4 in suite - Luminae?

[maggie.1008]

I feel we have 2 different topics here. 1 is solo in cabin and the other is letting people in suites add guests. I understand solo guest being allowed to bring one non suite guest to dinner. However moving guests around to give non suite guests Luminae dining is still scamming the system. MHO. What if all suite guests did this. I`m sure this is not what X intended.

[ghstudio]

I feel we have 2 different topics here. 1 is solo in cabin and the other is letting people in suites add guests. I understand solo guest being allowed to bring one non suite guest to dinner. However moving guests around to give non suite guests Luminae dining is still scamming the system. MHO. What if all suite guests did this. I`m sure this is not what X intended.

 

The "problem" is that, ignoring the two other adults, Celebrity has never come up with a solution for families travelling together in aqua or suites. It's certainly possible that the "young wealthy" target audience wants to stay in a suite and put their child(ren) in a cabin across the hall or nearby.....but of course they would like to eat together. You can't do that in blu at all, and you can apparently do it once in Luminae for $50 each (dinner) or lesser amounts for breakfast/lunch...no kids prices. By ignoring that segment, Celebrity is really turning off some of the very people they are trying to attract.....strange way to run a business.

 

Although I was the original suggester of putting all 4 adults in the suite and the kids separate...I do agree that it's skirting the intent of the system, although in reality, it is permitted. I do, however, take issue with "rules" that mean that the kids in their own non suite/aqua cabin aren't able to eat with their parents...or the parents having to eat in the MDR to dine with their kids. Just seems like a poorly thought out policy to me.

 

I think the solo issue is different....deserving it's own thread.

[richsea]

But how?!?

 

I do pay for upgraded glasses of wine. I pay for the occasional $25 wine tasting, and sometimes a special dining experience depending on the crowd I meet on board an who wants to do it. But this all adds to about $400, and I have $750 OBC on my upcoming cruise. So all I've done is spent the house's money, and am left with taking $300 cash out in the casino.

 

I DIY my shore excursions, I don't buy photos, don't get ripped off in the shops or duty free, don't do bingo, don't buy art, don't gamble at all.

 

But how? You answered your own question. YOU don't have a bill because YOU don't spend money on those things that many, many others do. One shoe does not fit all.

[Ma Bell]

The "problem" is that, ignoring the two other adults, Celebrity has never come up with a solution for families travelling together in aqua or suites. It's certainly possible that the "young wealthy" target audience wants to stay in a suite and put their child(ren) in a cabin across the hall or nearby.....but of course they would like to eat together. You can't do that in blu at all, and you can apparently do it once in Luminae for $50 each (dinner) or lesser amounts for breakfast/lunch...no kids prices. By ignoring that segment, Celebrity is really turning off some of the very people they are trying to attract.....strange way to run a business.

 

Although I was the original suggester of putting all 4 adults in the suite and the kids separate...I do agree that it's skirting the intent of the system, although in reality, it is permitted. I do, however, take issue with "rules" that mean that the kids in their own non suite/aqua cabin aren't able to eat with their parents...or the parents having to eat in the MDR to dine with their kids. Just seems like a poorly thought out policy to me.

 

I think the solo issue is different....deserving it's own thread.

 

Since Luminae is a new restaurant for suite passengers there was never before a problem with families traveling in separate accommodations dining together. They dined together in any of the other venues just as they can now. They are also able to dine together in Luminae by paying the charge. Why is it necessary to skirt the rules?

 

If you book a suite "you" and the "actual" occupants of the suite are entitled to dine in Luminae. You are also entitled to invite guests on a space available basis and pay for them.

[chemmo]

Celebrities royal suite and penthouse suites are ideal for a family with one or two small children or one older child/young adult. As are many of the Sky Suites and Family Veranda Cabins. Never tried it with 4 adults so cannot comment. No problems, everyone in the family pays the price but gets the benefits.

 

What Celebrity doesn't have is equivalent to the RCCL Royal Family suite designed for extended families or the presidential suite suitable for extended families and friends. I am not saying personally that I want these suites on Celebrity but they do have a specific market. I think one of the reasons some people are trying to 'push the boundaries' of suit benefits is the limited choices that celebrity offers for extended family/friendship groups.

 

If I was in the situation of the OP I would probably look at booking 2 suite rooms or a family veranda and a standard veranda and a dining package. It just becomes tooooooo hard to mess about with the ifs and buts...

 

Personally, I feel that the more people try to push boundaries the more the hotel chain/cruise line will become pedantic about sticking to the rules.

