The economy and cruising on "O"

[Paulchili]

Stan -

I agree with you up to a point. Oceania does have a good product but an important part of that equation is the price. Because, let's face it, there are better products out here in the cruise industry (but for a higher price, generally speaking).

Once Oceania is starting to approach that pricing level (and exceeds it occasionally) it's no longer such a good product. Then you can choose SilverSea, Seabourn, Regent, etc or choose to save money and get the identical ship with a very similar product on Azamara.

You are asking me to help Oceania (or any other business) in "bad times" - did they have me and my pocket book foremost on their mind when times were good? I think not, it was their bottom line they were concerned about.

[Paulchili]

Stan -

I agree with you up to a point. Oceania does have a good product but an important part of that equation is the price. Because, let's face it, there are better products out here in the cruise industry (but for a higher price, generally speaking).

Once Oceania is starting to approach that higher pricing level (and exceeds it occasionally) it's no longer such a good product. Then you can choose SilverSea, Seabourn, Regent, etc or choose to save money and get the identical ship with a very similar product on Azamara.

You are asking me to help Oceania (or any other business) in "bad times" - did they have me and my pocket book foremost on their mind when times were good? I think not, it was their bottom line they were concerned about.

I will give you a small example.

I booked a cruise with O using a $ 200 credit certificate from a previous O cruise. Unfortunately I had to cancel that cruise eventually but rebooked the same cruise for a year later (1 month after canceling). O refused to honor the $ 200 certificate as it was past the 45 days from the prior cruise. Technically speaking they were right, morally I don't believe so. They could have very easily allowed the certificate to be credited - but they chose not to.

It's not the $ 200 in itself (it's not that much money) , but it's the principle behind it (read: customer appreciation and good will)

Sorry - double posting due to the addition.

[LHT28]

Not to beat the proverbial dead horse, but I would not compare Associated Press report to Buzz Tracker.

 

Is Associated Press news reporting?:confused:

[Paulchili]

Is Associated Press news reporting?:confused:

 

I am not quite sure what you mean by that comment - please clarify.

Here is a quote from Wikipedia:

"The Associated Press (AP) is an American news agency"

Being a news agency I am not surprised they are reporting news (as opposed to selling groceries).

I find them to be a very credible source of information.

[LHT28]

"The Associated Press (AP) is an American news agency"

Being a news agency I am not surprised they are reporting news (as opposed to selling groceries).

.

 

YIKES and here I thought they sold cookies

[Paulchili]

YIKES and here I thought they sold cookies

 

I figured I needed to set you "straight" - you are welcome.

[meow!]

... Hitting the other fellow, when he is down, is down is always bad form, and nobody has that much intellectual curiousity.......

Oceania is definitely not down, the very fact that it is the stiffest in pricing, with no real discounts at all, is the best and most direct proof that it is not down. Look at all other lines with deep real discounts (compared to their respective previous pricngs). It is quite obvious that Oceania is not in any danger, and supporting higher pricing is tantamount to supporting higher profits, which is rather unusual for ordinary consumers.

 

P.S. In fact a good argument can be made in helping Oceania accept some flexibility in pricing, recognizing the existing economic situation. The sooner it starts to gradually increase its flexibility, the smoother the "landing" will be. The more management "will power" in defending its prices now, the day (when it comes, which is more than likely) that it has no choice but to "let go" this price fortification, the worse will be the "landing". I think encouraging Oceania to start earlier in making the transition to price flexibility sooner is doing it a favour, better than helping it heighten its wall of resistance in a tsunami!

[lcand1923]

A local travel agency put together a cruise on O for September/October 2008. We were booked. We knew several people who were also booked. We had to cancel due to health problems about three weeks before the cruise. Another couple had to cancel due to health reasons about two weeks before the cruise. The final couple had to cancel the night before the cruise because of a rather serious accident.

 

Perhaps some of the empty cabins/empty berths on this cruise were because of last minute cancellations. Oceania would still have the revenue from these bookings, but wouldn't have the passengers for a news report.

[Paulchili]

A local travel agency put together a cruise on O for September/October 2008. We were booked. We knew several people who were also booked. We had to cancel due to health problems about three weeks before the cruise. Another couple had to cancel due to health reasons about two weeks before the cruise. The final couple had to cancel the night before the cruise because of a rather serious accident.

 

Perhaps some of the empty cabins/empty berths on this cruise were because of last minute cancellations. Oceania would still have the revenue from these bookings, but wouldn't have the passengers for a news report.

 

lcand1923,

That is certainly a possibility - thank you for pointing that out. I am sorry that you had to miss your cruise, but hope you are better.

However, I still agree with meow's arguments. These are not normal times and one cannot conduct business as usual and expect to prosper.

There have been numerous happy O cruisers posting here that they can no longer afford O and are looking elsewhere (but not necessarily stopping cruising altogether).

[StanandJim]

There have been numerous happy O cruisers posting here that they can no longer afford O and are looking elsewhere (but not necessarily stopping cruising altogether)

 

PaulChili-

 

On the other hand, there have been numerous posts from ex Crystal and Silversea passengers who are scaling down to O. Who is to say that it won't balance out?

 

Comparing apples to apples, for us, anyway, Oceania is not overpriced. In fact, considering the quality, we find it slightly under priced.

 

I'll give you an example:

 

As you can see from our cruise clock below, we're sailing on the Nautica next June (Athens to Rome).

Another option we considered was Venice to Barcelona on the Oosterdam (also a 12 day cruise).

For the same standard of room (comparing a Vista Suite to an SA) the fare on Hal was $150 less. Not even worth mentioning.

 

Consider the economy of Scale advantage that Hal has, in using an 85,000 ton ship carrying nearly 2000 passengers. Isn't it amazing that O can come that close?.......and throw in a butler, yet!

[meow!]

For the same standard of room (comparing a Vista Suite to an SA) the fare on Hal was $150 less. Not even worth mentioning.

Yes, but since vista and owner's suites comprise only 3% of the total number of Oceania cabins, it is not a "typical comparison". You should compare those typical (e.g. category B) cabins to its equivalent on whichever other cruise line instead.

[merryecho]

CA- one thing we didn't realize about mass market cruises until we did RCCl with kids last year, our ship spent very little time in port- as port charges are expensive. Some places it was only 4 hours, and when 2,000 people have to get on and off the ship, it is hardly worth it. As Hondoner says, it was great for us because this trip was all about 3 teen girls having fun. But when it is the 2 of us, give us Oceania.