Crown & Anchor Program Revisions - join the merged discussions here

[kauppias]

I think if they had done a half cocked effort it would have been messy and alot of tensions would rise.... I think of their options they should have considered a card room type lounge or adding drink coupons to the coupon book instead of removing them all together as I guess they did? :( as for the consierge they should have could have added a concierge to the diamond members say at the pursers desk or maybe one that was reachable by phone or so on or so on... BUT we all know how it went

[Aquahound]

Heck, I don't even like the change in C&A benefits, the only difference is I am capable of understanding why the changes are necessary in the judgement of those who are responsible for running the cruiseline.

 

And rest assured, you are not the only one.

[berwyn]

Here it is, found it! :)

 

Does that "D"mean Abe is a diamond?

[CRUZBUDS]

Maybe they should have at least let Diamond members have access to the lounge for any trips booked prior to a cut-off date. If they had done that, we probably would not have canceled our B2B on the Mariner in October. We've already booked a 15 day with Holland America.

 

I watched the CNBC special about the cruise industry. They focused line was NCL, they made a big deal about keeping the ships full. The reporter spoke of bargains and incentives to lure passengers. It is bizzare to me that RCCL choose this time to drive away so many loyal customers. :confused:

[Elizanessie]

Oh yeah they took their time and thought it through jc - thats why as Liz has already said more bad news is on its way - why emails haven't been sent !!

 

 

What is a non-functioning member ? jc

 

 

 

 

 

 

jj......

 

 

Now JJ dont be puting words in my mouth please...I didnt say bad news...I said more changes to come....you just never know...maybe they have changed their minds...or amended it...or heck who knows...I just wish they would pull their darn fingers out and give us all, all of the details.

[Alamogirl]

This board has been interesting reading.

 

DH and I just made Platinum this last cruise. All have been 7 days and only 1 was in a JS, the rest just a balcony. We haven't really thought much about the different levels until the last cruise, where just about everyone at our tables were Diamond and above and we heard a great deal about the CL.

 

We do tend to spend a great deal on the ship as we both enjoy specific wines, champagne and other libations, pluse shopping on the ships. If points were awarded according to what is spent we would would be at a higher level then we are. But, it doesn't matter, we enjoy RCL and will continue to cruise with them. Look at the economy and what is happening to most large businesses.. CUT BACKS. RCL is no different. So is the loss of a free drinks or private room really worth all this aggravation? For us no.

 

Relax - Be Happy and be glad that you are able to cruise.

[Host Kewlguy]

Regarding more changes to come: I wouldn't be surprised to see the amount of cruise credits increased to reach Platinum, Diamond and Diamond Plus. I know that was one of the changes they were originally considering. If so, hopefully we'll be grandfathered in at our current level.

[grand isle joe]

I do not have blind loyalty. I have cruised with other cruise lines. I don't only take cruise vacations. I didn't book RCI cruises to get free booze. I will book RCI and other lines in the future. I don't go on a message forum and tell someone how to run their own company. I don't try to harm another person's property by trying to chase people away. I don't cheer for someone else's property to become bankrupt like you do.

 

 

I am not emotionally tied to RCI brand. I like Celebrity better, but I do like RCI's ships better. I prefer HAL's Lido buffet 10 to 1 over the windjammer which I mostly avoid. If you were a functioning member of this forum and not someone just out to attack RCI because of RCI's change in behavior you might know this about me, but instead you just charge on blindly with emotion and your pitchfork. You think RCI sucks, great. Who the rip cares what you think, especially for the 40th time? Heck, I don't even like the change in C&A benefits, the only difference is I am capable of understanding why the changes are necessary in the judgement of those who are responsible for running the cruiseline. Do I think they did this on a whim, or because they wanted to make all of the diamonds mad? Of course not. Which means that they knew that people would be unhappy, but they knew that they had to do it anyway.

 

jc

 

I salute you for your continuing rational responses in the face of outrageous irrationality. Keep up the good fight.;)

[berwyn]

Regarding more changes to come: I wouldn't be surprised to see the amount of cruise credits increased to reach Platinum, Diamond and Diamond Plus. I know that was one of the changes they were originally considering. If so, hopefully we'll be grandfathered in at our current level.

