Child Prices .... ouch ...

[Patch Nelson]

The last time my wife and I sailed on QM2 was November last year. Had a great time, but no surprise there, we knew we would after travelling on her for our Honeymoon the year before.

 

This trip was a little different as two of us boarded, and, unbeknown to us at the time, three of us got off. (I blame Baroness Ruth Deach for all those IVF scare lectures!!)

 

Anyway, as excited as we are about our new arrival (Baby George, all being well, will arrive in August) - I have to confess that I'm absolutely gutted that it'll be quite a while now before we can travel on the QM2 again, finances being the major factor.

 

I read the thread last week about the nursery facilities and started to get a tinge of excitement that, with careful saving, we may be able to not only go back but give a reasonably aged child say 6 or 7 a wonderful memory of the ship. I'd have loved that at that age!

 

When the new brochure arrived this week I couldn't believe my eyes when I read that children over 2 years of age cost the same as a fully paid adult. Am I alone in being amazed by this?

 

Obviously I've never had cause to look at Child places in the past but my understanding with 'package' style holidays that children up to the age of 12 are usually discounted to half fare. Is full price the norm for the Crusie industry?

 

Needless to say ... plans now seem well and truly shelved!

[ocngypz]

There are only two cruiselines which will give you a break on children under two: Disney and Norwegian.

[Patch Nelson]

There are only two cruiselines which will give you a break on children under two: Disney and Norwegian.

 

Sorry, I may not have made it clear. I believe, without checking the brochure that Children under 2 go free. That's fine, infact possibly even generous.

 

What I found very difficult to believe was that Children over two pay exactly the same price as a full adult, ie- no concession for say under 16's or even under 12's.

[pnhmrk]

When the new brochure arrived this week I couldn't believe my eyes when I read that children over 2 years of age cost the same as a fully paid adult. Am I alone in being amazed by this?

 

I must admit to never having looked for child prices either;) but I would have thought that, assuming there are two of you going already, you'd only be paying the third/fourth person fare and they are much cheaper than the full fare for the first two passengers.

[P1TKL]

The last time my wife and I sailed on QM2 was November last year. Had a great time, but no surprise there, we knew we would after travelling on her for our Honeymoon the year before.

 

This trip was a little different as two of us boarded, and, unbeknown to us at the time, three of us got off. (I blame Baroness Ruth Deach for all those IVF scare lectures!!)

 

Anyway, as excited as we are about our new arrival (Baby George, all being well, will arrive in August) - I have to confess that I'm absolutely gutted that it'll be quite a while now before we can travel on the QM2 again, finances being the major factor.

 

I read the thread last week about the nursery facilities and started to get a tinge of excitement that, with careful saving, we may be able to not only go back but give a reasonably aged child say 6 or 7 a wonderful memory of the ship. I'd have loved that at that age!

 

When the new brochure arrived this week I couldn't believe my eyes when I read that children over 2 years of age cost the same as a fully paid adult. Am I alone in being amazed by this?

 

Obviously I've never had cause to look at Child places in the past but my understanding with 'package' style holidays that children up to the age of 12 are usually discounted to half fare. Is full price the norm for the Crusie industry?

 

Needless to say ... plans now seem well and truly shelved!

 

I have cruised 4 times now with my boys starting when they were 3 and 5. I have never paid full adult prices yet for them and wait for offers which are always appearing. This year we are going on the QE2 and the boys are now 10 and 12 They are still sharing our cabin and wait for it they are absolutely FREE ! The amount we are paying since we started cruising seems to be going down for the 4 of us - so don`t despair you will still be able to cruise if you keep an eye out for offers !!

[Patch Nelson]

I must admit to never having looked for child prices either;) but I would have thought that, assuming there are two of you going already, you'd only be paying the third/fourth person fare and they are much cheaper than the full fare for the first two passengers.

 

Good point, and sounds like the answer to me. I shall check that one out and hang my head in shame as I admit I hadn't considered that before posting!

[PennyAgain]

With good shopping, you will find that taken children along is not a major expense when they share a room with you. When they are old enough to have their own room (and a parent may have to be booked into each of the 2 rooms) you will need to look for specials and discounts for a 2nd room booking.

 

Congratulations to the original poster for the new family member. What a story to tell in future! Does this bring up a new list of options for names?

