Platinum members, your benefits are next...

[MrMileStoner]

I'm off the Mr. Milestone train. Have a good life.

 

I doubt that and I do. :D

[MrMileStoner]

Have you? Your rhetorical questions abound and are worthless contributions in my view.

 

How about specifically answering up to your allegations of bribery on other cruise brands.

 

Yes. You are entitled to your opinions, no matter how worthless.

 

See above.

[Sparky2]

Well, we certainly needed yet another thread about it, right? :rolleyes:

 

Seriously, people. They're perks that they do NOT have to grant. To anyone.

 

I don't use the free laundry. I don't eat the chocolates delivered to the room. I usually give away my free gift. The only Platinum perks I enjoy are early boarding and maybe 1 or 2 visits to the service desk during a week-long cruise. I don't even know if the priority tender is worth it since the last time I used it (Pride last May), the blue-card FTTF people were a virtual stampede to be first on the tender (which then sat for about 10 minutes while it filled with other people).

 

That's it. Would I just have a hissy-fit meltdown if those were taken away? No, I would not.

 

It would be just like it was before I was Platinum. I'd arrive at the port fairly early and I'd board fairly early.

 

As I've said in a few of the other threads, if it bothers everyone so much, then spend your vacation dollars elsewhere. It's your money. You have the right to spend it wherever you want. If you think you'll be more appreciated elsewhere, then go!

 

Carnival will have no problem filling your berth with a new cruisers who will purchase FTTF, buy ship excursions, buy tons of photos, play bingo, etc.

 

As a shareholder, I have no problem with them keeping costs in line and keeping cruise fares at a very reasonable level. My cruises now cost less, in real dollars, than they did when I started cruising in 2001. Can people say the same about anything else? Costs rise. To continue to provide a very good vacation value, something has to give. A degree in economics isn't needed to understand these things! ;)

 

Well said.

[A2Mich]

Bribes are built into the Royal business model and that simply is not the case with Carnival. But like you say, if it is important to someone.

 

 

True, but they are at least making more than a half hearted attempt at showing loyalty appreciation, which is subject to change at any time.

[A2Mich]

Anybody can get "shareholder dividends", just buy the stock. Also anybody can get the shareholder OBC if they own 100 shares or more of CCL. Even Gold members can get that credit. Well, at least for now.

 

 

 

On the OBC I am always anticipating that that will go away, but until then, give me my Florida Resident Rate, add on my CCL Shareholder OBC and Platinum perks and it is a fun inexpensive Cruise Vacation.

 

 

I know that. It was meant as a joke in meaning that Carnival has found yet another way to cut costs--see how happy the cheerleaders are at that announcement.

[A2Mich]

Priority check in after one cruise? Priority over only the people taking their first RCL cruise I suppose?

 

 

 

CL.

 

 

Yes. Pinnacle, Diamond Plus, and suite guests still have higher priority boarding as they should.

[A2Mich]

It is quite specific and costs shareholders quite a bit of money. Speaking of shareholders benefits, doesn't Royal have more restrictions on shareholder OBC comared with Carnival?

 

 

But maybe some cruise lines have figured out that spending money in that way is a worthwhile investment. I estimated from a very basic showing of hands one night at a show on Royal, that while there were a large number of first timers onboard, they appear to have been greatly outnumbered by repeat guests. Of course I have no way to know how many cruises any of them have been on, or what their status was, but by estimation having considerably more repeaters than first timers says a lot.

 

Whether or not the loyalty program has any bearing on the amount of repeat business is also unclear, but MAY have had some influence on some peoples decisions. Either way, it seems, at least at first glance, that repeat customers represent a fair number of their guests and that is a huge market.

[carrieluvsgreg]

That is an interesting point of view. It made me go back and look at me 19cruises to see how many interiors were had. The final answer is: 5 of the cruises were interior, 2 were oceanview. Not bad for 97 days at sea.

 

 

I'm not at all ashamed to say that every day of our 13 cruises has been interior or porthole. I choose to book interior and spend the money elsewhere. It's everyone's choice what type of room to book. We have also always booked two rooms when our kids have gone instead of squeezing into one room... I have booked 4 spa staterooms and paid the upcharge for the cloud 9 usage. It too was a choice.

[MrMileStoner]

True, but they are at least making more than a half hearted attempt at showing loyalty appreciation, which is subject to change at any time.

