Simply More Means Simply Back to Which Cruise Line for You?

[Sabbycat]

21 hours ago, ak1004 said:

 

Our friends sailed with Celebrity for 30 years, reached Elite plus. We finally convinced them to try O. They are not going going back to Celebrity. 

 

After trying a Mercedes, we are not going back to Honda. Yes, it costs more, but nobody asks why Mercedes costs more than Honda..

 

If you want a luxury experience, you have to pay for it, including paying for things you don't use. 

We paid $200 pp/night more for SS Retreat than Penthouse suite on Oceania, so I would not say that Celebrity is cheaper.

[ak1004]

1 hour ago, Sabbycat said:

We paid $200 pp/night more for SS Retreat than Penthouse suite on Oceania, so I would not say that Celebrity is cheaper.

 

I know that Retreat prices are crazy, I was referring to standard cabins. 

[QuestionEverything]

4 hours ago, Hlitner said:

Traveling on land offers many advantages to any cruise, including the ability to go where you want without the constraints of a port day and getting back to the ship.  DW and I have long enjoyed just flying (or taking a cruise) to Europe where we might spend some time in a favorite city and than simply rent/lease a car for a few weeks.  A car allows us to go where we want, when we want, stay as long as we want, and not have to deal with the what we consider the horrors of bus travel.  Trains are also a good option for getting from Point A to Point B, but also are very limiting when moving around outside major cities.  

 

I might add that a car allows folks to go many places not even accessible to cruisers.  Just a year ago we were in Europe, flew to Prague, rented a car, drove through parts of the Czech Republic and Poland.  It was a fantastic trip, we ate better than on nearly any cruise, and our cost was less than a premium or luxury cruise line.  And consider that none of the areas we visited are even accessible by cruise ship (and mostly not readily visited by river cruise).  We are now thinking about a driving trip, next year, that would start in Trieste (where we debark from an O cruise) and take us south to Split, through some parts of Croatia and Slovenia, up into the Austrian Alps, and back into Italy (to drop the car and fly home).  Many of the places we want to drive are not accessible to any kind of cruise.

 

While we still love cruises, we have found that for us the perfect trip combines some cruising with a land trip.  The best of both worlds :).

 

Hank

Thank you Hank. Excellent analysis and post.

 

Acknowledge this is a cruise "groupie" site. But the reality is that it appears people are choosing to lessen cruising and move to other vacations on land. The "forced" pricing on O will impact some and not others. I am planning less cruises on any line.

Suffice it to say that land based tours are outstanding as well as Magnificent driving trips in North America (and Europe).

Cruising will compete with all other vacation options.

We like cruising as well, but it is not the absolute that it once was.

To each their own.

Edited July 4, 2023 by QuestionEverything

[susiesan]

8 hours ago, ak1004 said:

 

Agree - but small group tours are also significantly more expensive.

 

The only land tour I would consider is something that has maybe only 1-2 travels between cities. Say 4-5 days in Madrid, then 4-5 days in Barcelona and another 4-5 days in Lisbon. In each city there is also an option for short travels to see places nearby. 

 

Yes, you definitely see more in each place than on a cruise, but also see less places. On a cruise you "taste" each port, and then decide if it's worth to come back. Some ports are overnight. We also arrive 2-3 nights earlier to each port, so we have at least one place that we learn more in depth.

 

There is a tradeoff to everything.

Why would you need a tour to travel like this? Fly to the first city, take trains to the others, fly home from the last. Make a few hotel reservations. Book day tours from the concierge or tour desk at each hotel. You'll save a bundle.

[Hlitner]

13 minutes ago, susiesan said:

Why would you need a tour to travel like this? Fly to the first city, take trains to the others, fly home from the last. Make a few hotel reservations. Book day tours from the concierge or tour desk at each hotel. You'll save a bundle.

Just an observation (based on over 50 years of extensive travel), but some folks do not travel without being a part of tours or excursions.  We have met cruisers that will not even get off a ship (anywhere) unless they are part of an excursion.   Sometimes I think that those of us who will do our own thing, just about anywhere in the world, are considered the strange folks by fellow Americans and Canadians.  We once helped a couple (on a cruise) plan several European ports.  This took several hours of talking, writing, etc.  Later in the cruise they told us they had "chickened out" and finally booked the expensive cruise line excursions.  The lady was actually in tears when she said they were simply afraid to do anything on their own.  To us, the thought of taking some cruise line excursions would make us cry!  No way do we enjoy being on a bus with 60 other souls being led around like cattle.  But this is simply another case of "different strokes."