[scottjeanne]

You are correct in that the third or fourth person in each room is at a significant discount. We are taking the QE2 this summer to the mediterranean- 16 days and my 15 year old daughter is charged at $1706. That is a per diem rate of just over $100. Not bad. And for those with young children, there is no charge for the nursery/children's program. They do offer babysitting in your cabin which is at an hourly rate. Overall, it is still a fabulous deal.

 

Jeanne

[ocngypz]

3rd and 4th passengers pay the same rate regardless of age. The fare is lower than that of first and second passengers, but whether the extra passengers are 1 or 101, the rate is the same. If the child is the second passenger in the cabin, the child pays the adult rate. Additionally, if there is an air promo on the sailing, the third and/or fourth passengers are nor eligible for the reduced air.

 

This is NOT the case with Disney and NCL. The extra passenger fares are age dependent

[jonmar]

When my wife and I first travelled onboard QM2 in 2004, children under 2 were free if they were the third/fourth passenger. When we went the second time, my wife was pregneant and they were still free. We booked our next voyage, leaving this weekend by the by, and found out Cunard had changed their policy and now all third/fourths must pay the full rate regarless of age. I can understand this policy in that I'm sure it is an attempt to limit the number of children onboard. While I appreciate this motive (I don't like kids, apart from my little P Nut), I think they have possibly miscalculated. Had the child gone free, I personally would feel somewhat indebted to Cunard, and would not let my daughter flip out in the dining room. In the event she did, I would quickly remove her, or take dinner in our cabin. Now that she is a paying passenger, I doubt I will jump too quickly to remove her. I am actually hoping some staff member suggests removing her. I cannot wait for this moment. The point is, while limiting the number of children on board, Cunard will have also instilled a sense of entitlement in parents. I just want one freak out. The rest of the voyage, she will take dinner in the cabin.

[Kindlychap]

When my wife and I first travelled onboard QM2 in 2004, children under 2 were free if they were the third/fourth passenger. When we went the second time, my wife was pregneant and they were still free. We booked our next voyage, leaving this weekend by the by, and found out Cunard had changed their policy and now all third/fourths must pay the full rate regarless of age. I can understand this policy in that I'm sure it is an attempt to limit the number of children onboard. While I appreciate this motive (I don't like kids, apart from my little P Nut), I think they have possibly miscalculated. Had the child gone free, I personally would feel somewhat indebted to Cunard, and would not let my daughter flip out in the dining room. In the event she did, I would quickly remove her, or take dinner in our cabin. Now that she is a paying passenger, I doubt I will jump too quickly to remove her. I am actually hoping some staff member suggests removing her. I cannot wait for this moment. The point is, while limiting the number of children on board, Cunard will have also instilled a sense of entitlement in parents. I just want one freak out. The rest of the voyage, she will take dinner in the cabin.

 

Are you saying that if you have paid for your child, and the said child misbehaves to the extent that a member of staff has to ask for it to be removed, you would protest?

 

Surely the fact that you have paid for her doesn't alter the fact that, presumably, you don't want to insult the neighbours in the dining room (or whereever)?

[pnhmrk]

would not let my daughter flip out in the dining room. In the event she did, I would quickly remove her, or take dinner in our cabin.

 

You might, but how many wouldn't? How many adults already have their time disrupted because of a child's misbehaviour?

 

I don't like kids, I don't have kids, yet I still pick a line with good kids facilities - not because I'll use them but because they will keep the kids out of my way!

[tree29]

Jonmar,

 

If I understand you correctly you would quite like your daughter to misbehave and spoil someone else's evening so that you get to feel a sense of value in paying a full fare for her.

 

Surely I have this wrong?

 

Teresa

[dak]

Patch,

I see you hail from darkest Yorkshire and would possibly have little objection to the British product.

We have had great cruises with the kids on P&O. It must have had some effect - my son is now a deck cadet and (hopefully) will qualify as an Officer of the Watch at the end of the year! We have enjoyed excellent discounting (from memory, I think that the total cost for a 14 year old and a 17 year old, sharing our cabin, was less than £400 for our 16 day Manaus – Southampton sailing). There are still zero cost fares to be had, particularly for infants and ex Southampton, but there does tend to be poorer discounting for the popular holiday times as you would expect.

The product has changed a bit over the years; the ships have become bigger boxes (and probably a bit Carnivalised) but that seems to be what the cruise industry believes that we want as we await the next Grand Queen Vistaspiritconquestgenesis of the Seas. (Or heaven forbid, the Princess Kaguya!)