 

PT Barnum would be proud.

 

But maybe some cruise lines have figured out that spending money in that way is a worthwhile investment. I estimated from a very basic showing of hands one night at a show on Royal, that while there were a large number of first timers onboard, they appear to have been greatly outnumbered by repeat guests. Of course I have no way to know how many cruises any of them have been on, or what their status was, but by estimation having considerably more repeaters than first timers says a lot.

 

Whether or not the loyalty program has any bearing on the amount of repeat business is also unclear, but MAY have had some influence on some peoples decisions. Either way, it seems, at least at first glance, that repeat customers represent a fair number of their guests and that is a huge market.

 

Repeat guests do not grow the business and pay for new ships.

 

I think it is safe to say Carnival is satisfied with the number of repeat guests they get.

[A2Mich]

PT Barnum would be proud.

 

 

 

Repeat guests do not grow the business and pay for new ships.

 

I think it is safe to say Carnival is satisfied with the number of repeat guests they get.

 

 

No, PT Barnum would be proud of all of the ones who simply let everything change without questioning. There truly is a sucker born every minute.

[cruzfitter]

Specifically their loyalty program.

 

Does Carnival have a loyalty program?

[cruzfitter]

It is quite specific and costs shareholders quite a bit of money. Speaking of shareholders benefits, doesn't Royal have more restrictions on shareholder OBC comared with Carnival?

 

Apparently, Carnival needs to use shareholders benefits to bribe customers to return.

Edited May 10, 2015 by cruzfitter
Spelling

[A2Mich]

Apparently, Canival needs to use shareholders benefits to bribe customers to return.

 

 

How does anyone figure that they are specifically using "shareholder benefits?" EVERY expense is a potential loss to shareholders. By your logic, the ship's should sit at the dock and not go anywhere. Fuel costs money, so that is using a shareholder benefit. Sorry, but this logic of shareholder benefit is BS. Besides, the ones getting very wealthy off of "shareholder" benefits are pissing away a lot more money than you'd probably care to think about. Is a CEO salary really worth millions per year? That money is also potential shareholder benefits. If spending money to retain past guests is keeping the ships sailing full and keeping those passengers spending money, then there must be some kind of ROI.

[MrMileStoner]

Apparently, Carnival needs to use shareholders benefits to bribe customers to return.

 

Shareholder benefits are at the corporate level and apply to all Carnival brands. Carnival Cruise Line doesn't have a say.

Edited May 10, 2015 by MrMileStoner

[cruzfitter]

How does anyone figure that they are specifically using "shareholder benefits?" EVERY expense is a potential loss to shareholders. By your logic, the ship's should sit at the dock and not go anywhere. Fuel costs money, so that is using a shareholder benefit. Sorry, but this logic of shareholder benefit is BS. Besides, the ones getting very wealthy off of "shareholder" benefits are pissing away a lot more money than you'd probably care to think about. Is a CEO salary really worth millions per year? That money is also potential shareholder benefits. If spending money to retain past guests is keeping the ships sailing full and keeping those passengers spending money, then there must be some kind of ROI.

 

You missed my point. If ,as Mr. MileStoner points out, the fact that Royal has a better loyalty program means that Royal is bribing people to cruise with them. Then it should also be true that Carnival having a better shareholder program also means that they are bribing people to cruise with them.

Personally, I don't feel either of these programs are bribes. I also don't think one is better than the other. Each has its own pluses and minuses.

[cruzfitter]

Shareholder benefits are at the corporate level and apply to all Carnival brands. Carnival Cruise Line doesn't have a say.

 

Wow, it's worse than I thought. Carnival Corp. apparently has to bribe people to cruise any of their brands. Not true but just look at how statements can be twisted. Next you'll be telling us how Royal has to bribe shipyards to build their ships.

 

So, you know somehow that Carnival's board of directors couldn't make a change and not allow the shareholder benefits.

[A2Mich]

I also don't think that either program is a bribe. I feel that maybe RCI is trying to show some appreciation more so than Carnival is doing. Also I don't think that RCI is needing to necessarily use their program to fill their ships, but people do appreciate the fact that they may indeed receive some recognition. Either way, those ships sail full as well. The one thing with repeat cruisers that is important to remember--repeat cruisers can may be able to keep the ships sailing full even in slow times when there are not enough new cruisers to do so. If the economy tanks again and the new cruisers aren't spending the money to go on cruises, the regular cruising retirees can certainly help fill empty cabins and keep the money flowing in. While I also don't feel like the majority of people stay with any particular cruise line simply for the loyalty bennies (though I know there are those that do, and they are all too proud to remind you of who they are), being recognized or appreciated is certainly a nice gesture that many people at least appreciate, if not expect.