 

Returning to the original OP's dilemma I still have concerns that no matter how they on paper or in practice split rooms they could probably still enjoy their holiday more by looking at other options.

 

As another post said I do think solo travellers in suites does merit its own post.

[villauk]

Celebrities royal suite and penthouse suites are ideal for a family with one or two small children or one older child/young adult. As are many of the Sky Suites and Family Veranda Cabins. Never tried it with 4 adults so cannot comment. No problems, everyone in the family pays the price but gets the benefits.

 

What Celebrity doesn't have is equivalent to the RCCL Royal Family suite designed for extended families or the presidential suite suitable for extended families and friends. I am not saying personally that I want these suites on Celebrity but they do have a specific market. I think one of the reasons some people are trying to 'push the boundaries' of suit benefits is the limited choices that celebrity offers for extended family/friendship groups.

 

If I was in the situation of the OP I would probably look at booking 2 suite rooms or a family veranda and a standard veranda and a dining package. It just becomes tooooooo hard to mess about with the ifs and buts...

 

Personally, I feel that the more people try to push boundaries the more the hotel chain/cruise line will become pedantic about sticking to the rules.

 

Returning to the original OP's dilemma I still have concerns that no matter how they on paper or in practice split rooms they could probably still enjoy their holiday more by looking at other options.

 

As another post said I do think solo travellers in suites does merit its own post.

 

Another problem when X brought in the new suite system was not considering their current ship configurations i.e. they have CC and standard balcony cabins connecting to suites. How is that ever going to work with extended families for dining? If the parents book the suite, and then put the children/family members in the connecting standard/CC balcony cabin, where should they dine? Surely connecting cabins are on the ship to link families together? IMHO, they did not fully consider the consequences when they implemented the new suite program.

[Ma Bell]

Another problem when X brought in the new suite system was not considering their current ship configurations i.e. they have CC and standard balcony cabins connecting to suites. How is that ever going to work with extended families for dining? If the parents book the suite, and then put the children/family members in the connecting standard/CC balcony cabin, where should they dine? Surely connecting cabins are on the ship to link families together? IMHO, they did not fully consider the consequences when they implemented the new suite program.

 

Which suites have connecting standard or CC balcony cabins?

[villauk]

Which suites have connecting standard or CC balcony cabins?

 

On S class S1s have both CC and SV connecting. On M class RS has CC connecting.

Edited August 18, 2015 by villauk

[Ma Bell]

The solution is to pay an extra $100. a day and have dinner together or the suite people go to select or the MDR. Another solution is to not book the suite when traveling with family or spring for two suites. One more solution is to book Aqua for the others and dine in Blu together. It's not a problem unless one wants to make it a problem, it's a choice.

[villauk]

The solution is to pay an extra $100. a day and have dinner together or the suite people go to select or the MDR. Another solution is to not book the suite when traveling with family or spring for two suites. One more solution is to book Aqua for the others and dine in Blu together. It's not a problem unless one wants to make it a problem, it's a choice.

 

That's not the point I'm trying to make. I personally don't stay in suites so it makes no difference to me, however, why promote connecting cabins for familes to cruise together when they are in different 'classes'. The whole point of having a connecting cabin is to use/spend time together - not to have them in different 'classes' of cruising. This is what occurs when you have an existing ship layout and try to implement new programs without considering all the consequences ;).

[maggie.1008]

I have dined in Luminae and don`t feel t is suitable for most young children. It is a upscale dining room. It is unfair to expect young ones to sit though a two hour dinner. I`m sure I will get flamed but I don`t want lots of kids in Luminae. I would go back to AQ and dine in Blu . The reason most like Blu or Luminae is for a more quiet and relaxed dining room, unlike the chaos of the MDR.

[Ma Bell]

That's not the point I'm trying to make. I personally don't stay in suites so it makes no difference to me, however, why promote connecting cabins for familes to cruise together when they are in different 'classes'. The whole point of having a connecting cabin is to use/spend time together - not to have them in different 'classes' of cruising. This is what occurs when you have an existing ship layout and try to implement new programs without considering all the consequences ;).

 

What consequences? I'm sure if someone is booking a suite they can afford the extra $100 bucks a day for dinner. It's a lot cheaper than booking two suites.

[villauk]

What consequences? I'm sure if someone is booking a suite they can afford the extra $100 bucks a day for dinner. It's a lot cheaper than booking two suites.

