"Loyalty" in general is a thing of the past

[A2Mich]

I spend thousands of dollars a year at WalMart and get no loyalty rewards... am I missing something?

 

 

The difference is that Wally World never offered any loyalty perks to begin with, so they haven't taken anything away. You were never told anything about a loyalty program that doesn't exist. With Carnival, they have offered a loyalty program for many years now with, albeit limited, perks for your loyalty. They have been chipping away those perks, most likely to save money. Kind of difficult to be loyal to a company when it appears that they have very little loyalty to their loyal customers.

[poison7fl]

The difference is that Wally World never offered any loyalty perks to begin with, so they haven't taken anything away. You were never told anything about a loyalty program that doesn't exist. With Carnival, they have offered a loyalty program for many years now with, albeit limited, perks for your loyalty. They have been chipping away those perks, most likely to save money. Kind of difficult to be loyal to a company when it appears that they have very little loyalty to their loyal customers.

 

Carnival isn't the only company that has changed their perks... EVERY company changes their perks... It happens, accept it and move on people.

 

i know some people are still butt hurt over not getting a couple of free drinks, but jeez... come on...

[A2Mich]

Carnival isn't the only company that has changed their perks... EVERY company changes their perks... It happens, accept it and move on people.

 

i know some people are still butt hurt over not getting a couple of free drinks, but jeez... come on...

 

 

You are correct that every company has made changes, but have yet to see any other cruise line that has gutted their program to the shell that Carnival now has. Maybe some consumers actually enjoy the recognition of being a loyal customer to a company that they have spent thousands and thousands of dollars with. It's not a matter of a few drinks, and nobody's butt hurt over losing a few drinks. It's not a matter of money at all. Its Carnivals position that only certain loyal cruisers are worth recognition now. Even people with only 30 days cruising have spent a lot of money on those cruises and to simply take away what little they were already offering just leaves a bad taste in people's mouths.

[StolidCruiser]

The difference is that Wally World never offered any loyalty perks to begin with, so they haven't taken anything away. You were never told anything about a loyalty program that doesn't exist. With Carnival, they have offered a loyalty program for many years now with, albeit limited, perks for your loyalty. They have been chipping away those perks, most likely to save money. Kind of difficult to be loyal to a company when it appears that they have very little loyalty to their loyal customers.

 

So by this argument, it would be impossible to show loyalty to Wally World since they have no loyalty program and therefore no loyalty to their loyal customers?

[elliair]

Originally Posted by A2Mich

The difference is that Wally World never offered any loyalty perks to begin with, so they haven't taken anything away. You were never told anything about a loyalty program that doesn't exist. With Carnival, they have offered a loyalty program for many years now with, albeit limited, perks for your loyalty. They have been chipping away those perks, most likely to save money. Kind of difficult to be loyal to a company when it appears that they have very little loyalty to their loyal customers.

 

But, you are free to shop around and find better deals with another store. Big Lots had a loyalty program and after you purchased so much merchandise in dollars, you got a large discount on your next purchase. Well, they took that "perk" away, they no longer have a loyalty program. Every once in a while I'll get a $15 off coupon, but, I have to spend at least $75 to get that $15 off. There's nothing in the store that I want to pay $75 for, so I don't shop there that often. I'm free to choose where I spend my money just like everyone else.

Edited May 13, 2015 by elliair

[mediccruzin]

You are correct that every company has made changes, but have yet to see any other cruise line that has gutted their program to the shell that Carnival now has. Maybe some consumers actually enjoy the recognition of being a loyal customer to a company that they have spent thousands and thousands of dollars with. It's not a matter of a few drinks, and nobody's butt hurt over losing a few drinks. It's not a matter of money at all. Its Carnivals position that only certain loyal cruisers are worth recognition now. Even people with only 30 days cruising have spent a lot of money on those cruises and to simply take away what little they were already offering just leaves a bad taste in people's mouths.

I always have to pay the premium price for our cruises as work only allows 8-10 weeks advance notice on taking time off. I can't book a cruise 12-16 months in advance like many. The price I pay for working public safety.

