Fictitious 3rd person on booking to get the cabin you want

[The Fun Researcher]

2 minutes ago, livylotte said:

I don't understand how you can book a 3rd person without giving name, date of birth, passport number etc?

 

We completed our first two cruises with no passport. (ours had both expired and we hadn't renewed them yet)  Closed loop cruises from North America do not require a passport.  There is no proof of identification required when you book a cruise.

Dan

[The Fun Researcher]

13 hours ago, Milwaukee Eight said:

Of course you don’t..... 

 

I only think it's an issue when someone books for 3 expecting to get the third to be refunded when they don't show.  ...or booking a third as a child 12 years old or younger with the "kids sail free" promotion knowing they will have them as a no show.

 

Otherwise, if you pay for a third party that doesn't show up (and don't get a refund) then I don't think it's unscrupulous.

Dan

[mr walker]

48 minutes ago, brillohead said:

The cruise ship is still getting their money.

 

Well, they are getting the fare, but missing the opportunity of the onboard spending of the 3rd person, something they budget for.

 

An argument could be made perhaps a no-show should have an amount extra charged to cover this?  Some may still pay this for their coveted cabin, for others that may be step too far, and this would penalize ' genuine' no shows, rather than the ones playing the system.

 

Not sure if it in vogue elsewhere, but here In Sydney some high-end restaurants require a credit card number when booking, and there is a charge for no-shows stated to cover their lost income/profit.

[mr walker]

1 hour ago, brillohead said:

The cruise ship is still getting their money.

 

duplicate - damn internet 🙂

Edited February 21, 2020 by mr walker

[The Fun Researcher]

15 minutes ago, mr walker said:

 

Not sure if it in vogue elsewhere, but here In Sydney some high-end restaurants require a credit card number when booking, and there is a charge for no-shows stated to cover their lost income/profit.

 

This is common at Disney World here in the US for high demand restaurant locations as well.  I've made many a reservation that required my credit card to reserve.  Fortunately we always showed up.  🙂

Dan

[robtx100]

19 hours ago, foggyphils said:

I snagged that 7408. Been looking at it for a few days but it disappeared for about an hour today and decided I better get my deposit in! My SIL also got the only 300 sq ft (besides the handicap one) Panaramic Oceanview.  It’s looking like a ghost ship currently, unless there is just a ton of guarantee bookings. Pretty much every cat I looked at had all but one or two cabins avail. 

 

I'm glad you were able to get it. It probably disappeared when I was looking at it. You're obligated to throw a party on that big balcony now. We had 46 people on it one time, and still had room to move around. 

[BeachChik]

1 hour ago, mr walker said:

 

Well, they are getting the fare, but missing the opportunity of the onboard spending of the 3rd person, something they budget for.

 

An argument could be made perhaps a no-show should have an amount extra charged to cover this?  Some may still pay this for their coveted cabin, for others that may be step too far, and this would penalize ' genuine' no shows, rather than the ones playing the system.

 

Not sure if it in vogue elsewhere, but here In Sydney some high-end restaurants require a credit card number when booking, and there is a charge for no-shows stated to cover their lost income/profit.

How is this different then a solo cruiser? The cruise line loses the money of that second passenger.
 

It’s really not different. 

[Luke gs Daddy]

On 2/19/2020 at 10:28 PM, maxcat910 said:

Interesting idea. How do you book a fictitious person when you need to put in a passport or similar for them?

Oh stop!

[brillohead]

I never knew so many people have never heard of John or Jane Doe!  🤣

[papaflamingo]

On 2/19/2020 at 10:20 PM, cruiselvr04 said:

I see nothing wrong with this as you are paying more.  You’re paying for the third person whether they are there or not. We did this once although the person ( grandson) was actually on the ship, just slept with his parents instead of us. 

You might find something wrong with it if your grandson was unable to go because there was no 3 passenger cabins left because a bunch of couples took them by faking a third person.  Also I believe that the number of booked passengers factor into the max allowable for life boats.  So it's conceivable that booking could be stopped by maxing out the lifeboat space due to fictitious passengers.  I know that's a bit of a hypothetical.   

[foggyphils]

11 hours ago, robtx100 said:

You're obligated to throw a party on that big balcony now. We had 46 people on it one time, and still had room to move around. 

Bahaha!

[John&LaLa]

Royal needs to forgo the 3 pax requirement and just raise the price on the afts and the corners. If they don't sell early, drop the surcharge

 

Edited February 21, 2020 by John&LaLa

[ATC cruiser]

14 hours ago, mr walker said:

 

Well, they are getting the fare, but missing the opportunity of the onboard spending of the 3rd person, something they budget for.

