Celebrity not honouring rate?

[RichYak]

9 minutes ago, mahdnc said:

 

I had posted this in the now-removed thread, but it bears repeating here.  Although there is no universal definition on what constitutes a pricing mistake, in all fairness to Celebrity, the recent Silhouette pricing controversy was interpreted to be an error by at least two different Cruise Critic members.

 

 

 

And the person that they both quoted simply thought they were great prices. For an error to be clear, it should be obvious to the average travel customer. Those of us on CC are different breeds.

 

I'm sorry, but I still maintain that a 3-day cruise for over $800 is not even close to an obvious error.

[TrueCruiseaholic]

43 minutes ago, mahdnc said:

 

I had posted this in the now-removed thread, but it bears repeating here.  Although there is no universal definition on what constitutes a pricing mistake, in all fairness to Celebrity, the recent Silhouette pricing controversy was interpreted to be an error by at least two different Cruise Critic members.

 

 

 

Well if two people on Cruise Critic said it was a price error, then it obviously was! (Sarcasm)

 

Seriously, though, if Celebrity was selling a cruise at a given price it was not a price error. Nobody hacked Celebrity's website. They set that price and allowed cruises to be booked at that price.

 

It is a cop out. This is not one person setting a price and putting it in the Celebrity computer system. It is a whole team. MANY people at least indirectly approved of the prices by allowing them to be the set prices in the computer system.

 

Has Celebrity come back and claimed any of the itineraries released are incorrect? Changed any ports on any days of the new itineraries? I don't think so.

 

I guess putting in a surcharge for room service or another lobster tail is just a technical error too? Celebrity will change that back in a few weeks?

Edited January 3, 2023 by TrueCruiseaholic

[prmssk]

2 minutes ago, RichYak said:

And the person that they both quoted simply thought they were great prices. For an error to be clear, it should be obvious to the average travel customer. Those of us on CC are different breeds.

 

I'm sorry, but I still maintain that a 3-day cruise for over $800 is not even close to an obvious error.

With that argument, a company should never be able to claw back pricing that is a mistake because someone may have thought it was just a good deal and not an obvious error.  Where is that line between obvious error and great deal?  Who gets to decide where that line is?

 

In this case, we are talking about deals that say cruisers know sound too good to be true.  This isn't just Celebrity changing their mind.  And I highly doubt this is a decision Celebrity took lightly.  I'm sure they could predict that backlash this would cause.  They aren't going to make this some general policy (as some in this and other threads seem to fear) because the backlash would only get worse and they wouldn't stay in business long.

[cw2go]

1 minute ago, RichYak said:

And the person that they both quoted simply thought they were great prices. For an error to be clear, it should be obvious to the average travel customer. Those of us on CC are different breeds.

 

I'm sorry, but I still maintain that a 3-day cruise for over $800 is not even close to an obvious error.

Respectfully, I have the NYE cruise booked on the Silhouette and its 4 nights. I paid $944 for interior with military discount for myself and DH This same cruise with AI perks in that class stateroom is unrealistic. I do believe Cel should have stepped up quicker and offered a much better compromise in this situation but I also see it was clearly an error. The underlined portion of the quoted posts reveals the fellow CC'ers knew so too. 

[TrueCruiseaholic]

3 hours ago, jagoffee said:

You sure have taken a giant leap.
 

 It is reasonable to say that Celebrity will not honor pricing errors that have been quickly recognized and corrected.  

Celebrity reserves the right to cancel a guest's booking for almost any reason. Celebrity has chartered out ships and refunded the guests who were booked. If Celebrity bans you (which they threatened at least one guest from a previous thread on this topic),  Celebrity obviously cancels and refunds all the bookings.

 

The argument is not whether Celebrity CAN cancel bookings, it is whether they morally or ethically SHOULD. Obviously many users think Celebrity is in the right with this. I disagree. See previous post.