 

Ask yourself why many here on CC will book cruise line hotel packages, which generally cost about double of doing the same thing on their own, because they feel more comfortable with a cruise line package.  or those in a place like Port Everglades that pay 2 to 3 times the price of a taxi for the right to cool their heels waiting for a transfer bus to fill-up...and than drop them at a common location that might be a half mile from their terminal/gate.  Just the way it is.

 

Hank

 

Hank

[ak1004]

14 minutes ago, Hlitner said:

Just an observation (based on over 50 years of extensive travel), but some folks do not travel without being a part of tours or excursions.  We have met cruisers that will not even get off a ship (anywhere) unless they are part of an excursion.   Sometimes I think that those of us who will do our own thing, just about anywhere in the world, are considered the strange folks by fellow Americans and Canadians.  We once helped a couple (on a cruise) plan several European ports.  This took several hours of talking, writing, etc.  Later in the cruise they told us they had "chickened out" and finally booked the expensive cruise line excursions.  The lady was actually in tears when she said they were simply afraid to do anything on their own.  To us, the thought of taking some cruise line excursions would make us cry!  No way do we enjoy being on a bus with 60 other souls being led around like cattle.  But this is simply another case of "different strokes."

 

Ask yourself why many here on CC will book cruise line hotel packages, which generally cost about double of doing the same thing on their own, because they feel more comfortable with a cruise line package.  or those in a place like Port Everglades that pay 2 to 3 times the price of a taxi for the right to cool their heels waiting for a transfer bus to fill-up...and than drop them at a common location that might be a half mile from their terminal/gate.  Just the way it is.

 

Hank

 

Hank

 

Hank,

 

You are 100% correct, but it all comes with experience.

 

We usually arrive 2-3 nights before the cruise and stay in the embarkation port. Booking our own hotels and our own excursions. We aim for small group excursions (10-15 people), but also do some exploring on our own.

 

We also book our own air, but there are exceptions, like our SS cruise next year where they offered business class upgrade for $2,000 USD. Also, in some cases pre cruise hotel packages are attractively priced, and if you book through the cruise line, they include transfers and waive deviation fees. 

 

We definitely check prices. In our first two cruises from Port Everglades we booked ship transfers, but realized very quickly that taxi is cheaper and more convenient.

 

It does take some experience to become more independent, but we are getting there.. Still feel the most comfortable with combination of land and sea - in our case it's typically 20% land and 80% sea, but it might change.

 

On a related note, ships excursions are not always that bad. On our last SS cruise they had on average around 25 people on those excursions, and I don't think I would be comfortable to explore Al Manamah or Muscat on my own. But in Dubai and Abu Dhabi we had no issues. 

[Hambagahle]

12 hours ago, QuestionEverything said:

Thank you Hank. Excellent analysis and post.

 

Acknowledge this is a cruise "groupie" site. But the reality is that it appears people are choosing to lessen cruising and move to other vacations on land. The "forced" pricing on O will impact some and not others. I am planning less cruises on any line.

Suffice it to say that land based tours are outstanding as well as Magnificent driving trips in North America (and Europe).

Cruising will compete with all other vacation options.

We like cruising as well, but it is not the absolute that it once was.

To each their own.

If we travel to France, Germany or Italy (which are all neighbouring countries for us) we mostly take trains.  it has become very complicated to drive into German and French cities in the last several years because of the requirement for the Environmental sticker on the car.  Parking everywhere is a nightmare.   We do drive though in the countryside.  Tuscany for example.    When our ship docks in Trieste we are going to an island in the Venice Lagoon for a couple of nights.  And then will take the train home to Switzerland - Venice to Milan is about 2 1/2 hours.  Milan to us here is the same...  

 

But back to the original question - we are marginally better off with the Simply More package and will stick to our cruise plans with that package...  We really like Oceania and also have cruised and liked Regent.  We think the food is better on Oceania though and food is important to us!

Edited July 4, 2023 by Hambagahle

[QuestionEverything]

Just now, Hambagahle said:

If we travel to France, Germany or Italy (which are all neighbouring countries for us) we mostly take trains.  it has become very complicated to drive into German and French cities in the last several years because of the requirement for the Environmental sticker on the car.  Parking everywhere is a nightmare.   We do drive though in the countryside.  Tuscany for example.    When our ship docks in Trieste we are going to an island in the Venice Lagoon for a couple of nights.  And then will take the train home to Switzerland - Venice to Milan is about 2 1/2 hours.  Milan to us here is the same...  

