What Am I Missing….This Stinks

[Guppy99]

Deliberately booking a solo plus a person who you know in advance will be a know show, with the intent of avoiding the solo booking fee, is in fact an attempt at fraud.

[jg51]

8 hours ago, jagoffee said:

I was curious, so I looked into the cruise that you are referencing.  If you book the OV with the AI (standard price), it will cost you $3422 for two ($1711 each).  If you also book another solo OV with the AI (standard price), it will cost the solo the same $3422.  As I understand your comments, you understand and this is exactly what you expected. So as long as you both book with the standard AI rate, you have no issue.

 

The  problem is that Celebrity is offering you a special GTY rate which includes no AI (Cruise Only) and no cabin choice for a lower price of $2399 ($1199).  Easy to understand.  The problem is that a solo is not offered nor can they book the GTY cruise only rate.  They have to book the Standard (AI) with a cabin choice rate.  
You are not really comparing apples to apples between the Solo rate of $3422 with perks(AI) and you Cruise only (no cabin choice or perks ) rate of $2399.

 

I am not justifying the Celebrity choice of not offering the same rate to solo cruisers, I am just explaining it.

 

I assume that you and your husband are willing to give up the AI (Classic Drink Package, Internet, and paid gratuities) for the $56 saving per person?  (And no cabin choice).  Personally I think those items are worth $56 a day.

 

If one of you does not drink and does not want the AI and the other wants it, you could move the passengers around between the two cabins.  Book two people in the GTY cruise only cabin.  Of course your cabins will not necessarily be in the same area.  I am not sure that it is a good idea to book two cabins with a GTY unless you do not mind being in totally different locations possibly even different categories and decks.

 

Good  luck in your decision.

.

Excellent detective work, explanation, and advice, "jagoffee"!

 

We think that, despite what at first seems like a loss of about $1,000, it would be wise for the OPs to forget about the GTY option and just pay the $3,422 twice.  Doing this would not only ...

(1) provide the OPs with two valuable features (unlimited WiFi and the beverage package [valuable despite no use of alcohol]), but also ...

(2) give the OPs the ability to try to get two adjacent staterooms [very desirable].

 

The reason we said that the OPs paying $3,422 (instead of $2,399) would only "seem" like a loss of about $1,000 is the fact that the $3,422 would include pre-paid Service Charges, while the $2,399 would not.  If the OPs were to keep the GTY cabin (with no "AI" features), they would have to pay daily service charges on board, thus "eating into" that ostensible $1,000 savings, possibly quite considerably.

.

[hcat]

22 hours ago, Bo1953 said:

Also, can you explain the reason you consider the pricing 'fraud' as in the thread title???

 

bon voyage

 I agree Bo, .

Maybe not fair but how is it fraud?

Some , lines are more single cruiser friendly than others,,

[nocl]

2 hours ago, zitsky said:

 

What's the worst that can happen to a solo plus a no show?

pretty much nothing. As long as there in no cancel for any reason insurance claim (which would be fraud) and it is just a no show, the normal response for cruise line is to refund taxes and fees and retain the cruise fare.

 

As a one time event should be no problem. Now if some tried this repeatedly the cruise line might flag them, like airlines do with some ticketing practices.

[Guppy99]

1 minute ago, nocl said:

pretty much nothing. As long as there in no cancel for any reason insurance claim (which would be fraud) and it is just a no show, the normal response for cruise line is to refund taxes and fees and retain the cruise fare.

 

As a one time event should be no problem. Now if some tried this repeatedly the cruise line might flag them, like airlines do with some ticketing practices.

Still fraudulent.

[nocl]

1 hour ago, Guppy99 said:

Deliberately booking a solo plus a person who you know in advance will be a know show, with the intent of avoiding the solo booking fee, is in fact an attempt at fraud.

However they are not avoiding the booking fee. What they are doing is booking a double fare that is not offered to singles. No fraud involved with booking a valid double fare and so.eone not showing up.

[Guppy99]

2 minutes ago, nocl said:

However they are not avoiding the booking fee. What they are doing is booking a double fare that is not offered to singles. No fraud involved with booking a valid double fare and so.eone not showing up.

yes it is if you know they will not show and your intent was to avoid the solo travel fee.

[nocl]

9 minutes ago, Guppy99 said:

Still fraudulent.

