Silversea Shenanigans Onboard Silver Muse

[tnm6217]

I'm not typically one to complain on Cruise Critic, but I wanted to send some real-time information regarding my experience with a few things since boarding Silver Muse yesterday (June 13th)...

 

This is my second Silversea sailing, after having sailed on Nova in April. I am Elite on Celebrity, which now entitles me to 250 day VS privileges under Status Match. As a lover of Champagne (who usually only drinks while on a cruise), I couldn’t wait to see what my “upgraded bottle of Champagne in suite” would be. I was saddened to see the standard Monopole bottle waiting in my suite upon embarkation.

 

I asked my butler about it, and he politely told me that the Monopole was the premium Champagne. I pushed a little harder and he said he would have the butler manager speak with me. The butler manager showed up only a few minutes later and informed me the 250 day VS Status Match only entitled me to free laundry, not the premium Champagne. I asked additional questions and learned that the premium option (for the 250 day sailed VS status) is a bottle of Barons de Rothschild Rose, and that "the ship was informed" that the 250 day VS Status Match benefit was only the free laundry.

 

I went back and reread all of the VS and Status Match literature and there are no listed exceptions beyond the complimentary cruise perk. I went to guest relations and let them know what was happening. The reception manager agreed my interpretation of the literature was correct, but said "that's what we were told." He asked me to email the literature to him, which I did. That was around 5:30 pm yesterday, and I haven't heard anything back. I'll report back if/when I do.

 

There is no Duval Leroy Champagne onboard Silver Muse, which is frustrating since they have it on Nova and Nova is doing the same route as Muse.

 

Additionally, I had prebooked a spa service for $419. This morning, I went for the appointment and was told the service would be $599. I pulled up my confirmation from Silversea (emailed to me earlier this week) to show the technician the price. He said he had seen other people with similar situations, but that I would need to talk with the spa manager to see if she could honor the price, and to come back to talk with her later today. I appreciated that he let me know ahead of time, but I'm not sure I even want to mess with it now. 

 

Both of these "little" issues have me feeling like there are some mistruths and bait-and-switch tactics going on.

 

The ship is lovely, the staff are GREAT, and the food has been fabulous across the board. I am happy to be here, but definitely a little frustrated by these issues and the apparent inability of the staff to resolve them onboard (which could be a Corporate-driven issue).

 

 

[Host Jazzbeau]

4 minutes ago, tnm6217 said:

Both of these "little" issues have me feeling like there are some mistruths and bait-and-switch tactics going on.

I usually hate to see that term thrown around on Cruise Critic, but I have to agree with you here!

[Gourmet Gal]

30 minutes ago, tnm6217 said:

Both of these "little" issues have me feeling like there are some mistruths and bait-and-switch tactics going on.

I actually don’t think SS is sophisticated enough to intentionally bait and switch.  It’s more likely misinformation, no mechanism to automatically honor a guest’s documentation, and the inability of staff to be able to problem solve on the spot.  I have a feeling this kind of checking in with HQ or the boss didn’t happen before the merger.  How frustrating to have this happen twice already.

 

I do think the spa is very poorly run and I also had a problem with attempts to upsell on a recent Spirit cruise.  I ended up cancelling all my treatments.

 

And don’t worry about the Duval LeRoy - you’re not missing much but perhaps the Monopole actually is an upgrade now.

[dawntrdr]

It's impossible to have a "bait and switch" unless you purchased the cruise after the match program was announced.  But they did get your expectations raised which is almost certain to cause you to feel disappointed.

[Port Power]

I had the same experience on boarding Silver Wind today.  Monopole in the ice bucket.  Reception confirmed they had me down as 250 days.  However, the butler list they had received from head office showed Monopole against my name.  I think that list might have been made up before the status match announcement was made.  The receptionist also brought up the current VS benefits and acknowledged it listed the Champagne upgrade was an entitlement.  Unfortunately her hands are tied.  She has emailed HO and will get back to me.

 

This is still a learning curve for the ship’s staff.  They have been placed in a difficult situation by HO.

 

Also no Duval LeRoy on the ship.  The waiter didn’t know anything about the new relationship deal.  Monopole blue top is the only champagne with no extra charge.

[Host Jazzbeau]

12 minutes ago, Port Power said:

The receptionist also brought up the current VS benefits and acknowledged it listed the Champagne upgrade was an entitlement.  Unfortunately her hands are tied.  She has emailed HO and will get back to me.

This is not how luxury lines work.

