Do you think X is headed in the right direction?

[Alsmez]

Yes, Celebrity is heading towards a revamp to attract a much higher % of younger patrons. That is a wise strategic business decision.

 

If Celebrity wishes to increase the % of younger patrons who are big spenders - then they have work to do if their recent ad is any indication. It would seem that such a strategic decision requires them to reduce the average length of their cruises to match the available time and budget of their new target market. I should suspect that 7 day cruises would increase in frequency vs the 14 days. Younger folks are social creatures and I am not sure the "ship in a ship" concept is something they support - my 29 year old niece finds it totally offensive and will not consider Celebrity who she feels is the worst offender.

ABoatNerd

 

This is interesting, especially the bit about younger cruisers feeling put off by a "class system." I'm older than the person quoted above but still younger than most of Celebrity's clientele (in my late 30s, took my first Celebrity cruise in my early 30s). I don't necessarily find the ship-within-a-ship concept offensive, but I do find it somewhat annoying that I can't customize my vacation by paying more for the things that are important to me and less for the things that are not. Take the Suite experience on Celebrity as an example. I would be happy to pay extra to dine in Luminae, as food is one of my major interests. However, do I care about the butler, the larger room and Michael's Club access that also comes with a suite? Not at all. I'm sure there are an equal number of people who love the large room and butler service but are happy dining in the MDR - so why pay more for Luminae?

 

I think the ability to create and customize exactly the experience that one is looking for tends to be quite important to Gen Xers and Millenials. Most people in those age groups are working full-time, and even those with plenty of vacation dollars to spend have limited vacation hours - we want to make sure we use them carefully.

 

It is interesting to me that Celebrity is moving towards being RCL with the drinking and video screen venues which appeal to the younger folks along with reducing the quality standards of food, towels, entertainment, service etc - all more to the level of RCL.

 

RCL already has both the young person/couple and the young person with children and the young person with 3 generation vacation travel business well in hand.

 

Question - What exactly is Celebrity going to offer that RCL does not already do now? If the answer to this question is "a bit" better food and slightly differently decorated ships well good luck Celebrity.

 

Celebrity used to have the "premium" category in the mass market in their control and they have chosen to drive them selves downwards towards the middle of the mass market where RCL lives. It will be interesting to watch Celebrity to see where it lands, most certainly much lower than the perch it used to have.

 

ABoatNerd

 

I actually see Celebrity as being quite different from RCL, which is one of the reasons we chose Celebrity again for our upcoming cruise. RCL, with its rock climbing walls and ice rinks, seems VERY family oriented to me, and the last thing I want in a cruise is a lot of kids on board!

 

I think Celebrity would do well to go further in the direction of marketing itself as a more adult-oriented line. DINKs, who tend to have much more money to spend, DEFINITELY want kid-free vacations, but there are also plenty of Gen Xers who want to leave the kids with Grandma so they can have an adult vacation, and there is no mass-market cruise line that has really established itself as THE cruise line for younger adults looking to have a relaxing but still fun vacation.

 

The drink packages are a step in the right direction here, but X needs to take it a step further by sprucing up the theming of their bars. Cellar Masters is a perfect example - it's dark and dim and generally depressing. I've never seen a wine bar in NYC with such an atmosphere - even if they're dim, they're warm and inviting, with tables arranged in a way that promotes mingling and conversation. Tweaking the entertainment toward a younger audience would help too (i.e., no glass-blowing!). There's plenty to be done to make Celebrity stand out from the mass market, it's just a question of whether the current management is willing to make those changes!

[TravelerThom]

...I think it would be interesting to see Azamara and Celebrity merge, having new builds in the 50,000 ton range, and really make them be an upscale, adult-oriented line with ports that venture beyond the ones the mainstream lines offer (basically, Azamara on new ships). Royal Caribbean could keep the basic itineraries and continue to compete with the other mainstream lines and large ships.

