Shore excursion changes coming!

[IECalCruiser]

[quote name='QueenofEverything']My guess is that they have already decided to make this change. It only benefits them and in no way benefits the passengers. So, they make it look like it is a "trial" and guess what? It will be a huge success and become the new policy. They only make it look like the passengers have some sort of input on this. Cynical? Yes, but probably true![/QUOTE]As I said before, they appear to be rigging the "trial" to get the answer they want. In the process they will be removing a product differentiation that may hurt them in the future. Princess, are you listening?? Edited December 28, 2015 by IECalCruiser

[dfields1814]

I am on the Grand to Alaska this summer, and I hate the new prepayment thing. I booked a couple of Princess excursions that would be if interest to my young grandson. But if he were not on this cruise I would not book any excursions through Princess because of this prepayment thing. Normally I prefer to book my our own tours anyway but keeping the Princess excursions open as an option especially for tours a long way from the port where the roads and or traffic are not dependable. . Now, not to sure that option will still be there on future cruises.

[shredie]

[quote name='QueenofEverything']My guess is that they have already decided to make this change. It only benefits them and in no way benefits the passengers. So, they make it look like it is a "trial" and guess what? It will be a huge success and become the new policy. They only make it look like the passengers have some sort of input on this. Cynical? Yes, but probably true![/QUOTE]

Seems to be a lot of that lately. :(

[MicCanberra]

The survey is just a means of gathering the evidence required for the decision that they want to make.

[LeeRB]

[FONT="]I stumbled across this thread by accident, while looking for something else dealing with Princess; which seems to be how I find many things any more. [/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]Anyway, from reading the original posting; it seems that Princess has developed a rather severe case of visions of grandeur and self-importance lately. While I have only sailed on Carnival, RCCL and Princess; I do not include Princess among the ‘premium cruise lines’. I look to lines like Seabourn, Silver Seas, Paul Gauguin, Crystal, Azamara, and others that sail ships carrying 100’s vs. 1,000’s of passengers, and while I may be wrong, I also understand to be mostly all inclusive concerning beverages and excursions as the ‘premium’ class cruise lines. [/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]I wonder if the everyday lines sailing those multi-thousand passenger ships, including Princess, are not actually more interested in attracting cruisers in the 0-5 cruises group than those that have 15+ cruises under their belts. After all what did Carnival say to their Gold cruisers when they decided that they should get a coupon worth one free drink on their last night instead of being invited to a special reception that is now restricted to Platinum and Diamond members only:mad:. Besides, a lot of those that get that “free drink coupon” from Carnival have already paid for the drink back when they purchased their all you can drink package sticker at the start of the cruise. I can remember the days when they had a reception, before they invented the red card level, for everyone that had sailed Carnival before. As we advance up the food chain in the various loyalty programs it gets more expensive to the cruise lines to provide the perks they do give us, because there more of us. By doing their best to attract people that are at the low end of the loyalty programs they can save thousands on the free laundry, specialty restaurants, ‘cabin discounts’ and other perks they supposedly give us. Then when you add in the number non-North American cruisers sailing out of US ports these days, the number of passengers at or above Platinum seem to be making up a smaller and smaller number of passengers on board these massive ships. [/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]I am not saying they don’t want ‘seasoned cruiser’ coming back and are conspiring against those of us that have sailed a few times; but if it quacks like a duck and walks like a duck………:rolleyes:[/FONT]
[FONT="] [/FONT]
[FONT="]Well now that I have added my 2 cents to the discussion, back to my original quest.:)[/FONT] Edited January 11, 2016 by LeeRB
correction of a correction

[grouchomarx]

One of the things I liked so much about Princess vs NCL and RCL was NOT having to pre-pay excursions. Gives you a sense of freedom to choose something and then be able to change it up later if you've had a change of mind. How about this Princess - you wanna be like those other cruise lines, how about letting us book specialty dining ONLINE ahead of time so I don't have to run to my phone when I board. How about having some real entertainment that can compete? And give away some drink packages while you're at it.

[cruiseintoheaven]

My biggest frustration with this would be losing the ability to use OBC. We are booked on the Crown to Alaska in May and will have close to 1,000 in OBC between the "twice as nice" promo, shareholder, TA, FCD etc......really hope this "trial" fails and fails fast at that.

