No more Simply More

[Syd58]

To me, the new pricing strategy either says we don’t want to compete with the all-inclusive luxury lines, (i.e.,Silversea, Seabourn, Regent, Crystal), OR we can’t..

[AMHuntFerry]

2 minutes ago, ORV said:

 Oddly enough I've met a lot of people over the years that go on Oceania as their first cruise. 

I love it when you talk about me 🙂 

[Syd58]

3 minutes ago, ORV said:

You do realize that is an Oceania release that is comparing them to the upper Mass Market lines? So yes, Oceania management and marketing do consider them their competition. 

 

I've been reading this forum for a while, and it's my perception that in the last 15 years(since I've cruised them) most of the customers coming to Oceania are moving up from Princess, Hal, Celebrity etc., not moving down from Seabourne, Silversea, Regent, Crystal etc. You do see posts and meet those onboard that cover the spectrum. Oddly enough I've met a lot of people over the years that go on Oceania as their first cruise. 

Absolutely, people are coming from these lines, but many of these people are willing to pay only so much for what they perceive to be an upgraded experience.

[EJL2023]

1 minute ago, AMHuntFerry said:

I love it when you talk about me 🙂 

🙋🏻‍♂️.  Same here for us. 

[AMHuntFerry]

3 minutes ago, Syd58 said:

To me, the new pricing strategy either says we don’t want to compete with the all-inclusive luxury lines, (i.e.,Silversea, Seabourn, Regent, Crystal), OR we can’t..

Again, not their target competition. In fact, I avoid alcohol-included lines (which also eliminates V and A).

Edited 12 hours ago by AMHuntFerry

[Maggie 1008]

I was on EJ in May for 10 nights Honolulu to Vancouver. I have been on all the premium and luxury lines. Yes, they do still have some growing pains but I can’t wait to sail on EJ again. Fabulous food and service. Most beautiful ship.

They will eventually have six ships so itinerary choices should improve. Cheers, Heather 

[AMHuntFerry]

Just now, EJL2023 said:

🙋🏻‍♂️.  Same here for us. 

And you're in Florida! I thought you couldn't live there unless you partially lived on a cruise ship.

[Syd58]

16 minutes ago, AMHuntFerry said:

Again, not their target competition. In fact, I avoid alcohol-included lines (which also eliminates V and A).

I know a number of people who sail on both, us included. We have 3 Oceania, 3 Silversea, 1 Regent, 1 Crystal, and 1 Seabourn booked. I think O does (or did), in fact, attract customers from the luxury, all-inclusive lines. With that said, their new pricing strategy will likely make it more difficult.

Edited 12 hours ago by Syd58

[njhorseman]

10 minutes ago, Syd58 said:

To me, the new pricing strategy either says we don’t want to compete with the all-inclusive luxury lines, (i.e.,Silversea, Seabourn, Regent, Crystal), OR we can’t..

You're using the wrong cruise lines to make your comparison. Oceania was never a luxury cruise line nor was it trying to be with SM. NCLH doesn't want or need another luxury line. Regent Seven Seas is the luxury cruise line of the NCLH corporate family. Oceania is supposed to occupy the premium niche in the corporation, between mass market line NCL and luxury line  Regent.

 

SM was an attempt to match the offerings of other premium lines such as Viking Ocean.

[DaisyGoldberg]

I don't find it that confusing. NCL owns both Oceania and Regent, so it makes far more sense to position O between mass market and luxury rather than compete with themselves.

 

Xpost with njhorseman!

Edited 12 hours ago by DaisyGoldberg

[Syd58]

1 minute ago, njhorseman said:

You're using the wrong cruise lines to make your comparison. Oceania was never a luxury cruise line nor was it trying to be with SM. NCLH doesn't want or need another luxury line. Regent Seven Seas is the luxury cruise line of the NCLH corporate family. Oceania is supposed to occupy the premium niche in the corporation, between mass market line NCL and luxury line  Regent.

 

SM was an attempt to match the offerings of other premium lines such as Viking Ocean.

I believe VO includes 1 excursion for every port as well as included drinks. How does Oceania’s new pricing strategy compete with this?

[AMHuntFerry]

4 minutes ago, Syd58 said:

I believe VO includes 1 excursion for every port as well as included drinks. How does Oceania’s new pricing strategy compete with this?