We do as well. The trains in Europe are the Best. We often do a personal tour with trains before a bus trip, then a personal tour after the bus trip to fly where ever we wish to depart from.

Last August we did a car tour from Paris to Normandy, the D Day beaches (had a retired US Marine with us), Mt Saint Michele (OMG great) then to Le Have where we took a train back to Paris.

I like cruising, but not as much anymore, since we have increased land travel - land travel is simply more rewarding experience wise.

[Rainbow3fe]

16 hours ago, Hlitner said:

Traveling on land offers many advantages to any cruise, including the ability to go where you want without the constraints of a port day and getting back to the ship.  DW and I have long enjoyed just flying (or taking a cruise) to Europe where we might spend some time in a favorite city and than simply rent/lease a car for a few weeks.  A car allows us to go where we want, when we want, stay as long as we want, and not have to deal with the what we consider the horrors of bus travel.  Trains are also a good option for getting from Point A to Point B, but also are very limiting when moving around outside major cities.  

 

I might add that a car allows folks to go many places not even accessible to cruisers.  Just a year ago we were in Europe, flew to Prague, rented a car, drove through parts of the Czech Republic and Poland.  It was a fantastic trip, we ate better than on nearly any cruise, and our cost was less than a premium or luxury cruise line.  And consider that none of the areas we visited are even accessible by cruise ship (and mostly not readily visited by river cruise).  We are now thinking about a driving trip, next year, that would start in Trieste (where we debark from an O cruise) and take us south to Split, through some parts of Croatia and Slovenia, up into the Austrian Alps, and back into Italy (to drop the car and fly home).  Many of the places we want to drive are not accessible to any kind of cruise.

 

While we still love cruises, we have found that for us the perfect trip combines some cruising with a land trip.  The best of both worlds :).

 

Hank

Hi,

    Sounds like a great plan. We retired 20 years ago and even before Airbnb, we rented apartments in cities around the world. We traveled to small towns by train or bus and used our apt. as a base.  A few times we rented a car for a month and traveled around a country. We sprinkled cruises into our lives.  Many were trans Oceanic. We found Oceania and fell in love.

      We will never do a bus tour. The thought of sitting in a bus with the same complaining 40 people for even 3 days would drive us both crazy. I definitely don't want to pack and unpack daily. Nor do I want to wake up when someone decides I need to be a "breakfast ".

     We tried and were dissatisfied with both Princess and Celebrity. 

     Now that we are older, we appreciate the ease of booking some ship excursions. The OE and OS have been good. 

        We aren't sure if we'll try another cruiseline after our 4 already booked Oceania without the SM. Time will tell. 

      Good luck to everyone.  Enjoy whatever you choose to do. 

😎🎉🌻🌊

[lackcreativity]

On 7/3/2023 at 8:28 AM, QuestionEverything said:

However, a Big issue is this - cruising is definitely losing appeal to some people, so land travel trips are now our #1 priority. All our friends who travel extensively and cruised extensively......we all have our Trafalgar and Globus brochures front and center now.

 

I will not dispute your observation, only stress your point about this being a subset of cruisers. We began our travels with Globus, and loved those trips back in the day. You can visit places not accessible by cruise ship, and spending all your time in the places you visit is a bonus. We didn't even mind the buses!

 

However, as we aged, we found that even with the support offered by the tour company, the constant packing and unpacking, every morning with an early departure, and yes, now the long stretches on the buses became tiring. That's when we tried our first cruise (Viking). We are not going back. We may branch out to Oceania in search of new itineraries, but the ease of travel is of importance to us now. Glad that we all have so many options.

 

 

 

[MarkWiltonM]

21 hours ago, mjobtx said:

For many of us, simply MORE will be a huge price increase because of the reduced value of shore excursions when compared to OLife. For 2025, Oceania had already reduced the number of shore excursions available

 

Another thing to consider is how often Oceania cancels port calls, due to weather, the possibility of labor unrest (?!), etc. On our cruise to Bermuda in March, which was titled "Pink Sands Soiree" and was to spend 3 days in Bermuda, the entirety of the Bermuda portion of the cruise was canceled and we instead had two nights in (wait for it) -- Jacksonville, Florida!!! The third day was an extra sea day. We didn't have any Oceania excursions booked in Bermuda, but for those who did choose excursions as their O Life option, they had to settle for hastily arranged excursions in frickin' Jacksonville, Florida. I have never seen so many sad faces on a cruise in all my years of sailing.  