[Chief93]

This will all blow over.

 

Those Gold cruisers who have only cruised Carnival aren't going to change cruise lines because then they would have to start over in that line's loyalty program.

 

Those Gold cruisers that already cruise other lines may jump ship for other lines, but they are probably are folks that cruise for a specific itinerary and they probably don't care about losing one lame party.

 

Either way, Carnival doesn't care. New cruisers spend more money. The ships are full. The ships are going to stay full.

 

I had bad experience at my local Logan's Steakhouse. I will never step foot in it, or any other Logan's, as long as I live. And they don't care. Every time I drive by the parking lot is full. As far as Carnival is concerned, they don't care if you are offended and never come back. As long as the ship is full. It's just business.

[eponym]

Loyalty programs throughout the travel industry have been pared back, including cruise lines. Since the Internet made it easy to shop for the cheapest prices, travel became more of a commodity than it already was.

 

(a) There are perks/benefits/loyalty/reward offers (with worth) for drink packages, and special dining comps that are pretty appealing on some brands.

 

(b) You just gave great reasons why perks/benefits/loyalty/rewards have (or should) evolve into actual spend.

 

Not all programs, from all companies, from all industries have yet. Some in transportation provide perks/benefit/loyalty/reward based on both spend and miles traveled.

[bruadhin]

You have a good point - however, not all repeat cruisers are those tightwads. Carnival also can't afford to assume that every repeat cruiser is in that group. i see an awful lot of posts here on CC from people that state "I will only sail in a balcony or better," or, "I will only book suites," and "I think XYZ's premium drink package is a great deal," etc. These people are most likely spending considerable amounts of money onboard. The cruise lines attempting to alienate them would be foolish. If the cruise lines REALLY wanted to get crazy, they most likely could go back through every customer's history and determine exactly what kind of spender they are. The manpower needed to do so would probably be insane, but is probably possible. I can tell you that the cruiselines do determine a per passenger spending amount for every cruise, though I don't know if they go to the trouble to figure out exactly what every individual spends. I would guess that they do track the "big spenders", whatever that threshold may be.

 

All NCL needs to do is call up their sister company, Caesars. Caesars knows to the penny how their guests gamble, where they stay, and how they spend.

 

The software is out there to do it. It would just need to be adapted to the cruise industry.

[Out to sea!]

You are correct that every company has made changes, but have yet to see any other cruise line that has gutted their program to the shell that Carnival now has. Maybe some consumers actually enjoy the recognition of being a loyal customer to a company that they have spent thousands and thousands of dollars with. It's not a matter of a few drinks, and nobody's butt hurt over losing a few drinks. It's not a matter of money at all. Its Carnivals position that only certain loyal cruisers are worth recognition now. Even people with only 30 days cruising have spent a lot of money on those cruises and to simply take away what little they were already offering just leaves a bad taste in people's mouths.

 

Those that spend money just to earn a loyalty perk should sail a different line. It's really as simple as that.

[A2Mich]

So by this argument, it would be impossible to show loyalty to Wally World since they have no loyalty program and therefore no loyalty to their loyal customers?

 

 

Umm....no. Did you not read the post to which this was a reply? It was in response to someone equating being loyal to Carnival versus being loyal to WalMart. WalMart didn't change the game by cutting back on a loyalty program they never had, whereas Carnival DID and will probably continue to do so. When shopping at WalMart, you as a consumer know upfront that they do not offer a loyalty program. Carnival advertise their loyalty program and its "perks."

[Out to sea!]

Umm....no. Did you not read the post to which this was a reply? It was in response to someone equating being loyal to Carnival versus being loyal to WalMart. WalMart didn't change the game by cutting back on a loyalty program they never had, whereas Carnival DID and will probably continue to do so. When shopping at WalMart, you as a consumer know upfront that they do not offer a loyalty program. Carnival advertise their loyalty program and its "perks."

