ToadOfToadHall

Sadly, British irony doesn’t always make it crossing the pond.

 

Neither does, it appears, the expression "the Emperor's new clothes" when used as an idiom.

Don't you always, routinely, add-on 15% in your head? I do to avoid surprises (actually, I can't work out 15% quickly, so add 20% for speed).

 

But I don't need to because because I know once I've added 15%, then converted it back to pounds (at the time), the figure comes out roughly the same.

Thankfully, as you can see from today's conversion rate, things have improved since your voyage (Cunard don't control exchange rates of course). I had the same problem a few years back; the exchange rate wasn't good. Then again, I've known times when it was excellent, so it can be seen as "swings and roundabouts" over time.

 

Best wishes,

All of those points are indeed true !

Today, for example, a drink on board costing $12 (incl 15%) would set you back approx £8.90. Not the same figure at all.

But you've added the 15% on, I'm talking about looking at the price as displayed.

Using your example, the displayed price of said drink would be $10.43. As I said, I went last summer ($/£ was around 1.27).

So $10.42 + 15% (=$12) / 1.27 = £9.44.

So I was seeing $10.42 and paying £9.44. I would say those figures are not that much different.

One British couple I know pretend that the prices are shown in GBP (not USD) and this, they tell me, helps to keep their spending down as they think twice about the cost of items (in the shops for example). When they get their final account statement* from the Purser's Desk early on the morning of disembarkation, and convert to GBP, they are then pleasantly surprised at how much less they have actually spent (in GBP).

Trouble is, there's not much in it (and when we went last summer it was even worse). After you add 15% to every $ price you see, and then convert it to £, you end up pretty much back where you started. In fact, last year, I did just that; i.e. see dollars and think pounds. However, when I got my final bill I was not pleasantly surprised.

In the UK, 175 degrees proof = 100% (people my recall seeing 70 degrees on bottles of UK spirits, which is 100/175 * 70 = 40%)

In the US, 200 degrees proof = 200%.

So, yes, whilst proof values are indeed different, as BigMac says, percentage is percentage.

Don't like it? Then DON'T eat it. Simple as that!

You have managed to miss my point.

We went B2B in mole class and it was pretty much a bed (or two beds if you preferred), and that was it. Certainly no sofa.

Sorry to hear that you have to queue too. But considering how long it takes to travel internationally either by ship or plane, it really is a small portion of the journey.

It does take a long time, but most of that time is caused by the stupidity at the airports.

For example, on our last cruise, we flew from Venice to Heathrow. It's a 2 and half hour flight - total time was over 7 hours (from arriving at Venice airport to collecting my car at Heathrow).

We had to queue for 3 hours at Venice and 2 at Heathrow. A 7 hour trip, 5 hours of which was queuing - that 70% of the journey time standing in a queue.

Caviar - The Emperor's New Clothes

'Lunch' (midday) may have been free. 'Dinner' is often a meal served after 6pm. ;)

Lunch & Dinner or Dinner & Tea.

Depends if you are Darn Sarf or Oop North !

, the UK (as a foreigner you have to queue, you cannot just wave your passport like UK citizens can)

Those days are long gone. Now we too have to queue up to be abused and mistreated even when returning to our own country.

Paying for dinner in the Golden Lion is no different to paying in any of the alternative dining options. As I have already paid for dinner I only eat in my appointed restaurant on principle.

Indeed, so do we.

I was paying £5.50 for a can of Strongbow last year on the QV. I think that pushed me over the edge.

But before our last cruise I also would have said that Cunard bar prices were inline with London pubs, but I'd not say that now.

Also, the biggest problem is the length of the cruise. If we assume the prices are London Hotel/restaurant prices, that's fine for a night or two but not when it's 14 nights (or whatever) in a row. So if I go to an expensive place to eat and the drinks prices are high, well I just think "okay, it's only for a night". Now do that for 14 nights on the trot and you feel that you are being had over.

Another point to note is that clearly (from what people have said above), people in the US are used to paying far more in America for drinks than people from the UK are used to in Britain.

You want to wear a tuxedo and gown at night then you'll have to pay a bit more for your drink.

Hmmm.....really ?

My copy of the Cunarder has just been delivered by Postman Pat.

