Difficult Choices in a Real World

[JayNu]

I am a long time member of these boards, occasional poster. After reading this entire thread, I just had to jump in here...uk1, I find your original post to be a perfect analysis and example of my opinion, but you said it so much better. My husband and I first tried Seabourn in 1996 because of a discounted price for an off season cruise. We might not otherwise have booked at full price, so we were trying something special on a lark. After that wonderful experience we were sold on luxury cruising. At this stage in our lives, we can't afford the time, or money for long full price cruises so we don't cruise that often. Never the less, I would hate to think that SS by lowering prices will also reduce the quality of their product. There must be another way of increasing profits besides simply increasing passenger numbers. There are so few really, truly special cruise lines left to choose from.

 

As to our cruising background, 1991 NCL, 1992 Windstar, 1994 a now defunct line I can't remember(cheap), then over the years...1 Celebrity with our boys, 1 Danube River cruise thru Intrav, 5 RSSC (once on each ship except the Navigator), 3 Seabourn ( one was the Sea Goddess). We enjoyed all (but one) of our RSSC cruises and they were a good value for what we got. I feel strongly that there are subtle (yet important) differences between a cruise line like RSSC, and the other luxury lines mentioned in this thread. For example the only RSSC that I feel compares favorably with Seabourn was the Song of Flower, and that was probably due to the similarity in size and passenger numbers. For many people, the little things are not ‘worth’ the extra money, but for those who appreciate the differences and like the food and drinks, let’s hope there remains a place for us all.

[simonv]

Amen!

[uk1]

I am a long time member of these boards, occasional poster. After reading this entire thread, I just had to jump in here...uk1, I find your original post to be a perfect analysis and example of my opinion, but you said it so much better. For many people, the little things are not ‘worth’ the extra money, but for those who appreciate the differences and like the food and drinks, let’s hope there remains a place for us all.

 

Many thanks for the kind words.

[cruisinsince75]

This is an interesting thread. I was looking at all the comparisons of the different lines and thinking where I would rate them. So in rating the smaller lines I would have to rate them as follows.

 

#1 Silversea. All Inclusive, good sized cabins, real verandahs (probably what gives it a slight nod over Seabourn).

 

#2 Seabourn. All Inclusive, good sized cabins.

 

#3 Sea Dream Yacht Club. (I haven't sailed on yet) All Inclusive and more laid back atmosphere but smaller cabins.

 

#4 Radisson. (Sailing on RSSC in July) All Inclusive except for drinks, good size cabins, real verandahs.

 

I will say that these are so close that I would consider any of these, depending on itinerary and price. For example: We are looking at doing the Silver Whisper on a Med Cruise in late spring. Seabourn for a similar itinerary was $500 more per person, Sea Dream Yacht Club $750 more per person, and RSSC (for early booking on the Diamond) would have been close to the same price, but about $500 more for a comparable ship (the Voyager) even though twice as large with twice the number of people.

 

Don

[uk1]

Don,

 

I don't know whether the pricing comparisons have taken account of the heavy 2005 SS med discounts - but either way I feel that your analysis shows that SS is a steal compared to the other lines.

 

From recollection of other threads Sea Dream can sometimes have families who can overtake what is a small craft. With Seabourn as I understand it, it's a lack of balconies - and once you have a balcony do you ever go back?

 

So how do you summarise your survey?

[English Voyager]

Two observations on Radisson,viz their best discounts are at the launch of the following year's brochure,which for 2005 was,from memory,09/04,and the entry level suites for the Voyager,I believe,are bigger than those of the competion.

[goeurope]

>> At this stage in our lives, we can't afford the time, or money for long full price cruises so we don't cruise that often. Never the less, I would hate to think that SS by lowering prices will also reduce the quality of their product.<<

 

The price charged to any given passenger (or even the average passenger) is only one element that affects the line's ability to maintain the quality of its product. Remember, many costs on a voyage are fixed. Whether a voyage carries 100 or 386 passengers, the line has to pay the same wages for the captain and much of the crew, nearly the same amount for fuel, the same amount for owning or leasing the vessel, and so on. So, if the line can fill empty berths by lowering its prices somewhat or by offering capacity-controlled discounts, it may be in a better position to maintain quality than it would be if it failed to take advantage of today's "yield management" techniques.

[JayNu]

"So, if the line can fill empty berths by lowering its prices somewhat or by offering capacity-controlled discounts, it may be in a better position to maintain quality than it would be if it failed to take advantage of today's "yield management" techniques."