 

Dilemmas from the family being in different 'classes'. How do you know what they can or can't afford. Again, the point I'm trying to make is that X are causing issues where there would be no need if they had thought about those connecting suites before the program was introduced. They are the ones offering the 'family' accommodation. It doesn't have to be young children in those non suite connecting cabins either. It could be elderly parents that require that extra reassurance of having grown-up children in connecting cabins on-hand.

 

I understand what you are saying about choice (it's up to them what they book), but why bother having connecting suites if you can't use them accordingly? X may as well block the suites off permanently and prevent any future issues occurring.

Edited August 18, 2015 by villauk

[cle-guy]

Dilemmas from the family being in different 'classes'. How do you know what they can or can't afford. Again, the point I'm trying to make is that X are causing issues where there would be no need if they had thought about those connecting suites before the program was introduced. They are the ones offering the 'family' accommodation. It doesn't have to be young children in those non suite connecting cabins either. It could be elderly parents that require that extra reassurance of having grown-up children in connecting cabins on-hand.

 

I understand what you are saying about choice (it's up to them what they book), but why bother having connecting suites if you can't use them accordingly? X may as well block the suites off permanently and prevent any future issues occurring.

 

I'm a proponent of blocking the connecting cabins from suites to ensure they are open to those in the suites first if needed. Once a suite sells with connector, then open it to general sale.

 

Frankly all connecting cabins should be reserved for those who desire them, with a requirement to book both cabins, until closer to final payments.

 

This is especially needed the M class PH's, with the connection to the concierge cabin, that is decorated in the same style as the PH, clearly intended as a second bedroom. Unfortunately, the secret is out on those, and people tend to scoop them up immediately, leaving the PH unable to get a connection for use with family.

 

I also think that once on board, especially families in CS, RS and PH, the Michaels concierge will be open to accommodating families as necessary who are traveling in "different classes" with regard to minors and elderly family. The Michael's concierge makes things happen and can bend rules as they need to to provide exceptional service.

 

Bottom line of the suite program, is to fawn over the suite guests and provide exceptional service to them.

[Ma Bell]

Dilemmas from the family being in different 'classes'. How do you know what they can or can't afford. Again, the point I'm trying to make is that X are causing issues where there would be no need if they had thought about those connecting suites before the program was introduced. They are the ones offering the 'family' accommodation. It doesn't have to be young children in those non suite connecting cabins either. It could be elderly parents that require that extra reassurance of having grown-up children in connecting cabins on-hand.

 

I understand what you are saying about choice (it's up to them what they book), but why bother having connecting suites if you can't use them accordingly? X may as well block the suites off permanently and prevent any future issues occurring.

 

I still don't understand why you say they can't be used accordingly. They are not causing any issues. The vast majority of the time those cabins are booked by non related parties and when they are booked for related parties they have offered the solution of being able to pay for invited guests. If they can't afford to pay for their guests for dinner they certainly can't afford to pay for two suites.:confused:

[villauk]

I still don't understand why you say they can't be used accordingly. They are not causing any issues. The vast majority of the time those cabins are booked by non related parties and when they are booked for related parties they have offered the solution of being able to pay for invited guests. If they can't afford to pay for their guests for dinner they certainly can't afford to pay for two suites.:confused:

 

They'd have a job because I think there is only 1 suite that connects to another suite on the S class ships - my point exactly! All the other suites connect to CC or standard balconies ;).

[LA_Design]

They'd have a job because I think there is only 1 suite that connects to another suite on the S class ships - my point exactly! All the other suites connect to CC or standard balconies ;).

 

 

quite correct [emoji41]

[Ma Bell]

They'd have a job because I think there is only 1 suite that connects to another suite on the S class ships - my point exactly! All the other suites connect to CC or standard balconies ;).

 

I'm aware of that. You were making a point about the configuration of the ships being a problem.

 

So what are you suggesting? The same cabins have been on the same ships for years and I don't recall this ever being a problem before. The only difference is the addition of perks for suites. Are you suggesting that they offer free perks for anyone booking the connecting cabins?

 

It seems to me that people booked in suites still have the exact same options they had before with additional benefits that they can now choose to use, ignore or pay extra for those in the adjoining cabin to use.

 

I think we all know there is no free lunch so I suppose they could charge more for the adjoining cabin when booked together and give everyone the benefits. Of course then we could have complaints about benefits being included that they don't need.

 

It seems to me they have provided a solution to the problem.

Edited August 18, 2015 by Ma Bell

[villauk]

 

It seems to me they have provided a solution to the problem.

