Disgusted with RCL and Rhapsody Cabin changes!

[Gayle V]

. It will do absolutely no good to take out my frustrations on the crew, who had nothing to do with this mess. I will also not willingly create problems for the passengers that took my..

 

As far as our interactions with the people that got our corner aft... there will be none. .

 

For papakaiser and MysteryMe: I know you will behave with all the class you can muster, but if it were me I would want to talk with those people in "your" cabin. I mean, calmly and friendly. And find out whether or not Royal Caribbean really did call them. And if they did, IF they presented the truth of the situation.

 

In a pleasant and totally nonaccusatory tone:

 

"Hi, I'm John Doe. I have a question I need to ask you.. We are the people who were supposed to cruise in your cabin. We booked it xx month ago. Then Royal Caribbean bumped us out of it and resold it. They claim they asked the new occupants if they'd be willing to book elsewhere so they could restore our booking, but I strongly suspect that that call was never made? I'd really like to know if they were truthful with me."

 

They might be really nice people who would be appalled to find themselves in the situation of having unwittingly "taken" your cabin. Not that you would expect it to change anything, you could even assure them that you realize it was a mistake not of their doing. If you stay friendly about it all this could leave you as friends, and clear any undercurrents of bad feeling when you see them at their/your door.

 

On the other hand, IF they did know the whole story, and chose to keep a cabin, knowing it was unfairly offered them, then they deserve to feel uncomfortable about it. In that case, just say "Thanks for clearing that up. Have a nice cruise." And then walk away. And ignore them.

 

The ones that I think will be raising the stink on the ships are the passengers who find out once onboard their rooms have been moved without telling them..

 

MDSue, I think you are right, mostly because they will be so surprised, and will not have had time to get their feeling under control. It's going to hit them like a slap in the face. Of course they will get angry and try to fight the situation. The only people they will have to "fight" with will be the crew. It would be foolish to expect them to just smile and say "Oh, that's OK. Go ahead and give my cabin away." It's just not human to respond that way.

[MDSue]

 

MDSue, I think you are right, mostly because they will be so surprised, and will not have had time to get their feeling under control. It's going to hit them like a slap in the face. Of course they will get angry and try to fight the situation. The only people they will have to "fight" with will be the crew. It would be foolish to expect them to just smile and say "Oh, that's OK. Go ahead and give my cabin away." It's just not human to respond that way.

 

Hi Gayle, I cannot imagine how angry and betrayed I would feel if this were to happen to me. I honestly would not believe a reputable company that I had complete faith in would even consider such a move. It is one thing to have an unexpected maintenance problem with a room that would cause a room switch, but to sell it out from under you and then say "the room number is the same, so you are techincally getting what you paid for" is simply unacceptable and unbelievable.

 

Of course, I would not treat any of the crew members rudely because they are not to blame, but I would be at the pursers desk demanding answers, and I would be demanding restitution as well. The disappointment would be immeasurable and most likely would affect my decision to ever sail with RCI again.

 

I do hope the OP will come back and tell us that RCI came to their good business senses and restored the original customers to their rooms they bought in good faith. The secondary bookers should be told of the mistake and be moved-plain and simple. I'm sure they will be equally disappointed, but the room rightfully belongs to the people who booked it first.

 

Many years ago, I noticed that extra money kept showing up in my bank account. It would have been really nce to have kept the money and I admit I was a bit disappointed when the bank realized their mistake and took the money back (and restored to whoever it belonged too). However, the money was never mine and neither should these rooms be to the secondary bookers.

 

Between this issue and a few other recent issues I've read with customer service issues, I will hold off re-booking again for now. I've been on multplie cruises with both Carnival and Royal Caribbean. I am at the point where I'd like to choose one brand to cruise with so I can start getting frequent cruiser perks. I'm leaning towards the Carnival brand strictly due to how they treat their customers. My favorite all-time ship is a Royal Caribbean ship and I, personally, have never had a bad experience with either line.

 

I just believe that the OP was given "the Royal Shaft" in this case and it really upsets me.

[Loucat]

I cannot believe this. We had booked 1100 on Jewel and all of a sudden were notified we were moved to a JS midship. When I called and complained, they told me the cabin was given to another person and I could not have it back. After much discontent, we were moved to a Grand Suite. It did not matter though, as we love 1100 and have booked it as soon as sailings open. We now have a "no cabin change" on our reservation, but I am not sure that would matter. I never did figure out what happened. We have 1100 booked for this fall, having booked it last year. I am concerned they will move us and if they do, they can keep their company as they have no business ethics.

[CassCruise]

I cannot believe this. We had booked 1100 on Jewel and all of a sudden were notified we were moved to a JS midship. When I called and complained, they told me the cabin was given to another person and I could not have it back. After much discontent, we were moved to a Grand Suite. It did not matter though, as we love 1100 and have booked it as soon as sailings open. We now have a "no cabin change" on our reservation, but I am not sure that would matter.

You're lucky when we had a similar incident in 2009 we were given nothing when they took away our corner aft balcony they gave us an "upgrade" a midship JS (we had booked months and months before with my sister whose cabin was the closest inside to our - deliberately and with our bookings linked - then with no consultation no apology no nothing, and having finally managed to have my sister being relocated near us after much arguing from us - we then got used to the idea and had our booking marked no upgrade/move etc etc after being told there was no way possible of getting our cabin back - low and behold and again with no communication we suddenly noticed we had our old cabin back and yet again more phone calls etc etc and after much time and effort (which I shouldn't of had to expend!) my sister was reallocated her cabin - then we get to port and they try and put the person who was subsequently given our our cabin IN WITH US - what a nightmare - again no apology, no obc nothing we did speak to the purser's desk (on a different topic which led to a discussion about our booking saga) she vowed to get to the bottom of it - and towards the end of the cruise her only comment with an apologetic shake of her head was she had no idea what had happened she tried but to no avail - she said it was a complete mystery!