 

I agree, so long as the quality of food, service, and attitude of staff are not too badly compromised on these discounted cruises. My earlier point was that, so far as RSSC is concerned, I have seen a SUBTLE decline in the above things. Especially on 2 for 1 cruises. I do not mean to infer that RSSC isn't still a wonderful cruise line, just not quite at the same level as it used to be, and not the same level as Seabourn. As I stated in my earlier post, these differences may be irrelevant to many people. To each his or her own! I just hope that there will somehow remain the various levels of choices for all of us.

[uk1]

>> At this stage in our lives, we can't afford the time, or money for long full price cruises so we don't cruise that often. Never the less, I would hate to think that SS by lowering prices will also reduce the quality of their product.<<

 

The price charged to any given passenger (or even the average passenger) is only one element that affects the line's ability to maintain the quality of its product. Remember, many costs on a voyage are fixed. Whether a voyage carries 100 or 386 passengers, the line has to pay the same wages for the captain and much of the crew, nearly the same amount for fuel, the same amount for owning or leasing the vessel, and so on. So, if the line can fill empty berths by lowering its prices somewhat or by offering capacity-controlled discounts, it may be in a better position to maintain quality than it would be if it failed to take advantage of today's "yield management" techniques.

 

Thats' it .... marginal costing as discussed previously.

 

However there's one or two complicated wrinkles that defeats the objectives in this case.

 

With normal discounts with other products, eg food, plane tickets etc, anyone who has previously purchased has to shrug and accept that later (or earlier) people received a discount to which they haven't benefited.

 

Unluckily (for SS) they are prepared to recalculate fares already offered and where they have received deposits. This means that the marginal costing model doesn't work in the way you say. SS relies on customers not knowing or not claiming a "re-price" as it isn't voluntereed but has to be known about and claimed. I have a letter stating that my purchases will be repriced if subsequently offered for less.

 

So if they have 100 customers already on the books and then announce a 50% reduction, they potentially probably need to get to 250 customers before they make a penny profit more than for the 100 if all 100 claimed a reprice. Obviously if less people claim then the break-even point is less and of course me publicising this won't help. The worst of all worlds from SS is that they pay for expensive advertising sell 30 crusies at 50% off and 50 current cruisers claim a reprice. It's easy to go backwards.

 

What also then comes into play adversely, is how those who don't know about re-pricing feel (and they may have paid 100%) when on cruises with people that paid less.

 

Finally, I'm not certain how to express this well so forgive me if it sounds clumsy - but you'll understand what I'm driving at - but also an SS ship full of people that all paid full price might feel different to a ship where half are on 50% and this in time may drive the "full payers" away.

 

All in all, these are some of the reasons why I prefer higher prices, lower loadings and exclusivity.

 

I spend a lot of time trying to resolve this conundrum for clients, and a way around this is once you have built up a customer base of people who have largely paid 100%, then offer them bargains ie through Venetial Society that aren't advertised through the press. This give a lower yeild but keeps the product similar in feel and locks in serial/loyal customers rather than irritate them or dissapoint them.

 

Jeff

[goeurope]

I spend a lot of time trying to resolve this conundrum for clients, and a way around this is once you have built up a customer base of people who have largely paid 100%, then offer them bargains ie through Venetial Society that aren't advertised through the press. This give a lower yeild but keeps the product similar in feel and locks in serial/loyal customers rather than irritate them or dissapoint them.

 

That's a good point about the repricing. And your suggestion regarding the Venetian Society is well taken, although it doesn't address the problem of attracting new passengers (something that's obviously important in an industry where a high percentage of the existing customer base is past middle age).

[Jaffa]

Goeurope

 

Spot on!!

That is why l said in an earlier post that Silversea is working towards those new markets.

I am a prime example of their success. I am also only 40 years of age, & a male solo passenger. I do believe Silversea is being successfull here. Most reports are that Silversea is cruising with good numbers onboard. When you consider that they are not offering "that many" deep discount's, l count no more that 20 at any one time at more than 40%.

 

They are being more generous in the past 2 years with solo pax than what l have seen them offer previously. With my 3 BTB's l recieved 10%, 10% & 25% solo loadings only, so thats what sold me on the price part of my decision.

Only one of my cruises (the first) had any substancual discount at 40% so l just added another cruise with my savings.

 

My opinion is they are hitting "new markets" but they are doing it carefully with due planning and not to over the top, to quickly.