[V8Babe]

Only been a couple of weeks and already seen lots of posts about status, especially those who have never sailed Silversea but apparently have ‘250+ days’ expecting special treatment.  Please spare a thought to those who have only ever travelled Silversea and trying to get to the magic 100. Definitely not fair to loyal Silversea folks.

[Port Power]

11 hours ago, Host Jazzbeau said:

This is not how luxury lines work.

No, it shouldn’t be.  But as I stated, the SS ships have been placed in this position by RCG.  Very unfortunate. And sad.

[Texas Tillie]

Don't forget that the spa is a contract operation, not operated by Silversea. That being said, the unexpected price change is unacceptable.

[RetiredandTravel]

Sounds very disappointing.  Glad to hear the rest of the cruise is going well.  They did have Pommery when we were on.

[Texas Tillie]

39 minutes ago, RetiredandTravel said:

Sounds very disappointing.  Glad to hear the rest of the cruise is going well.  They did have Pommery when we were on.

 

I was told on Nova in May that when the current supply of Pommery is gone, it's gone for good.

[UKCruiseJeff]

It takes a blend of extremely rare management skills to collectively devise an extremely cunning plan that manages to both hack off all of the new high-value customers that they worked hard to attract and ask to defect from their current loved loyalty brand who then buy and find that they were clearly cheated and misled,  whilst at the same  time managing to make their MOST valued existing long-term customers upset because they feel that these brand new SS customers are more valued and being treated better.

 

Perhaps they aren’t savvy enough to have collectively worked out that disloyalty to their most loyal long-term existing customers might be considerably more expensive than seizing the opportunity to disappoint a few new ones. 

 

Whilst at the same time accelerating their luxury brand downmarket as rapidly as possible, 

 

Brilliant. 🙂

 

Jeff

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 15 by UKCruiseJeff

[tfred]

the big issue here is the change of price at the spa. The price quoted is the price and should be easily honored. 

 

The champagne discussion is different.  I am sure that the wine market is limited in production and gets substituted as supplies dwindle.  Supplier contracts and prices also come into play. It happens now with X out of Miami, I can only imagine what happens in far flung ports. No one wants 10 cases of anything when 1000 was ordered.  You will get something pretty good, maybe something better 

 

The champagne upgrade may be different for legacy VS against RCG status match and I am ok with that (as a status matcher myself)  SSea should do a better job in making sure that the ships know what VS status match gets (its pretty limited anyway - basically laundry)

 

The hub-hub over status match happens in every loyalty program - air, hotel, lounge.  The problem is when the new folks take up physical space that was only allowed by actual "stays". That certainly isnt happening at SSea   Other than free laundry, an upgraded champagne and future discounts there isnt anything that is being taken away from legacy SSea pax.  BTW - you won't see a horde of X pax on board. SSea routes just dont conform to many peoples work schedules

[RetiredandTravel]

1 hour ago, RetiredandTravel said:

Sounds very disappointing.  Glad to hear the rest of the cruise is going well.  They did have Pommery when we were on.

 

 

Now you tell me 🙄😁😁

 

[UKCruiseJeff]

tfred,

 

The actual core issue is an extremely simple one. 

 

It is how you meet the reasonable expectations of those things that are important to your customers.  And what is important will vary at the edges.  

 

Do you meet - or even better exceed them - or have you been complicit in creating a set of expectations that you have wilfully or negligently failed to meet.  One set of customers will be satisfied or delighted, the other set disappointed. 

 

It is where you are “on that  scale” and how you understand it and manage it that defines which direction your organisation progresses.

 

Jeff

 

 

 

 

Edited June 15 by UKCruiseJeff

[MuseCruiser]

3 hours ago, UKCruiseJeff said:

It takes a blend of extremely rare management skills to collectively devise an extremely cunning plan that manages to both hack off all of the new high-value customers that they worked hard to attract and ask to defect from their current loved loyalty brand who then buy and find that they were clearly cheated and misled,  whilst at the same  time managing to make their MOST valued existing long-term customers upset because they feel that these brand new SS customers are more valued and being treated better.

 

Perhaps they aren’t savvy enough to have collectively worked out that disloyalty to their most loyal long-term existing customers might be considerably more expensive than seizing the opportunity to disappoint a few new ones. 

 

Whilst at the same time accelerating their luxury brand downmarket as rapidly as possible, 

 

Brilliant. 🙂

 

Jeff

 

 

 

 

 

 

You understand there are more customers for a premium product than for a luxury product, do you not?