[loxley]

I am gold. The only way I know that is that was my last card color. I have no idea where I am on the climb, because I just don't care. But I do know carnival makes more profit on a new cruiser which they give nothing to, than they do me. My S/S card is tips only. No pictures, no drinks, no bingo, nothing extra. I did all that stuff when I was a new cruiser.

[eponym]

I am gold. The only way I know that is that was my last card color. I have no idea where I am on the climb, because I just don't care. But I do know carnival makes more profit on a new cruiser which they give nothing to, than they do me. My S/S card is tips only. No pictures, no drinks, no bingo, nothing extra. I did all that stuff when I was a new cruiser.

 

And, Big Data is likely going to push you aside in the near future.

[MrMileStoner]

And, Big Data is likely going to push you aside in the near future.

 

Balderdash.

[figdu]

Same here, the only perk I care about is priority boarding.

 

Us as well!

[MrMileStoner]

Wow, it's worse than I thought. Carnival Corp. apparently has to bribe people to cruise any of their brands. Not true but just look at how statements can be twisted. Next you'll be telling us how Royal has to bribe shipyards to build their ships.

 

So, you know somehow that Carnival's board of directors couldn't make a change and not allow the shareholder benefits.

 

Carnival likely learned it from Royal, but aren't so chintzy. :rolleyes:

 

Close - Royal shops shipyards until they can convince one to cosign the loan.

 

The Carnival board can do whatever they like but historically have renewed the benefit every year.

[A2Mich]

One other thing to consider to is that Royal Caribbean tends to spend more on each ship. To be fair, that may very well be because RCI does not build the same number of ships per class that Carnival Corp does. That may in fact, help keep Carnival Corp per ship cost lower as, theoretically, a fair part of the engineering costs can be spread over more units built. Take Carnival's Fantasy class ships--they built 8 of them. Even carnivals newer ships, are basically evolutions of the previous design, and are building similar ships for HAL, Cunard (a few, not all), Costa, and Carnival. Only Princess, as far as their mainstream brands, have unique designs. RCI tends to build 3-4 of each design of ship and then abandons the design, with the one exception of the Voyager class.

[eponym]

One other thing to consider to is that Royal Caribbean tends to spend more on each ship. To be fair, that may very well be because RCI does not build the same number of ships per class that Carnival Corp does. That may in fact, help keep Carnival Corp per ship cost lower as, theoretically, a fair part of the engineering costs can be spread over more units built. Take Carnival's Fantasy class ships--they built 8 of them. Even carnivals newer ships, are basically evolutions of the previous design, and are building similar ships for HAL, Cunard (a few, not all), Costa, and Carnival. Only Princess, as far as their mainstream brands, have unique designs. RCI tends to build 3-4 of each design of ship and then abandons the design, with the one exception of the Voyager class.

 

Economies of scale do play a big role.

 

On the flip side, RCI does have some very beautiful and state of the art boats.

[A2Mich]

Economies of scale do play a big role.

 

 

 

On the flip side, RCI does have some very beautiful and state of the art boats.

 

 

Yes they do, and RCI had been a bit more daring as risk takers to try new things, while companies like Carnival have more or less sat back and watched and waited. Which there is nothing wrong with - playing it safer is not necessarily a bad thing. Carnival can watch and see what gimmicks and innovations work and which don't without spending their capital refitting a few ships as test beds. If other lines can make something work, they may or may not follow suit. One thing where Carnival Corp DID screw up, was the exclusion of backup generators on most, if not all of their ships, and it had been reported that under the questionable leadership of Gerry Cahill, Carnival Cruise Lines let a fair amount of maintenance slip, which MAY have contributed to the failures and malfunctions they had which led to such bad press. Speaking of bad press, I do think that Carnival does get a bad rap in the press. Princess has breakdowns, RCI has fires, they all have occasional collisions with each other, Carnival and RCI have breakdowns as well, yet Carny seems to get the most bad press of all of the major cruise lines. However, the bad press may not necessarily be that they had the problem to begin with, but rather how well or poorly they handled the situation.