 

I cannot really fault them so far, but l just worry that penny pinching to save a bit here and there doesn't become a issue to improving margins.

 

One final point,

Silversea's rates of repeat passengers is not decreasing but is on a gentle incline. It seems to me that Silverseas is manageing to hold the new customers it is selling to.

All in all they seem to be doing ok to me.

 

Colin..................................

[uk1]

That's a good point about the repricing. And your suggestion regarding the Venetian Society is well taken, although it doesn't address the problem of attracting new passengers (something that's obviously important in an industry where a high percentage of the existing customer base is past middle age).

 

There are several ways this might be addressed and doing it in a way that reduces the repricing exposure and has minimal impact of the product or customer satisfaction amongst existing customers..

 

One is to offer people who have been on directly competitive cruises a venetian society discount for their first cruise. This attracts the "right people" and has no repricing exposure. Another which I'd love to play with if I were them is better "clothing" ie instead of offering discounts (so avoiding the repricing) offer new customers 20% off their second cruise if booked on board, or add chauffeur transfers at the home end, or an "on board credit" etc. All these ways will attract someone for their first cruise, then you can rely on the product to bring them back.

[meow!]

Jaffa:

 

Haven't seen your postings for three months, more specifically, how did your three back-to-back cruises go? Are you satisfied with them, any comments? Thank you.

[jhp]

the future. Diamond is already gone in a few weeks, and PG is only under have to agree with you absolutely. The RSSC fleet seems so be shrinking in ce possible, and I will always look into whatever SilverSea is doingcontract over 2006 in Tahiti. We all love to have the best cruise experienI

[jhp]

For the life of me, I cannot understand how my post above got so fractured. I edited last night, and today when I looked in, it looks like a lunatic wrote it! So sorry, just go figure, but I think the regulars on this board know I do not speak gibberish, if you check my posts from my profile.

[Seadoc]

While in the insomnia-induced act of creating - for selection of cruises for the next year or so - a "comparative spreadsheet" charting several lines (SB, SS, Oceania and SeaDream) against criteria including, thus far, all-inclusivity (or not); average "per diem" cost; itineraries; capacity; strengths; weaknesses and "dangers" (e.g., risk of "partial sell-out" to affinity groups and, per several posts elsewhere on a particular SeaDream experience, "children")...while in the process of creating that comparison, I serendipitously encountered this thread which, in my opinion, should be MANDATORY reading for all attempting to select from among those lines.

 

Particular KUDOS to Jeff (aka: uK1) for posts #3 and #16, which strike me as uniquely comprehensive, incisive and insightful analyses of "the elusive elements of cruising" and to Colin (aka: Jaffa) for so well articulating those four more non-subjective components (all-inclusive, itinerary, ship size and cruise duration) which all too frequently are lost in the CruiseCritic din of innumerable posts on subjective issues (e.g., food; onboard services; HQ services and responsiveness; dress codes; all "cabin" issues from location to layout, to toiletries, etc.). It is, arguably, only the "objective elements" that are within our selection criteria purview...the subjective elements are (opinion) pure "intra-cruise experiences" and outside of our control. So to both Jeff and Colin: thanks so much for making the insomnia so valuable an experience!

 

In the final analysis, how the various lines identify themselves (to themselves and their market), how they market and sustain that identification and how potential customers are both obtained and retained is a responsibility of those who manage the lines. Having said that, the vagaries of business are many but (opinion) the quintissential truth was stated by Jeff in post #16:

"...the feeling of ownership...". That, in conjunction with "predictable product" and "customer service" are ultimately what separates the wheat from the chaff.

 

My little exercise - with the invaluable input from this single thread is now over...the only remaining decision, alas, is between SB, SS and SeaDream...and any help would be much appreciated.

 

Craig

[uk1]

Craig

 

Firstly you build my hope up ………… I helped you, you say ………. but now it seems that you couldn’t conclude. Fat lot of help I was. Still your problem is nothing to do with cruising. It’s to do with decision making, if all of what you said is true of course.

 

I have a nagging doubt about your post. Forgive me being a boring git. I looked at your previous posts.

 

Are you interested in cruises or are you employed by a cruise line or agent? You are an analytic - I'm an intuitive - so I'm sure you'll forgive the direct question.

 

Jeff

[Seadoc]

Jeff-

 

Actually, neither.

I'm a retired oncologist (ergo, I suspect, the analytic label sticks) and have yet to be employed by or associated with any cruiseline or TA - and don't envision it in the future.

