Princess Cruise lines discriminates against Single Travelers.

[ollienbertsmum]

I certainly understand that a no show is charged the full fare which has already been paid. It is just additional charges for items they might have bought had they been on the cruise that I question. You shouldn’t be charged for costs you don’t incur. At least if this happens I won’t be surprised. Better to be forewarned.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Oh - in addition, now I see the outrage.

[florisdekort]

Interesting about the upscale lines. Is the cost of the cruise actually lower or only lower when you compare to adding drink package, etc? Just wondering since I never really looked at these lines since they are pricier and I don't drink.

 

 

Azamara is very good for solo travellers as they offer a 25% (as opposed to 100%) single supplement on select sailings, and the list of applicable sailings is quite long. The also frequently have a second passenger half off sale “BOGOHO”, which for a solo traveller effectively means a 50% single supplement on all sailings (during the sale). I’ve used both options many times and sailed for much less $ per day than my average on X or Princess.

[SOLIVITA LADY]

Oh - in addition, now I see the outrage.

 

 

 

I’m not outraged just flabbergasted they could charge for expenses they think you might have incurred had you been onboard.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Al54]

Azamara is very good for solo travellers as they offer a 25% (as opposed to 100%) single supplement on select sailings, and the list of applicable sailings is quite long. The also frequently have a second passenger half off sale “BOGOHO”, which for a solo traveller effectively means a 50% single supplement on all sailings (during the sale). I’ve used both options many times and sailed for much less $ per day than my average on X or Princess.

 

 

 

Totally agree with you. Sometimes, Azamara and even Silversea are better deals for solos passengers than the mass market cruiselines, even if, this year, I find the list of applicable sailings shorter. And, over all, solos passengers are truly WELCOME on those lines, and not only tolerated for a November mediterranean cruise! To be honest, I never felt discriminated by Cunard or Celebrity and my last Princess solo booking encountered no problem; but, when you're travelling solo, it really worth to check all the cruiselines, even the premium/luxury, without prejudice.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

[julieh]

Having sailed 25+ cruises on Princess with my husband and spent a lot of money with them I now find myself on my own since sadly my husband passed away in 2016. I feel that after all those cruises suddenly i am penalised because I have lost my husband. Think cruise lines need to think about there loyal passengers and include single balcony cabins on their new build ships

Edited February 24, 2018 by julieh
Spelling

[RDC1]

I’m not outraged just flabbergasted they could charge for expenses they think you might have incurred had you been onboard.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

If they did want to set up such a penalty then what they would probably use would be the rev ratio for example all of the CCL cruise lines in total get 77% of their revenue from fares and 23% from on board spend. For RCL lines it is 73.7% and 26.3%. NCLH has 72.7% and 27.8%.

 

So one would expect the penalty to be based upon such documented ratios. If such a penalty were to exist that is the info the line would use to establish it.

 

I doubt such a penalty exists because it is not referenced in the terms and conditions. One would also think that if there was such a penalty they would need to identify the dollar value at time of booking.

[pablo222]

If they did want to set up such a penalty then what they would probably use would be the rev ratio for example all of the CCL cruise lines in total get 77% of their revenue from fares and 23% from on board spend. For RCL lines it is 73.7% and 26.3%. NCLH has 72.7% and 27.8%.

 

They don't do any of this. They simply re-fare the remaining passenger as a single.

 

This is usually done when there is third-party insurance involved.

 

Two passengers book a cabin.

 

The first cancels for some reason. Cruise line handles that 'normally', by charging cancellation

fee, up to full amount -- depending on how many days before sailing.

 

Remaining passenger is now single-occupancy. Cruise line can re-fare remaining passenger at single fare.

Most cruise insurance covers this, so the passenger doesn't really care.

 

If you were a bean counter at the cruise line, and knew you could collect this additional fee from insurance,

would you do it?

 

Now we have people writing that the cruise line will have to show them where it says this...

 

Or what? Are they going to huff and puff and...

 

All the cruise line has to do is deny boarding, and the passenger is left on the pier crying 'show me'...

[RDC1]

They don't do any of this. They simply re-fare the remaining passenger as a single.

 

This is usually done when there is third-party insurance involved.

 

Two passengers book a cabin.

 

The first cancels for some reason. Cruise line handles that 'normally', by charging cancellation

fee, up to full amount -- depending on how many days before sailing.

 

Remaining passenger is now single-occupancy. Cruise line can re-fare remaining passenger at single fare.

Most cruise insurance covers this, so the passenger doesn't really care.

 

If you were a bean counter at the cruise line, and knew you could collect this additional fee from insurance,

would you do it?

 

Now we have people writing that the cruise line will have to show them where it says this...

 

Or what? Are they going to huff and puff and...

 

All the cruise line has to do is deny boarding, and the passenger is left on the pier crying 'show me'...

 

 

The reason for the discussion is that someone previously had mentioned reading that in the case of a no show of a dual booked passenger, the remaining passenger would be incur a an additional charge beyond the fare to account for lost revenue from the no show passenger. That was the basis for the discussion.

[ollienbertsmum]

The reason for the discussion is that someone previously had mentioned reading that in the case of a no show of a dual booked passenger, the remaining passenger would be incur a an additional charge beyond the fare to account for lost revenue from the no show passenger. That was the basis for the discussion.

