The legacy of Lisa Lutloff-Perlo

[lola2013]

Marelaine...

believe it or not, my first cruise was Cunard! They used to have two small ships...the Countess and the Princess that sailed weekly from San Juan. I have done 6 total cruises on the Countess, which has sadly been put out to pasture. Unfortunately, I don't see Cunard in my future due to the prices.

Susan

[K.T.B.]

I am not sure why anyone thinks bad behavior and stateroom are linked.

 

Some cruises are more party like, depending on cultures and also short cruises with unlimited drinking packages.

 

I remember the complaints from the infamous doll cruise, and so glad I wasn't on it. It was tough for many passengers and had no drinking among the most difficult passengers. That said, I find shorter cruises with drink packages more party like.

 

I do think the suite class is a double edged sword so to speak. If people must book up to get the same benefits they used to get or a little bit more they are going to say, as we have, now that I am spending this much, is this the best line for me?

 

The evolution since 2011 is quite stunning, the changes have been so big in this short time it's a wonder any of us can keep up. At times I feel for the staff, different rules on different ships and they are the ones to deliver bad news to passengers about benefit changes. I heard this over and over, well on Reflection, we did it this way....and me saying...well the press release says this....

 

Now of course, sometimes it's good news, but there is something to be said about knowing what you paid for, the staff knowing what you paid for, and consistency.

 

It's because some people are too busy keeping their noses stuck up in the air and see bad behavior as "low rent" or "unsophisticated". EVERYONE on that cruise has paid thousands to be on it. Some less, some more.

 

I can say that the few people I have met on the cruise who were in suites were probably the most down to earth people I've met. One of those couples were farmers and if you saw them people would make assumptions of their character.... Just because they had on very worn jeans and t-shirts around the ship, that didn't make them "low rent". It meant they were comfortable. Did they get drunk? No. Did they have an extremely good time to the point of giddiness? Oh yes. I can only imagine how some on here would have perceived them. :rolleyes:

 

IMO, the changes being made with Celebrity aren't bringing a lower class of people on board. What the changes are doing is nickle and diming all the passengers for the least little thing, while downgrading the experience. That's NOT the customer, that's the product.

 

if people are not liking product and wish to move on, fine. But blaming the passengers for it is like blaming the theater audience for your dislike of the Star Wars movie. :)

[Mynki]

When I went to book my first cruise many years ago, my very wise travel agent told me he'd never put me on a different line (whose name also begins with a "C";)

 

A wise man indeed! It will be a cold day in hell before I sail with those yobbish louts on Cunard! :D :D :D

[lola2013]

I became very good friends with some of the staff on Cunard...still exchange holiday cards many years later. Interestingly, when I told them that one day I would like to sail on the QEII, they told me I wouldn't be happy because of the "classes."

[Aquahound]

It's because some people are too busy keeping their noses stuck up in the air and see bad behavior as "low rent" or "unsophisticated". EVERYONE on that cruise has paid thousands to be on it. Some less, some more.

 

Did you say this right? :confused: I'm sure I'm not alone when I say bad behavior is bad behavior. When folks behave badly, they deserve anything people want to call them. If calling out bad behavior means my nose is stuck up in the air, then so be it.

[Orator]

Sorry to get back to the topic, but did you notice that the stock has gone over $100 a share to a new 52 week high. Somebody at Corporate must be doing something right to gain the confidence of the investment community. Hate to say this again, but in the corporate universe the consumer is important only to the degree that they generate profits at a good margin. The CEO is ultimatly judged on performance.

[hulamoon]

i think I was more satisfied when the stock was tanking. Lol

 

It's great they are doing well, good for them. If more people like the changes than the ones dissatisfied and less loyal they shall continue to do well.

[Karynanne]

i think I was more satisfied when the stock was tanking. Lol

 

 

 

It's great they are doing well, good for them. If more people like the changes than the ones dissatisfied and less loyal they shall continue to do well.

 

 

The stock is doing well...ships are full...but so many of we long-time cruisers with Celebrity have reference points, and can clearly see where all the recent changes are heading.

