Charge for second entree?

[sparks1093]

23 minutes ago, CRUISEFAN0001 said:

I knew the prices...as we have consumed maybe 1-2 drinks on an average cruise. However making a non-deal ($416) cost sound like some kind a deal misleads other folks trying to get a legitimate answer. It's pretty common knowledge that the drink packages are the biggest profit center for cruise lines in general and certainly with RCI. While some folks might justify spending exorbitant amounts on booze on a cruise (it's their money so for them it's OK), making it sound like everyone should consider it does others a dis-service. 

It's only a deal if the numbers work for you. For you the numbers don't work so obviously you wouldn't even consider the package. But even a moderate drinker can make the package worthwhile IF they want to drink something more than the included coffee, tea, lemonade, etc. 

[Mikew0805]

34 minutes ago, CRUISEFAN0001 said:

WOW...that kind of consumption is not even a remote possibility for any of the couples we've ever cruise with nor us.  But as for the math...yeah...you "saved" some money.

 

We did a 10-day cruise out of Sydney...each couple brought their 4 allowed bottles of wine (12 in total)...mission accomplished for under $300 for 6 people.

Based on the price on the Harmony in January... a kahlua and cream drink with gratuity was $11.74. That is roughly 4 and a half drinks a day per person to get to $750.  Not really something I would think of as excessive consumption. 

[CRUISEFAN0001]

Just now, sparks1093 said:

It's only a deal if the numbers work for you. For you the numbers don't work so obviously you wouldn't even consider the package.

Well said, and we'd have to agree. One size doesn't fit all.

[CRUISEFAN0001]

1 minute ago, Mikew0805 said:

Based on the price on the Harmony in January... a kahlua and cream drink with gratuity was $11.74. That is roughly 4 and a half drinks a day per person to get to $750.  Not really something I would think of as excessive consumption. 

Noticed your avatar...hmmmm.

 

Excessive is certainly a subjective term, and we've seen a variety of assessments on what makes up "excessive.

 

 

[Mikew0805]

3 minutes ago, CRUISEFAN0001 said:

Noticed your avatar...hmmmm.

 

Excessive is certainly a subjective term, and we've seen a variety of assessments on what makes up "excessive.

 

 

What about my avatar? I am a nurse. 

 

I can 2 drinks before I have to go lay down, or stop walking.. so excessive for me would be more than two. People like me do not buy the drink packages though.

 

However, most people that drink regularly are not affected the same way, and I would think that 4.5 drinks a day for some may not even get them a buzz, especially if spread out over 12 hours? 

 

 

Edited March 5, 2019 by Mikew0805
spelling

[CRUISEFAN0001]

Just now, Mikew0805 said:

What about my avatar? I am a nurse. 

 

I can 2 drinks before I have to go lay down, or stop walking.. so excessive for me would be more than two. People like me do not buy the drink packages though.

 

However, most people that drink regularly are not affected the same way, and I would think that 4.5 drinks a day for some may not even get them a buzz, especially is spread out over 12 hours? 

OK....just said I noticed your avatar....thought it was impressive.

[HBE4]

24 minutes ago, CRUISEFAN0001 said:

OK....just said I noticed your avatar....thought it was impressive.

 

I thought you might have been implying that since the person is a Registered Nurse, they would not condone "excessive" (whatever that is) drinking. My bad. I was wrong.

 

It's do agree, it's an impressive avatar.

 

And no doubt about it, drinking while on a cruise is expensive. The package makes to cost more bearable for certain people (me). But if I'm going on a budget vacation, I'd probably consider something else. Camping maybe....or a long weekend on a beach within a days driving distance.

 

And a couple of bottles of wine is a poor substitute for the drink package that allows me a vast array of drink options, any time , anywhere.  But again, that's me. For you, a couple of glasses of wine per cruise is fine.  I make no judgements. 😉

 

[CRUISEFAN0001]

5 minutes ago, HBE4 said:

 

I thought you might have been implying that since the person is a Registered Nurse, they would not condone "excessive" (whatever that is) drinking. My bad. I was wrong.

 

It's do agree, it's an impressive avatar.

 

And no doubt about it, drinking while on a cruise is expensive. The package makes to cost more bearable for certain people (me). But if I'm going on a budget vacation, I'd probably consider something else. Camping maybe....or a long weekend on a beach within a days driving distance.