 

 

 

 

Sometimes I go on a cruise and don't spend a dime extra. So do you think the cruise line shouldn't let me book a cabin because the cruise line is missing an opportunity of somebody else spending money onboard?

[hapster85]

You might find something wrong with it if your grandson was unable to go because there was no 3 passenger cabins left because a bunch of couples took them by faking a third person.     

Other than a few coveted locations, there aren't vast hoards of couples rushing to pay higher fares to book phantom thirds.

[dani negreanu]

On 2/20/2020 at 2:31 AM, robtx100 said:

Well, after all that, I decided to keep our hump cabin on deck 6.

 

Also, the convenience of the hump beats walking the Green Mile to the back of the ship. 

 

I couldn't agree more. I dread the long walk along the corridors -- I'm a "hump" person....😁

[A&L_Ont]

8 hours ago, John&LaLa said:

Royal needs to forgo the 3 pax requirement and just raise the price on the afts and the corners. If they don't sell early, drop the surcharge

I’m surprised they don’t already do this. 

 

1 hour ago, dani negreanu said:

I couldn't agree more. I dread the long walk along the corridors -- I'm a "hump" person....😁

I’m a hump person too. 😂

 

[papaflamingo]

16 hours ago, hapster85 said:

 Other than a few coveted locations, there aren't vast hoards of couples rushing to pay higher fares to book phantom thirds.

 

You sure about that?  But regardless, if a 3 passenger cabin is booked by 2, and a family of 3 want one, it's not that unlikely that there isn't enough 3 passenger cabins available.  Ships fill up.  Sorry, I just find it selfish to do so.  I've read a number of posts throughout the years where people are unable to find a 3+ person cabin as they're all sold out.  Wonder how many only really had 2 in them?

[hapster85]

You sure about that?  But regardless, if a 3 passenger cabin is booked by 2, and a family of 3 want one, it's not that unlikely that there isn't enough 3 passenger cabins available.  Ships fill up.  Sorry, I just find it selfish to do so.  I've read a number of posts throughout the years where people are unable to find a 3+ person cabin as they're all sold out.  Wonder how many only really had 2 in them?

Yes, I'm sure. In the past, 2 people (or even one) could readily book a 3/4 berth cabin, so it's no surprise that folks had trouble finding available 3/4 berth cabins. Especially if they didn't book early.

With Royal Caribbean restricting those cabins to a minimum of 3 people, there are naturally going to be more of them available for groups of 3 or 4. But as there is obviously a demand for them, they are still going to sell out, so it's still important to not wait to book.

As far as people booking phantom thirds, I don't see it being a widespread issue. Most people are too bargain conscious to spend more than they have to. And as others have mentioned, it's really no different than a solo cruiser booking a double.

[papaflamingo]

11 hours ago, hapster85 said:

Yes, I'm sure. In the past, 2 people (or even one) could readily book a 3/4 berth cabin, so it's no surprise that folks had trouble finding available 3/4 berth cabins. Especially if they didn't book early.

With Royal Caribbean restricting those cabins to a minimum of 3 people, there are naturally going to be more of them available for groups of 3 or 4. But as there is obviously a demand for them, they are still going to sell out, so it's still important to not wait to book.

As far as people booking phantom thirds, I don't see it being a widespread issue. Most people are too bargain conscious to spend more than they have to. And as others have mentioned, it's really no different than a solo cruiser booking a double.

Well, I agree to a point.  You also have to consider lifeboat space.  That is a limiting factor.  A single in a cabin only takes a single lifeboat space.  A phantom third person is counted in the lifeboat count.  Honestly, I just am not a fan of trying to trick the system.  The difference between a 3 person and 2 person cabin location is generally minimal.  I can see if there are no 2 person cabins available, only 3, and someone is willing to pay the upcharge, but I guess I just think differently.  I'm one who likes to be above boards on everything I do and not deceive anyone.   Just how I am. 

[brillohead]

38 minutes ago, papaflamingo said:

Well, I agree to a point.  You also have to consider lifeboat space.  That is a limiting factor.  A single in a cabin only takes a single lifeboat space.  A phantom third person is counted in the lifeboat count.  

Not exactly.

A single in a "single studio" room only takes one lifeboat space.

A single in a standard double occupancy room is allotted two lifeboat spaces, even though they're only using one.  

[papaflamingo]

10 hours ago, brillohead said:

A single in a standard double occupancy room is allotted two lifeboat spaces, even though they're only using one.  

Are you sure about that?  Because there has been a number of threads that have discussed 3 and 4 passenger cabins not being able to sell to 3 or 4 because the lifeboat space isn't available.  So that would indicate that they use actual passenger numbers rather than actual bed space available.  To be honest, I have absolutely no idea.  I always assumed that the max lifeboat capacity was based on the max passenger/crew capability.  But many threads over the years indicate that is not the case.  