 

The product is changing. I have always adapted well to change, as long as it fits into my lifestyle needs. We have six cruises booked right now, and time will tell if we actually sail all of them.

[ghstudio]

Sorry to get back to the topic, but did you notice that the stock has gone over $100 a share to a new 52 week high. Somebody at Corporate must be doing something right to gain the confidence of the investment community. Hate to say this again, but in the corporate universe the consumer is important only to the degree that they generate profits at a good margin. The CEO is ultimatly judged on performance.

 

Given that their major cost is fuel, the profit picture is, of course, rosy. I don't have the details, but the question is how the on board revenue and booking revenue (not future bookings) are doing.....however, they are not driving the stock price. Sometimes a CEO just steps in good xxxx like plummeting fuel prices and has little to do with increased profits.

 

I can safely assure you that the savings from cutting out the daily water to aqua passengers is a rounding error on any chart...although the words look good on a list of "revenue enhancing actions" which Lisa, of course shows to the holding company.

[hulamoon]

The Aq water seems silly to me, unless they are trying to save stateroom attendant work, as most of the guests have a drink package. So it is just a bit irritating and a nudge towards packages.

 

We are in the same boat with 5 scheduled and we also will reassess each.

[chicagopaul]

I agree that the Aqua water thing is a bit ridiculous especially with the pricing of AQ cabins. I think the delivery of water might be slightly more the issue. I like the idea of water is available upon request. This way there is less waste.

 

Regarding fuel prices though, I need to respectively disagree. Large companies such as Celebrity / Royal, purchase fuel contracts way in advance, just like airlines. The current low oil prices may help them with future fuel contracts, but likely are not hitting their bottom line right now. The only way to know this is to check out their 10Q or 10K...I'm not a stockholder so I haven't cared to review them.

 

I think it is premature to vote positive or negative on the current CEO. I think we need to see her in her job for at least 18 to 24 months before a judgement can be made.

 

Personally there are some changes I'm not crazy about and of course I'd prefer a cheaper cruise price. But I realize the industry is changing. We, for instance always purchase the drink package. So raising prices to include the drink package is fine by me. Suite prices have increased dramatically, but the suites have some new perks so those new perks need to be taken into account.

 

At the end of the day, it is a changing industry that Celebrity is competing with. As long as their ships are sailing full then their pricing will remain high. As long as the food in Luminae, Blu and Specialties remains great and the ships are clean and the service continues to be excellent, we will continue to sail them.

 

Either way, as the year is coming to a close I think we are ALL very lucky to have the ability to choose to sail Celebrity or another line. With that being said, Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!

[ghstudio]

I really doubt that they couldn't have just added $10 to the price of an aqua cabin without anyone even thinking about the "increase" for even a micro-second. The water is is just a cheap slap in the face change...clearly with some ulterior motive which remains elusive.

[hcat]

I really doubt that they couldn't have just added $10 to the price of an aqua cabin without anyone even thinking about the "increase" for even a micro-second. The water is is just a cheap slap in the face change...clearly with some ulterior motive which remains elusive.

 

I think you are correct..it's often the next move that was the real objective...

 

...some X CEOs and the famous chefs that have been featured have not lasted very long...they were still hawking one chef's big coffee table cookbook after he was gone...

Edited December 23, 2015 by hcat

[TeaBag]

Just looked up the price today of the AQ cabin we have booked for April. It is nearly twice the price! Surely they could afford a few bottles of water with these atrocious prices?

 

OTOH, the shares rose above $100 today for the first time (settled back to $99 before closing), so some people will be very pleased with the CEO.

Edited December 23, 2015 by TeaBag

[Northern Aurora]

I really doubt that they couldn't have just added $10 to the price of an aqua cabin without anyone even thinking about the "increase" for even a micro-second. The water is is just a cheap slap in the face change...clearly with some ulterior motive which remains elusive.

 

ghstudio: If we ever meet on a cruise I am going to buy you a martini! The elimination of the long-standing daily delivery of water to Aqua staterooms really is a cheap slap in the face -- as are the answers some us, including me, have received to their letters and e-mails.