 

And a couple of bottles of wine is a poor substitute for the drink package that allows me a vast array of drink options, any time , anywhere.  But again, that's me. For you, a couple of glasses of wine per cruise is fine.  I make no judgements. 😉

 

👍

[Balsam12]

5 hours ago, HBE4 said:

 

Not directly.

 

But perhaps given the choice of raising the price of the drink package OR charging for a 2nd entree, by choosing the charge for a 2nd entree, the drink package is given a temporary reprieve from price increases. ...emphasis on temporary.

 

Charging for 2nd entree is certainly not going to lower the cost of anything.

Precisely the point I was making.

[Ocean Boy]

1 hour ago, Balsam12 said:

Precisely the point I was making.

Charging for something in the MDR is not going to have any affect on the price of drink packages, temporary or otherwise.

[Balsam12]

4 hours ago, Ocean Boy said:

Charging for something in the MDR is not going to have any affect on the price of drink packages, temporary or otherwise.

Then you have no idea about economics.

 

Cruise line needs to increase revenue. They have many options, including charging for extra food, or increasing the cost of the beverage package.

 

They choose to charge for extra food. It has now had an effect on the beverage package because they chose not to increase the price.

[tinkr2]

 

 

 

16 hours ago, Sitzmark said:

I was once eating at a restaurant in South Carolina that was reputed to have very good food.  I was told the Collard greens were excellent.  I had never had them before so I figured, go for it and try something new.  I hated them.  When the server asked if there was something wrong with them, I assured him that they were probably just fine but I didn't care for them.  He wanted to bring something else but I assured him it was neither his fault or the cooks fault that I chose something I didn't like.  I'll send back improperly prepared food, but my mistakes are on me, I now know not to order that item.  The ribs and other items I ordered for my dinner were excellent.

 Exactly! Distinguishing the not for me versus the prepared poorly or spoiled.

 

15 hours ago, HBE4 said:

 

Totally agree.  Yes, 15 drinks a day sounds pretty excessive, especially if you are at a college frat house or someones house for a dinner party from 8-11 pm.

 

However, 1 drink an hour for 15 hours, most people will be bloated and/or sleepy long before getting a buzz.  Exception being the aforementioned Long Island Ice Tea and similar super-charged drinks.

 Long Island Teas have 2oz. of liquor, as does a manhattan , a real martini, an old fashioned or any liquor on the rocks. The problem with teas is not the amount of liquor in them, its generally bc they are sweeter and chugged.

[Balsam12]

2 hours ago, tinkr2 said:

 Long Island Teas have 2oz. of liquor, as does a manhattan , a real martini, an old fashioned or any liquor on the rocks. The problem with teas is not the amount of liquor in them, its generally bc they are sweeter and chugged.

A correctly made Long Island iced tea has four shots of alcohol.. Rum, Vodka, Gin and Triple Sec (e.g. Cointreau).

 

A Manhattan or Old fashioned has two shots of alcohol ...Whisky/Bourbon and Vermouth.

 

I don't know about "oz" as I use the metric system like pretty much all of the civilised world, but from what my converter tells me, 1oz is equal to 30ml, which is a standard shot.

Sweet drinks are definitely "chugged" more than ones like Manhattans (or my favourite, the Rusty Nail), and when they have more alcohol to start with...

 

[Ocean Boy]

5 hours ago, Balsam12 said:

Then you have no idea about economics.

 

Cruise line needs to increase revenue. They have many options, including charging for extra food, or increasing the cost of the beverage package.

 

They choose to charge for extra food. It has now had an effect on the beverage package because they chose not to increase the price.

Ok, whatever you say. Do you really think those guys at RCI can't multitask? They look at each department individually and attempt to maximize all areas. 

 

Feel free to tell me what I have no idea about. I won't be so rude back to you.

[Balsam12]

25 minutes ago, Ocean Boy said:

Ok, whatever you say. Do you really think those guys at RCI can't multitask? They look at each department individually and attempt to maximize all areas. 

 

Feel free to tell me what I have no idea about. I won't be so rude back to you.

You were both rude and wrong when you said that charging for extra food had no effect on the price of the beverage package.

 

And you have no idea about economics.

 

Of course they look at every department. Then they decide to either introduce new charges or increase existing charges. For the case in point, they decided to introduce a new charge for extra food. In turn, this means they didn't increase existing charges... ergo, the beverage package stayed at the same price.

 

I am not for a minute suggesting the price of the beverage package will decrease, nor am I suggesting it will never increase. The simple fact is that while they are looking at other areas to increase revenue, they are not increasing (or limiting)  the beverage package.