Could be true.You have been correct in the past.

[coxswain]

Now JJ dont be puting words in my mouth please...I didnt say bad news...I said more changes to come....you just never know...maybe they have changed their minds...or amended it...or heck who knows...I just wish they would pull their darn fingers out and give us all, all of the details.

 

 

 

Sorry Liz - you never know i guess.

 

 

 

Fingers crossed

 

 

 

 

jj.....

[sealord]

Heck, I don't even like the change in C&A benefits, the only difference is I am capable of understanding why the changes are necessary in the judgement of those who are responsible for running the cruiseline. Do I think they did this on a whim, or because they wanted to make all of the diamonds mad? Of course not. Which means that they knew that people would be unhappy, but they knew that they had to do it anyway.

 

jc

 

I think it may be helpful to read between the lines in the below post, which I made earlier.

 

Policies do change. And, we may also be assuming 'facts not in evidence'. "They" stated that the original intent of the Concierge Lounge was 'for the suite passengers'. That may be what was in someone's head, but I don't see it on paper. At least using the info available in front of me. I have in front of me my original application for the C&A. It has a 1/02 date on the form (January 2002). There are three levels ... no Diamond Plus ... Gold, Platinum, and Diamond ... and a note "Current Silver members will be automatically upgraded to Gold."

 

"The benefits improve at each level. The more you cruise the more you get." And it clearly states under "Diamond - Cruise Vacation Benefits, Concierge Service on select ships." I know a couple of the Vision class ships have been retro-fitted with a CL, but I don't know when. Otherwise, the first ship that I know of that was designed and built with a CL was the Radiance ... maiden voyage 3/10/2001. So it would appear, that if the CL was ever exclusively for the suite passengers, that policy changed in nine months or less. The only thing that is clear is that the Concierge Lounge is a benefit that RCI "intended" to use as "bait" to attract (unsuspecting) customers. That is "bait" as in "bait and switch.":mad:

 

By the way, there are no 'disclaimers' on the form ... only, "Complete Terms and Conditions available on request." Gotcha!

__________________

In the year 2001 there had been a Crown and Anchor Silver level. It went away and simply became "Gold". There was a C&A Diamond level, and there was no C&A Diamond Plus level. So, now they recently created a C&A Diamond Plus level, and after a short period of adjustment, they took away the most valued benefits of the Diamond level and gave them to the Diamond Plus level ... a level that did not exist when most of us became "committed" to RCCL and the C&A program. So we stayed loyal in exchange for reaching the advertised "zenith" and it's benefits, and they moved the goal posts. If you look at the 'evolution' of the program, it would appear that this is not a matter of responding to circumstances, it is a matter of cold calculation. To assume that they didn't know that sooner or later they would have a lot of "Diamonds", and it would then become expedient to take away the promised benefits and move the goal posts, is to assume as 'they' did that their 'loyal' customers are stupid.:mad:

[xpcdoojk]

Didn't you already post this?

 

How legalistically are we going to make this thread? Do we need Congress to subpeona the RCI management team?

 

Seriously, who cares why the lounges were originally intended? They can change their offering, and you can book with them or not. This is not that complicated.

 

jc

[rubrrick]

No, I am not factoring in extraneous variables. Royal Caribbean loses out on somewhere around $15 to $20 per day (rough estimates) per person per day that uses the CL during Happy Hour (or should I say Happy 3 & 1/2 hours). This is completely independent of how much someone paid for a room, how much they gamble, how many shore excursions they book and what not. If the lounge did not exist, they would make about $15 to $20 more per day from people who previously utilized the CL.

 

No point in bringing up Las Vegas. Vegas gives away alcohol to gamblers so they are disinhibited and are far more likely to gamble more (and the more people gamble, the more the casino profits over the long run - sometimes even the short run)! The CL is not a profit center for Royal Caribbean like the casinos are for the Vegas hotels. The CL is an area where Royal loses out on money as a nice gesture to guests as well as for advertisement purporses (an incentive to crusie with them).