 

Do you or do you not agree that Carnival has every right to change their loyalty program at any time at their discretion?

 

If you agree they do, did you or did you not know that early on in your cruising life?

Edited May 13, 2015 by Out to sea!

[xeroxme]

You are, of course free to take your cruising dollars elsewhere. I love how everyone says it is the principal of it, or they could have handled it better (which btw, is true for everything, any change at any time). Just so I am sure if I understand, you are leaving, unless Carnival is the cheapest, or somebody is close to as cheap or ??

 

 

 

Just for the record, I am diamond and I do bring those red and blue (and gold and platinum and white) cards with me as well. They are fine with the way this was handled and recognize it for what it is, a business decision. All that being said, happy cruising, whereever you cruise....

 

 

Why? Why? Why? Do you respond so entitled or better than the other posters? Are you Stephen Hawking? Let's help people. Obviously you must be Platinum or Diamond. Good for you. If you are the CEO of Carnival congrats for keeping up on the cost cutting.

The comment to which you have replied too carries weight in that if the ships don't sail full (which can become a reality) the cost of cruising will become more expensive or less attractive for yourself and others. The fact the most Diamond and Platinum could care less about the VIFP is relevant because they got their fill of it. If Carnival was smarter they would do away with VIFP for platinum and diamond because they are already hooked on Carnival and probably value their laundry freebies and priority stuff more.

Have a past guest party for Gold and even Red makes more sense because you want them to keep coming back and back and that makes a cruise line money.

Anyways play nice Jimbo5544. It's a small planet.

[jimbo5544]

Why? Why? Why? Do you respond so entitled or better than the other posters? Are you Stephen Hawking? Let's help people. Obviously you must be Platinum or Diamond. Good for you. If you are the CEO of Carnival congrats for keeping up on the cost cutting.

The comment to which you have replied too carries weight in that if the ships don't sail full (which can become a reality) the cost of cruising will become more expensive or less attractive for yourself and others. The fact the most Diamond and Platinum could care less about the VIFP is relevant because they got their fill of it. If Carnival was smarter they would do away with VIFP for platinum and diamond because they are already hooked on Carnival and probably value their laundry freebies and priority stuff more.

Have a past guest party for Gold and even Red makes more sense because you want them to keep coming back and back and that makes a cruise line money.

Anyways play nice Jimbo5544. It's a small planet.

 

 

I always play nice. The reasons for them removing the party is over crowding plain in simple. Can I understand feelings of missing it , sure. Did I say the post does not carry weight? At the end of the day all posts are equal. I must have missed that. My status a cruiser has nothing to do with my post, it is common sense. You play nice also. By check out my posts before you make blanket statements. Happy sailing.

[A2Mich]

Do you or do you not agree that Carnival has every right to change their loyalty program at any time at their discretion?

 

If you agree they do, did you or did you not know that early on in your cruising life?

 

 

Sure they have the right to do so. Doesn't mean it's the best decision or an equitable one for anyone but themselves. Also doesn't mean it won't irritate customer or that said customers won't remember it. There's a lot to be said for customer relations, whether or not Carnival chooses to believe it.

[A2Mich]

I always play nice. The reasons for them removing the party is over crowding plain in simple. Can I understand feelings of missing it , sure. Did I say the post does not carry weight? At the end of the day all posts are equal. I must have missed that. My status a cruiser has nothing to do with my post, it is common sense. You play nice also. By check out my posts before you make blanket statements. Happy sailing.

 

 

I still don't believe that overcrowding is the real reason -believe what you wish. I'm still hedging my bet that, like everything else Carnival has done, that others simply defend 100%, is nothing more than cost cutting - plain and simple. As if Carnival is HONESTLY going to say that it's economic? Same as with the chocolates - eliminating them because there was a lot of waste from people throwing them away - well let's see--Carnival USED to have good chocolates way back when. In the interest of cutting costs, either a different supplier or simply a cheaper product was introduced. Now the chocolates taste like crap and people don't like them and are throwing them away. So let's remove that too - might as well. Bottom line is that all of these moves are for cost cutting - you can choose to believe the cover story of overcrowding if you wish. BTW, I'm from the government and I'm here to help....or, "the check's in the mail." I also have a bridge for sale too, in case you're interested.

