Should HAL try to be all things to all people

[bUU]

I wasnt implying that HAL, Princess and Celebrity are interchangable, that is clearly not the case. I meant that all three percieved as a step above mass market, particularly HAL and X.

Are you sure that the distinction between HAL and Princess is not wishful thinking? I wonder if there is room in the market for two distinct, vertical classes between Carnival below, and Cunard above. Essentially, I believe that space where you're trying to put HAL and Princess isn't big enough for two stacked vertically. So the distinction between HAL and Princess, IMHO, must be something other than vertical class. (Please, let's not even get into the "HAL is better than Princess" stuff -- I bet for everyone who says so, I can find someone on the Princess board that says the exact opposite! :))

 

So I think the real issue here is how to distinguish between HAL and Princess, and I think the real answer to that rests with catering to children, or not doing so and thereby providing a more consistently adult-focused experience. If my guesses are correct, then that means that anything else that doesn't support that distinction is decided on the financial merits.

 

What I was referring to was that people here talk about how little things are going away and reduced perks etc. I see that as a fact of economics, they need to make a profit, as their costs go up, some are passed on to the passenger some arent. The reality of this is that some things need to be cut, and organizations either learn to run more efficiently and cut those costs or they will not survive.

Indeed, and that's a perspective that would be viciously attacked on those commercial television forums I alluded to. It is a credit to this forum that people acknowledge and recognize that reality, even though it most likely adversely affects them. You might say, "What good is it to ignore reality like that?" Yeah -- I'd say that too! :)

[bUU]

But when was the last time HAL changed something - anything - and most people here didn't find the change objectionable?

I think that is an unshakable truth of the Internet, and perhaps applies more widely than that. Resistance to change is very common -- almost ubiquitous.

 

It seems to me that a lot of people here - many of the most vocal people - are extremely pessimistic about HAL's future direction, and have been for ages. I can't even remember how many times there seems to have been a widespread consensus that this is the last straw, HAL has finally changed too much, etc.!

As as common as that is, Internet-wide, I've come to look at such pronouncements, without firm and convincing evidence, as nothing more than bravado, i.e., folks applying hyperbole, perhaps, to make their personal unhappiness with something sound more important than just one person's disappointment.

 

I wouldn't go so far to say that there's no potential downside to HAL. The potential downside is that more people will want one type of dining than can get it - and inevitably the ones who can't get it will be unhappy. That isn't good for HAL.

However, that's a miscalculation, not a mistake. It is no different than, on one cruise, having too few seats in the library, because that specific cruise has a lot of readers on it. At least with dining, they can develop a system which has some flexibility, responding to the differences between how many guests want each type of dining, by moving where the dividing line in the dining room is. It might take a little while to work that nuance out.

 

It is a given that there will be people who don't like the change. That is always the case. The question is, will the change bring enough benefit to outweigh that?

And the benefit that they're aiming for is revenue and market share.

[Jade13]

I wasnt implying that HAL, Princess and Celebrity are interchangable, that is clearly not the case. I meant that all three percieved as a step above mass market, particularly HAL and X. Personally I really like that all the lines are somewhat unique because you can try other experiences which I am looking forward to.

 

I dont know anything about commercial TV so I am not sure I fully understand the point you are trying to make there. What I was referring to was that people here talk about how little things are going away and reduced perks etc. I see that as a fact of economics, they need to make a profit, as their costs go up, some are passed on to the passenger some arent. The reality of this is that some things need to be cut, and organizations either learn to run more efficiently and cut those costs or they will not survive.

 

We met people on the Westerdam (who were receiving their 100 day medals) but prefer Princess. They are Princess Elite and have traditional dining and say the menu is more extension and food much better on Princess. So, (besides the look of the ships) I am not sure how different these two Carnival cruise lines really are?

[gizmo]

Very well said. I don't support the freestyle dining.....and other things they are trying to do so they can appeal to the people who like Carnival, RCCL, Norwegian, etc. (the mainstream "mediocre" cruise lines). HAL needs to set the pace and be unique...that's what draws me to them in the first place. If anything, I'd rather see them become more like Cunard than any of those other lines you mentioned, but still, I'd rather them just stay Holland America rather than try to be like another cruise line.

 

Ditto. :)

[vanders]

Unfortunately HAL does have dancing waiters... and musicians miming on fruit instruments...

Hooray for masterchef?

[fcorey]

Unfortunately HAL does have dancing waiters... and musicians miming on fruit instruments...

Hooray for masterchef?

 

touche :D , funny to read an insider as the same regard for it as many here

[vanders]

which is why some of us ham it up beyond belief! Breadstick swordfights anyone?