[Mapu]

And what about all that On Board Credit...(which can not be used to pre-pay). You would be "forced" to drink it away or spend it in their shops. No wonder they have become so "generous" with their offerings.

 

My vote is a "NO". Please don't change something that works because other lines are doing it. What became of standing out as different?

I actually laughed when I read the Princess rational. Funny how when it is because "other cruise lines" do it Princess should do it. Other cruise lines have done away with formal nights but Princess hasn't! I agree with all the offers including substantial onboard credit why would I want to pay for my shore excursions in advance?

Edited January 11, 2016 by Mapu

[SoCal Cruiser78]

I actually laughed when I read the Princess rational. Funny how when it is because "other cruise lines" do it Princess should do it...

 

Well, if Princess wants to play "follow the others", then I wish they would add paid priority check-in, CSD line, luggage delivery and tendering like Carnival's FTTF.

Edited January 13, 2016 by SoCal Cruiser78

[Woobstr112G]

The survey is just a means of gathering the evidence required for the decision that they want to make.

 

Mic;

 

Or the decision they've already made.....:D

 

Bob

[dadofjessie]

This is a tough one for me. I book what we want as soon as it becomes available. I plan on what I need to pay on our credit card when we get home for these when we travel on Princess so OBC is a good thing for us toward our bill as we don't drink much or buy much in any of the shops (nothing new). Without excursions on our ship board bill not sure on some trip OBC would get used up.

On the other hand when we travel on NCL you must pay for your excursion when you book them. Though we only had them cancel one excursion was not happy because they gave us OBC. They did not refund our credit card. They said it could go toward another excursion so it would balance out. This left a sour taste with NCL excursion which compared to Princess they are seriously lacking at any rate.

So flip a coin like not paying until on board but was one less item to bank for when we returned. Tough choice maybe, but with so many tours out there and smartphones etc. to do more on your own who can say what we may do if they go this route.

 

This is an interesting line for me. Most of my cruising experience has been with Celebrity. With Celebrity, you have to pay in advance of the cruise when you book the excursion. I suppose it gives the cruise line your money up front (they get the interest if they bank it) but it also allows them and the tour operators to more efficiently plan for numbers, etc. I never considered using OBC to pay for excursions, I leave the OBC for the DW to spend as she sees fit during the cruise. I am certainly not worried about prepaying for excursions and then they're being cancelled, you will get refunded.

 

On another note, you will notice that I will be doing a circle Japan and while the the official catalog for the excursions for my specific cruise are not yet available I notice that excursions for other cruises have the tours in Japanese consistently cheaper by $20 over the English tours. I wonder why.

[ChiefBoats]

My DW and I are not in favor in forced pre-pay. Even if offered we do not pre-pay. I would vote NO if it came to a survey vote.

 

_____________________________________

Island Princess 2008 Alaska, Island Princess 2009 (B2B) Alaska, Royal Princess (Old) 2010 Alaska, Golden Princess 2011 Alaska, Coral Princess 2012 Panama Canal, Star Princess 2012 Alaska, Island Princess 2013 Alaska, Crown Princess 2013 Western Caribbean, Caribbean Princess 2013 Western Caribbean, Royal Princess 2014 Eastern Caribbean, Royal Princess 2014 New England, Emerald Princess 2014 Western Caribbean, Emerald Princess 2015 Western Caribbean, Ruby Princess 2015 Alaska, Caribbean Princess 2015 Western Caribbean

[TNTLAMB]

There is one consideration I haven't seen mentioned. Princess largley operates their own excursions in the Alaska market. Up until NOW that has been the case with each of the other lines under the corporate umbrella. My understanding is the whole Alaska shore market is going to be a separate operation that will include all the corporate lines. Likely it will be called Princess Vacations or similar but will include the other lines and will be operated separately. By consolidating the various excursions there will be fewer seats available on the more popular excursions and prices very competitive as they will essentially dominate the market.

[Alaskanb]

We have had to prepay for excursions on the land component of our 2016 Alaska cruise tour is that normal? No prepay for the cruise component excursions.

[Loonbeam]

That is normal for land, yes... They operate on a different system then onboard.

 

We have had to prepay for excursions on the land component of our 2016 Alaska cruise tour is that normal? No prepay for the cruise component excursions.

[Loonbeam]

They have to hire an english speaking guide for those tours. Good english speaking guides are at a premium (not sure if a $20 per pax premium) but a good dual language experienced guide over there can cost upwards of $60 an hour.

