JH hints again that changes to loyalty program changes are coming

[jimbo5544]

1 minute ago, n6uqqq said:

I always get a long island for my VIFP drink and paid a buck and some change because it exceeded the limit. My last cruise in May they had raised the allowed amount and it was actually " free" . 

Sounds good to me (your experience, as well as the LI Ice Tea).

[n6uqqq]

3 minutes ago, jimbo5544 said:

The bread gets buttered from all, not just casinos.  I would agree that they entice these cruisers to continue to lose by giving them discounted cruises.  I do not think that it ties to anything else. 

You are correct, we all play a role. Getting the ship full is half the battle. 

[scottasp]

I could be wrong but my understanding is that the casino is ran by an outside vender. I assume they pay Carnival to be there. I would also assume that Carnival is not giving them free cabins or free drinks. That would mean the vender is paying Carnival for these. The gambler may not be paying Carnival directly but they are being paid. Apparently moneywise this works out fine for the vender Carnival and the gambler. I know occasionally people win but the house in the long run does not lose. Maybe the gamblers would continue to cruise with free rooms anyway. I would think the gamblers are spending money on drinks and everything else non gamblers are.

 I have been in casinos that gave me free drinks, what a deal, usually cost me around a hundred dollars a drink.

[jimbo5544]

5 minutes ago, scottasp said:

I could be wrong but my understanding is that the casino is ran by an outside vender. I assume they pay Carnival to be there. I would also assume that Carnival is not giving them free cabins or free drinks. That would mean the vender is paying Carnival for these. The gambler may not be paying Carnival directly but they are being paid. Apparently moneywise this works out fine for the vender Carnival and the gambler. I know occasionally people win but the house in the long run does not lose. Maybe the gamblers would continue to cruise with free rooms anyway. I would think the gamblers are spending money on drinks and everything else non gamblers are.

 I have been in casinos that gave me free drinks, what a deal, usually cost me around a hundred dollars a drink.

While I do not know, I would be shocked of Carnival does own the casino operation, while they may vary well sub out the operations of them.  Are they profitable? Of course, or they would not be there.  I have no issue with CCL discounting rooms for people to come lose money in.  My gripe is that they count the same as the rooms I pay for (from a loyalty perspective).  I pass thru the casino's, but do not feel the addiction others do.

[BlerkOne]

38 minutes ago, n6uqqq said:

Carnival sure does know who butters their bread. That is exactly why gamblers get the casino rates. I don't gamble and have been offered exactly zero reduced rate or free cruises. These cruises are far from free for the people who really gamble. It has been said out here that booking a room barely covers the fixed costs of a cruise. So when a cruiser goes to the casino and drops their kids inheritance, Carnival entices them there with cheap/free cruises and often throws in free drinks, which encourages further indiscretion with their willingness to drop more money in the casino. 

That's what the gamblers would like you to think. The cruises are basically free and clear. There is no requirement to gamble.

 

Post COVID casino rates were plentiful to get cash flow going at a time when people were reluctant to cruise. Carnival knew if they made the cruises cheap enough, people would sail. Enter the gambler.

 

Carnival used them to get a jump start. Now there is more competition for still too many casino cabins. There is no need for Carnival to continue giving away so many.

[n6uqqq]

10 minutes ago, jimbo5544 said:

While I do not know, I would be shocked of Carnival does own the casino operation, while they may vary well sub out the operations of them.  Are they profitable? Of course, or they would not be there.  I have no issue with CCL discounting rooms for people to come lose money in.  My gripe is that they count the same as the rooms I pay for (from a loyalty perspective).  I pass thru the casino's, but do not feel the addiction others do.

Global Casino Operations runs the Casino for Carnival and is indeed part of Carnival Corp, so they help the bottom line for CCL. https://www.oceancasinojobs.com/ 

[Colorado Beach Bum]

19 hours ago, jimbo5544 said:

So you want them to combine them….got it.  

Nope.  I still believe they are separate. I enjoy the Carnival brand and many of the offerings - shows, comedy, piano bar, dining, live music and much more.  I appreciate the loyalty points as a valued carnival cruiser as I suspect you do.  If I only wanted to chase casino comps I wouldn’t keep going back to Carnival, there are plenty of casinos out there. I respect your opinion that they shouldn’t count, but don’t understand why you continue to bash others with differing opinions. 

[n6uqqq]

9 minutes ago, BlerkOne said:

That's what the gamblers would like you to think. The cruises are basically free and clear. There is no requirement to gamble.