My wife and I cruise 4-5 times annually. We started at the "bottom" a few decades ago and have, thanks to an addiction, worked our way through the "ranks" to today's analytic exercise, as previously posted (in sleep-deprivation mode).

The remarks I thanked both you and Colin for served to both cystalize and confirm the criteria I had so anal-retentively listed on my nifty "spreadsheet".

Cruising for us is a combo of escape and discovery. We intuitively appreciate the cruise experience closely mimicing the cruiseline advertising. We far prefer being "well and adequately treated" over false-obsequiousness (at one end of the continuum) or herding at the other.

So for us it's not so much a matter of "which" (SB, SS, SD) but "why". If, as and when we encounter our "ideal" line and experience the sense of "ownership" one of you alluded to, our exercise will end and we'll bop off into the sunset.

Thanks again.

Craig

[oregon50]

If you are doing four cruises per year, this would be my suggestion. On the same day, book a SS and SB cruise which sails a few months apart. You will be commited to sampling both before deciding which becomes your addiction.

 

I am determined to try SB, but after five on SS it might be too late.

[uk1]

Ah .... I see.

 

I can help! This is nothing to do with cruises but is to do with the way or method you're trying to arrive at your conclusion.

 

The problem is that you are what Frued would have called (if they had used such words) an anlalytic. People become anlytics because they are unable to trust something as nebulous as instinct or intuition. They feel comfort in taking all relevant factors and using these to calculate the best decision to make. I bet you have a spreadsheet with all of the ships or lines along the top and all the factors going down. Each ship has a calculation for each factor. I'm willing to bet you could share your information with another who posts regularly here (no name no pack drill) who I genuinely believe has got her ( .......oooops) calculation down to the $ per square foot of suite per diem day factored against the staff per client day to give a league table .............

 

There's nothing wrong with this approach in the right environment. The problem you cannot take into account with such a calculation is how you factor in "quality" and "feeling at home" and "friendliness" etc etc

 

Having done this, sometimes an unpredicted result occurs. I say unpredicted because people who follow this approach to decision making often have a favoured conclusion in mind but feel comfort with having proof that their intuitive conclusion is supported by hard fact. And so something must be missing. Why doesn't the numbers support my instinct? So then you realise that each factor must of course carry a different wheight. So you place different weights against each factor and recalculate. And so the process goes on. And then when you complete these calculations, you find yourself almost paralysed with confusion and the fear of making a decision you fear you may subsequently conclude was the wrong one and therefore regret. And you fear therefore that you may miss an opportunity of enjoying the right decision if you only refined the calculations more. The question then becomes what did I miss from my calculation that I could have added to ensure it has more or a chance to be correct.

 

In the back of your mind somewhere is a nagging voice telling you that one option seems to be the option that you want to take. I bet what's holding this voice back is that this particular option costs more, but your analytical nature is stopping you because it is illogical to pay more than you need unless there is a corresponding calculation that justifies the price difference.

 

Craig, tear up the spreadsheet and release yourself from analytical prison.

 

Follow that little voice that is your instinct and intuition and take that SS cruise!

 

Jeff

 

ps and when you find what you enjoy stop agonising about all the things you haven't tried.

[Seadoc]

Oregon 50 - Good suggestion...fortunately, it had separately occured to me as the only sensible exit door from this pseudo-dilemma and it's what we're going to do.

 

Jeff- Your analysis is spot- on but fails in "degree of disease": the spreadsheet actually listed 4 lines (Oceania has subsequently been eliminated from the original 4 "contenders") compared against the variables of:

 

"All-Inclusive" ...a visceral aversion to scribbling my john hancock, as legible as it may be, as frequently as would be necessary over a two week timeframe (an aversion to "nickle and diming"). It alone caused the demise of Oceania.

 

"Average Per Diem"...a dicey issue. While we continue to seek what we seek, we're ultimately as "value oriented" as anyone, feeling that while we're fully prepared to pay for what we seek, we're disinclined to pay more than is "necessary" and patently unwilling to pay for "extras" like pretentiousness, disconnect between marketing perception and reality, etc. Among SB, SD and SS it's not much of a practical concern. Having said that, however, there's a lurker in the back of my mind about another's SD experience which was "augmented" by the presence of 30 or so kids onboard. It prompted my inquiry email to SD about the issue...the response (pure marketing, given the posted direct experience) alluded to the "rarity" of the event, the fact that SD is inappropriate for kids and, to SD's credit (and viability on the spreadsheet), expressed a willingness, at time of booking, to share passenger demographics with me. Still, however, the lurker whispers "what if, after you book, 30 kids are also booked?...what options will you have?".