Despite the rather excited implication by excitedofharpenden that I know nothing of Azarama's background I can tell you that when RCCL bought Pullmantur Cruises in 2007 they announced that Pullmantur's Blue Dream would become the Celebrity Journey and that Pullmantur's Blue Moon would become the Celebrity Quest. Brochures were issued showing doctored photos with the ships in Celebrity livery with those names. It was not much over a month before the ships went into revenue sailings for RCCL that the creation of Azamara was announced. For several subsequent years the President of Celebrity was also the President of Azamara, and only when Pimentel arrived did Azamara have their own unique President.

[excitedofharpenden]

 

I think it would be interesting to see Azamara and Celebrity merge, having new builds in the 50,000 ton range, and really make them be an upscale, adult-oriented line with ports that venture beyond the ones the mainstream lines offer (basically, Azamara on new ships). Royal Caribbean could keep the basic itineraries and continue to compete with the other mainstream lines and large ships.

Heaven forbid they merge! They are quite different animals and I like the size of their ships. Azamara management have said for a long time they won't go much bigger. I hope they are true to their word. Even a ship 20 or 25 thousand tons more would cut back severely on the ports they can get close to. I love both Celebrity and Azamara for different reasons, but it's clear from my knowledge that they are run in a different way.

 

Phil

[hulamoon]

I thought they separated as the reviews had slid and they felt having dedicated eyes on the situation would improve the situation.

[TravelerThom]

Heaven forbid they merge! They are quite different animals and I like the size of their ships. Azamara management have said for a long time they won't go much bigger. I hope they are true to their word. Even a ship 20 or 25 thousand tons more would cut back severely on the ports they can get close to. I love both Celebrity and Azamara for different reasons, but it's clear from my knowledge that they are run in a different way.

Oceania went from 30K to 66K GRT on their newer ships. I agree that going from Azamara's current 30K GRT ships to 50K - 55k GRT would be a big change, and definitely not all for the better. Given your knowledge would you speculate where Azamara would be shipwise and otherwise five years from now?

[BrendaJ]

I'd be interested to know if Oceania cruisers prefer the old R ships, or their new builds, which are larger. Oceania and Azamara are in weird spot with their old ships - they offer a more inclusive experience than the premium lines, but they are limited to what they can do with most of the cabins. You can put all the luxurious finishes you want into a cabin - 170 square feet is still 170 square feet and doesn't feel like luxury to me. It seems to me that RCL would like to have a luxury brand, but I just don't think Azamara can be considered a luxury line until they have a new build. Only the true luxury lines are building small ships which is a shame, but I guess it just isn't profitable to sail a small ship unless the cabin prices are sky high.

[Gishua_]

Its pretty easy for me to see as to why they are re-branding. You yourself switched over to X awhile ago, you are getting older and the brand is getting ready for the next generation of cruisers. I used to compare X to the likes of a 'Four Seasons" hotel. Dull but nice luxury. HAL pretty much covers this. X is now going for a more 'W' Hotel feel which will usher in the mid age cruisers who don't want to cruise Carnival or Royal. Princess is great but a little conservative in decorations. I (A 30s something working professional with no kids) love X and all my friends (30-45 ish) working professionals with no kids or 1 kid love X too. X is simply adjusting their brand for the current and future demand. While the more conservative X is on its way out with its older customers. BYE.

[Bagokie]

Our first X cruise was in a CS with only a butler as a suite perk! Our second was in an M class PH when the only perks were a butler and two bottles of spirits!

We think, in fact we know, the suite experience has seriously improved!

 

For a while we took several RC cruises as well as X because we did enjoy some of the suite perks they offered, especially the conceirge lounge.

 

I think people are used to expecting more for their money AI resorts, hotels with included 'club' cocktail hours....

 

I think X is trying to keep up with trends like this, offering a more inclusive option if you want one.

