Price Drops for Single Pax

[benchmarklearning]

We are going on the Oosterdam March 25 and I am thinking of taking my father-in-law (depressed due to divorce at age 68). He said he wants the cheapest inside cabin if he goes (what a romantic!).

 

Does HAL ever remove the singles surcharge as the time gets closer? wouuld I get a price break if I wait until a week or less before sailing?

 

Thanks in advance for any advice!

[jhannah]

I've never heard of it. And I can't imagine them doing it even if they need more bodies on board.

[FlorenceItaly]

I am on the March 18th cruise, on a single supplement, and I still haven't found a price anywhere as low as I got. What I did for this particular cruise is use http://www.*****.com and went with one of the agents from one of the agencies that came back with the best quote. In fact, the particular quote I got is even lower than this particular agencies web site shows. I've had great service and no problems. You can do MUCH better than the Holland America site. This is my 3rd HAL solo cruise, with another one booked.

 

Marie

[Krazy Kruizers]

I read this a lot as well. And I haven't heard of anyone getting a good deal on a single supplement near cruise time.

[RuthC]

I've done the single supplement routine more times than I care to count. The supplement has never been removed. And when you think of it, why should it be? The same number of people (1) in the same cabin---why charge less?

I've even done the guaranteed share and wondered if I would be alone if there were available cabins. No such luck on that score either.

The way bookings are going lately the price will never be lower than it is now. Don't wait or there might not be room on the ship for the cruise you want to book.

[dot73]

The HAL single supplement is very reasonable compared to other cruise lines. An inside single shouldn't be that much. I have found that travel agents always have a lower price than the HAL website. Your father-in-law will be a very popular man on this cruise. There are always a lot more single women than single men on HAL cruises. Being fussed over may cheer him up.

[airlink diva]

I agree with everyone else, they won't take the "single tax" (that's what I call it) out. The only exception was right after 9/11. I went on a cruise less than two weeks afterwards and was charged under 100%.

But shop around online and with your travel agent. The majority of the time, a great deal on HAL is common. Good luck

[RevNeal]

I've seen the supplement reduced from 150% to 125% on certain cruises. I've seen the cruise fare itself discounted more deeply, which in-turn brings the dollar-amount of the base and, hence, the supplement down. But I've never seen the supplement removed. :( The only way to do that is to add another fare-paying passenger to that room booking.

[Roz]

I'm curious about the "unromantic" part of booking an inside cabin. I book them to stay within budget. It has nothing to do with romance or a lack thereof. :D

 

Roz

[TnTom]

A couple of friends and I were on the Oosterdam in January, and one reason we picked that cruise was the reasonable rate for single-occupancy cabins (we each wanted our own). We only paid about $200 each above the double occupance, per-passenger rate, and even after purchasing the top-tier travel insurance, and after paying all of the fees and taxes, it still came in under $1,000. Plus, that was for a class "F" cabin... unobstructed view, outside cabin. We loved it!

 

Last year, I had my own cabin on the Caribbean Princess, and I paid over $1,600 for a much less desirable outside cabin. It wasn't much of a price break at all.

[kryos]

I've done the single supplement routine more times than I care to count. The supplement has never been removed. And when you think of it, why should it be? The same number of people (1) in the same cabin---why charge less?

They should remove it in order to accommodate the increasing number of solo passengers they are getting on the average voyage. No reason whatsoever that HAL can't set aside a small cluster of smaller staterooms specifically for single passengers. They could also "split up" a couple of the larger ones into two cabins ... each with a single bed and maybe even a shared bathroom between the two, if necessary.

 

There is absolutely no reason, in my opinion, that single passengers on a ship should have to pay any kind of single supplement. They should just get one-half of the accommodations that the two passengers in a cabin are paying ... less room, just a single bed, and possibly a bathroom shared with the single cabin directly adjacent ... or a private bath that is extremely small.

 

No reason this can't be done.

 

Blue skies ...

 

--rita

[SueSea]

I've done the single supplement routine more times than I care to count. The supplement has never been removed. And when you think of it, why should it be? The same number of people (1) in the same cabin---why charge less?

 

I agree with the single supplement when it results in a loss of revenue for the cruise line. If I book a cabin by myself, and the ship is full, my booking solo means the ship might have had to turn away two people that would have booked that cabin. However, if the ship is not full, then my booking solo no longer results in a loss of revenue. If I hadn't booked my cabin, it would have gone unsold. My booking solo results in additional revenue, not a loss. My beef with the cruise lines is that when a ship sails with empty cabins, they do not refund the single supplement.

[RuthC]

My beef with the cruise lines is that when a ship sails with empty cabins, they do not refund the single supplement.

So what you're saying is that when the cruiseline has not taken in as much revenue because of unsold cabins that they should then give back some of the revenue they did get? Is that it? Instead of a loss they should take a bigger loss?

Like I said---where's their motivation? Why would they?

[SueSea]

So what you're saying is that when the cruiseline has not taken in as much revenue because of unsold cabins that they should then give back some of the revenue they did get? Is that it? Instead of a loss they should take a bigger loss?

Like I said---where's their motivation? Why would they?

 

Yes, that's what I'm saying. It's no different than when the cruise lines lower their prices to get unsold cabins booked. They often let those who booked early get the lower rate if they call in and ask for it (usually before final payment, but sometimes after). Using your logic, the cruise lines should NOT give early bookers the discounted rates. But the cruise lines know that the bulk of their profit comes from onboard sales. They want those cabins filled even at a low profit margin on the cruise fare because of the expected onboard revenues. Still, they don't want to p*ss off all passengers who booked early so they give those who find out about lower prices a credit or an upgrade. Or in your words, instead of taking a loss on the unsold cabins, they take a bigger loss on some cabins already sold.

 

If the cruise line refunds the single supplement when a cabin would have otherwise gone unsold, it's the same principle. If I book a single cabin I pay a higher price because I may be preventing the cruise line from selling my second bunk. That results in the potential loss of a second fare and onboard revenues from a second person. But if the ship is not filled, I have not caused them to lose out on a second person's revenue. The ship has not lost anything because I booked--instead of another empty cabin they have one person paying a fare and onboard expenses. What would motivate them to eliminate the single supplement when a ship is not full? The same thing that motivates them to give those who booked early lower rates when the prices go down. It keeps customers happy and appeals to the passengers' sense of fair play.

[kryos]

Yes, that's what I'm saying. It's no different than when the cruise lines lower their prices to get unsold cabins booked.

I agree 100% with SueSea. With all the folks traveling solo these days ... especially on the longer, more exotic voyages, there is absolutely no reason why singles and solos should pay ANY kind of a supplement. Rather, the cruise lines should take this increasing trend of solo travelers into consideration and reconfigure some cabins to accommodate them. In such a case, what will they lose? They will pretty much have two passengers sharing the same space as they shared before ... only the cabins will be smaller ... with possibly a shared bath for every two.

 

What's the problem?

 

Where has the cruise line lost money?

 

Sounds like smaller cabins would be a far better option that a single share program where two possibly completely incompatible people would have to share digs for the duration of the voyage. It's far easier to share a bathroom than complete quarters.

 

Blue skies ...

 

--rita