[LGW59]

56 minutes ago, RichYak said:

I would like clearer definitions of "pricing errors" and "quickly" because in the recent cases, I find neither to be true. Were they very attractive prices? Absolutely. Were they clearly errors? Not to me, no. We're not talking 99 cents for a cruise which is the spirit of the Errors and Omissions clause. We're talking $200+ pp/pd for suites for very short cruises. Cheap for sure especially recently, but certainly not unheard of.

 

And waiting 3 weeks before pulling the rug out from under customers is not at all quick. Doing the right thing would have taken a day. The fact that it took as long as it did indicates to me that they needed to be sure they were covered for acting in bad faith.

 

I agree with the poster you replied to. This is a bad precedent to set and it's not at all a giant leap.

And they probably spent more on the lawyers looky looky than they are recouping for their “losses”

 

[RichYak]

2 minutes ago, prmssk said:

Where is that line between obvious error and great deal?  Who gets to decide where that line is?

Finally, you understand the point.

[LGW59]

35 minutes ago, mahdnc said:

 

I had posted this in the now-removed thread, but it bears repeating here.  Although there is no universal definition on what constitutes a pricing mistake, in all fairness to Celebrity, the recent Silhouette pricing controversy was interpreted to be an error by at least two different Cruise Critic members.

 

 

 

Ahh ok it’s settled then if two different CC members interpreted it 

[prmssk]

1 minute ago, RichYak said:

Finally, you understand the point.

But we clearly don't agree on what that means for what Celebrity should or can do in this case.

[TrueCruiseaholic]

I guess Best Buy, Walmart, Costco, etc put a TV on sale and then a week after you buy it they say "Oh that price was obviously an error, please pay us more money."

[jagoffee]

The original thread had a nice graph showing the initial prices for different categories and the corrected prices for the new releases being discussed.  An error was very obvious to me, but surely the definition of error is up to interpretation.  Celebrity would be the only one that know for sure.  I trust them in this situation.  I can see how others might not.  Compare the Suite price with the Retreat benefits to a balcony and/or other categories.  Or earlier new releases.

 

Just my opinion.  I can understand why anyone who was able to take advantage of the error to have a different one

 

Edited January 3, 2023 by jagoffee

[prmssk]

Just now, TrueCruiseaholic said:

I guess Best Buy, Walmart, Costco, etc put a TV on sale and then a week after you buy it they say "Oh that price was obviously an error, please pay us more money."

In this case, the sale is already complete.  A booking with a cruise line for 2 years in the future is not actually a completed sale.  I don't think this is a fair comparison.

[RichYak]

Just now, prmssk said:

But we clearly don't agree on what that means for what Celebrity should or can do in this case.

If it was a clear (to everyone) error, like a decimal in the wrong place, we would agree.

[prmssk]

Just now, RichYak said:

If it was a clear (to everyone) error, like a decimal in the wrong place, we would agree.

Even then someone could claim it wasn't clear to them.  So you clearly are willing to draw that line somewhere.  Should your opinion on where to draw the line be the one we all follow?

[RichYak]

2 minutes ago, prmssk said:

So you clearly are willing to draw that line somewhere

I did in my previous response to you: a decimal in the wrong place. $820 instead of $8200 would be a clear error. On the other hand, if I can find examples of other 3-day cruises for around $800 on mass market cruise lines, which i suspect I could, then it's not at all a clear mistake.

[NorthStarStateCruiser]

Alright everyone, there's clearly two sides to this discussion.  Can we keep future posts relevant to how Celebrity actually handles the situation rather than what they should or shouldn't do?

 

As someone who's affected by this, I'd like to know how others decide what to do and what they are offering.  Getting off track is going to get the topic removed again.

[TrueCruiseaholic]

2 minutes ago, NorthStarStateCruiser said:

Alright everyone, there's clearly two sides to this discussion.  Can we keep future posts relevant to how Celebrity actually handles the situation rather than what they should or shouldn't do?

 

As someone who's affected by this, I'd like to know how others decide what to do and what they are offering.  Getting off track is going to get the topic removed again.