 

"Itineraries" - all in the beholder's eye. Either "new and discoverable" or otherwise. Either port-intensive or seadays. Either predictably warm and ideally sunny (a deal-maker for us) or not.

 

"Capacity" - we like small. Am uncertain if there's a palpable difference between 200 and 400 pax but will experiment.

 

"Strengths" and, separately, "Weaknesses" - these evolve, if they do, vicariously from reading innumerable posts, evaluating (such as one can) the context of the poster/experience and, ultimately, from pure empiricism.

 

A few words about intuitives vs(?) analyticals: the die has long ago been cast- I suspect for all of us. We "are" who we "are". Not sure if it's immutable.

In our case the past few decades of evolution have been from being pure intuitives when we began cruising to, now, incomplete analyticals. I commiserate with the poor soul whose spreadsheet includes "$ perdiem/SF vs staff/pax ratio" but can INTUITIVELY understand the results of being a PURE ANALYTICAL.

 

If the ball we keep our eye on remains labelled "fun" and "discovery", I suspect it'll all somehow work out.

 

Craig

[uk1]

Craig, good to see you awake!

 

I promise you the analytical thing is curable.

 

The SS experience is perfect for those that aren't counting pennies - but can be enjoyed by those with enough of the where-with-all to enjoy it as well. You have to be less logical with this type of purchase. The downmarket players are perfect for spreadsheet analysis but I don't think you can do it up here.

 

I too was effected by the SD thread of 30 kids. Frankly it would probably .... alright I'm lying .... it WOULD have ruined it for me and my wife. SS doesn't welcome kids but tolerates them. There's no facilities and no allowances either in the price or in the facilities. I like that. In fact I'd make SS child-free by mandate. I think that would increase customers. Everyone thinks there kids are perfect and all the other know they're not. We had a set of kids on the last cruise who had walkie talkies. I see a thread on another forum about the subject. One poster expressed the view that anyone who doesn't like him and his walkies talkies can go and ....... I was tempted to beg him to post his cruises so we could avoid each other.

 

There's choices evreywhere and if only I could be certain that I could have a cruise where I'm not a hostage to the noise and behaviour of other people's kids then it would make me a very happy man. I'd like it guaranteed. I know ..... I can see it now ....... the flames and hate mail ......"we're entitled to bring our kids ......." - but they are allowed on almost every cruise and surely there's a place for a child-free line just like there's a place for places like Sandals? It don't make me a bad person, just that I want what I want and they want what they want. There's space for us all.

 

Small - or very small is imprortant. Jean and I can get up early and eat outside and finish our breakfast just before others arrive. We like that. You can do this on a small ship. With a larger one they'll be a 100 other people with the same idea. We can have an early quiet dinner. Then go to the bar when everyone else is starting to eat. Everyone likes their own way and a small ship can make you feel that you can build your own experience.

 

Cash if you are lucky can be the means to an end. To take the other extreme to make the point, SS isn't really designed for those that have to struggle to make every penny be accountable for itself. In the end I think it's wise to have two categories of cash. That bit of cash that you spend with analysis and wisely, and that bit of cash you shrug and say I might be spending too much but I don't want to compromise. SS should develop it's prodcut for the second category and ideally customers should by it in sync with that aspiration.

 

Welll ..... that's my view anyway.

 

Jeff

[simonv]

Jeff, Right on.I wonder which line I could take my grandchildren to (they are not here yet unfortunately, but soon I hope). The SS and SB with children would be out of question. They would be bored silly, too. But Disney.....? I wonder if there's a market for upscale family friendly cruise line?

[Seas the Day]

Jeff, Right on.I wonder which line I could take my grandchildren to (they are not here yet unfortunately, but soon I hope). The SS and SB with children would be out of question. They would be bored silly, too. But Disney.....? I wonder if there's a market for upscale family friendly cruise line?

 

I have heard Disney cruises are fabulous. I was walking around the top deck with a woman one morning, and she told me she goes on only two cruise lines. She and her husband go on Silversea when by themselves, and take their children and grandchildren on Disney. I've stayed at Disneyworld many times, and I have always been impressed over their attention to detail, and their ability to interest the parent in addition to the child.

[simonv]

I will check them out when the time comes.