You can now eat in the Golden Lion on the QV in the evenings ($4 for starters, $8 for mains) between 6PM and 9PM.

So that, I would suggest, is the reason why the dress code has been removed from the pub.

We've been on two Baltic cruises on the QV.

If you list the ports I can see if I can remember where shuttles were used.

Just a thought on the sharing bit. Could part of the reason be perhaps because has been logistically impossible to give tables for two for all cabins on a two seating dining basis and therefore the tradition of sharing tables became the norm and accepted by many passengers as being a sociable part of the cruise?

Those who don't want to share can request tables for two.

Now that is the most logical answer so far; it's because there is not enough room for all those tables for 2. And yes, before someone says "but we travel as a 4 or 6 or whatever, and therefore you are wrong", I will pre-empt that by adding that of course some people do travel in 4s or 6s, but the vast majority travel in 2s.

So people accept this arrangement because because they accept that space is limited; but one land they do not.

You've never eaten at Durgin Park in Boston, I see.

I've just look that place up, their website has plenty of pictures of their seating arrangements.

But that's nothing like Cunard' seating arrangements. It has lots of seating arranged in rows. Plenty of places have seats in rows, so of course it's easy to sit next to other people you do not know. Other posters have mentioned places with bench type seating arrangements - again, that is nothing like Cunard.

in the MDR, as a couple, you can sit with another couple on a table for 4 (a single table, not a bench or in a row) that you have never met before. That type of arrangement simply does not happen on land. And even if people know of a restaurant where you did sit like that, that is exceptionally rare; it does not make my initial observation incorrect - 1 place in a 1000 does not prove my question to be incorrect.

Also, my question was : Why is sitting with other people in a restaurant acceptable on a cruise but it's not acceptable on land ? (and by sit with other people, to be clear, I do not mean sitting on a bench/in a row. I mean, say, 2 couples that do not know each other sitting at a table for 4).

So far the vast majority of answers have been about whether people like it or not. I did not ask that.

However, breakfast is another ball game. We are that couple in the naughty corner who are happy to wait for a table for 2 no matter how long the wait. I can’t be bothered with small talk first thing and especially when it’s a new group each day and the conversation is repetitive from day to day with the same pleasantries.

That is exactly how I feel as well about breakfast.

Exactly, when ever I travel I expect to find Earth underneath my feet, not water. I also expect to wake up and go to work. It's a holiday because you don't do the normal stuff. /bitchyness #OneOfThoseDays

When I say "at home" at don't mean as in "in your house, when you are not on holiday".

So when you go on holiday that is not a cruise, do you expect to eat with strangers by sitting at the same table as them then?

I have a double breasted tuxedo which was rather expensive when I first bought it. I feel very comfortable in this tux but I am now beginning to wonder if I should replace it as it is probably completely out of fashion.

The biggest change is in the cut of the trousers. I have some trousers with straight legs that now look and feel like 20" bell bottoms !

I agree with this sentiment but think it is a problem throughout the cruise industry. Price hikes on fares, drinks and lowering the standard of meals in MDR and buffet, P&O are having the same problem, yet they dont think that they have to try hard to keep loyalty of customers because I feel that they have the arrogant attitude of people returning whatever so they dont have to try. I am afraid that they have forgotten that loyalty works both ways.

Yes, I suspect it applies equally to all cruise lines. People are very loyal to their favourite brand and will not have a thing said against them, so they continue to show them patronage no matter the level of arrogance shown towards them.

If it bothers you that much dont go on a cruise. Simple.

I never said it did. I never passed any such comment.

The question I asked was "why is it acceptable on a cruise but never acceptable on land ?"

I love sharing tables on a cruise. I enjoy meeting my fellow passengers. However, I would be horrified to be expected to share a table at a hotel at home. Cruising is just a different type of holiday with different experiences.

Horrified - that's exactly my point.

You (i.e. people in general) would not dream of doing it at home, or indeed on any other holiday (save at a 1950s holiday camp), and yet everyone accepts it on a cruise.

And other thought has just struck me; do people share a table in the Lido ? I bet they don't.

It is not unique to cruising and I can remember since the early 1960's sharing tables not only on board ships but also when my parents took me on holiday to Holiday Camps.

Now I did think of that; sharing tables is like being in a 1950s/1960s holiday camp.