Are we seeing the first signs of changes for the future and were some lines prescient with respect to the future post COVID?

[LHT28]

On 1/2/2021 at 7:56 PM, getting older slowly said:

O  I think I get it.... O  is all about   having the Airfare included.....

 

 

It is more than that

Food, smaller ships, ports   & ambience   are our reasons for choosing Oceania

We rarely take their air package   we take the credit  & book our own air

 YMMV

[getting older slowly]

1 hour ago, LHT28 said:

It is more than that

Food, smaller ships, ports   & ambience   are our reasons for choosing Oceania

We rarely take their air package   we take the credit  & book our own air

 YMMV

 

It may very well be.. and everybody is different

 

One issue is the itinerary.... we cruise for relaxing time and to go somewhere

 

So when any of mid and high lines offer an out and back itinerary   we will look at them

 

For the moment it is lines like Princess  with their slight ship with in a ship... are fine...

particularly at the current dollar for dollar cost

( and we do enjoy the room in our cabin )

 

Don

[sverigecruiser]

5 hours ago, cruisemom42 said:

 

If one is a solo cruiser who enjoys sailing on small ships, one has dwindling options. For me, small ship cruising is rapidly becoming a very expensive trip, relative to other types of travel.  And I am still at the stage of "wanderlust" that I would rather take several less expensive trips annually than one big blowout. 

 

 

Doesn't that mean that for you the best thing should be if also the small ships had a two-class system? You could choose the cheaper class and still get to the same ports as everyone else on the ship.

[navybankerteacher]

6 hours ago, sverigecruiser said:

 

Doesn't that mean that for you the best thing should be if also the small ships had a two-class system? You could choose the cheaper class and still get to the same ports as everyone else on the ship.

Having two classes generally requires more space - which probably requires a larger ship.

[cruisemom42]

9 hours ago, sverigecruiser said:

 

Doesn't that mean that for you the best thing should be if also the small ships had a two-class system? You could choose the cheaper class and still get to the same ports as everyone else on the ship.

 

I am not interested in not being able to access portions of an already small ship!

[sverigecruiser]

21 minutes ago, cruisemom42 said:

 

I am not interested in not being able to access portions of an already small ship!

 

It should help to reduce the cruisefare for you.

[Toofarfromthesea]

Calling the ship within a ship a 'class system' makes about as much sense as calling a restaurant a 'class system' because some people get meatloaf and some get filet mignon.

Getting more because you are paying more is not a class system.  

[Aquahound]

13 minutes ago, Toofarfromthesea said:

Calling the ship within a ship a 'class system' makes about as much sense as calling a restaurant a 'class system' because some people get meatloaf and some get filet mignon.

Getting more because you are paying more is not a class system.  

 

Agreed.  I've sailed several ships that had this setup and I never once felt as though I was cruising in a  lower "class" by being in a standard balcony room.  Much ado about nothing, IMO.  

[ColeThornton]

There's more than a few cruisers who worry way too much about what other passengers do with their cruising dollars.  There are so many diverse experiences available across various companies to choose from, and that just makes the industry better and more competitive.

 

Why would I care if someone pays more money for what they consider a better experience on the same ship that I paid half their fare for?  That doesn't make me a "lower class" passenger which is something that would only happen in one's own mind.   Doesn't make much sense to me.

[SelectSys]

15 hours ago, cruisemom42 said:

 

I know this isn't the forward-looking response you're asking for, but I have to challenge your assertion that there are "many options" available for all cruisers.

 

If one is a solo cruiser who enjoys sailing on small ships, one has dwindling options. For me, small ship cruising is rapidly becoming a very expensive trip, relative to other types of travel.  And I am still at the stage of "wanderlust" that I would rather take several less expensive trips annually than one big blowout. 

 

So while I will continue to look for the odd bargain fare for a cruise that meets my criteria of ship size, itinerary and value, I expect cruises to feature less in my post-COVID travel plans.

