and we're in the quadruple dipping pool too). Either that, or make none of them refundable. Using $100 in OBC for wine costs Princess $20 or so. Walking off the ship with $100 at the same time they're paying vendor fees for credit card charges costs them more than $100.

 

I'm sure it's actively discussed at Princess HQ weekly, but they instead chose to "speak softly" and implement additional usage based charges. That went over like a lead balloon, but the fact that they attempted it on an inaugural sailing indicates to me that change is coming, and if it's not that, it will be something else.