[jimbo5544]

I still don't believe that overcrowding is the real reason -believe what you wish. I'm still hedging my bet that, like everything else Carnival has done, that others simply defend 100%, is nothing more than cost cutting - plain and simple. As if Carnival is HONESTLY going to say that it's economic? Same as with the chocolates - eliminating them because there was a lot of waste from people throwing them away - well let's see--Carnival USED to have good chocolates way back when. In the interest of cutting costs, either a different supplier or simply a cheaper product was introduced. Now the chocolates taste like crap and people don't like them and are throwing them away. So let's remove that too - might as well. Bottom line is that all of these moves are for cost cutting - you can choose to believe the cover story of overcrowding if you wish. BTW, I'm from the government and I'm here to help....or, "the check's in the mail." I also have a bridge for sale too, in case you're interested.

 

So let's see, they say it is over crowding which is backed up by many many posts here. You say....no it's a cut back. Your right , they are lying (why? I have no idea, do they have to no).

 

Next it is chocolates, they taste like crap (because of a cutback, I bet) and with their master plan they planned that so that when people throw them away (never seen that but I cruise Carnival so how would I know:eek:) hey can take them away. That move must have saved them millions, all those chocolates :cool: really?

 

The real bottom line is you will think whatever you want (which obviously yo have the right to do) no matter what the facts are. Your right you have convinced me with your great logic. Where is the bridge?

[jimbo5544]

I still don't believe that overcrowding is the real reason -believe what you wish. I'm still hedging my bet that, like everything else Carnival has done, that others simply defend 100%, is nothing more than cost cutting - plain and simple. As if Carnival is HONESTLY going to say that it's economic? Same as with the chocolates - eliminating them because there was a lot of waste from people throwing them away - well let's see--Carnival USED to have good chocolates way back when. In the interest of cutting costs, either a different supplier or simply a cheaper product was introduced. Now the chocolates taste like crap and people don't like them and are throwing them away. So let's remove that too - might as well. Bottom line is that all of these moves are for cost cutting - you can choose to believe the cover story of overcrowding if you wish. BTW, I'm from the government and I'm here to help....or, "the check's in the mail." I also have a bridge for sale too, in case you're interested.

 

btw, check out this thread, about the over crowding....

 

http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=2208816

 

Post #5

Edited May 14, 2015 by jimbo5544

[eponym]

Exactly. On 95% of our cruises, we have booked a balcony. We don't buy pictures, we don't buy trinkets, perfume, jewelry, booze to take home, art, and drinks on a whim. Newbies not being experienced will whip out the S&S card and when they see their final print out they go into shock. Hardly will they be a repeat customer any time soon as they will be working a very long time to pay off the debt. We are not Carnival's or Princesses best customers as we do not buy into all their marketing hype.

 

Are you at or above the Gold perk/comp/loyalty/VIFP/reward level on Carnival? You seem to me to have a lot of cruise knowledge, and it might help me understand the last sentence of your statement above. Thank you.

[eponym]

It might be wise for Carnival to consider rolling out a GOLD/RED loyalty/perk/promo/benefit/reward party on the less than 5 day sailings for next 3 years to build loyality and business now that they have pacified the Diamond and Platinum patrons.

Edited May 14, 2015 by eponym

[elliair]

Are you at or above the Gold perk/comp/loyalty/VIFP/reward level on Carnival? You seem to me to have a lot of cruise knowledge, and it might help me understand the last sentence of your statement above. Thank you.

 

It's clearly marked in my sig line what reward level we're at on both cruiselines. If you're wondering about my remark that we aren't Carnival or Princess' best customers, is because we don't buy photos, trinkets, watered down drinks, gamble or play Bingo. Our S&S card is used most often to either open the cabin door or the safe. We do eat one evening in the specialty restaurant and order a bottle of wine and that's about it.