However, it may be that your budget will be better satisfied. BTW Ventura is showing infant discounts of between 30% and 100% depending on sailing.

 

David (who is currently suffering from withdrawal symptoms)

[KarenR_UK]

 

When the new brochure arrived this week I couldn't believe my eyes when I read that children over 2 years of age cost the same as a fully paid adult. Am I alone in being amazed by this?

 

Obviously I've never had cause to look at Child places in the past but my understanding with 'package' style holidays that children up to the age of 12 are usually discounted to half fare. Is full price the norm for the Crusie industry?

 

Patch

 

I was also going to recommend P+O - last years brochure (2006 for 2007) even had a couple of cruises which were advertised as free for children (late autumn and winter to the Canaries from memory) - they coincided with the 0% Single supplement offers which is why I noticed But I think you do have to book before the first revision of the brochure as the discounts tend to go down (& the supplements up:D ) .

 

ok decided to dig the brochure out and have a look (to add value to the post as so far I'm not saying any more than David (DUK) above :D.)

 

Aurora 12 nights from 25th Nov 07 to the Canaries : family savers (infant) FREE, Family Savers (16 and under) FREE; Share Savers (Adult) : FREE; (Single supplement 20%:confused: why not 0 - 3rd+4th adults go free; not fair:D )

 

Oriana 10 nights 5th Nov 07 to Canaries : infants and 16+under free (the adults have to pay on that one - and I should think so too with a SS of 40%)

 

most of them, when I flicked through seemed to have 90% discount (a lot are free) for infants & 70-90% for under 16s. Can't find my 0% single supplements, so I guess I got hold of a 2nd edition brochure.

 

Goodness knows what they are going to do this year - I am avidly waiting for the main brochure to see if I can go to Venice next year!! But Ventura is getting priority this year which seems to have pushed the brochure dates for the other ships back.

 

They also have kids clubs which I understand are very good

 

Karen

[jonmar]

Are you saying that if you have paid for your child, and the said child misbehaves to the extent that a member of staff has to ask for it to be removed, you would protest?

 

Surely the fact that you have paid for her doesn't alter the fact that, presumably, you don't want to insult the neighbours in the dining room (or whereever)?

 

People, people, people, please do not misunderstand. As I said, I think it was a major miscalculation on Cunard's part. I questioned the apparent lack of thought to the higher ups and was summarily dismissed. I don't like kids either. Actually I can't stand them. While my daughter is the proverbial apple of my eye, I can understand not everyone agrees with my assessment of her being the only enjoyable child on planet Earth. Having said that, yes, I want one episode of misbehaviour in the dining room. I want a staff member to ask me to remove the child, and thus begin a debate Cunard thought I was foolish to consider. Of course that discussion will occur away from other guests. My point in all of this, is that while I have manners and a sense of fairness to my neighbours, I doubt many parents paying for a 15 month old will. My quarrel is with this foolish policy that breeds entitlement, not with my neighbours in the dining room. Do I want a full blown tantrum that becomes embarassing? No. Do I want a opportunity to prove a point in living colour? You better believe it. I don't want whiny little buggers next to me either, but I think their policy almost guarantees it.

[KarenR_UK]

Just been replying to another post, and was checking the itinerary of a cruise and noticed a 'free child places' notice on it

 

Following the link http://www.cunard.co.uk/OnOffer_Details.asp?ID=137

"Free Child Places Available for Summer 2007

Book by 31 March 2007

Jet off with the family to join one the world’s most famous ships QE2 or Queen Mary 2 and take advantage of our fabulous free child offer available in all stateroom categories."

 

there are 2 QE2 cruises featured (12 and 26th August) and 3 QM2 crossings (18th July, 3rd and 9th August)

 

So a bit short notice for this year:) , but it does mean they do it, you just have to wait for the offers.

 

Karen

[ocngypz]

When cruiselines run "children free" promotions, they increase the fares of the first and second passengers. I can see the fare differentials on the reservation screens.

 

Promotion is the key word here. Disney and NCL across the boards on every sailing have age dependent concessions for the under 2 crowd.

 

Whether or not one is paying for an under two is irrevelant when it comes to bad behaviour. It doesn't cost anything to go to church. Yet parents whose children are disruptive, take the child out to the "crying room".

[travel-to-go]

The last time my wife and I sailed on QM2 was November last year.

 

This trip was a little different as two of us boarded, and, unbeknown to us at the time, three of us got off.