 

Post COVID casino rates were plentiful to get cash flow going at a time when people were reluctant to cruise. Carnival knew if they made the cruises cheap enough, people would sail. Enter the gambler.

 

Carnival used them to get a jump start. Now there is more competition for still too many casino cabins. There is no need for Carnival to continue giving away so many.

You are correct, no gambling required, but the offers will dry up in a NY minute if that were to happen for any length of time. And just maybe after all the casino offers to get people back to cruising worked so well that Carnival has learned that it is a big money maker. When casino offers no longer help Carnival's bottom line they will dry up. So far there doesn't seem to be any signs that casino offers are on their way out.

[jimbo5544]

17 minutes ago, Colorado Beach Bum said:

Nope.  I still believe they are separate. I enjoy the Carnival brand and many of the offerings - shows, comedy, piano bar, dining, live music and much more.  I appreciate the loyalty points as a valued carnival cruiser as I suspect you do.  If I only wanted to chase casino comps I wouldn’t keep going back to Carnival, there are plenty of casinos out there. I respect your opinion that they shouldn’t count, but don’t understand why you continue to bash others with differing opinions. 

I bash nobody.  You state your view, which I am fine with.  I state mine which apparently you have issue with.  Of course they are separate or we would not be discussing it.  You first said you did not want them combined, then said you wanted them combined (which I do not, but again fine).  I commented that you did want them combined (or the ability to get benefits for loyalty while not paying the same as others), which again is fine, all view count.  Notice I did not say you bash anything or anyone, which I did not do either.

Edited July 22 by jimbo5544

[BlerkOne]

16 minutes ago, n6uqqq said:

You are correct, no gambling required, but the offers will dry up in a NY minute if that were to happen for any length of time. And just maybe after all the casino offers to get people back to cruising worked so well that Carnival has learned that it is a big money maker. When casino offers no longer help Carnival's bottom line they will dry up. So far there doesn't seem to be any signs that casino offers are on their way out.

The best offers might dry up, but the offers still come. And now half the world wants to cruise for reduced rates on Carnival. More competition for those slots. Just like airlines reduce the number of award seats and increase the number of miles required for them, Carnival should be doing the same.

[Colorado Beach Bum]

9 minutes ago, jimbo5544 said:

I bash nobody.  You state your view, which I am fine with.  I state mine which apparently you have issue with.  Of course they are separate or we would not be discussing it.  You first said you did not want them combined, then said you wanted them combined (which I do not, but again fine).  I commented that you did want them combined (or the ability to get benefits for loyalty while not paying the same as others), which again is fine, all view count.  Notice I did not say you bash anything or anyone, which I did not do either.

We see it differently which is fine - I said I respected your opinion. I think the two programs are separate and NOT combined.  Loyalty points are for days sailed which one should be rewarded for no matter who, what or how it was paid for.  Casino rates are completely separate.  That’s how I see it but as I stated above, I respect those who see it differently.  Just as I respect those who don’t think kids should get to diamond/platinum because their parents paid for the cruise. 

[aborgman]

1 hour ago, jimbo5544 said:

Clearly they can now, I do not think they should. 

 

You don't think they should, even if it maximizes profitability?

[RoperDK]

3 hours ago, BlerkOne said:

IMO that is exactly who Carnival is not trying to placate. Carnival doesn't want cruisers who cruise for perks, but cruisers who like the brand.

This IMHO is a great point.  Why would anyone cruise with a brand that doesn't please them, regardless of status?  The status perks are just a bonus to me.  If I don't like the food, environment, or service, then I won't bother wasting my time on that cruise line. I feel that we all settle into a cruise experience that makes us feel comfortable.  I do value the perks, but if I don't enjoy the cruise experience, then I would be dumb to keep going over and over.  I also play in the casino and get perks for my play.  I still choose which cruises I consider. I will pass over a great offer on a short cruise on an older ship for a smaller offer on a cruise on a newer ship with a better itinerary.  Doesn't everyone do that?      

[BlerkOne]

10 minutes ago, aborgman said:

 

You don't think they should, even if it maximizes profitability?

Maximizing profits is not the the same as serving shareholders' best interest.

[Colorado Beach Bum]

6 minutes ago, BlerkOne said:

Maximizing profits is not the the same as serving shareholders' best interest.

Are you referring to long term shareholder value?  Then I agree. Short term profits aren’t necessarily good for long term value.  