[Mynki]

So, six months on, how is she doing?

[florisdekort]

I'm stunned people on here think that a bottle of water in Aqua class would be a Board Room conversation.

Second, just as it was pity of X to scratch a $10 perk, it's pity of people on here to still be whining about it 12 months later. First world luxury problem.

[florisdekort]

Sorry to get back to the topic, but did you notice that the stock has gone over $100 a share to a new 52 week high. Somebody at Corporate must be doing something right to gain the confidence of the investment community. Hate to say this again, but in the corporate universe the consumer is important only to the degree that they generate profits at a good margin. The CEO is ultimatly judged on performance.

 

 

Well said. By all objective measures, as a CEO, she's doing great.

[Mr. Click]

If I am a shareholder I am happy with her work, as customer, I have some issues. It is two different worlds. Take a look at United Airlines under Jeff Smiesek after the the great CO/UA merger. They cut a lot of corners, annoyed and lost a lot of high value customers as they cut benefits for their Elite/Premier members and added fees for everyone. They also alienated a huge number of their employees, replaced many with outsourcing. Smiesk is gone now, not for the stock's performance but for being under investigation by the feds for bribes paid in NY/NJ and the new CEO is taking the opportunity to correct some of the past mistakes by going back to be being more passenger/customer friendly. Companies need to listen to their customers or their customers become someone else's customers, loyalty perks or not.

[Cruzinram]

CHIC did it for me. After 30 cruises on Celebrity over 20 years, we will be moving over to Cunard. Class elegance, and tradition, like cruises used to be.

[Cruzaholic41]

I just recently cruised Eclipse and if this is the way Celebrity is headed with their entertainment and service, I'm a very happy cruiser. It was very befitting the name "Celebrity." I loved it. And kudos to the CD, Richard Spacey, who brought over some energy from RCI.

[K.T.B.]

CHIC did it for me. After 30 cruises on Celebrity over 20 years, we will be moving over to Cunard. Class elegance, and tradition, like cruises used to be.

 

Speaking of chic vs. formal, I noticed something very interesting on my last cruise. The majority of the people who had set dining times we're mostly dressed up on the "formal nights", while those who were "select" were definitely not. And while this probably is NOT the case for every cruise or dining time, it was the case for mine.

[bbeltmom]

As a professional woman, I am offended at how LLP is shamelessly using 'Captain Kate' as a marketing tool. No slur intended to the lovely Captain, but it starts to make you wonder if she was made Captain for one reason only (and before I get flamed for this - I am only suggesting that this is what the perception could be).

 

As LLP was cutting back and offending loyal Celebrity customers immediately after arriving at her new position, she was gallivanting around the country hosting and attending exclusive events. But she placated people by giving back the chocolates that should never have been taken away in the first place (another marketing ploy?). I am anticipating that very soon the water to Aqua class will be restored and she will be in the 'good books' again (and since most people sail with a bev pkg these days it will really cost X nothing!).

 

According to these boards, at least the previous CEO was contactable and although LLP promised an e-mail address that she could be contacted at she has never followed through.

 

The company that I work for had a CEO that did nothing but watch the bottom line and as he watched - the more he cut back the more it fell until he left with his golden parachute and our stock price at record low and employee moral down there in the toilet with it. It has taken about 5 years for the company to even start to recover from his damage.

 

I hope she sees the error of her ways before it is too late.

[Ma Bell]

Well said. By all objective measures, as a CEO, she's doing great.

 

The stock is at $76 today.

[Mynki]

The stock is at $76 today.

 

Indeed. A quick look at FDK's posting history will show a fascination with snapping at other forum members as opposed to factual information. ;)

 

Since it's high of $102.73 at the end of december 2015 the stock is now tanking with an almost 25% fall in just 6 months. By my 'objective measures' I'd suggest shareholders could be happier! But as has been pointed out, share prices and customer satisfaction are two completely different worlds. How happy are those sailing onboard?