[UKCruiseJeff]

27 minutes ago, MuseCruiser said:

You understand there are more customers for a premium product than for a luxury product, do you not?

 

You do understand that cruisers buying a Silversea cruise  are promised a luxury product not a premium product, do you not?

[Host Dan]

4 hours ago, UKCruiseJeff said:

It takes a blend of extremely rare management skills to collectively devise an extremely cunning plan that manages to both hack off all of the new high-value customers that they worked hard to attract and ask to defect from their current loved loyalty brand who then buy and find that they were clearly cheated and misled,  whilst at the same  time managing to make their MOST valued existing long-term customers upset because they feel that these brand new SS customers are more valued and being treated better.

 

Perhaps they aren’t savvy enough to have collectively worked out that disloyalty to their most loyal long-term existing customers might be considerably more expensive than seizing the opportunity to disappoint a few new ones. 

 

Whilst at the same time accelerating their luxury brand downmarket as rapidly as possible, 

 

Brilliant. 🙂

 

Jeff

 

 

 

 

 

 

Well said Jeff.

[ChucktownSteve]

19 hours ago, UKCruiseJeff said:

It takes a blend of extremely rare management skills to collectively devise an extremely cunning plan that manages to both hack off all of the new high-value customers that they worked hard to attract and ask to defect from their current loved loyalty brand who then buy and find that they were clearly cheated and misled,  whilst at the same  time managing to make their MOST valued existing long-term customers upset because they feel that these brand new SS customers are more valued and being treated better.

 

Perhaps they aren’t savvy enough to have collectively worked out that disloyalty to their most loyal long-term existing customers might be considerably more expensive than seizing the opportunity to disappoint a few new ones. 

 

Whilst at the same time accelerating their luxury brand downmarket as rapidly as possible, 

 

Brilliant. 🙂

 

Jeff

 

 

 

 

 

 

As they say in the States, it's all about the Benjamins.  "Benjamins" is a slang word for money, referring to Benjamin Franklin's image on the US $100 bill. Royal Caribbean Group apparently is looking for their RCL and Celebrity cruiser to pay more, fill their limited number of suite SS ships and then they can raise the rates; all while cutting costs.

 

That matches the 2014 philosophy Corporate initiated called "Double-Double".  Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd. (RCCL) set a dual goal of boosting its return on invested capital to double digits and doubling its 2014 earnings per share over the next three years.

I haven't witnessed RCG being concerned about their loyal cruiser after watching how they deteriorated the Celebrity experience over the years.  I suspect they believe their well will never run dry with new cruisers as the "expensive benefit" loyalists drop off or die.

Edited June 16 by ChucktownSteve

[UKCruiseJeff]

53 minutes ago, ChucktownSteve said:

As they say in the States, it's all about the Benjamins.  "Benjamins" is a slang word for money, referring to Benjamin Franklin's image on the US $100 bill. Royal Caribbean Group apparently is looking for their RCL and Celebrity cruiser to pay more, fill their limited number of suite SS ships and then they can raise the rates; all while cutting costs.

I haven't witnessed RCG being concerned about their loyal cruiser after watching how they deteriorated the Celebrity experience over the years.  I suspect they believe their well will never run dry with new cruisers as the "expensive benefit" loyalists drop off or die.

 

I think it is mostly the unexpected consequences of many seemingly rapidly convergence of diverse and seemingly unrelated trends.

 

The most influential factor that has changed  over the last few decades is that investors now churn more often and more quickly as a result of both electronic transactions in real time by brokers and then latterly the public managing and churning their own investments directly for themselves.  People use to hold the shares for a long time and now most hold it for comparatively short times ….. even often measured in hours and days. 

 

This means that whereas the main pressure on CEOs and their boards use to be the building of foundations of long-term value and improvement has been replaced by the need  to increase the pressure for short-term gains.  Shareholders appoint boards on the basis them needing CEOs who can meet this need.  The only real moderating influence are often pension funds etc.  The consequences of this is that CEO’s pay and rations are no longer more aligned to long-term progress but tactical “this year” and quarterly value growth.  This has caused and coincided with more rapid movement of leaders from job to job.  People don’t lead their companies for as long as they use to.