[ak1004]

52 minutes ago, lackcreativity said:

I will not dispute your observation, only stress your point about this being a subset of cruisers. We began our travels with Globus, and loved those trips back in the day. You can visit places not accessible by cruise ship, and spending all your time in the places you visit is a bonus. We didn't even mind the buses!

 

However, as we aged, we found that even with the support offered by the tour company, the constant packing and unpacking, every morning with an early departure, and yes, now the long stretches on the buses became tiring. That's when we tried our first cruise (Viking). We are not going back. We may branch out to Oceania in search of new itineraries, but the ease of travel is of importance to us now. Glad that we all have so many options.

 

 

 

 

Exactly how we feel. And to see places not accessible by cruise ship, we can take a river cruise, which has the best of both worlds.

[mjobtx]

1 hour ago, lackcreativity said:

I will not dispute your observation, only stress your point about this being a subset of cruisers. We began our travels with Globus, and loved those trips back in the day. You can visit places not accessible by cruise ship, and spending all your time in the places you visit is a bonus. We didn't even mind the buses!

 

However, as we aged, we found that even with the support offered by the tour company, the constant packing and unpacking, every morning with an early departure, and yes, now the long stretches on the buses became tiring. That's when we tried our first cruise (Viking). We are not going back. We may branch out to Oceania in search of new itineraries, but the ease of travel is of importance to us now. Glad that we all have so many options.

 

 

 

We feel the same way. The older I get, the less I am willing to schlepp luggage in and out of hotels, train stations, and trains every two or three days. Our stress level goes up and our enjoyment level goes down. If we take a land trip, we stay for at least a week in one location and sightsee by private guide from there. 

[mjobtx]

37 minutes ago, MarkWiltonM said:

 

Another thing to consider is how often Oceania cancels port calls, due to weather, the possibility of labor unrest (?!), etc. On our cruise to Bermuda in March, which was titled "Pink Sands Soiree" and was to spend 3 days in Bermuda, the entirety of the Bermuda portion of the cruise was canceled and we instead had two nights in (wait for it) -- Jacksonville, Florida!!! The third day was an extra sea day. We didn't have any Oceania excursions booked in Bermuda, but for those who did choose excursions as their O Life option, they had to settle for hastily arranged excursions in frickin' Jacksonville, Florida. I have never seen so many sad faces on a cruise in all my years of sailing.  

Our issue with simply MORE is that it forces you to book Oceania shore excursions in order to use the allowance. However, you do have the flexibility to book OE, OS etc. excursions that were not available with the OLife shore excursion amentity. That said, the total value of the simply MORE amenity is less than the maximum total value of the OLife shore excursion amenity. 

 

We recently had three shore excursions cancelled on our Alaskan cruise. We were given refunds. I can't tell from the information available what will happen with simply MORE. Will Oceania issue a refund to your onboard account or will they force you to book another shore excursion in order to maximize the value of the amenity.

[lackcreativity]

11 minutes ago, mjobtx said:

We feel the same way. The older I get, the less I am willing to schlepp luggage in and out of hotels, train stations, and trains every two or three days. Our stress level goes up and our enjoyment level goes down. If we take a land trip, we stay for at least a week in one location and sightsee by private guide from there. 

Sounds good to me, hope to do that kind of land trip in the future. Right now, we are the Odd Couple who are both still working (part-time) in our early 70's. We both like what we are doing, have some flexibility, finance our travels without touching money that's "for retirement", but can't really come and go as we please yet.  Cruising still fits the bill for us, for now. 

Edited July 4, 2023 by lackcreativity

[shepherd really]

5 minutes ago, mjobtx said:

Will Oceania issue a refund to your onboard account or will they force you to book another shore excursion in order to maximize the value of the amenity.

Both seem doubtful, especially if the cancellations are on the final port before the end of the cruise, when booking another tour is not an option.  Sounds like use it or lose it.  Ports cancelled? Too bad, so sad.  