Anyway, pretty much beating a dead horse here.  Like I've said, I''m not a fan of fake bookings to trick the system.  Just me.  I tend to always try to stay on the transparent side of things.  No, I don't share drink packages either even though I know I probably could.  

[hapster85]

Are you sure about that?  Because there has been a number of threads that have discussed 3 and 4 passenger cabins not being able to sell to 3 or 4 because the lifeboat space isn't available.

It's my understanding that all of those extra berths could never be sold anyway, because more of them exist than total passenger capacity. That allows for flexibility across cabin types.

[brillohead]

5 hours ago, papaflamingo said:

Are you sure about that?  Because there has been a number of threads that have discussed 3 and 4 passenger cabins not being able to sell to 3 or 4 because the lifeboat space isn't available.  So that would indicate that they use actual passenger numbers rather than actual bed space available.  To be honest, I have absolutely no idea.  I always assumed that the max lifeboat capacity was based on the max passenger/crew capability.  But many threads over the years indicate that is not the case.  

I'm absolutely sure about that.

Third and fourth passengers are "extras" -- can only be added if extra lifeboat space is still available for that muster station.  

The first and second passengers are "givens" -- space is always available for them in the lifeboat. 

 

(Assuming double or more occupancy, of course.)

I learned this when I started booking solo rooms, but wanted to keep the option available to be able to add someone down the road.  I asked about booking a "John Doe" second passenger to preserve lifeboat space.  My TA (who is also a friend of mine, and is also a top seller for Royal Caribbean for the last couple years) explained that even if I book the room as a solo, Royal will still allot two lifeboat spots for that room.  The only time you have trouble adding someone is when you're trying to add a third or fourth passenger -- those are "space available" berths, whereas the first two berths (in a non-studio room) are "space guaranteed" berths.

Using round numbers to explain (not necessarily related to actual lifeboat capacity or room category breakdown) : 

Imagine 100 rooms 
50 hold only 2 people (100 total)

25 hold up to 3 people (50 double occupancy plus 25 third passenger = 75 total)

25 hold up to 4 people (50 double occupancy plus 50 3rd/4th passengers = 100 total)
-- grand total would be 275 passengers if all rooms are filled to capacity

 

But if the lifeboat only holds 250, Royal will allot 200 lifeboat spots for the first two people in each room automatically -- that way they are able to make sure they are able to put two people in every room.  Then the remaining 50 spots get taken up by third and fourth passengers until all 50 are taken, at which time the remaining triple and quad occupancy rooms are limited to only booking two passengers each.

If they didn't allot lifeboat space to all the double-occupancy rooms before they are even booked, it's possible that all the triple and quad rooms would be fully booked (175 people) and then only 75 spots remain for the 50 double-occupancy rooms, which means that unless there are a LOT of solo cruisers in that particular muster station, several of those rooms would be completely empty for the sailing -- and empty rooms don't generate revenue.

Since third and fourth passengers are often children, the income generated is usually less for the third and fourth berths in a room -- drink packages, spa treatments, specialty dining, etc., bring in more money for adults than kids.  So it's in Royal's best interest to make sure that they have the most first and second passengers possible, with 3rd/4th passengers being a bit less profitable, on average.

So that's why you hear stories of not being able to add a third or fourth passenger due to no available lifeboat space, but you don't hear stories of not being able to add a second person to a previously-booked-solo double-occupancy room.  The first and second person's spots are permanently saved for them in the lifeboat before the reservations are even made.

[island lady]

On 2/18/2020 at 9:07 PM, John&LaLa said:

 

Vision/Rhapsody ones are pretty cool

 

Currently enjoying JS aft wrap cabin 8596 for both legs on Rhapsody.  Had same cabin type on 3 leg Vision last month as well.  Gotta love that huge balcony.  😉 

[island lady]

Most frustrating on this new policy, and the number of cabins RCI "blocks out" for 3 per occupancy.  I booked favorite hump cabin on Serenade for the Sydney to Honolulu leg for next spring a few months ago.  Had to wait several weeks for new bookings to be available to book the final leg to Vancouver. 

 

Wanted to keep the same cabin, of which I had no problems at all booking as two in the cabin.  So I called the day the bookings were released for that leg, and found I was blocked out due to needing 3 in a cabin.  As were about a dozen of those same cat cabins anywhere near the centrum.  What??!!  Weeks later, they are still showing available with no one booking them.  😠

 

This is very frustrating, and now have to move 2 cabins down due to that lame policy.   Should not have to force us to lie about a phantom person just to be able to keep same cabin.  🤬