 

On our last couple of cruises we have seen the number of younger cruisers increasing, could be the itineraries we chose but I think the marketing of bars like the Martini Bar are appealing to the twenty/thirty something market who have outgrown the RC experience themselves. They are looking for a calm, relaxing and 'chic' environment in which to spend their hard earned salaries. In contrast we have not seen that many family groups...

 

The world is changing, we all expect improvement and change but then we don't like change if it is something we particularly like! For example, much as I know the X speciality menus very well and would like to see some new items I would hate them to remove my favourites!

 

I have no intentions of abandoning ship now or in the near future! No ship or cruise line is perfect but X seems to offer the experience we are seeking at present.

 

 

This. We booked with Celebrity because we are looking for a calm, relaxing and stylish environment in which to spend our money. I don't see how seeking value triggers a culture shift of the type of cruisers loyal to Celebrity. Quite the contrary- those who seek and get value are more apt to spend the 5 or 6k-before flights - on Celebrity, again. Also, who wouldn't want to avoid the bar tab at the end of the cruise!? We booked an Alaskan cruise in September to avoid kids and luxuriate on a ship passing through glaciers. If we wanted to party like rock stars, we would go to an island in the sun.

Edited January 14, 2016 by Bagokie

[russg140]

I certainly had no idea that when I posed this question there would be 5 pages of replies in 2 days! Clearly everyone has their opinion.

 

In reading a great many of the responses I can only add this: Celebrity is changing in ways that don't appeal to me, personally, and the counter of "then choose another cruise line" is something I actually said we were considering in my OP. Some suggested it's "out with the old, in with the new", which I don't disagree with but don't fully understand as a long term business model.

 

The problem I see is that, for example, if a cruise line offers "exclusive" perks to 10% of the cabins (those paying the most), then later offers the same to the next 10%, and so on - at some point does the perk lose its "exclusive" status and allure and enticement to book the higher category? Then when all of the "perks" for booking the higher priced cabin follow suit, it stands to reason that the higher cost isn't justified since everyone now gets the same perks, unless new perks are offered.

 

This Sunday relatives are boarding the NCL Breakaway, having booked and enjoyed the Haven immensely last year. Riding the elevator going up to the Haven it was overheard more than once, "The Haven - that's where all the snobs are." So paying more and getting a more private experience now equates to being a snob? Sad.

 

We're on Millenium Transpacific in March in a RS. We'll see how it goes and make a decision whether to stick with X or not. As David Bowie (RIP) sang, "Turn and face the strange changes..."

[fleckle]

We can't fault Celebrity for trying to attract new customers, but it would be extremely foolish to drive away the age group that gets 52 weeks of vacation every year.

 

Having both the time and the disposable income to spend on cruising,

(retired, no mortgage or college loan or tuition payments), they additionally pull extra spending money out of their IRAs every year instead of paying in.

 

[Host Jazzbeau]

Possibly, but NCL's Haven and MSC"s Yacht Club (disclaimer: I have not partaken) seem a much more aggressive approach, and I would think more successful approach. If (or should I say when) Azamara folds, I see those customers heading much more to Oceania, or upscale to Crystal etc, or to Haven or Yacht Club.

 

Thom

 

So Azamara's two R-ships are too old, but Oceania's four (count 'em four!) R-ships are going to attract new customers? And Oceania was willing to pay CCL for Ocean Princess and then put millions into refurbishing her -- why, so she could go to the breakers? I don't see the logic here.

Edited January 15, 2016 by Host Jazzbeau

[Host Jazzbeau]

I think it would be interesting to see Azamara and Celebrity merge, having new builds in the 50,000 ton range, and really make them be an upscale, adult-oriented line with ports that venture beyond the ones the mainstream lines offer (basically, Azamara on new ships). Royal Caribbean could keep the basic itineraries and continue to compete with the other mainstream lines and large ships.