[mjobtx]

Just now, shepherd really said:

Both seem doubtful, especially if the cancellations are on the final port before the end of the cruise, when booking another tour is not an option.  Sounds like use it or lose it.  Ports cancelled? Too bad, so sad.  

That would be my concern. With simply MORE it is already a use it or lose it amenity. It just becomes less valuable if you can't use it because of cancelled ports and a credit for the cost of the booked and cancelled shore excursion is not issued. For us, the simply MORE program is a net negative. 

[shepherd really]

6 minutes ago, mjobtx said:

That would be my concern. With simply MORE it is already a use it or lose it amenity. It just becomes less valuable if you can't use it because of cancelled ports and a credit for the cost of the booked and cancelled shore excursion is not issued. For us, the simply MORE program is a net negative. 

Agreed, I ran the numbers for both my already booked cruises.  Neither was a deal. On one, the amount I would spend on excursions went up by $125pp, add in the $600 pp higher cruise price and the lack of value for the "Simply more" benefits and it was not even a close call.  Your results may vary.

[ak1004]

13 minutes ago, mjobtx said:

That would be my concern. With simply MORE it is already a use it or lose it amenity. It just becomes less valuable if you can't use it because of cancelled ports and a credit for the cost of the booked and cancelled shore excursion is not issued. For us, the simply MORE program is a net negative. 

 

Wasn't it the same with oLife? If you booked with oLife and selected 4 excursions, one of them in the last port, and the port was cancelled, wouldn't you lose it?

[mjobtx]

2 minutes ago, shepherd really said:

Agreed, I ran the numbers for both my already booked cruises.  Neither was a deal. On one, the amount I would spend on excursions went up by $125pp, add in the $600 pp higher cruise price and the lack of value for the "Simply more" benefits and it was not even a close call.  Your results may vary.

It works in your favor if you always buy the House Select Beverage Package but we don't. However, prior to simply MORE, Oceania reduced the shore excursion amentity so its value was more in line with the simply MORE value. But simply MORE is still less than the lowered OLife shore excursion amenity. Oceania is trying to disguise significant increases in price as benefits. For those of us that don't buy beverage packages, the disguise doesn't work.

[mjobtx]

6 minutes ago, ak1004 said:

 

Wasn't it the same with oLife? If you booked with oLife and selected 4 excursions, one of them in the last port, and the port was cancelled, wouldn't you lose it?

We took the shore excursion amenity and booked our shore excursions. They qualified for the Unlimited Passport Collection. We were given refunds for all canceled shore excursions. We had the option of replacing them. We replaced two of them but the transactions were debits and credits. We were credited for the ones we cancelled and debited for the ones we added. The transactions were not linked.

[shepherd really]

6 minutes ago, mjobtx said:

It works in your favor if you always buy the House Select Beverage Package but we don't. However, prior to simply MORE, Oceania reduced the shore excursion amentity so its value was more in line with the simply MORE value. But simply MORE is still less than the lowered OLife shore excursion amenity. Oceania is trying to disguise significant increases in price as benefits. For those of us that don't buy beverage packages, the disguise doesn't work.

Correct, but I assign a low value to the house beverage package based on the amount my wife and I drink and the limitation of only during lunch and dinner. On port intensive cruises that means dinner only. Add in the nights of free drink events and the happy hours and it isn't worth much. 

Edited July 4, 2023 by shepherd really

[halfapair]

We pick cruises based on itineraries and value. Generally speaking, we prefer a line such as RCL for the Caribbean. You’re not really going anywhere special on a Caribbean cruise, but someplace like the Baltic, or Panama Canal, or Mediterranean is special. And Oceania will probably have the best itineraries for those types of cruises.

 

so I would say that it all depends on what you’re looking for in a particular cruise.

[mjobtx]

1 hour ago, shepherd really said:

Correct, but I assign a low value to the house beverage package based on the amount my wife and I drink and the limitation of only during lunch and dinner. On port intensive cruises that means dinner only. Add in the nights of free drink events and the happy hours and it isn't worth much. 

Oceania knows what percentage of its passengers buy beverage packages. Oceania also knows that beverage packages have an extremely high gross profit margin. They have little or no value to my wife and me. Oceania is making a calculated decision that they hope will increase their profit margins. There is nothing wrong with that. But simply MORE is a failed attempt at camouflaging a significant price increase for the ancillary elements of a cruise on top of the easily identifiable increases in cabin tariffs. I personally think they went too far too fast. 