 

 

Unfortunately your situation is still underserved by the cruise lines - the solo traveler.  Only recently have some of the larger ships introduced cabins for single cruisers.  Maybe more capacity will be built for the single traveler, but so far it's pretty limited.  Maybe as the market segment increases you'll find more.  You also seem to be an experienced traveler and would not be satisfied by these cruises where single options exist. 

 

I believe that cruise capacity is likely to be reduced generally (same with airlines) and prices will rise. I also think destinations are going to be somewhat reduced due to the linger effects of COVID on travel.

 

I am total in agreement with you regarding more trips at a reasonable price point versus luxury.  Maybe you'll need to explore alternate travel approaches for the near to mid term.  Longer term I would expect more options for you if the total market of solo travelers continues to increase. 

 

15 hours ago, navybankerteacher said:

Of course, the ability of some to get reserved seats mean that the opportunity of others to have a wide selection of seats is restricted - or even to get ANY seat without rushing into the theatre early.  It is similar to Carnival's "Faster to the Fun" program -- the line was only able to sell expedited boarding by unavoidably delaying the boarding of others.

 

Those that pay more always get better service.  Kind of reminds me a bit of the rush for bin space in aircraft for coach passengers without access to early boarding.  I have deliberately booked a seat in the rear of planes where I was in general boarding such that I was reasonably sure I wouldn't need to check a bag.

 

14 hours ago, Cruzaholic41 said:

Bingo!  I’ve done the ship-within-a-ship a few times. The biggest benefit is getting an upgraded experience but still having access to great games, amenities, and entertainment. It’s perfect for those who are willing to pay a little more but are still young at heart. I’m a very active person who still likes to get up and dance to great music.  Unfortunately, premium and luxury lines tend to be VERY lacking in those areas...

 

Thanks for confirming my intuition.

[cruisemom42]

1 hour ago, Toofarfromthesea said:

Calling the ship within a ship a 'class system' makes about as much sense as calling a restaurant a 'class system' because some people get meatloaf and some get filet mignon.

Getting more because you are paying more is not a class system.  

 

Of course it is a class system. Only certain people will be able to afford to pay more to access these spaces.

 

If it were truly non-class based, then everyone should be able to pay for access to the areas they want without having to upgrade to a suite. For example -- a forward-facing lounge onboard ship. If there is only one equivalent facility, and my access to it is blocked because I am not a suite passenger, that is certainly an issue for me.

 

Or an extra charge restaurant -- fine if everyone is given the ability to pay an upcharge for the chance to eat a meal or two there (common practice) rather than having a restricted area only available to suite passengers for the entire course of the cruise.

 

If you want to make things "for pay" onboard, I can accept that. But creating a bundle, the total cost of which is high, with the goal of keeping out those who pay lower fares is not acceptable to me.

 

1 hour ago, Aquahound said:

 

Agreed.  I've sailed several ships that had this setup and I never once felt as though I was cruising in a  lower "class" by being in a standard balcony room.  Much ado about nothing, IMO.  

 

It may not bother you that you do not have full access to all areas of the ship, such as prime deck locations and/or indoor areas for viewing. However, it does bother me and it does represent a change from how cruising was in the past. Why should this be blindly accepted?

 

53 minutes ago, ColeThornton said:

 

Why would I care if someone pays more money for what they consider a better experience on the same ship that I paid half their fare for?  That doesn't make me a "lower class" passenger which is something that would only happen in one's own mind.   Doesn't make much sense to me.

 

There is a limited footprint aboard ships. Adding space and perks for one group often happens at the expense of another group -- see the examples I have already cited above. 

 

Why has the model changed over the past few years from people paying twice as much for twice as much cabin space (which seems fair) to people paying twice as much but also having special restaurants, exclusive access to certain ship areas and even preferred seating in some cases?

 

I am paying twice as much per person for a balcony cabin as a couple sharing that space. Does that get me any extra perks?  No, it gets me nothing -- people will say "But you get twice as much space!"  Why shouldn't that equally apply to suites?