[BlerkOne]

15 minutes ago, Colorado Beach Bum said:

Are you referring to long term shareholder value?  Then I agree. Short term profits aren’t necessarily good for long term value.  

Shareholder value is also not the same as shareholders' best interest. But yes, long term.

[Elaine5715]

1 hour ago, BlerkOne said:

That's what the gamblers would like you to think. The cruises are basically free and clear. There is no requirement to gamble.

 

Post COVID casino rates were plentiful to get cash flow going at a time when people were reluctant to cruise. Carnival knew if they made the cruises cheap enough, people would sail. Enter the gambler.

 

Carnival used them to get a jump start. Now there is more competition for still too many casino cabins. There is no need for Carnival to continue giving away so many.

You only need to gamble once to join the players club.  The offers are based on factors other than prior gambling but gamblers gamble then justify overspending because they might get a "free" cruise.  

[IntrepidFromDC]

4 hours ago, StephPS79 said:

This has certainly been a lot of thought/discussion analyzing a $16 dollar drink benefit…

 

If it makes the masses happy, once I reach Diamond from my Casino Rate bookings, I’ll tell the bartender to use my voucher to buy a round for the person next to me.  I’ll even pay the taxes if needed.  Holy moly. 

Holy moly is right, favorite neighbor!  I see you're in VA Beach.  Please let me know next time you're cruising out of Baltimore, bar buddy.  😁 🏴‍☠️ 🍹

[Stick93]

2 hours ago, BlerkOne said:

The best offers might dry up, but the offers still come. And now half the world wants to cruise for reduced rates on Carnival. More competition for those slots. Just like airlines reduce the number of award seats and increase the number of miles required for them, Carnival should be doing the same.

There is a lot of competition for the casino gamblers. No shortage of Casinos or gamblers. Must be very profitable for them not to do what you suggest. Once they lose a gambler some where else they have lost their “loses” as well. 

Edited July 23 by Stick93

[Stick93]

1 hour ago, Elaine5715 said:

You only need to gamble once to join the players club.  The offers are based on factors other than prior gambling but gamblers gamble then justify overspending because they might get a "free" cruise.  

Gamblers don’t think - they go with instinct and their hopes. Everything is about the next wager. You are overthinking the win and losses and freebies. 
 

But gamblers can also deduct losses from winnings… So they can win while losing as well. 

[Elaine5715]

19 minutes ago, Stick93 said:

Gamblers don’t think - they go with instinct and their hopes. Everything is about the next wager. You are overthinking the win and losses and freebies. 
 

But gamblers can also deduct losses from winnings… So they can win while losing as well. 

I never mentioned wins and losses.  Also, it is impossible for a causal gambler to record losses in a way that will pass an audit.  

[BlerkOne]

21 minutes ago, Stick93 said:

There is a lot of competition for the casino gamblers. No shortage of Casinos or gamblers. Must be very profitable for them not to do what you suggest. Once they lose a gambler some where else they have lost their “loses” as well. 

That's debatable. There are only so many cruise ships and not all of them even have casinos. That strongly suggests a casino is not necessary to keep a cruise ship afloat.

[BlerkOne]

21 minutes ago, Stick93 said:

Gamblers don’t think - they go with instinct and their hopes. Everything is about the next wager. You are overthinking the win and losses and freebies. 
 

But gamblers can also deduct losses from winnings… So they can win while losing as well. 

That's not how I gamble. I gamble with my head and not over it. 

 

You can deduct losses from winnings but have plenty of supporting documentation for each session if the IRS comes knocking. 

[Stick93]

Just now, BlerkOne said:

That's not how I gamble. I gamble with my head and not over it. 

 

You can deduct losses from winnings but have plenty of supporting documentation for each session if the IRS comes knocking. 

You gamble? From your posts it doesn’t look like you are one of those people “gaming” carnival - but if you are I hope you win big in the casino and with a free room. 
 

IRS is looking for the big fish! 

[kwokpot]

2 minutes ago, BlerkOne said:

That's not how I gamble. I gamble with my head and not over it. 

 

You can deduct losses from winnings but have plenty of supporting documentation for each session if the IRS comes knocking. 

Yes, exactly. We were challenged by the IRS on our joint tax return and via letter writing we alerted them to the fact that they had not reviewed the attached worksheets on how we came to only pay taxes on our offset winnings. It took several months but they accepted our calculations. The differential was in the 5 figures.