 

On another note, you will notice that I will be doing a circle Japan and while the the official catalog for the excursions for my specific cruise are not yet available I notice that excursions for other cruises have the tours in Japanese consistently cheaper by $20 over the English tours. I wonder why.

[satxdiver]

Pax like the CONVENIENCE of pre-paying so that the bill at the end is not so high - REALLY? For those of us with OBC, this makes it hard to use it if we have to pre-pay our excursions or risk not getting to go on the excursion because it already is full before we board. One really bid plus for booking Princess is that we could pay for the excursions once onboard the ship. Little by little Princess is becoming like its competitors which means selecting the ship/cruise line is a non-issue. So much for loyalty. I would vote no after getting my laugh of the day by reading their "reasons".

[dfields1814]

I am on one of those Alaska test cruise and I hate it.

[notentirelynormal]

There is one consideration I haven't seen mentioned. Princess largley operates their own excursions in the Alaska market. Up until NOW that has been the case with each of the other lines under the corporate umbrella. My understanding is the whole Alaska shore market is going to be a separate operation that will include all the corporate lines. Likely it will be called Princess Vacations or similar but will include the other lines and will be operated separately. By consolidating the various excursions there will be fewer seats available on the more popular excursions and prices very competitive as they will essentially dominate the market.

 

I tried to get information on an excursion in Alaska a year or so ago and was told that if I was on a cruise ship I could not book them at all. They had a contract with the cruise line.

[shredie]

Mic;

 

Or the decision they've already made.....:D

 

Bob

 

That's the truth.

[nelume]

" My guess is that they have already decided to make this change. It only benefits them and in no way benefits the passengers. So, they make it look like it is a "trial" and guess what? It will be a huge success and become the new policy. They only make it look like the passengers have some sort of input on this. Cynical? Yes, but probably true! "

 

-----------

 

You got that right! Classic marketing BS. Issue a 'survey' to make the customer feel like they are part of the process, important...but we all know the corporate decisions are make before the press release goes out. Princess, don't insult our intelligence.

 

PRINCESS : not impressed. If you're going with 'an industry standard' and following other lines...thank you, but we won't follow you.

[LEtue]

We all know that Princess makes some of the revenue for each cruise from shore excursions and I guess they think prepay is the way to go. I book a mixture of independent and ship excursions for Alaska only and if Princess makes the switch I will not book any of their excursions - the same as when I sail with any other cruise line.....

 

This is one of the things that I really love about Princess and I haven't had any excursion canceled due to lack of participation so I don't buy the fact that too many are cancel and Princess can't plan ahead.

 

Not sure why Princess feels if the others are doing it - they should. :(

[IECalCruiser]

As I posted before, I do believe that Princess has decided to make the change and has rigged a test to get the results they want. There is a very high percentage of first time cruisers in Alaska who will not know that Princess didn't require prepayment of shore excursions and will be happy with the test. If this change is made I will only book Princess shore excursions if I don't have another option. There are some attractions that are not open to the public when a cruise is in port but Princess will contract with that attraction for a tour, the attraction may be so far away that there is a risk of a private tour missing the ship, or there just aren't enough people on a Roll Call to set up private tours.

[LEtue]

As I posted before, I do believe that Princess has decided to make the change and has rigged a test to get the results they want. There is a very high percentage of first time cruisers in Alaska who will not know that Princess didn't require prepayment of shore excursions and will be happy with the test. If this change is made I will only book Princess shore excursions if I don't have another option. There are some attractions that are not open to the public when a cruise is in port but Princess will contract with that attraction for a tour, the attraction may be so far away that there is a risk of a private tour missing the ship, or there just aren't enough people on a Roll Call to set up private tours.

 

I am sure you are right about most new cruisers to Alaska. But if they find their way to a roll call - they will be educated about independent options - which can be booked individually. There are some very good ones without ties to the cruise lines. The only excursion I would have trouble with on my upcoming trip is the small boat tour that leaves directly from the ship in Tracy Arm.

 

I guess we will see how far Princess goes! :(

[FritzG]

We're on the May 15th Ruby Alaska cruise, and when I look at the excursions on my CP it doesn't say anything about paying in advance. Am I missing something, or are the excursions for this cruise not part of the new policy/test?