 

While I do think Royal will probably make out with a little extra money by closing the CL to Diamonds (i.e. they will save more money by limited the number of people having access to the lounge than they will lose by people not booking with them because of this policy change that cannot be replaced by new bookings). However I do think it was a bad buisness decision. I would have liked to have seen a compromise such as a two drink maximum or only having the lounge open on certain nights (i.e. formal nights for example) or charging half price for drinks etc. An alternative like that could have still saved them significant money, but kept a rather nice perk/incentive in place and upset far fewer loyal cruises.

 

Gonzo........thanks for helping me try to make my point. Would not the Diamond members be happy with something, rather than nothing?

 

I think that Royal Caribbeans Minister of Propaganda, should be dismissed and then shot on the spot........for sending out such a harsh email.

 

I have gone along with certain cutbacks......because, yep, it was inevitable in todays economy.

 

There should have been an alternative that would have saved them, actually 100's of thousands of dollars, and made it still palatable, even if the Diamonds had to come out handing over a bit more money, they still would have some benefits........and some bragging rights.

 

Many of us knew that something was going to be done.....for sometime now.

 

RCCL's loyalty campaign could have been handled very differently IMHO.

 

I hope that we don't see the day when all operations cease......and passengers are stranded at the port at which bankruptcy is declared, which is exactly what happened to Renaissance in 2000 (or 2001).

 

We loved Renaissance.......and were a week away from booking our next cruise with them........when they pulled the plug, and left many passengers stranded in ports of call, with no help getting them back to their main port so they could fly home.

 

It would be interesting to know the exact figure of how many Diamonds there are out there?? Can anyone guess?? Over 1 million might be about right. Of those 1 million, let's say that only 500,000 were peeved enough to say........we will cruise with someone else.......and spread the word to just 8 others that are considering sailing with Royal Caribbean.

 

Well........that adds up to 4 million people that possibly are looking to cruise for the first or 5th time........that the Diamonds are suggesting to look elsewhere for there cruises.

 

My point here, is that I think that it's going to be tougher to fill all of their ships, as they have in the past, when they have such a terrible "word of mouth" advertising program.

 

Stepping down off of my soapbox!

 

Rick

[gemcam1]

This board has been interesting reading.

 

DH and I just made Platinum this last cruise. All have been 7 days and only 1 was in a JS, the rest just a balcony. We haven't really thought much about the different levels until the last cruise, where just about everyone at our tables were Diamond and above and we heard a great deal about the CL.

 

We do tend to spend a great deal on the ship as we both enjoy specific wines, champagne and other libations, pluse shopping on the ships. If points were awarded according to what is spent we would would be at a higher level then we are. But, it doesn't matter, we enjoy RCL and will continue to cruise with them. Look at the economy and what is happening to most large businesses.. CUT BACKS. RCL is no different. So is the loss of a free drinks or private room really worth all this aggravation? For us no.

 

Relax - Be Happy and be glad that you are able to cruise.

 

I'm not being a wise guy but let's look at it this way:

 

If your boss promised you a bonus if you achieved a certain goal then took it away would you be happy and be glad you have a job or would you be upset that you worked very hard to obtain the benefit that was then snatched away?

[beachbuzzard]

Do we need Congress to subpeona the RCI management team?

 

Not a bad idea. Might get them to stop hearing on steroid use in Major League Baseball too. Get me the Capitol Building!!!

[pierces]

No, I am not factoring in extraneous variables. Royal Caribbean loses out on somewhere around $15 to $20 per day (rough estimates) per person per day that uses the CL during Happy Hour (or should I say Happy 3 & 1/2 hours). This is completely independent of how much someone paid for a room, how much they gamble, how many shore excursions they book and what not. If the lounge did not exist, they would make about $15 to $20 more per day from people who previously utilized the CL.

 

No point in bringing up Las Vegas. Vegas gives away alcohol to gamblers so they are disinhibited and are far more likely to gamble more (and the more people gamble, the more the casino profits over the long run - sometimes even the short run)! The CL is not a profit center for Royal Caribbean like the casinos are for the Vegas hotels. The CL is an area where Royal loses out on money as a nice gesture to guests as well as for advertisement purporses (an incentive to crusie with them).