 

[Toofarfromthesea]

58 minutes ago, cruisemom42 said:

 

Of course it is a class system. Only certain people will be able to afford to pay more to access these spaces.

 

If it were truly non-class based, then everyone should be able to pay for access to the areas they want without having to upgrade to a suite. For example -- a forward-facing lounge onboard ship. If there is only one equivalent facility, and my access to it is blocked because I am not a suite passenger, that is certainly an issue for me.

 

Or an extra charge restaurant -- fine if everyone is given the ability to pay an upcharge for the chance to eat a meal or two there (common practice) rather than having a restricted area only available to suite passengers for the entire course of the cruise.

 

If you want to make things "for pay" onboard, I can accept that. But creating a bundle, the total cost of which is high, with the goal of keeping out those who pay lower fares is not acceptable to me.

 

 

It may not bother you that you do not have full access to all areas of the ship, such as prime deck locations and/or indoor areas for viewing. However, it does bother me and it does represent a change from how cruising was in the past. Why should this be blindly accepted?

 

 

There is a limited footprint aboard ships. Adding space and perks for one group often happens at the expense of another group -- see the examples I have already cited above. 

 

Why has the model changed over the past few years from people paying twice as much for twice as much cabin space (which seems fair) to people paying twice as much but also having special restaurants, exclusive access to certain ship areas and even preferred seating in some cases?

 

I am paying twice as much per person for a balcony cabin as a couple sharing that space. Does that get me any extra perks?  No, it gets me nothing -- people will say "But you get twice as much space!"  Why shouldn't that equally apply to suites?

 

 

You're right.  For you.  You should boycott MSC.  And the line that has the Haven.  And every line that has a restaurant reserved for suite pax.  And every line that has a restaurant reserved for other categories, like Celebrity's Blu.

Companies have every right to structure their offerings however they wish, and if someone doesn't like how they do it the proper response is to not do business with them, not whine enviously because you don't like it.  If you can buy a bigger cabin by paying more, why shouldn't you be able to buy a better experience by paying more?  Yacht Club pax are not paying extra just for a slightly bigger cabin they are paying for the whole package.  And the cost of staying in a suite is generally way more than the proportional increase in square footage. 

This is no more a class system than some people not getting a balcony because they booked an inside cabin and can't get access to a private balcony a la carte.  And it doesn't become a class system because the cruise line doesn't offer all amenities 'a la carte'.  Just because some people have class envy doesn't mean that the subject of their envy is a class system.

[SelectSys]

2 hours ago, cruisemom42 said:

Why has the model changed over the past few years from people paying twice as much for twice as much cabin space (which seems fair) to people paying twice as much but also having special restaurants, exclusive access to certain ship areas and even preferred seating in some cases?

 

Almost certainly because the cruise line executives have decided they can make more money by doing so.  The lines also need to keep innovating to some degree as they are in competition with each other.  Some innovations we might like such as picking your own dining time and others not so much such as exclusive dining rooms/pools.

Edited January 5, 2021 by SelectSys

[JRG]

On 1/2/2021 at 10:16 AM, SelectSys said:

Do you think Viking was "ahead of curve" on anticipating these changes?  Do you see other lines as being innovative with respect to the likely post-COVID world? 

 

I don't think they were ahead of the curve,  they maybe got lucky to find themselves in position to capitalize on certain opportunities.   Viking may become a refuge for HAL cruising refugees.

 

Carnival is being innovative with what they are doing in assembling 4 ships off the west coast and calling it a Fun thing at Sea or something.   It sounds like 4 ships circling in a group to have fun at sea and burn a sea day or two.   

 

I may have that story wrong so hopefully somebody else know the details.