53 minutes ago, AMHuntFerry said:

That's just it...O is not trying to compete with luxury lines even through many customers frequent luxury and/or mainstream cruises. With SM they were trying to emulate Viking which did not appeal to as many people as they hoped. Here is who O sees as the main competition (https://www.oceaniacruises.com/value😞

"With SM they were trying to emulate Viking which did not appeal to as many people as they hoped."

[njhorseman]

1 minute ago, Syd58 said:

I believe VO includes 1 excursion for every port as well as included drinks. How does Oceania’s new pricing strategy compete with this?

The Simply More model that is being eliminated, although different in how the shore excursion inclusion was handled is what was intended to compete with VO. VO includes wine and beer at lunch and dinner, which is what Oceania's Simply More does.

[Syd58]

7 minutes ago, AMHuntFerry said:

"With SM they were trying to emulate Viking which did not appeal to as many people as they hoped."

 

7 minutes ago, AMHuntFerry said:

"With SM they were trying to emulate Viking which did not appeal to as many people as they hoped."

In many cases, Viking’s prices were/are comparable to O with included excursions and drinks. Since you indicated VO was a primary competitor, wouldn’t it put O at a competitive disadvantage if prices remain relatively the same but O now does not include excursions and drinks? It remains to be seen how O’s new pricing strategy plays out.  If history is indicative of the future, they’ll likely change it again before too long..

Edited 12 hours ago by Syd58

[AMHuntFerry]

2 minutes ago, Syd58 said:

 

In many cases, Viking’s prices were/are comparable to O with included excursions and drinks. Since you indicated VO was a primary competitor, wouldn’t it put O at a competitive disadvantage if prices remain relatively the same but O now does not include excursions and drinks? It remains to be seen how O’s new pricing strategy plays out. 

But the whole point of the SM elimination is that a large contingent of target customers (who may not include you or me) did not value included wine/beer and/or included shorex, while included gratuities were appreciated by most. My personal hope is that O takes some of the (possible) savings and puts it into food and service which are probably important to most cruisers (except those who will not be referenced 😉 ).

[Syd58]

12 minutes ago, AMHuntFerry said:

But the whole point of the SM elimination is that a large contingent of target customers (who may not include you or me) did not value included wine/beer and/or included shorex, while included gratuities were appreciated by most. My personal hope is that O takes some of the (possible) savings and puts it into food and service which are probably important to most cruisers (except those who will not be referenced 😉 ).

I am not privy to the specific reasoning as to why O changed pricing strategies again, but what I can say is it was likely revenue (or cost) driven. I also can say, IMO, it not a good look for a company to keep changing pricing strategies in a relatively short period of time.

Edited 11 hours ago by Syd58

[ORV]

13 minutes ago, AMHuntFerry said:

while included gratuities were appreciated by most

Well, unless you're over 10 cruises, then you're not that happy with it. Now we're paying for something we were already getting for no additional cost. 

[AMHuntFerry]

29 minutes ago, ORV said:

Well, unless you're over 10 cruises, then you're not that happy with it. Now we're paying for something we were already getting for no additional cost. 

Oops, change most to some. $250 will buy quite a few Obans though 😉 

[durberville]

2 hours ago, terrydtx said:

From what I have read and heard this was why O is dropping the SM Program, too many complaints for customers about having to pay for things they do not want or use, like Alcohol and shore 

Edited 11 hours ago by durberville
Nvm…tried to delete and couldn’t. Lol

[Thought2go]

1 hour ago, Syd58 said:

I am not privy to the specific reasoning as to why O changed pricing strategies again, but what I can say is it was likely revenue (or cost) driven. I also can say, IMO, it not a good look for a company to keep changing pricing strategies in a relatively short period of time.

I think O is in for some bumpy rides going forward. They are IMHO jettisoning their reputation in Cuisine for some nebulous revenue enhancement. Itineraries, I believe, will fall flat as competition moves in- Not refurbing Marina as planned tosses a lot onto Vista to pick up the amenities- and the well documented soundproofing issues will stall that until Allura pops the cork. What they have neglected on the R class ships leaves very little to offer in the cupboard. After all there are only so many PH which is what is filling up. I’ve had at least 6 major changes on my upcoming cruise in very short order that is sending re-evaluation signals going forward.

One was a particular port I was most interested in where the time has been shortened to 10-4 and is now also a tender. Canceled meeting friends for Ceviche as nothing opens there till 3pm.

Why bother getting off the ship? To buy souvenirs?? Yeah no thanks.

Edited 10 hours ago by Thought2go