Edited March 6, 2019 by Balsam12

[CRUISEFAN0001]

6 hours ago, Balsam12 said:

Then you have no idea about economics.

 

Cruise line needs to increase revenue. They have many options, including charging for extra food, or increasing the cost of the beverage package.

 

They choose to charge for extra food. It has now had an effect on the beverage package because they chose not to increase the price.

There is some truth to your point. Here are the real economics:

 

In the case of most cruise lines...there is an operating cost and also (separately) profit centers.

 

Most cruises are scheduled and priced to basically break even, in that there are fuel, personnel (the largest segment), licenses & fees for ports, and other expense that vary depending on the ship and destination. This is why (for example) a Panama Canal cruise costs more since there is an added "passage tax per vessel". Food for a full ship of passengers is also one of those costs that is "baked into" (pun intended) the overall operating costs.  As specific ship bookings fill up the available cabins, their operating costs get met.

 

"Sales" are also done periodically for cruises to assure enough cabins are sold to cover their operating costs. A ship does not have to be sold out entirely to meet those operating costs. If sold out, there is actually a slight excess in revenue.

 

Optional services (such as excursions, drink packages, specialty restaurants, internet services, etc.) are the real profit centers of a cruise line. Recently they added "The Key", which is a new optional service.

 

On every cruise, the assumption is a full passenger list (as far as food brought on board). In reality, not all the food is consumed on most cruises. Due to allergies, lack of attendance for dinner, variety of appetite, planned excess of some food portions, and other factors, there is virtually always extra food in the main dining room for passengers who request it - in fact - we have personally experienced several cruises where servers practically begged passengers "are you sure you don't want another..." - to avoid having food go to waste.

 

Until and unless the overall cost vs revenue model changes, it's reasonable to assume things won't change in the main dining room when it comes to the availability of an extra entree, appetizer, or other meal portion.

Edited March 6, 2019 by CRUISEFAN0001

[Balsam12]

22 minutes ago, CRUISEFAN0001 said:

There is some truth to your point. Here are the real economics:

 

In the case of most cruise lines...there is an operating cost and also (separately) profit centers.

 

Most cruises are scheduled and priced to basically break even, in that there are fuel, personnel (the largest segment), licenses & fees for ports, and other expense that vary depending on the ship and destination. This is why (for example) a Panama Canal cruise costs more since there is an added "passage tax per vessel". Food for a full ship of passengers is also one of those costs that is "baked into" (pun intended) the overall operating costs.  As specific ship bookings fill up the available cabins, their operating costs get met.

 

"Sales" are also done periodically for cruises to assure enough cabins are sold to cover their operating costs. A ship does not have to be sold out entirely to meet those operating costs. If sold out, there is actually a slight excess in revenue.

 

Optional services (such as excursions, drink packages, specialty restaurants, internet services, etc.) are the real profit centers of a cruise line. Recently they added "The Key", which is a new optional service.

 

On every cruise, the assumption is a full passenger list (as far as food brought on board). In reality, not all the food is consumed on most cruises. Due to allergies, lack of attendance for dinner, variety of appetite, planned excess of some food portions, and other factors, there is virtually always extra food in the main dining room for passengers who request it - in fact - we have personally experienced several cruises where servers practically begged passengers "are you sure you don't want another..." - to avoid having food go to waste.

 

Until and unless the overall cost vs revenue model changes, it's reasonable to assume things won't change in the main dining room when it comes to the availability of an extra entree, appetizer, or other meal portion.

I can't argue with anything you have said. It all makes perfect sense.

 

It does not, however, change what I posted...

[Ocean Boy]

2 hours ago, Balsam12 said:

You were both rude and wrong when you said that charging for extra food had no effect on the price of the beverage package.

 

 

I was rude for saying that?

[The Fun Researcher]

17 minutes ago, Ocean Boy said:

I was rude for saying that?

 

No, you weren’t.

 

Dan

[Iamcruzin]

  "Keeping the drink price down " in relation to charging more for something else has to be the worst example of cause and effect.  The drink package price fluctuates more than the Dow Jones average and it's base price is different based on the ship and sailing. All pricing is based on what the market will handle. This concept of keeping prices down every time they charge more for something doesn't happen. Removing perks, down grading food quality, up charging is all to make a profit and has nothing to do with keeping the base price down. I find Royal Caribbean to be one of the more expensive per day cruise lines which is why there is almost 20yrs between my 2 sailings.  I have been sailing with Princess and Celebrity over the past 20yrs.