[cruisemom42]

2 hours ago, Toofarfromthesea said:

This is no more a class system than some people not getting a balcony because they booked an inside cabin and can't get access to a private balcony a la carte.  And it doesn't become a class system because the cruise line doesn't offer all amenities 'a la carte'.  Just because some people have class envy doesn't mean that the subject of their envy is a class system.

 

You can call it what you like but it is exactly the same thing that was called a Class system on the ocean liners of old, and I am far from the first to call attention to the similarities.

 

I don't have class envy, I have a distaste for the class system altogether. I have very democratic (in the small "d" sense) tastes. Personal accomplishment, a wide-ranging curiosity and desire for knowledge, a humanitarian outlook, and how one treats one's fellow man are far more apt to impress me than traveling in a suite or haven or club on a mass market cruise liner.

 

[Aquahound]

1 hour ago, cruisemom42 said:

 

You can call it what you like but it is exactly the same thing that was called a Class system on the ocean liners of old, and I am far from the first to call attention to the similarities.

 

No, it is not “exactly” like the liners of old. Not even close. Not even in the same ballpark. It blows my mind anyone would even make that comment. 🙄

[ilikeanswers]

15 minutes ago, Aquahound said:

No, it is not “exactly” like the liners of old. Not even close. Not even in the same ballpark. It blows my mind anyone would even make that comment. 🙄

 

I have watched so documentaries on ocean liners of old I would agree with @cruisemom42that a ship within a ship is like going back in time. You did have different accessibility around the ship depending on the class of room you bought. Those with the suites were allowed into the restaurant whereas those with a standard inside cabin even if they wanted to splash out on a nice evening meal just weren't allowed. The tea rooms and smoking lounges were forbidden for anyone without a certain level of cabin. Of course back then the idea was to make sure classes didn't mix unlike now where passengers do leave their cordoned off area to mingle with the masses but overall the idea of buying a bundle room deal that gives you exclusive access to services and products really isn't too dissimilar to 1st, 2nd, 3rd class concept used by ocean liners when they were still a form of transit🤔. It is like that saying everything old is made new again😂

[ilikeanswers]

6 hours ago, cruisemom42 said:

Why has the model changed over the past few years from people paying twice as much for twice as much cabin space (which seems fair) to people paying twice as much but also having special restaurants, exclusive access to certain ship areas and even preferred seating in some cases?

 

People are more willing to buy bundled products. Fast food restaurants were the first to realise this. If you wanted to get people to buy more than a burger you created a bundle meal otherwise patrons were happy to just buy one burger. Something about a bundle deal makes people willing to spend more than if you ask people to pay for things one at a time. The travel industry has been taking advantage of the bundle deal mindset for years, ship within a ship is just a way cruise lines have found to utilise this profitable concept on the ships themselves. 

[Aquahound]

15 minutes ago, ilikeanswers said:

I have watched so documentaries on ocean liners of old I would agree with @cruisemom42that a ship within a ship is like going back in time.

 

Sorry, but I don't agree that it's "like" either.  Again, not even close.  Classes on old school cruise liners were microcosms of the worldwide class system.  In fact, most of the 3rd class passengers weren't even interested in the cruise.  It was cheap transportation.  Today, I'm fairly certain most cruisers who book standard rooms could afford to splurge on a suite if they wanted to.  To suggest that this ship in a ship structure is anything similar to what used to be, is simply ludicrous.  

[getting older slowly]

The whole ship within a ship thingie......

 

So... it like business or first class air travel... or overnight/multi night train travel they have different levels.... whether you call it levels or classes  or whatever

 

You pay more you get more.... pretty simple......

 

and if you don't wish to pay more... just be happy...

 

It seam most of people who don't use the ship within a ship ( inferring paying more )

ot travel on ship where this happens are the ones against it .......