 

There shouldn't be a problem in the first place, and it's only a solution providing there is sufficient space available ;). But as Curt stated above, those in the higher suites don't have a problem because Michael's Concierge makes things happen anyway.

[ghstudio]

What consequences? I'm sure if someone is booking a suite they can afford the extra $100 bucks a day for dinner. It's a lot cheaper than booking two suites.

 

I believe you are only permitted to bring in one or more(?) guests to Luminae on ONE night.....so it's $100 one night and then eat in the MDR...and it's $100 for dinner for two...if you want to eat breakfast, brunch/lunch in Luminae, that's more $'s for "the kids".

[Ma Bell]

I believe you are only permitted to bring in one or more(?) guests to Luminae on ONE night.....so it's $100 one night and then eat in the MDR...and it's $100 for dinner for two...if you want to eat breakfast, brunch/lunch in Luminae, that's more $'s for "the kids".

 

I was speaking of dinner for two. Obviously if people want to eat every meal in Luminae it's not going to work well or going to cost moe but that's the way it is.

 

We can't always have everything we want and need to make choices about what's important. There are lots of ways to work things out.

[JFontaine]

.

 

We can't always have everything we want and need to make choices about what's important. There are lots of ways to work things out.

 

Celebrity wants people in those penthouses to have everything that they want. They just haven't communicated how it works very well. And having lived through a concierge transitioning to her relief, it shouldn't be up to the MC concierge to make that happen (or not). At $20,000 a week or whatever the penthouse is now going for, that's unacceptable.

[cle-guy]

Celebrity wants people in those penthouses to have everything that they want. They just haven't communicated how it works very well. And having lived through a concierge transitioning to her relief, it shouldn't be up to the MC concierge to make that happen (or not). At $20,000 a week or whatever the penthouse is now going for, that's unacceptable.

 

Generally around $11-12k a week. Reflection Suite is generally $24,995/week.

 

On my upcoming Summit, PH is down to $4499 per person... I live for last minute deals like this. :D

[Project_gal]

But how?!?

 

I do pay for upgraded glasses of wine. I pay for the occasional $25 wine tasting, and sometimes a special dining experience depending on the crowd I meet on board an who wants to do it. But this all adds to about $400, and I have $750 OBC on my upcoming cruise. So all I've done is spent the house's money, and am left with taking $300 cash out in the casino.

 

I DIY my shore excursions, I don't buy photos, don't get ripped off in the shops or duty free, don't do bingo, don't buy art, don't gamble at all.

 

I think we are taking this too far off topic but I will answer.

 

We are disadvantaged by not enjoying the same wines as our "colonial cousins" and, thus, our wine surcharge on the premium package is the major chunk. My husband does have a limited gambling budget - it is his entertainment. Don't do bingo, buy art or buy overpriced "duty-free". Pre-purchase photo package and the very few excursions we may do as well as pre-pay our gratuities [so they are not included in the total].

 

We always do the Chefs Table but never the Wine Connoisseurs Dinners. A little spending in the shops [nothing much by I usually run out of something in the cosmetic lines and nothing is cheap on board] but it mounts up, postage, laundry [although we have not been charged for our latest two cruises], wine for entertaining in our suite, I forget the rest and would need to bring back our archived account to be more specific but a good chunk is tips for sommelier and Chef's Table [the rest we pay in cash].

[Project_gal]

The "problem" is that, ignoring the two other adults, Celebrity has never come up with a solution for families travelling together in aqua or suites. It's certainly possible that the "young wealthy" target audience wants to stay in a suite and put their child(ren) in a cabin across the hall or nearby.....but of course they would like to eat together. You can't do that in blu at all, and you can apparently do it once in Luminae for $50 each (dinner) or lesser amounts for breakfast/lunch...no kids prices. By ignoring that segment, Celebrity is really turning off some of the very people they are trying to attract.....strange way to run a business.

 

Although I was the original suggester of putting all 4 adults in the suite and the kids separate...I do agree that it's skirting the intent of the system, although in reality, it is permitted. I do, however, take issue with "rules" that mean that the kids in their own non suite/aqua cabin aren't able to eat with their parents...or the parents having to eat in the MDR to dine with their kids. Just seems like a poorly thought out policy to me.

 

I think the solo issue is different....deserving it's own thread.

 

It is a long time now since I read the rules but I thought that Celebrity allows children under 12 [as, I believe, they are in the OP's case] to eat in Luminae with their parents for no additional charge.

 

I am sure that Curt who always seems to have these things to hand could confirm.