Ship or Shopping center

Since the takeover of P&O by Carnival there appears to have been a constant re-adjustment of the shipboard facilities towards providing more and more space for "pay extra" venues. No doubt this has raised the revenue take by the company but I feel that space has been stolen from the passenger who has paid for the public venues on board, just to find they have to pay extra to access these areas. ( Note the use of the word passenger, not customer who is another creature who exists in a shore based world).Sindu, 17 and the like are "stealing" our paid for space which should be utilized for our entertainment.

The first time I noticed this was the Gary Rhodes restaurant which was forced into the Curzon room on Oriana. This had the effect of forcing the classical recitals to use the Crows nest (which was unsuitable due to the air con noise). As the Classical recitals had to be moved the cocktail pianist had to be moved to the top of the Atrium and so it goes on that the demographic of the whole design of the ship was ruined just so P&O could get a bit more revenue from a pay extra restaurant. If the food quality were kept up in the main restaurants this would not be necessary.

Recently on Azura this approach was very obvious in the number of pay extra restaurants as well as the number of photo setups around the ship on formal nights. At one stage there were 3 separate photo shoots going on just within the Atrium which ruined the flow of passengers in the area. I initially felt awful walking through them but soon realized if I didn't I would be stuck on a stairwell all night.

Are we just there to be milked? Do the Carnival management think we do not notice this approach? Where will it end? Perhaps payment to enter the Casino or shops or the Boat deck or the Theaters or perhaps the liftboats if the ship is sinking! (£100 for an inside seat, £50 for an outside seat and free if you want to swim except for the £5 hire for the life jacket).

Would we rather not pay a bit more and re-establish the genuine feel of being welcomed on board and that the ship is "OUR" home from home.

Since the takeover of P&O by Carnival there appears to have been a constant re-adjustment of the shipboard facilities towards providing more and more space for "pay extra" venues.

 

 

Would we rather not pay a bit more and re-establish the genuine feel of being welcomed on board and that the ship is "OUR" home from home.

I understand your views, but is it not the mission of any company to make money ?

Yes, the term "Passenger" has gone, but so has the "Pursers Desk" and many other nautical names.

We are now "Guests" and use the "Reception Desk".

To put it in real terms, if you want the lifestyle vacation that you mentioned, it is available on other cruise lines like Seabourne . But it does cost a lot more.

Just not P&O, as you correctly mentioned, its a brand of a big Carnival Corp who never wanted it anyway.

Carnival only ever wanted the Princess brand, as did Royal Caribbean, and who bothalso bid for the company.

P&O was always going to be a shadow of its former self and is very much un-loved at Carnival Corp head office as it has many identity issues.

.

.

But the cost of cruising is much less in real terms today compared with the pre Carnival days back in 2003.

You should be thanking Lord Sterling for abandoning the merger with Royal Caribbean in favour of Carnival.

The share price of Carnival UK Plc is now more than double what P&O Princess International Plc was back then too.

But the cost of cruising is much less in real terms today compared with the pre Carnival days back in 2003.

You are so so correct on this.

Cruising is cheaper by a mile.

.

You can also see the drive for profit in the new ship. Designed for the British market is nonsense, it is a design for the US market with a Crows Nest added. Some none revenue earning venues have been simply eliminated like the promenade deck and other venues now charge where they used to be free. I am trying Britannia next month and hopefully my worries will not be realised.

You should be thanking Lord Sterling for abandoning the merger with Royal Caribbean in favour of Carnival.

 

Why? Celebrity are the same group as RCI and I don't see any problem with them.

Why? Celebrity are the same group as RCI and I don't see any problem with them.

would P&O have the ships it has today? As was said before Princess cruises was the main target company.

I reckon RCI would have passed down its older ships to P&O too and further Grand Class ship commitments at the Italian shipyard cancelled in favour of the Scandinavian yards.

delete

But the cost of cruising is much less in real terms today compared with the pre Carnival days back in 2003.

 

 

 

You should be thanking Lord Sterling for abandoning the merger with Royal Caribbean in favour of Carnival.

 

 

 

The share price of Carnival UK Plc is now more than double what P&O Princess International Plc was back then too.

Quite right, you cannot have P&O as it was pre Carnival as the pricing has changed so much. We are in a suite on Britannia for less per night by £15 per person per night than on Aurora in a balcony cabin in 2001. That's 14 years and the price is less now.

If you want it as it was then prices need to be 30% to 60% higher than they now are. That's not going to happen.

Going back to my pricing above. Just to get back to what I paid in 2001, in the same cabin would cost me £1500 to £2000 more per 14 night cruise. You could spend every night in a speciality restaurant and not spend that much.

So even with the things you have to pay for if you want them it is still cheaper than 14 years ago.

An inside cabin to the Canaries was recently advertised on TV for around £100 per night for an inside cabin.

I will shortly be staying in "hub" hotel room in London for more than this. Someone has to pay for the fact that my cruise accomodation will get me virtually to Africa and back, feed me and entertain me for a week. I am happy if it is the shopper and the speciallity restaurant guest who does that.

Quite right, you cannot have P&O as it was pre Carnival as the pricing has changed so much. We are in a suite on Britannia for less per night by £15 per person per night than on Aurora in a balcony cabin in 2001. That's 14 years and the price is less now.

 

If you want it as it was then prices need to be 30% to 60% higher than they now are. That's not going to happen.

 

Going back to my pricing above. Just to get back to what I paid in 2001, in the same cabin would cost me £1500 to £2000 more per 14 night cruise. You could spend every night in a speciality restaurant and not spend that much.

 

So even with the things you have to pay for if you want them it is still cheaper than 14 years ago.