 

Interesting 

 

 

[navybankerteacher]

53 minutes ago, Aquahound said:

 

Sorry, but I don't agree that it's "like" either.  Again, not even close.  Classes on old school cruise liners were microcosms of the worldwide class system.  In fact, most of the 3rd class passengers weren't even interested in the cruise.  It was cheap transportation.  Today, I'm fairly certain most cruisers who book standard rooms could afford to splurge on a suite if they wanted to.  To suggest that this ship in a ship structure is anything similar to what used to be, is simply ludicrous.  

You clearly miss the point -- when you refer to "...old school CRUISE liners ...", you are not talking about immigrants to the New World; they were riding liners, not cruise ships.  And, no, these "most cruisers"  who book standard rooms are already stretching their budgets --   that is why the likes of NCL keep marketing their come-ons like "free drinks".

 

The "ship within a ship" is clearly a dual (or more) class system - somewhat comparable to old passenger ships - and very dissimilar to the one class cruise ships which did generally exist from the last quarter of the 20th Century through the first few years of this century  --- and which was abandoned by the mass market lines when they started their pitch to the budget market while trying (pretending is a better term) to offer a quality experience to those willing to pay for quality.

[Aquahound]

14 minutes ago, navybankerteacher said:

You clearly miss the point -- when you refer to "...old school CRUISE liners ...", you are not talking about immigrants to the New World; they were riding liners, not cruise ships.  And, no, these "most cruisers"  who book standard rooms are already stretching their budgets --   that is why the likes of NCL keep marketing their come-ons like "free drinks".

 

 

Try to follow the context, NBT.  It wasn't me who made the reference.  My comments originated from this post.  I highlighted key words for ya...

 

4 hours ago, cruisemom42 said:

 

You can call it what you like but it is exactly the same thing that was called a Class system on the ocean liners of old, and I am far from the first to call attention to the similarities.

 

 

And my opinion remains the same.  It is not "exactly" the same as "ocean liners of old."  I then went on to say in the response to the other poster that I do not agree that's it's even similar.  If that opinion differs from yours and you think modern day cruise ship "ship in a ship" concept is "exactly" the same as "ocean liners of old," or that it's even similar, then we must agree to disagree.  

Edited January 6, 2021 by Aquahound

[ilikeanswers]

1 hour ago, Aquahound said:

Sorry, but I don't agree that it's "like" either.  Again, not even close.  Classes on old school cruise liners were microcosms of the worldwide class system.  In fact, most of the 3rd class passengers weren't even interested in the cruise.  It was cheap transportation.  Today, I'm fairly certain most cruisers who book standard rooms could afford to splurge on a suite if they wanted to.  To suggest that this ship in a ship structure is anything similar to what used to be, is simply ludicrous.  

 

I think you misunderstood what I was saying. The basic concept is the same albeit refitted to the modern era and for the modern passenger. You purchase a suite and that privileges you access to certain parts of the ship that are forbidden to those who purchase a different type of cabin, it is no different to how first class was structured on an ocean liner, in fact it would not surprise me if whoever came up with ship within a ship did not base their idea on the ocean liner class structure😁. 

[Aquahound]

7 minutes ago, ilikeanswers said:

 

..it is no different to how first class was structured on an ocean liner... 

 

I get the point your making.  I do agree with a lot of what you say, except for this one part.  IMO, there is still a pretty big difference.  It could be we're just looking at it differently. 🙂

[sverigecruiser]

5 hours ago, navybankerteacher said:

And, no, these "most cruisers"  who book standard rooms are already stretching their budgets --   that is why the likes of NCL keep marketing their come-ons like "free drinks".

 

 

I disagree with this. I really think that "most cruisers" can afford a suite if they really want it. The reason for saying that is that my salary is much lower than the average salary in Sweden and the average salary in Sweden is lower than the average salary in the US.

 

I'm sure that lots of people are stretching their budgets to be able to cruise even in a cheap cabin but for most people the reason why they have to stretch their budget is that they prefer to spend their money on other things. Most people who cruise can afford a suite if they really want to but they prefer to spend their money on other things!

 

I may be wrong but because of my own experience and my own rather low salary I really think that I'm correct.