 

While I do think Royal will probably make out with a little extra money by closing the CL to Diamonds (i.e. they will save more money by limited the number of people having access to the lounge than they will lose by people not booking with them because of this policy change that cannot be replaced by new bookings). However I do think it was a bad buisness decision. I would have liked to have seen a compromise such as a two drink maximum or only having the lounge open on certain nights (i.e. formal nights for example) or charging half price for drinks etc. An alternative like that could have still saved them significant money, but kept a rather nice perk/incentive in place and upset far fewer loyal cruises.

 

I think we can agree that it was a questionable business decision and that we'll probably never know all the reasoning and thought (or lack of both) that went into it.

 

Maybe...

 

- Suite passengers pay more so they should get more. After all, does anyone complain about the first-class airline passengers paying $800 more for their extra legroom, free drinks and dinner over coach's compression seating, $4 beer and micro-bag of peanuts?

- Diamond members spending the extra money on suites won't be affected.

- Non-suite Diamond members leaving in anger can be replaced by new cruisers more likely to buy photos and souvenirs.

- Celebrity Elites don't get many perks and they see pretty happy.

- Demand is so high that the money spent on loyalty programs is superfluous.

- People will be so busy complaining about the new limited menu that they may not notice.

- These changes were less obvious than changing the logo to a big "one finger salute" with a Diamond over it? :p

 

All conjecture, serious or not, is moot at this point. What's done is done.

 

My main source of hurt in all of this is not the loss of a few drinks (since the Martini bars make much better ones) or the stripping of the coupon book. It is their apparent disregard for customer loyalty. I don't regret the 95 days we've spent on various Royal ships but I no longer feel inclined to choose them over another line because of brand loyalty.

 

I feel that I've posted enough on this subject for now. I'll go assemble the slide show from the last cruise and remember the real reason that we cruise...because we love it!

 

Dave

[sealord]

Didn't you already post this?

 

How legalistically are we going to make this thread? Do we need Congress to subpeona the RCI management team?

 

Seriously, who cares why the lounges were originally intended? They can change their offering, and you can book with them or not. This is not that complicated.

 

jc

 

Just as we can choose to read or not to read. You seem irritated by those of us who are 'irritated'. So I don't understand why you continue to read, unless you 'feel' compelled for some reason to offer rebutal. Try this ... many of us feel 'cheated'.

 

Let's say for a moment that RCI is an automobile company. You buy one of their cars for the advertised price of $30,000 ... but you don't get the car until 'after' it is completely paid off. So, after making the last payment, which took you ten years, you get the car. But, whamo ... a short time later they 'repossess' the car, that you had fully paid off, and they say "oops, that same car will now cost you $75,000, and we are going to keep the car until you pay us another $45,000. Oh, you don't like that? Well, you failed to read the fine print."

 

Hmmm. Maybe that's why our automobile companies are going bankrupt?

[Aquahound]

If your boss promised you a bonus if you achieved a certain goal then took it away would you be happy and be glad you have a job or would you be upset that you worked very hard to obtain the benefit that was then snatched away?

 

I do not agree with this metaphor at all.

 

Speaking for myself, I did not work to gain diamond status. It was something that was given to me after I took so many cruises on my cruise line of choice.

[berwyn]

I do not agree with this metaphor at all.

 

Speaking for myself, I did not work to gain diamond status. It was something that was given to me after I took so many cruises on my cruise line of choice.

A lot of people feel that they "have worked"for their status and now they feel screwed.

[xpcdoojk]

I'm not being a wise guy but let's look at it this way:

 

If your boss promised you a bonus if you achieved a certain goal then took it away would you be happy and be glad you have a job or would you be upset that you worked very hard to obtain the benefit that was then snatched away?

 

Yeah, that would be bad. Think of the poor AIG guys that were working with the only payment being their bonus, and then the president of the USA and the congress decided to whack them for 90% of their bonus.