 

Overlaying all of this is the further complications of the way that the increasing speed of sudden external and unexpected forces eg natural disaster (eg covid) and geopolitical influences (eg world unrest) have become so rapid and fast and unexpected.  This means that the main imperatives might be simply survival and “getting through” and not get overtaken by these unexpected events.  This also enhances the tendencies to be short-term and tactical rather than long term strategists,  

 

There’s a very clear and palpable reducing value for creating and sustaining and harvesting of long-term customer loyalty,  The topic is now largely a corporate pretence and a component of marketing than actual corporate behaviour but as genuinely loyal customers are reticent to believe this to be so, they become complicit in the deception and simply become compliant and tactically exploitable.

 

The trajectory now is towards buyers being more tactical than brand loyal.  The explosion of the internet and social media means that customers can find out and determine who best fits them today and less of who do I want to trust with my loyalty for the next decade or two. 

 

It now simply doesn’t seem to matter as much if promises are made and not kept.  They want your cash today and with the explosion of people cruising  there will be enough replacements to replace the single cruise disappointed defectors for a while. Hence the daft scheme outlined in this thread but not delivered is attractive and is adopted irrespective of the longer term obvious consequences.

 

Life is simply changing and sometimes we take a bit longer to catch up and smell the coffee.

 

Jeff

 

 

 

 

Edited June 16 by UKCruiseJeff

[ChucktownSteve]

8 minutes ago, UKCruiseJeff said:

 

There’s a very clear and palpable reducing value for creating and sustaining and harvesting of long-term customer loyalty,  The topic is now largely a corporate pretence and a component of marketing than actual corporate behaviour but as genuinely loyal customers are reticent to believe this to be so, they become complicit in the deception and simply become compliant and tactical exploitable.

 

Jeff

 

 

 

 

 

I attribute the reticent behavior towards jumping ship (because of value reduction) to the boiling frog syndrome. That's where you place a frog in a pot of tepid water then turn up the heat slowly. Thus the frog doesn't realize he's being boiled.  Regarding my Celebrity experience, I referred to that as "death by a thousand cuts." 

 

Eventually many reach their loyalty tolerance level when taken further should the company deviate too much from the things that made them successful with their customers. It's a tightrope between keeping both the shareholders and customers happy.

 

How much is enough?

[highplanesdrifters]

2 hours ago, ChucktownSteve said:

 

@ChucktownSteve

It's a tightrope between keeping both the shareholders and customers happy.

 

if the customers aren't happy, the shareholders won't be happy. Tell that to the bean counters.   Worked out really well for Boeing.  🤣 

[ChucktownSteve]

36 minutes ago, highplanesdrifters said:

@ChucktownSteve

It's a tightrope between keeping both the shareholders and customers happy.

 

if the customers aren't happy, the shareholders won't be happy. Tell that to the bean counters.   Worked out really well for Boeing.  🤣 

As long as they can keep filling the ships with people who don’t know how it’s changed, the stockholders will be happy. I equate it to if you’ve never eaten a filet, hamburger can be pretty good to some people. 
 

Boeing is a whole different type of problem. 

[highplanesdrifters]

3 minutes ago, ChucktownSteve said:

As long as they can keep filling the ships with people who don’t know how it’s changed, the stockholders will be happy.

 

You hit the nail on the head!  I wonder how many of the newbie upgraders will come back.  Is it a one off YOLO and back to Carnival or will it stick?

[tfred]

2 minutes ago, ChucktownSteve said:

As long as they can keep filling the ships with people who don’t know how it’s changed, the stockholders will be happy. I equate it to if you’ve never eaten a filet, hamburger can be pretty good to some people. 
 

Boeing is a whole different type of problem. 

There is a whole bunch of monied people that haven't cruised but are spending an equivalent amount of money at a land resort every year on a "big" vacation. Every cruise line wants them and there is a definite movement to cruises from land vacay folks 

 

There are many cruisers who are dropping big dollars in a suite on X or NCL (equal to what SSea costs) and are looking for interesting routes to be on They are familiar with the X product and just need a small push to try SSea (free laundry) 

 

Every hotel chain in the world has a loyalty program. Marriott has everything from Fairfield Inn to Ritz Carlton. If you are a regular Marriott member you can stay in a Ritz and get some benefits but not all. I am a top lifetime tier on Marriott and can only get some benefits since I am not a long term Ritz customer

 

You know that NCL is looking at the success of this (and it will be ) and look to rollout their own version - NCL-Oceania -Regent. MSC is doing it with Explora   Its a no brainer.  The lux ships are not some private club that operates off referrals where people earn their stripes - they need new customers as any business does and it is natural they would look at their existing customer base   

 

SSea will work out the kinks of recognition in a few months and everyone will get some sort of $50 at retail French champagne in a bucket of ice and 99% of them will be very happy.