Nope. it is not. Not a DA in the world would take that as a fraud case. 

 

After all they booked a valid fare. they paid the fare, that was available for two guests. Cruises all the time have last minute no shows.

 

As long as one does not try to claim insurance on the canceled individual, (that would be insurance fraud). If anything, just like with airlines that will take action when people take advantage of ticketing structure it would be up to the cruise lines to take action. However the difference is that the airlines have specific language against it in the term of carriage  and the cruise lines do not have any language forbidding the practice in there contracts.

Edited October 29, 2021 by nocl

[nocl]

1 minute ago, Guppy99 said:

yes it is if you know they will not show and your intent was to avoid the solo travel fee.

Show me in the cruise contract where the practice is forbidden. 

[Hearthosesteeldrumsplayin]

I am about to sail my first time on Celebrity, so not as familiar with their pricing structure.  However, on NCL, we have added a 3rd or 4th person for very little extra.  If you are willing for all of you to be in the same suite, try a 2 bedroom suite.  The 2nd bedroom is small, but a good size for a single and it has its own bathroom, which is equivalent to what you would find in a typical stateroom.  The HAVEN is much pricier (there's a reason), but you can also find some of the older ships that have 2 bedroom suites outside of the HAVEN area.  Just thinking that might be a good option for you if they are sailing where you want....

[Arizona Wildcat]

13 minutes ago, nocl said:

Nope. it is not. Not a DA in the world would take that as a fraud case. 

 

After all they booked a valid fare. they paid the fare, that was available for two guests. Cruises all the time have last minute no shows.

 

As long as one does not try to claim insurance on the canceled individual, (that would be insurance fraud). If anything, just like with airlines that will take action when people take advantage of ticketing structure it would be up to the cruise lines to take action. However the difference is that the airlines have specific language against it in the term of carriage  and the cruise lines do not have any language forbidding the practice in there contracts.

Agree and I could find no language forbidding the practice.

I agree with Bo and others that there is no fraud on behalf of Celebrity.  If one feels the cost is not reasonable then don't book passage.

[nocl]

The reason why the airlines have language in ther term of carriage preventing practices like booking a connecting flight, and only taking one leg was because they tried to take action against people doing so before having that language and lost in court. Thus the addition of the language. The cruise lines do not have similar language in their contracts. 

 

It is a valid fare at time of booking, all penalties paid as in no refund of the no show passengers fare.

[zitsky]

4 minutes ago, Hearthosesteeldrumsplayin said:

I am about to sail my first time on Celebrity, so not as familiar with their pricing structure.  However, on NCL, we have added a 3rd or 4th person for very little extra.  If you are willing for all of you to be in the same suite, try a 2 bedroom suite.  The 2nd bedroom is small, but a good size for a single and it has its own bathroom, which is equivalent to what you would find in a typical stateroom.  The HAVEN is much pricier (there's a reason), but you can also find some of the older ships that have 2 bedroom suites outside of the HAVEN area.  Just thinking that might be a good option for you if they are sailing where you want....

 

Is there a name for the 2 bedroom suites?  Thanks.

[nocl]

20 minutes ago, Arizona Wildcat said:

Agree and I could find no language forbidding the practice.

I agree with Bo and others that there is no fraud on behalf of Celebrity.  If one feels the cost is not reasonable then don't book passage.

Certainly no fraud on the part of the cruise line setting their pricing structure however they want. Of course the more they'd this the more incentive people have to find ways to find work around.

 

Based upon the normal mass market model where 25% of their revenue comes from on ship purchases when the extras are not included with fare X.

 

2 people in the cabin would yield in general 2(1.33x) =2.66× where as the solo even paying double fare would yield 2.33x  a opportunity loss of .33x of the yield of a cabin with 2 people in it, even when paying the double fare. Celebrities solution has shifted to not allow the option of solo booking without the extras that make up a lot of the onboard spend.  a bit higher cost that just raising the solo premium to a bit more than double single fare but in most cases results in far less out cry.

 

The funny thing is that they are making the change when ships are sailing half full and the normal number of cabin limits do not apply.