[jhannah]

:rolleyes:

If we wanted "cutesy" we'd go to other lines. HAL's trademark is elegant and refined without being stuffy. I'd love it to stay that way.

[HeatherInFlorida]

............

It seems to me that a lot of people here - many of the most vocal people - are extremely pessimistic about HAL's future direction, and have been for ages. I can't even remember how many times there seems to have been a widespread consensus that this is the last straw, HAL has finally changed too much, etc.!................

 

I agree, Doug. I think, though, that the pessimism holds true more for the person voicing their disappointment, not for HAL. HAL's future direction will be what it will be ... and they'll do fine. But if they veer too far away from some of the traditions that many here are so fond of, then they will lose those passengers and replace them with new ones.

 

For HAL, it won't matter. Sincerely, it won't. They're a business ... it's all numbers. I honestly don't believe that HAL cares that much about its repeat passengers. Yes, they may treat them a little better on a cruise because some are familiar faces, but they don't really do that much for their Mariners.

 

I know many will disagree with me and that's okay. It's JMO:) .

[hammybee]

I still don't like the Vistas! I mean, they're fine, but I don't like them. I just can't warm to these like I have to their R-class predecessors.

 

Me too. Heck, I like the Marco Polo.

 

The greater number of balconies and suites making them more affordable, is the big plus on VISTA class. I do have to say that the Library/Explorers Lounge on the Noordam is spectacular and instead of adding trendy gimicks, HAL stuck with what works and loaded this ship with art. This is the kind of stuff that continues to distinguish HAL from the others, at least for me. The rest is superficial.

[Bramcruiser]

I agree, Doug. I think, though, that the pessimism holds true more for the person voicing their disappointment, not for HAL. HAL's future direction will be what it will be ... and they'll do fine. But if they veer too far away from some of the traditions that many here are so fond of, then they will lose those passengers and replace them with new ones.

 

Although I can see what Heather and Host Doug are saying, the fear is not that HAL will do what it has to do to change. Change is inevitable and I've stated before that change is necessary to survive in this business climate of ours. However, if HAL markets itself all over the map - and the dining is not the only issue regarding this line - then it stands the possibility - and I'm stressing POSSIBILITY here - that they not only do not pick up newcomers as expected but also lose the faithful. HAL needs to define itself and thus the OP's comments and my own are not particularly pinpointed to just change in one particular direction.

 

HAL probably will survive long-term but it has to realize that change just for the sake of change is a two-sided sword and that it better know just what it is in promoting itself to possible newcomers that the line is so desparate to get these days. HAL has a very loyal following but outsiders continue to scratch their heads over the line. Will the freestylers of NCL who try it out feel its for them in the end?

 

The real answer? Only time ever tells if any marketing ploy works or not. It'll be interesting to see.

 

David

[fcorey]

I agree, Doug. I think, though, that the pessimism holds true more for the person voicing their disappointment, not for HAL. HAL's future direction will be what it will be ... and they'll do fine. But if they veer too far away from some of the traditions that many here are so fond of, then they will lose those passengers and replace them with new ones.

 

For HAL, it won't matter. Sincerely, it won't. They're a business ... it's all numbers. I honestly don't believe that HAL cares that much about its repeat passengers. Yes, they may treat them a little better on a cruise because some are familiar faces, but they don't really do that much for their Mariners.

 

I know many will disagree with me and that's okay. It's JMO:) .

 

Heather I would have to agree with you on some of this. I personally dont immediately think change is bad. They have to expand their appeal to ocntinually draw new people to them otherwise they wont survive, and nobody here wants to see HAL fold. It is sad to see things that you enjoy disappear. With the new dining choice I think most fear it will not be implemented as Sail had said, but will inconvenience their preference....that may be, but we'll get through it. As far as mariners and their treatment, I have no basis for comparison to what other lines do for their heavy repeaters. Howver I will say that it really doesntseem to be much, particularly for those that have considerable time with HAL. In the end it is a business as you say, and I hope they dont change too much and stay in the market where they are as we really do enjoy sailing with them

[HeatherInFlorida]

David, you make an excellent point and only time will tell. And that where the "all things to all people" comes into it. If they try to be that, they'll end up being nothing to no one.

 

Still, I'm sure all would agree that HAL is nothing close to the line it was before it came under the Carnival umbrella. It's just that the changes are slow so they almost happen without anyone realizing it.

 

Fcorey, I agree. People grow up, grow old, and HAL has to appeal to new generations as they begin to travel. I completely understand that. For me it's not an issue because we can find happiness on a couple of cruise lines and will expand beyond that if we need to. We might have to spend a bit more, but there are many cruise lines to choose from.