Edited March 6, 2019 by Iamcruzin

[Mikew0805]

31 minutes ago, Ocean Boy said:

I was rude for saying that?

I do not think so...

 

I do agree with you that one increase in charges... take this one for example, IF it was to ever happen, does not influence whether or not charges for other services increase or decrease. One does not need to be well versed in "economics" to know that there is not someone sitting behind a desk at RCI thinking "Oh, since we raised the price on abc, let's give them a break and not raise the price on xyz." 🙄

Edited March 6, 2019 by Mikew0805

[HBE4]

Perhaps people are getting hung up on the phrase "keeping prices down" as if one area/department/profit center/pots of gold is subsidizing another.

 

There are a lot of different factors going into a price increase: what the competitors are doing, what the market will bear (i.e. will a price increase drive away purchase of said product) and yes, history of past price increases.

 

If a company has 10 pots of gold, it will usually try to figure out which pots of gold give the best bang for the buck. However, if they keep returning to the same pot of gold over and over, it may eventually backfire and result in declining revenue Hence: they will opt to spread out the price increase among  several pots of gold, not necessarily at the same time.

 

Take the KEY for example. Royal wanted more money. If Royal did not introduce this little pot of gold, most likely - IMHO - it would have raised the price of another pot of gold somewhere else - room service, Johnny Rockets, Popcorn, pictures...who knows.  Eventually the prices of those items will go up as well, just not this year.

[Iamcruzin]

8 minutes ago, HBE4 said:

Perhaps people are getting hung up on the phrase "keeping prices down" as if one area/department/profit center/pots of gold is subsidizing another.

 

There are a lot of different factors going into a price increase: what the competitors are doing, what the market will bear (i.e. will a price increase drive away purchase of said product) and yes, history of past price increases.

 

If a company has 10 pots of gold, it will usually try to figure out which pots of gold give the best bang for the buck. However, if they keep returning to the same pot of gold over and over, it may eventually backfire and result in declining revenue Hence: they will opt to spread out the price increase among  several pots of gold, not necessarily at the same time.

 

Take the KEY for example. Royal wanted more money. If Royal did not introduce this little pot of gold, most likely - IMHO - it would have raised the price of another pot of gold somewhere else - room service, Johnny Rockets, Popcorn, pictures...who knows.  Eventually the prices of those items will go up as well, just not this year.

Precisely....and correct me if I'm wrong but I think I read on a previous thread at the end of 2018 that Royal raised the price of the drink package for 2019.  If this is true I find it ironic that the drink package is being used as an example of keeping the cost down by charging more for something else, because the introduction of the Key came after the price hike for the drink package.

 

Getting back to the flavor of the thread. The passenger demographic for HAL skews older. People on fixed incomes are most likely  not going to purchase programs like the key or even expensive drink packages. They also like to get a bang for their buck, so maybe ordering two meals is popular on HAL.  Charging extra for the double meal is their way of increasing profits to offset expenses.

[HBE4]

12 minutes ago, Iamcruzin said:

Precisely....and correct me if I'm wrong but I think I read on a previous thread at the end of 2018 that Royal raised the price of the drink package for 2019.  If this is true I find it ironic that the drink package is being used as an example of keeping the cost down by charging more for something else, because the introduction of the Key came after the price hike for the drink package.

 

You are correct. The price of the on-board drink package was raised at the beginning of 2019. Not sure if the price of individual drinks were raised and the pre-pruchased drink package prices seems to be "holding steady" from what I've read here.   Maybe with The Key, Royal felt they did not have to raising the price of pre-prurchase drink package?? I guess that can be viewed as "subsidizing" or "keeping the price down".

 

20 minutes ago, Iamcruzin said:

Getting back to the flavor of the thread. The passenger demographic for HAL skews older. People on fixed incomes are most likely  not going to purchase programs like the key or even expensive drink packages. They also like to get a bang for their buck, so maybe ordering two meals is popular on HAL.  Charging extra for the double meal is their way of increasing profits to offset expenses

 

That got me thinking. Older people generally do not eat as much as when they were young. I know I can't. So on HAL, there could have been a lot of 2nd entrees that ended in the trash which may not happen on Royal. Hence, no need to Royal to charge.

 

 

[HBE4]

 

I have to stay away from this thread in the mornings. It's 9:30 am and I'm craving a steak and beer.