 

We don't seem to have had any concrete evidence for this policy beyond what someone recalls "reading" - or have I missed something??

[Al54]

Sorry, there's an evidence on MSC european website : art. 13.2 and 13.3 of the "general conditions" :

- 13.2 : in case of no show 100% cancellation fees for the missing passenger (normal)

- 13.3 : if the original booking was in a double cabin, the remaining passenger will be also (the french word used is "également") charged with a 100% single supplement (or any current single supplement) and will be responsible for asking to his (her) own travel insurance a compensation for the missing passenger cancellation fees applied by the cruiseline.

It clearly means that if you're making a "dummy" double booking in Europe, you'll be charged with a 100% no show cancellation fees AND a 100% single supplement : very expensive cruise for a mass market cruiseline!

I checked the american website, and didn't find this condition. So, it's probably against the american law.

And yes, I can confirm what another person said on this thread, a few years ago I read on europeans "general conditions" that the cruiseline applied a 125% single supplement, the 25% being the compensation for the cruiseline "lost". But now, it seems they prefer to simply forbid a solo booking.

The morality is :

- Don't be european

- Don't try to play with the cruiseline rules

- Don't book on a "mass market family oriented" cruiseline when you're travelling solo....except if you are a great fan of glittering stairs!

 

 

Envoyé de mon iPad en utilisant Forums

[ollienbertsmum]

Sorry, there's an evidence on MSC european website : art. 13.2 and 13.3 of the "general conditions" :

- 13.2 : in case of no show 100% cancellation fees for the missing passenger (normal)

- 13.3 : if the original booking was in a double cabin, the remaining passenger will be also (the french word used is "également") charged with a 100% single supplement (or any current single supplement) and will be responsible for asking to his (her) own travel insurance a compensation for the missing passenger cancellation fees applied by the cruiseline.

 

 

 

Envoyé de mon iPad en utilisant Forums

 

Thanks for that

[pablo222]

The reason for the discussion is that someone previously had mentioned reading that in the case of a no show of a dual booked passenger, the remaining passenger would be incur a an additional charge beyond the fare to account for lost revenue from the no show passenger. That was the basis for the discussion.

 

Lots of things are posted here. A few are even true.

 

Perhaps you can post a link to the MSC contract detailing the extra charge to recover onboard revenue.

 

That would be helpful for everyone.

 

Regardless, this is the princess board, and I posted what can happen on princess.

[RDC1]

Lots of things are posted here. A few are even true.

 

Perhaps you can post a link to the MSC contract detailing the extra charge to recover onboard revenue.

 

That would be helpful for everyone.

 

Regardless, this is the princess board, and I posted what can happen on princess.

 

If you read the previously posted topics. It was another poster that said that they had seen it. I then posted that it was not in their passenger contract. Another person than said that there is no way that they would know how much someone would have spent. It response to that I posted how such a fee could work based upon fare vs onboard split data which all cruise lines have, if such a fee existed which I doubt.

[RDC1]

We don't seem to have had any concrete evidence for this policy beyond what someone recalls "reading" - or have I missed something??

 

You are correct it does not appear to be in the US cruise contract. My post was strictly to convey how they could implement such a fee, if it existed.

[pablo222]

If you read the previously posted topics. It was another poster that said that they had seen it.

 

I read them. I dismissed them as a single data point.

 

You seem quite willing to extrapolate from this.

 

You apparently, have more free time than I do..

 

 

This is the princess board, no one has ever claimed (as far as I know) that princess makes some

sort of predictive-spend assessment.

 

What I have read here is that people on princess have been re-fared as a single.

[kerryincork]

I do. Two people drink more and spend more than one.

But I know many cruisers who don't spend a penny extra on board. Realistically there must be a large range of spending on board. Those who spend big and those who spend $50. They can't possibly know which one the OP. Inversely they can't know if the couple they do put in the cabin will spend anything.

 

Sent from my VTR-L09 using Forums mobile app

[RDC1]

I read them. I dismissed them as a single data point.

 

You seem quite willing to extrapolate from this.

 

You apparently, have more free time than I do..

 

 

This is the princess board, no one has ever claimed (as far as I know) that princess makes some

sort of predictive-spend assessment.

 

What I have read here is that people on princess have been re-fared as a single.

 

No one has claimed that. However, CCL does report Fare vs On Board breakdowns in their 10Q and 10K filing so one can be certain that they have that data for each of their owned cruise lines, including Princess, and is an important part of their business decisions. It most likely is a key factor is their pricing and availability of solo cabins. Since their total revenue for a solo would be approximately 10% less in revenue than a double, even with the 100% solo supplement.

[RDC1]

But I know many cruisers who don't spend a penny extra on board. Realistically there must be a large range of spending on board. Those who spend big and those who spend $50. They can't possibly know which one the OP. Inversely they can't know if the couple they do put in the cabin will spend anything.

 

Sent from my VTR-L09 using Forums mobile app

 

That is why they use their data and make pricing decisions off of statistical analysis. They do not know what any one nameless individual might spend, but they do know what their average and median spend is for one person in a given class of cabin. I would expect that they probably know that break down by passenger age, number of previous cruises, country of origin, given cruise route, etc.