[A2Mich]

So let's see, they say it is over crowding which is backed up by many many posts here. You say....no it's a cut back. Your right , they are lying (why? I have no idea, do they have to no).

 

 

 

Next it is chocolates, they taste like crap (because of a cutback, I bet) and with their master plan they planned that so that when people throw them away (never seen that but I cruise Carnival so how would I know:eek:) hey can take them away. That move must have saved them millions, all those chocolates :cool: really?

 

 

 

The real bottom line is you will think whatever you want (which obviously yo have the right to do) no matter what the facts are. Your right you have convinced me with your great logic. Where is the bridge?

 

 

I very distinctly remember the threads about the chocolates, and the reason given at that time was because of high waste. A few million chocolates can easily add up to a healthy amount of money at the end of a year. Saving nickels and dimes does add up across the number of passengers they serve. I'm not doubting that the parties are overcrowded, but I highly doubt that is the real reason. Most likely it was costing too much with the high turnout of passengers.

 

If you really want some interesting research, you will also find that Carnival, under the "wise" direction of Gerry Cahill had cut travel agent commissions in half. Why? Because they felt like it and don't have to tell us? No, to keep that money in house that otherwise was being paid to travel agents. And several of the highly publicized media incidents about Carnival were reported to be due to extreme cost cutting on maintenance. Explain the reported cutbacks on food quality and the additional charges for menu items that used to be included. Want to know why? Cost savings. As said earlier in this or one of the other 15 threads going about this, Carnival's responsibility is to its shareholders. That said, cut costs as much as possible to give the shareholders a better return so they don't bail out. It's all business.

[jimbo5544]

I very distinctly remember the threads about the chocolates, and the reason given at that time was because of high waste. A few million chocolates can easily add up to a healthy amount of money at the end of a year. Saving nickels and dimes does add up across the number of passengers they serve. I'm not doubting that the parties are overcrowded, but I highly doubt that is the real reason. Most likely it was costing too much with the high turnout of passengers.

 

If you really want some interesting research, you will also find that Carnival, under the "wise" direction of Gerry Cahill had cut travel agent commissions in half. Why? Because they felt like it and don't have to tell us? No, to keep that money in house that otherwise was being paid to travel agents. And several of the highly publicized media incidents about Carnival were reported to be due to extreme cost cutting on maintenance. Explain the reported cutbacks on food quality and the additional charges for menu items that used to be included. Want to know why? Cost savings. As said earlier in this or one of the other 15 threads going about this, Carnival's responsibility is to its shareholders. That said, cut costs as much as possible to give the shareholders a better return so they don't bail out. It's all business.

 

Everything is business, on all cruise lines. I am a TA, I know all about Gerry Cahill. Who did they not tell? BTW, Gerry is gone, his replacement, Christine Duffy comes from heading CLIA, and shocking as it may to believe, has been a cruise advocate (not cost cutting). Neither of the highly publicized incidents were due to poor maintenance btw. Both were within normal maintenance records..... anything else?

[jimbo5544]

I think this topic has been discussed enough for several times over. I will move on, carry on cruisers.....happy cruising.

[A2Mich]

Everything is business, on all cruise lines. I am a TA, I know all about Gerry Cahill. Who did they not tell? BTW, Gerry is gone, his replacement, Christine Duffy comes from heading CLIA, and shocking as it may to believe, has been a cruise advocate (not cost cutting). Neither of the highly publicized incidents were due to poor maintenance btw. Both were within normal maintenance records..... anything else?

 

 

Yes I know that Cahill is gone, but the cost cutting hit a nice stride under his command and has continued. From the information I got, including from my TA who I am friends with, as well as others, it does in fact appear that the incidents were in fact a result of poor maintenance. I wish I had known earlier that you were a travel agent. That makes much more sense now. All this time I simply thought you were a die-hard, blind faith cheerleader--nope. You have a vested interest in not saying anything bad about them.