Edited October 29, 2021 by nocl

[grandgeezer]

14 hours ago, Z'Loth said:

See https://www.cruisecritic.com/articles.cfm?ID=21 

 

The per-person pricing is based upon two people occupying a cabin. This makes it harder for people like me who like to travel alone. I would like to have a balcony cabin all to myself, but with the premiums that the cruise lines charge, I ended up taking a inside cave. There are very few ships, and only one in Celebrity's line, that actually have that rare solo cabin.

 

I can understand a 25% premium, or maybe a 50% premium, for occupying a cabin for two for myself. 100% gives me pause.... and they don't offset it with additional OBC or points. 

 

Why would they cut the price they can get for two people in the cabin, for a solo? Besides the loss of room revenue, the also lose out and any other money that person would have spent on other things like drinks, specialty dining, spa treatments, etc.

They are in business to make every penny they can.

[emmas gran]

If they move their cruise to Silhouette it now has single occupancy cabins. Not the same itinerary though

 

 

[Guppy99]

3 hours ago, nocl said:

Nope. it is not. Not a DA in the world would take that as a fraud case. 

 

After all they booked a valid fare. they paid the fare, that was available for two guests. Cruises all the time have last minute no shows.

 

As long as one does not try to claim insurance on the canceled individual, (that would be insurance fraud). If anything, just like with airlines that will take action when people take advantage of ticketing structure it would be up to the cruise lines to take action. However the difference is that the airlines have specific language against it in the term of carriage  and the cruise lines do not have any language forbidding the practice in there contracts.

sorry, you are wrong. Just because it is unlikely to be prosecuted, that doesn't make it any less fraudulent.  If you do this knowing there will be a no show, and with the intent to avoid to the charges, then it is fraud. I'm happy to say I paid off my student loans for my legal degree, have you? 

[Against Irrational People]

3 hours ago, grandgeezer said:

Why would they cut the price they can get for two people in the cabin, for a solo? Besides the loss of room revenue, the also lose out and any other money that person would have spent on other things like drinks, specialty dining, spa treatments, etc.

They are in business to make every penny they can.

^^^ This.  Under the OP’s perceived entitlement, the cruise line is losing more profit than if the room was actually booked by two people spending onboard. Based on lost profits, solo cruisers absolutely should pay more than double, if demand allows it.  
 

Also, cruise lines probably have additional data on the average onboard spending habits of solo cruisers that may cause them to price solo cruisers at an even higher multiple than 2x.  As a hypothetical, if solo cruisers are disproportionally on average socially awkward, non-drinking introverts who spend close to zero onboard, they are going to be priced even higher, thus screwing the outlier spray-tanned convertible-driving alcoholic widow(er) solo cruisers who actually do spend more. The goal of every cruise is to maximize profit on each room - no reason for them to price it based on the OP’s simplified pricing logic. It’s data-driven, not fraud.  Sorry to say, but the data has shown businesses who their undesirable customers are, and they are finding ways to exclude or price them out in favor of more profitable customers. This is the same reason why building contractors are turning down small projects vs. large projects.  Solo cruisers are just less profitable and therefore need to charged more. Is it discrimination - no, and please don’t be a Karen/Ken and analogize being a solo cruiser to being an underrepresented minority. It’s not the same ball park or sport, to quote Pulp Fiction.

 

I would love to see the data on solo cruisers, as well as data on all cruisers broken down by red/blue state, child status, state room size, etc. if there was ever a data breach by a cruise line, I would be on the dark web downloading all that data and crunching the numbers and posting the analysis here on Cruise Critics.

 

Edited October 29, 2021 by Against Irrational People
Clarification and spelling errors

[Z'Loth]

6 hours ago, grandgeezer said:

Why would they cut the price they can get for two people in the cabin, for a solo? Besides the loss of room revenue, the also lose out and any other money that person would have spent on other things like drinks, specialty dining, spa treatments, etc.

They are in business to make every penny they can.

 

That's correct. And I'm not a drinker, so no money made off me for the higher margin alcoholic drinks. I prefer the main dining room over a specialty restaurant. And I never had a spa treatment. 

 

[mfs2k]

Today they came for the solo traveler. 
Stay vigilant. Tomorrow they may come for you. 

[Jeremiah1212]

1 hour ago, N 2 Sun said:

In my view, the base price for a cabin should be X whether one or two people stay in it…..just as in most hotel pricing…at least American hotels. If people want perks, packages and other benefits, they are welcome to buy them. Choices are wonderful. But choices that charge people different prices for the same thing are wrong to me. 