 

Azamara and Celebrity are 180 degrees apart in philosophy. Azamara, even with only 2 ships, goes to more ports every year than Celebrity because Azamara ships go from A to B, then B to C, then C to D whereas Celebrity ships tend to do the same round trip over and over for six months then switch to their other home and do it again. It would be too confusing to have both philosophies with the same marketing department [neither Princess nor HAL have managed it very well].

[TravelerThom]

So Azamara's two R-ships are too old, but Oceania's four (count 'em four!) R-ships are going to attract new customers? And Oceania was willing to pay CCL for Ocean Princess and then put millions into refurbishing her -- why, so she could go to the breakers? I don't see the logic here.

Obviously Azamara and Oceania feel that they can get 5 more profitable years out of these R ships or they wouldn't be refitting them. I imagine O got a price too good to pass up on Ocean Princess, although I have to think the ship was also shopped to Azamara. I question what either line will do with the R ships next refurb cycle. They still will be somewhere for some years after that, but I'll be surprised if they can continue as super-premium. O has at least a Plan B with some newer ships, but if Az has a Plan B they are keeping it awfully close to the vest. Azamara offers a good product, but I don't see any logic in not moving forward with something for the future.

[excitedofharpenden]

I'd be interested to know if Oceania cruisers prefer the old R ships, or their new builds, which are larger. Oceania and Azamara are in weird spot with their old ships - they offer a more inclusive experience than the premium lines, but they are limited to what they can do with most of the cabins. You can put all the luxurious finishes you want into a cabin - 170 square feet is still 170 square feet and doesn't feel like luxury to me. It seems to me that RCL would like to have a luxury brand, but I just don't think Azamara can be considered a luxury line until they have a new build. Only the true luxury lines are building small ships which is a shame, but I guess it just isn't profitable to sail a small ship unless the cabin prices are sky high.

 

Azamara aren't a luxury line, don't market themselves as such and as far as I'm aware have no plans to try and get there. I've stayed in standard size 170 sq feet cabins a number of times and they are just fine and storage is better than S-Class standard size cabins.

 

Phil

Edited January 15, 2016 by excitedofharpenden

[excitedofharpenden]

Obviously Azamara and Oceania feel that they can get 5 more profitable years out of these R ships or they wouldn't be refitting them. I imagine O got a price too good to pass up on Ocean Princess, although I have to think the ship was also shopped to Azamara. I question what either line will do with the R ships next refurb cycle. They still will be somewhere for some years after that, but I'll be surprised if they can continue as super-premium. O has at least a Plan B with some newer ships, but if Az has a Plan B they are keeping it awfully close to the vest. Azamara offers a good product, but I don't see any logic in not moving forward with something for the future.

 

Well at least you seem to have moved on from telling us Azamara are going to fold! I don't know what Azamara's medium to long term plan is. They pay people to do that stuff;). I do know that they looked at one of the other R Class ships that was up for sale, but it had not been looked after and would have needed substantial investment to bring it up to snuff. Both Azamara ships have been well maintained and once refurbished they will have at least 5 years left in them by which time hopefully there will be news of a new build or two.

 

Phil

[DYKWIA]

Its pretty easy for me to see as to why they are re-branding. You yourself switched over to X awhile ago, you are getting older and the brand is getting ready for the next generation of cruisers. I used to compare X to the likes of a 'Four Seasons" hotel. Dull but nice luxury. HAL pretty much covers this. X is now going for a more 'W' Hotel feel which will usher in the mid age cruisers who don't want to cruise Carnival or Royal. Princess is great but a little conservative in decorations. I (A 30s something working professional with no kids) love X and all my friends (30-45 ish) working professionals with no kids or 1 kid love X too. X is simply adjusting their brand for the current and future demand. While the more conservative X is on its way out with its older customers. BYE.

 

There is absolutely no way I would equate the standard Celebrity product (inside, oceanview, balcony) to the product offered by Four Seasons.

 

Celebrity might say they are about " Modern Luxury" but the product to me feels much more like a Crowne Plaza, Hyatt Regency, Marriott hotel - solid 4 - 4.5 star experience.