[hammybee]

Still, I'm sure all would agree that HAL is nothing close to the line it was before it came under the Carnival umbrella. It's just that the changes are slow so they almost happen without anyone realizing it.

 

Well for one, HAL is profitable and not on the verge of bankruptcy.....( could not resist). :)

 

Just off the top of my head:

 

Veranda cabins are more affordable because there are more of them.

 

Inside and outside cabin prices have remained unchanged for almost a decade. Occasionally a cabin is less costly than it was 20 years ago.

 

The beds/linens are better.

 

In cabin ammenities are substantially better.

 

The coffee is better.

 

There is more public space, per passenger.

 

The library is larger and better.

 

There are internet services and less costly methods to call home.

 

There are two pools and multiple hot tubs.

 

The onboard choices are greater.

 

There is no longer any smoking in any dining room and most public areas/bars.

 

The wonderful crew have a guaranteed gratuity pool and do not need to be as concenrned about getting stiffed.

 

The ships are far more fuel efficient, stable, safer and enviornmentally friendly.

 

There are more interesting intineraries and multiple choices of weekly sails, in season, in Alaska, Caribben and Mexico.

 

We can now wait in our cabin to disembark.

 

In so many ways, a HAL cruise is better than it has ever been. What has changed is the passenger and passenger/crew ratio, a factor of price point.

[ekerr19]

Cruising is much more affordable now than it was past. My first cruise in 1984 cost more than my last cruise in 2007. The difference in accomodations was extreme too. From a small porthole to a Deluxe Verandah.

 

Dollar for dollar, cruising is currently one of the most afforable vacations. We average approximately $5,000 - $6,000 for our cabin(s) and shipboard account on a 10-day cruise for four. That is roughly $150 pp, per day. This is accomodations, food, entertainment, fine dining (Pinnacle), drinks/liquor, shore excursions, etc.

 

Having compared prices on vacations for years, I can attest that afforability remains one of the main reasons why we cruise as a family.

 

I would rather see HAL increase their prices in order continue to provide the same cruise experience we've grown accustomed to instead of diluting the product in order to gain mass market appeal.

 

In order to really remain successful, it's important to define your niche and target that particular market. With their attempts to attract broad masses of the cruise market, they lose their uniqueness. They become just another cruise line - no different from any of the rest.

[HeatherInFlorida]

Well for one, HAL is profitable and not on the verge of bankruptcy.....( could not resist). :)

 

................

 

I wasn't referring to when HAL was on it's last legs. There was a time when HAL wasn't affordable to me, but it was considered by many to be one the cream of the crop.

 

Of those I knew who cruised Holland America before anyone would dare call it HAL, it was a very gracious line. But I could easily be wrong because I'm not speaking from my own experience.

 

Many of the changes you're referring to have only taken place in very recent years. Carnival took over Holland American in 1989 I think??? Your list has taken place only over the past five or six years tops. For many years Carnival left HAL alone and I think it was better for it, but what do I know?:o

[Copper10-8]

Carnival took over Holland American in 1989 I think???

 

You are correct! Carnival announced the agreement to buy HAL for $625 million on November 25, 1988. Under that agreement, HAL would become a fully independent subsidiary of Carnival. The take over agreement was approved on January 1, 1989 and was signed on January 6, 1989 but did not become effective until January 15, 1989

Starting in 1983 (a financially disastrous year for them) HAL had not been doing well and also began to feel the competition from Carnival, and her aggressive new building program, severely!

*From 125 years of Holland America Line by Dalkmann & (HAL Captain) Schoonderbeek

[mariner]

Is cruising cheaper?

 

My onboard expenses on NOORDAM in Feb. were over $6.000. More than $1,000 above 2006 on MAASDAM. We drank the same and did the same on both cruises.

 

Couple the expnses with the fare, we're in Regency country, where I don't need to worry about getting booted from my dining spot or lounge by a group, 300 children or long lines for tenders. Might even come home spending less onboard.

 

Can't wait to see the quality of service under AYW. Whose tip are you going to deduct when you could have 7 or 10 different waiters?

 

HAL, of late, IMO, has just shown a consistent record of bungling any changes they've implemented. It starts ashore, where the gang in Seattle (or North Dakota, wherever the phone bank is) gives different answers. Then you go aboard, and get another round of answers.

 

In my mind, should I spend more than $11,000 on our one big vacation of the year with the possibility that my dining time could get changed, or a lounge could be closed or the service I've come to expect has morhed into the indifference of other lines? We dumped Princess for HAL because of all those reasons.

 

Those are the questions we're asking. And if we're not the demo HAL wants, then good luck sustaining $OE. I'm only 47. No kids.