 

Unfortunately it just doesn't work that way. A hotel provides a finite service if there is 1 person or 4 people in the room. You want room service or amenities? You will pay $$$$. A cruise is more like an all-inclusive resort where the same concept applies. If they can put 2 in a cabin there is no benefit to allowing 1 person to book that cabin at half price. There are a few cruise lines that offer solo cabins or at times a reduced solo supplement. I would research those options. 

 

Although it's wrong to you, you also glazed over the fact that you are comparing a Guarantee and an AI fare. It's not the same thing at all. 

[nocl]

8 hours ago, Guppy99 said:

sorry, you are wrong. Just because it is unlikely to be prosecuted, that doesn't make it any less fraudulent.  If you do this knowing there will be a no show, and with the intent to avoid to the charges, then it is fraud. I'm happy to say I paid off my student loans for my legal degree, have you? 

Then maybe you can explain the difference with the court rulings with the airlines where the courts found that they could not penalize passengers for booking valid fares, even when they did not intend to fly the entire ticket, until they added language preventing the practice to there terms of carriage.

 

Then show us where in the current cruise contract the practice in not allowed. Happens everyday where passengers are no shows at the pier.

 

Legal president is pretty clear. As a attorney you should be able to find the appropriate cases, if not let me know and I can list them for you.

 

While I am not an attorney, I had several on my staff that reported to me.

 

Show us the precidents that support your claims. Do that and I will show you the ones that ruled against the air lines.

[nocl]

8 hours ago, Guppy99 said:

sorry, you are wrong. Just because it is unlikely to be prosecuted, that doesn't make it any less fraudulent.  If you do this knowing there will be a no show, and with the intent to avoid to the charges, then it is fraud. I'm happy to say I paid off my student loans for my legal degree, have you? 

Let's look at another way if this actually ended up it court. I can see the following questions asked of the cruise line.

 

Was the fare booked valid? yes

How many times each year do you have a no show at the dock? Some number or I don't know.

Do penalize all of them? No

Have you previously penalized anyone for having a no show? No

Why this one? They posted on cruise Critic that they only did this to book a fare without inclusions. That there was never any intent for a second passenger.

Did they provide a valid name and passenger information? Yes

Then how can you be certain there was no chane the second person would cruise? The CC discussion.

 

Where do you draw the line on chance of some one filling the second slot 90 percent that they will sail, 50 percent, 1 percent?  We do not have a defined standard.

 

Is there language in the cruise contract to prevent the practice? No

 

Question to individual named on reservation? Was there any chance you might make the cruise? There was a slim chance. I would have liked to, since it would have been paid for by passenger 1, but in the end I was unable to.

 

Companies do things all the time with pricing. A lot of things that are ethically unfair. If it is unethical for a passenger to use the rules to their benefit, it is equally unethical to force a soli passenger to have to pay double for inclusiis that they will only use one of.

 

By The cruise line setting up the pricing most will not take the perfectly legal work around  so the number of people booking the lower double fare then having a no show will be small and the cruise line got their goal of most solo travelers paying the higher double fare including double the inclusions.

[Guppy99]

1 hour ago, nocl said:

Then maybe you can explain the difference with the court rulings with the airlines where the courts found that they could not penalize passengers for booking valid fares, even when they did not intend to fly the entire ticket, until they added language preventing the practice to there terms of carriage.

 

Then show us where in the current cruise contract the practice in not allowed. Happens everyday where passengers are no shows at the pier.

 

Legal president is pretty clear. As a attorney you should be able to find the appropriate cases, if not let me know and I can list them for you.

 

While I am not an attorney, I had several on my staff that reported to me.

 

Show us the precidents that support your claims. Do that and I will show you the ones that ruled against the air lines.

'"precedence", and the airline scenario is not on "all fours" with the airline policy. If fact, it is so far astray as to not even be relevant.  A cruise ship passenger, on board for several days, where there is probability of additional revenue from each individual is totally different. 

[Bo1953]

1 hour ago, nocl said:

Let's look at another way if this actually ended up it court. I can see the following questions asked of the cruise line.

While I cannot actually confirm this one way or another, I would tend to believe that this has ended up in court and went no where... as such the practice continues, even if it was modified.

 

bon voyage