 

If the government can do it why not RCI?:D:eek:

 

jc

[trafficlaw]

policies do change. And, we may also be assuming 'facts not in evidence'. "they" stated that the original intent of the concierge lounge was 'for the suite passengers'. That may be what was in someone's head, but i don't see it on paper. At least using the info available in front of me. I have in front of me my original application for the c&a. It has a 1/02 date on the form (january 2002). There are three levels ... No diamond plus ... Gold, platinum, and diamond ... And a note "current silver members will be automatically upgraded to gold."

 

"the benefits improve at each level. The more you cruise the more you get." and it clearly states under "diamond - cruise vacation benefits, concierge service on select ships." i know a couple of the vision class ships have been retro-fitted with a cl, but i don't know when. Otherwise, the first ship that i know of that was designed and built with a cl was the radiance ... Maiden voyage 3/10/2001. So it would appear, that if the cl was ever exclusively for the suite passengers, that policy changed in nine months or less. The only thing that is clear is that the concierge lounge is a benefit that rci "intended" to use as "bait" to attract (unsuspecting) customers. That is "bait" as in "bait and switch.":mad:

 

By the way, there are no 'disclaimers' on the form ... Only, "complete terms and conditions available on request." gotcha!

 

 

!!! Bravo !!!

[Lightsluvr]

I have gone along with certain cutbacks......because, yep, it was inevitable in todays economy.

 

There should have been an alternative that would have saved them, actually 100's of thousands of dollars, and made it still palatable, even if the Diamonds had to come out handing over a bit more money, they still would have some benefits........and some bragging rights.

 

Many of us knew that something was going to be done.....for sometime now.

 

RCCL's loyalty campaign could have been handled very differently IMHO.

 

It would be interesting to know the exact figure of how many Diamonds there are out there?? Can anyone guess?? Over 1 million might be about right. Of those 1 million, let's say that only 500,000 were peeved enough to say........we will cruise with someone else.......and spread the word to just 8 others that are considering sailing with Royal Caribbean.

 

Well........that adds up to 4 million people that possibly are looking to cruise for the first or 5th time........that the Diamonds are suggesting to look elsewhere for there cruises.

 

My point here, is that I think that it's going to be tougher to fill all of their ships, as they have in the past, when they have such a terrible "word of mouth" advertising program.

 

Stepping down off of my soapbox!

 

Rick

 

You hit the nail on the head, Rick!

 

Mother Royal is going to have to buy a lot of 30 second "Nations" TV advertisements to make up for the loss of 4 million sure thing cruisers... (including 6 in my family)

 

JMHO

 

LL

[beachbuzzard]

I do not agree with this metaphor at all.

 

Speaking for myself, I did not work to gain diamond status. It was something that was given to me after I took so many cruises on my cruise line of choice.

 

However... RCL created the C&A program, not the pax. They did it to attract repeat business via rewards, once again established by RCL, not the pax. You make it sound like the pax demanded the C&A because they felt they deserved something. It went the other way around. RCL offered, the pax responded by being loyal.

 

Some pax already were locked into a preference with RCL, so the C&A program and benefits are meaningless to them (like yourself). But others were "captured" by the intent of the program, like myself. I had no preference because RCL is the only line I've tried. My loyalty was established through the C&A, not through trial and error.

 

As a result, those of you that already have built loyalty through trial and error will remain loyal. For us, it means they lose the loyalty the C&A program got them and we will go out and do our own comparisons now.

[Aquahound]

You make it sound like the pax demanded the C&A because they felt they deserved something.

 

Huh??

 

No no no.

 

All I was saying is that I, for one, did not work to achieve my status. I do not cruise for loyalty program perks. They're nice to have, but they are nowhere near the top of my priority list. I see it as a gift, no more.

 

That's all I meant by what I said.

[ECCruise]

All I was saying is that I, for one, did not work to achieve my status. I do not cruise for loyalty program perks.

 

And that is fine, for your personal situation.

 

Unfortunately for RCL, I think there are (and will be) tens of thousands of customers (and former customers) that will not feel that way at all.

 

And that is sad.