 

Yet price above all else drives the mass-market cruiser. And I don't see them down the road saying, ``a HAL cruise was just perfect. Let's keep going back again and again.''

[HeatherInFlorida]

.........

My onboard expenses on NOORDAM in Feb. were over $6.000. More than $1,000 above 2006 on MAASDAM. We drank the same and did the same on both cruises...................'

 

I would certainly think you would be the demographic HAL wants on their ships!!!! :)

 

We thought our bill was high when it reached $1000. That was a Celebrity cruise and I'd gotten Acupuncture. We must be the cheapest people on the ship and certainly not the passenger any cruise line is looking to entice:D .

 

If we do any tours, we do book those prior to embarkation, but there's still no way we get close to $6000. Our bill is usually a few hundred for a 2 week cruise.

 

All that said, I think you're right. While the actual cost of the cruise has come down and is a great value, there are more and more add-ons. But at least we do get a choice about how much it costs us.

[hammybee]

You are correct! Carnival announced the agreement to buy HAL for $625 million on November 25, 1988. Under that agreement, HAL would become a fully independent subsidiary of Carnival. The take over agreement was approved on January 1, 1989 and was signed on January 6, 1989 but did not become effective until January 15, 1989

Starting in 1983 (a financially disastrous year for them) HAL had not been doing well and also began to feel the competition from Carnival, and her aggressive new building program, severely(QUOTE]

 

It appears to me that Carnival invested some serious money in the brand and ordered new ships as soon as the ink was dry. The Statendam was delivered in 1992, the Maasdam in 1993 and Ryndam in 1994. And for their time, they were indeed upscale ships and some of us continue to think they some of the best in the fleet.

[hammybee]

Is cruising cheaper?

 

My onboard expenses on NOORDAM in Feb. were over $6.000. More than $1,000 above 2006 on MAASDAM. We drank the same and did the same on both cruises.

 

Couple the expnses with the fare, we're in Regency country, where I don't need to worry about getting booted from my dining spot or lounge by a group, 300 children or long lines for tenders. Might even come home spending less onboard. /QUOTE]

 

The costs of cabins , apples to apples, is what remains unchanged. Compare an inside/outside on a 7 day Caribbean sail now to one in 1997 and on occasion, 1987 and one has to scratch their head. How can the in cabin experience and ammenities be better than ever for the same or less cost?

 

Once you step out of your cabin, it's all discretionary, cocktails, the casino, art auctions, shore excursions and spa services. And of course, this is where cruise lines make their money.

 

At your level of onboard spending, I too would be SERIOUSLY rethinking cruising as a vacation option. There is no reason to share/compromize a vacation with 2000 others when you are spending the amount of money you do.

[hammybee]

Is cruising cheaper?

 

HAL, of late, IMO, has just shown a consistent record of bungling any changes they've implemented. It starts ashore, where the gang in Seattle (or North Dakota, wherever the phone bank is) gives different answers. Then you go aboard, and get another round of answers.

 

I have no idea what you mean when you say a consistent record of bungling any changes. Maybe you are just venting your dissappointment and/or frustration and if so, that's OK. Or maybe I have memory loss ( a common afliction of cheerleaders :) ) because I think the majority of changes, have created a better overall and more marketable product.

[mamaofami]

Most people don't like change. It's not just about HAL or what happens on the ships. Change has a way of making people feel uncomfortable and they tend to resist it in the beginning.

[Crazy]

If you have a target on your back, so do I since I feel exactly the same...

 

I agree with Sail -- the same. Sail's comments were wonderful and I couldn't have said it better. Thank you.

 

Emily

[bUU]

Thanks for this list.... it sure puts things into perspective, as far as I'm concerned...

Just off the top of my head:

 

Veranda cabins are more affordable because there are more of them.

 

Inside and outside cabin prices have remained unchanged for almost a decade. Occasionally a cabin is less costly than it was 20 years ago.

 

The beds/linens are better.

 

In cabin ammenities are substantially better.

 

The coffee is better.

 

There is more public space, per passenger.

 

The library is larger and better.

 

There are internet services and less costly methods to call home.

 

There are two pools and multiple hot tubs.

 

The onboard choices are greater.

 

There is no longer any smoking in any dining room and most public areas/bars.

 

The wonderful crew have a guaranteed gratuity pool and do not need to be as concenrned about getting stiffed.

 

The ships are far more fuel efficient, stable, safer and enviornmentally friendly.

 

There are more interesting intineraries and multiple choices of weekly sails, in season, in Alaska, Caribben and Mexico.

 

We can now wait in our cabin to disembark.

 

In so many ways, a HAL cruise is better than it has ever been. What has changed is the passenger and passenger/crew ratio, a factor of price point.