OLife versus simply MORE shore excursion value comparison using 180-day 2024 and 2025 ATW cruises.

ATW 2024 – OLife 78 shore excursions or $7,800 shipboard credit

        Maximum shore excursion value $15,522

 

ATW 2024 – simply MORE, $10,800 shore excursion credit (30% reduction compared to OLife)

 

ATW 2025 – OLife 64 shore excursions or $6,400 shipboard credit

        Maximum shore excursion value $12,736 (18% reduction compared to 2024 ATW)

 

ATW 2025 – simply MORE, $9,800 shore excursion credit (23% decrease compared to OLife)

 

For shorter cruises, the reduction in value of the shore excursion amenity will be proportional. Whatever the amount, both the shore excursion credit and the beverage package are use it or lose it amenities. For some of us, there is a lot to lose.

 

There will be some percentage of cruisers that will be very happy about simply MORE. They are the passengers that always purchase a “House Select” beverage package which costs $39.95 per day per person. On a 180-day cruise, the value of that amenity is $7,191 per person or $14,382 per cabin. That will more than offset the decrease in value of the previous shore excursion amenity. I don’t know what percentage of Oceania’s passengers purchase the “House Select” beverage package but Oceania does. In my opinion, Oceania knows that including the high gross margin “House Select” beverage package and reducing the value of the shore excursion amenity will be  more advantageous to Oceania than OLife. For those of us that don’t drink or don’t buy beverage packages for a variety of reasons, the inclusion has no value.

 

To sum up the differences between OLife and simply MORE:

• ·         Significantly reduced value of shore excursion amenity with simply MORE
• ·         No option for shipboard credit in lieu of shore excursions with simply MORE
• ·         Elimination of a cruise only option with simply MORE
• ·         Addition of the “House Select” beverage package with simply MORE

 

 

[1985rz1]

4 minutes ago, mjobtx said:

Oceania knows what percentage of its passengers buy beverage packages. Oceania also knows that beverage packages have an extremely high gross profit margin. They have little or no value to my wife and me. Oceania is making a calculated decision that they hope will increase their profit margins. There is nothing wrong with that. But simply MORE is a failed attempt at camouflaging a significant price increase for the ancillary elements of a cruise on top of the easily identifiable increases in cabin tariffs. I personally think they went too far too fast. 

OLife versus simply MORE shore excursion value comparison using 180-day 2024 and 2025 ATW cruises.

ATW 2024 – OLife 78 shore excursions or $7,800 shipboard credit

        Maximum shore excursion value $15,522

 

ATW 2024 – simply MORE, $10,800 shore excursion credit (30% reduction compared to OLife)

 

ATW 2025 – OLife 64 shore excursions or $6,400 shipboard credit

        Maximum shore excursion value $12,736 (18% reduction compared to 2024 ATW)

 

ATW 2025 – simply MORE, $9,800 shore excursion credit (23% decrease compared to OLife)

 

For shorter cruises, the reduction in value of the shore excursion amenity will be proportional. Whatever the amount, both the shore excursion credit and the beverage package are use it or lose it amenities. For some of us, there is a lot to lose.

 

There will be some percentage of cruisers that will be very happy about simply MORE. They are the passengers that always purchase a “House Select” beverage package which costs $39.95 per day per person. On a 180-day cruise, the value of that amenity is $7,191 per person or $14,382 per cabin. That will more than offset the decrease in value of the previous shore excursion amenity. I don’t know what percentage of Oceania’s passengers purchase the “House Select” beverage package but Oceania does. In my opinion, Oceania knows that including the high gross margin “House Select” beverage package and reducing the value of the shore excursion amenity will be  more advantageous to Oceania than OLife. For those of us that don’t drink or don’t buy beverage packages for a variety of reasons, the inclusion has no value.

 

To sum up the differences between OLife and simply MORE:

• ·         Significantly reduced value of shore excursion amenity with simply MORE
• ·         No option for shipboard credit in lieu of shore excursions with simply MORE
• ·         Elimination of a cruise only option with simply MORE
• ·         Addition of the “House Select” beverage package with simply MORE

 

 

Yes, it's a mixed bag, and it is important to do the math as you have done.  But be careful in using the maximum shore excursion value in the comparison, as it's rare to actually reach that value.  Our experience is a factor of 1.6 to 1.7 is more in tune with what is actually doable.  This doesn't change your assessment as the excursion comparison still shows a loss, just not quite as bad.