Patch,

First, did I miss this announcement? If not, and this is the first time seeing this in print!

Congratulations!

Which piece of advice I gave you last year was the cause of this! (yeah right!)

 

So, here is my next piece of advice. (I have not read the whole thread yet Mybad- Only ocngpzy's response to you. Simply watch for one of those third passenger rates! You aren't going to book a separate cabin for the little one! (I don't think!)

 

Once again.

Congrats!

I am assuming you enjoyed your cruise.

Um,

Did you ever get out of the cabin? <G>

 

Karie,

who is feeling impish at the moment!

[jonmar]

Whether or not one is paying for an under two is irrevelant when it comes to bad behaviour. It doesn't cost anything to go to church. Yet parents whose children are disruptive, take the child out to the "crying room".

 

This is my whole point. They take them out because they didn't pay. Surely one can imagine a paying parent piping up with 's/he paid to sit here, deal with it'. I wouldn't (apart from the one episode I am hoping for), but I think Cunard's policy asks for it from those less considerate. Whether one is paying, regardless of behaviour, it entirely relevant. How many times have you been in a restaurant and some moron with a screaming kid wont take the child outside to settle them down? Now picture that same person paying a G note to eat dinner onboard QM2. I think it is quite optimistic to think that parents will feel compelled to get up and leave. We know what the right thing to do is, the problem is, I doubt many will do it, considering they were pretty much violated when paying their child's fare.

[Kindlychap]

This is my whole point. They take them out because they didn't pay. Surely one can imagine a paying parent piping up with 's/he paid to sit here, deal with it'. I wouldn't (apart from the one episode I am hoping for), but I think Cunard's policy asks for it from those less considerate. Whether one is paying, regardless of behaviour, it entirely relevant. How many times have you been in a restaurant and some moron with a screaming kid wont take the child outside to settle them down? Now picture that same person paying a G note to eat dinner onboard QM2. I think it is quite optimistic to think that parents will feel compelled to get up and leave. We know what the right thing to do is, the problem is, I doubt many will do it, considering they were pretty much violated when paying their child's fare.

 

To suggest that child pricing is "violation" is going several steps too far. One is "violated" when one is raped. Not when one doesn't get a cheaper cruise fare.

 

Matthew

[gardner westbound]

I agree. We are sailing with our 8 month old in April and had to pay the third party fare. Too make matters worse, Cunard says it will only accept children 1 year of age and older for the baby sitting service. So what am I paying for? Surely he won't eat his fare price in food. I'll be ordering lobster for him just to get my moneys worth even though he can't have it. That's how I feel anyway. I think if they are going to charge babies, then they should be prepared to provide some services for the child.

Another lobster please!!!!

[jonmar]

To suggest that child pricing is "violation" is going several steps too far. One is "violated" when one is raped. Not when one doesn't get a cheaper cruise fare.

 

Matthew

 

If you aren't quick enough on the 'uptake' to understand that remark was not to be taken literally, perhaps you should simply move one. I would welcome your input on the discussion of Cunard's policy, however, I don't need to be corrected when you aren't savy enough to understand sarcasm. I have read a number of your posts in the past, and while many are helpful, I do notice a great many tend to be smug, arrogant chides. I have waited a long time for you to scold me on one of my postings and now you have. In the face of your reprimand, I am raising a particular digit. I will give you one guess as to which finger it is.

[jonmar]

I agree. We are sailing with our 8 month old in April and had to pay the third party fare. Too make matters worse, Cunard says it will only accept children 1 year of age and older for the baby sitting service. So what am I paying for? Surely he won't eat his fare price in food. I'll be ordering lobster for him just to get my moneys worth even though he can't have it. That's how I feel anyway. I think if they are going to charge babies, then they should be prepared to provide some services for the child.

Another lobster please!!!!

 

Gee, this person sounds like they feel 'violated'. Actually my wife and I waited for our daughter to turn 1 year old to go back for this exact reason. You could have an NFL linebacker in your cabin, and that person pays the same as your 8 month old. Can anyone come up with an argument for Cunard on this one?

[ocngypz]

Gee, this person sounds like they feel 'violated'. Actually my wife and I waited for our daughter to turn 1 year old to go back for this exact reason. You could have an NFL linebacker in your cabin, and that person pays the same as your 8 month old. Can anyone come up with an argument for Cunard on this one?

 

Yes, the baby doesn't add to the onboard revenue in the way that an adult would.