Great post which puts things in a proper perspective.

Seems to be the trend now with the mass market lines.

Some ships you may as well go to a sopping centre some to a theme park, but as others have said the price has fallen in 2004 I did a cruise $3800 for us both, last year I did virtually the same cruise $3000 for us both.

So something has to make up for that costs must have increased substantially in that 10 years.

OK,

So it seems we are all to accept paying less and getting much less, as I asked in my initial post "where will it all end". I am not a share holder and am not interested in having my holiday used as a revenue grabber for large companies, all I ask is a great holiday experience for my payment.

But perhaps there is another force at work in my desires. I feel a desire to experience an "old fashioned" experience, one which the P&O name still evokes , one of reasonable standards, I do not expect Lords and Ladies at my table for Dinner but I also should not be expected to accept this once great line being dragged through in the direction of "dumb down as far as possible to make as much cash as possible".

I thank you for your comments but I return to my stance that I would pay more for decent standards and if you want to pay less then you do so somewhere else, and get less. There are many comments quoting "Butlins at sea", The inference of these comments are so sad for this once great line (my family have long history involving P&O). I simply am using this forum to state that I for one am not happy with the direction that Carnival have taken P&O and excuses for their actions are not the point, they are busy destroying this line for their short term gain, I could make many suggestions as to how Carnival could regain the great name of P&O but sadly I know that the American management either believe their approach is correct or they simply don't care about the P&O name, standards or their customers thoughts or desires, after all why should they care if their share price is up.

I would love to see the P&O name bought as a private entity and run along the lines of Fred Olsen with a genuine British view and an eye to the history of the line

OK,

 

I would love to see the P&O name bought as a private entity and run along the lines of Fred Olsen with a genuine British view and an eye to the history of the line

Dream on navy boy.

Cunard fits the bill so why have two (Carnival) brands offering the same experience and ethos

I ask that you may consider the initial reviews of Britannia by the passengers who have sailed on her, they prove that Carnival have gone in the wrong direction. I suspect they do not understand the British market and I would suggest the passengers keep reminding them of this fact otherwise they will believe in their own mistakes even when the reviews are bad. Bad ship design and use is exactly what I mean by "Ship or shopping center" these reviews are a poor indictment of Carnival's approach, they had a fantastic opportunity to build a world class product and it appears it is not what the passengers want so I class that as a failure on their part and they should learn from an expensive mistake.

Esprit - I will dream on, I don't need you to advise me of that, I shall keep telling Carnival when they are wrong, after all I am their customer/passenger, it's my money that keeps them afloat (at sea and on the stock market)

I ask that you may consider the initial reviews of Britannia by the passengers who have sailed on her, they prove that Carnival have gone in the wrong direction. I suspect they do not understand the British market and I would suggest the passengers keep reminding them of this fact otherwise they will believe in their own mistakes even when the reviews are bad. Bad ship design and use is exactly what I mean by "Ship or shopping center" these reviews are a poor indictment of Carnival's approach, they had a fantastic opportunity to build a world class product and it appears it is not what the passengers want so I class that as a failure on their part and they should learn from an expensive mistake.

 

 

 

Esprit - I will dream on, I don't need you to advise me of that, I shall keep telling Carnival when they are wrong, after all I am their customer/passenger, it's my money that keeps them afloat (at sea and on the stock market)

No the first reviews were very positive. As most of the ones following have been.

I can tell you that the reviews are brilliant compared to those for Arcadia when she first sailed.

I

Esprit - I will dream on, I don't need you to advise me of that, I shall keep telling Carnival when they are wrong, after all I am their customer/passenger, it's my money that keeps them afloat (at sea and on the stock market)

Navy boy if you know so much about P&O to suggest Carnival Corporation has got Britannia wrong why not go along to the next London AGM and voice your concerns. I have done just that in the past and had enlightening conversations with Mr Mickey Arison and Mr David Dingle

You would of course know that Mr Dingle is British, was with P&O Princess Int' Ltd long before the Carnival merger and is of course now chairman of Carnival UK plc.

As Dai has rightly said the Britannia reviews are typical of brand new P&O ships and skewed towards old P&O diehards that can't accept modernisation and love to go on maiden cruises just to moan about them after.

Dai

The Critic currently stands at 35% "love this ship", that does not suggest to me that the initial reviews are anywhere near good.

Esprit,

I shall not be attending any share holder meetings as I am not a share holder, just a paying passenger. Carnival can either listen to me or not as they decide.

Thanks for your comments everyone, it appears we disagree with the future direction P&O should take, we will get what we are given and like it or not but very large ships are not for me I can get such experiences in large hotels.

I know what I expect from a sea based holiday and shall spend my money accordingly.

Dai

 

 

 

The Critic currently stands at 35% "love this ship", that does not suggest to me that the initial reviews are anywhere near good.

 

 

 

Esprit,

 

 

 

I shall not be attending any share holder meetings as I am not a share holder, just a paying passenger. Carnival can either listen to me or not as they decide.

 

 

 

Thanks for your comments everyone, it appears we disagree with the future direction P&O should take, we will get what we are given and like it or not but very large ships are not for me I can get such experiences in large hotels.

 

 

 

I know what I expect from a sea based holiday and shall spend my money accordingly.

What critic would that be then never heard of the critic. I do know that there are hundreds of very positive reviews. And a few who have not worked out that she does not have central stairs top to bottom.

Every cruise brings a flurry of positive comments.

Still far more than when Arcadia came into service. I was told very forcibly that she was hated by P&O cruisers and that she would be moved on within the year. That of course was 9 year ago.