I am also curious to see if Celebrity gives anyone a break. Right now it appears to be Celebrity's way or the highway. Much like with all the other 2023 new year changes, Celebrity is banking on guests not protesting.

 

At this point in time, my cynicism wants to see Celebrity claim the new prices are an error and cancel the rebooked sailings for being too low.

[prmssk]

5 minutes ago, TrueCruiseaholic said:

I am also curious to see if Celebrity gives anyone a break. Right now it appears to be Celebrity's way or the highway.

The reports I am seeing are an offer of a 10% discount off the corrected fare or cancelling without penalty.  That isn't a super generous offer but it also isn't a "Celebrity's way or the highway" kind of offer.

[TrueCruiseaholic]

21 minutes ago, prmssk said:

The reports I am seeing are an offer of a 10% discount off the corrected fare or cancelling without penalty.  That isn't a super generous offer but it also isn't a "Celebrity's way or the highway" kind of offer.

Celebrity is saying: "pay 90% of our new price or we cancel your booking. Those are your options" Agree to disagree.

Edited January 3, 2023 by TrueCruiseaholic

[mahdnc]

1 hour ago, TrueCruiseaholic said:

Well if two people on Cruise Critic said it was a price error, then it obviously was! (Sarcasm)

 

Seriously, though, if Celebrity was selling a cruise at a given price it was not a price error. Nobody hacked Celebrity's website. They set that price and allowed cruises to be booked at that price.

 

It is a cop out. This is not one person setting a price and putting it in the Celebrity computer system. It is a whole team. MANY people at least indirectly approved of the prices by allowing them to be the set prices in the computer system.

 

Has Celebrity come back and claimed any of the itineraries released are incorrect? Changed any ports on any days of the new itineraries? I don't think so.

 

I guess putting in a surcharge for room service or another lobster tail is just a technical error too? Celebrity will change that back in a few weeks?

 

57 minutes ago, LGW59 said:

Ahh ok it’s settled then if two different CC members interpreted it 

 

All I am saying is that two of the affected parties realized that the pricing was an error.  This is in response to "how can I tell if it is an error" and not an attempt to define it (because you can't) or settle it.

[mahdnc]

1 hour ago, RichYak said:

And the person that they both quoted simply thought they were great prices. For an error to be clear, it should be obvious to the average travel customer. Those of us on CC are different breeds.

 

I'm sorry, but I still maintain that a 3-day cruise for over $800 is not even close to an obvious error.

 

I wasn't saying your definition is wrong.  I am saying that it appeared to be an error for a couple of people that were affected.  So it can be recognized and certainly not something we can all agree on.

[mahdnc]

BTW, I do wish that Celebrity would just honor the mis-pricing or provide a more generous settlement.  After all they are going to get it back through room service charges, reduced MDR food quality to encourage customers to eat at specialty restaurants, no-show charges, etc etc.

Edited January 3, 2023 by mahdnc

[dlh015]

2 minutes ago, mahdnc said:

After all they are going to get it back through room service charges, reduced MDR food quality to encourage customers to eat at specialty restaurants, no-show charges, etc etc.

Good one!! 😂

[RichYak]

15 minutes ago, mahdnc said:

 

I wasn't saying your definition is wrong.  I am saying that it appeared to be an error for a couple of people that were affected.  So it can be recognized and certainly not something we can all agree on.

That's all fine and I don't expect us all to agree on everything, and that's fine too. But here's my main point. For a company to fall back on an error clause in an agreement in order to nullify it, the "error" threshold should be very very high. Much much higher than "it appeared to be an error for a couple of people." It should be egregious. It should be misplaced-decimal-point egregious. IMO, that's the spirit of the contract clause in question. This isn't that. Given the limited scope, this seems petty.

[islabahia]

2 hours ago, RichYak said:

Seems like all the cool kids are doing this now 😎

X wanted to reprice to 4200 for 4 days in a Sky Suite.  Same week and we can cruise in a beautiful cabin on Vista for 7 days for $6,000 in a PH3.  Looks like a no brainer to us…