 

We wrote a letter to RCCL head office - to which we got no response ever, I then rang RCCL her in Aus to which I eventually received a small OBC for a future cruise from a most unhelpful person - I think they missed the part where I simply wanted an apology foremost and some type of explanation for closure and certainty of future bookings this would not happen again. We then booked this latest cruise and whilst we were lucky in keeping our cabin - what has happened to others has proved extremely unsettling to me and I very much doubt, with the exception of a great bargain, whether we would book them again - certainly not cruiseline of choice.....

[Guest intercruise]

Some people on this board have tried to explain RCL’s incomprehensible actions regarding this mess as a “business decision”, or claimed that the incident shows that all RCL cares about is money and they do not care about customer service and the customers that have been hugely inconvenienced by this move. These are both common reactions when businesses do things consumers do not like, but they are wrong.

 

There is no such thing as a “business decision” – there are “smart business decisions” and “dumb business decisions”. Smart business decisions ultimately increase the profitability and value of a company, and dumb business decisions reduce profitability and value. The people who characterize this as a “business decision” are really saying that it is a “smart business decision”. They are wrong. This was, and still is, a “dumb business decision” by RCL, and it rightly leads people to wonder about what other dumb decisions RCL will make in the future and how that might negatively affect their future cruise vacations. The negative impact on RCL’s brand from this is obvious, even though putting a value on that negative impact is very difficult.

 

Let’s look at this strictly from RCL’s point of view. Based on reported remarks by their customer service reps, their decision to not switch the rooms back to the original reservations has justified by the claim that “there are not that many people affected by this anyway.” Technically they are right, the people who are DIRECTLY affected and really upset are the ones that had corner aft suites that were moved. I have not seen any exact numbers on this in this thread, but there are maybe 50-100 people (I think). RCL probably made a quick decision that it was legally easier to go with the “we are honoring the room number choice that you made” line of reasoning rather than move the people who made the new reservations, and that any fallout from upset customers would be relatively limited. I am not a lawyer and I have not read through the fine print in the contracts (I have not sailed with RCL before), so I do not know what the rights and obligations are around this (and I am a little surprised that none of the posters here are lawyers that could offer an informed opinion on this issue), but the legal aspect is only the first step here and ultimately has little bearing on what the “smart” and “stupid” business decisions in this case are. Let’s assume that RCL decided for legal reasons that the second reservations were in a stronger “legal” position to get those rooms due to room number reasons, even though common sense and fairness would result in the original reservations being honored. Fine, second reservations get the rooms, but RCI should have realized how upset their original reservation holders would be and done enough to at least keep this from becoming a PR disaster for them. The $200 OBC offer has rightly (and universally) been called a joke, insult, slap in the face, etc. It has only made this PR problem worse for them.

 

What would have been enough to keep this from exploding the way it has? First step should have been to offer the second group of reservations a more attractive reason to move - $500 OBC and a discount on a future reservation would probably have enticed at least some of them to move. For people who still did not get their rooms back, a sincere apology (not an insulting “we are honoring your original reservation, you have the same room number” that only makes people more upset), $500 OBC and a bigger discount on a future cruise would probably have done enough to prevent this from becoming the PR disaster that it has become. Sure, many if not all of the original customers that did not get their rooms back would still be upset that they did not get the corner aft view that they had booked so far in advance to secure, but outside observers (like me) would not have been so appalled by RCL’s response, and RCL’s reputation would not have taken the hit that it has.

 

And ultimately, the reputational damage almost certainly has impacted the value of RCL much more negatively than the cost of providing OBC and a future cruise discount would have. Remember, we are talking about 50-100 reservations (maybe less) affected by this. Even if it is 100, then the cost to RCL would have been relatively low. Let’s assume generously that $500 OBC costs RCL $300 (that is most likely too high, but for these purposes it is fine) due to wholesale costs, etc. So 100 reservations take $300 value away from RCI - $30,000. For the discount on future cruises, let’s say those end up being worth $1000 each (again, that is probably a little high), so $100,000 lost revenue to RCL. So in total, remuneration would probably have cost no more than $130,000, and likely much less.

 

Has RCL’s business value taken a hit of greater than $130,000 from this episode? It looks pretty obvious that it has. And every day that goes by with RCL digging in their heels and refusing to do anything more about this costs them even more in reputation and future bookings, not to mention the risk that this gets publicized in more places. I only learned about this mess two days ago while browsing through the CC message board. Like nearly everyone else on the board, I was surprised by RCL’s original incompetence that brought this situation about, but have been shocked by their response since then and their total disdain not only for their customers directly affected by this, but in how this is being viewed by potential future customers. It makes me wonder about what their response would be to any problems we might have with them in the future, and makes me much less likely to cruise with them.

 

We are booking a cruise for next summer and had pretty much settled on a Celebrity cruise. After reading about this situation, we are going to book both that Celebrity cruise and a similar one on Princess. We were looking forward to trying out Celebrity, and the Princess cruise is more expensive by about 30% (it is a few days longer), but I really do not want to support a company that behaves like this. I will wait to see how this situation is resolved, but if RCL does not make this right, then we will take the more expensive Princess cruise instead of the (still expensive - $9,000) Celebrity cruise. Of course our booking is irrelevant to their overall business, but clearly a number of other people are also not going to sail with RCL in the future based on this episode. There will definitely be a revenue hit of some sort, not to mention the cost in time for their employees who have to deal with this continuing mess. It is also worth comparing RCL’s response here to Princess’ recent response to customer dissatisfaction over changes to balcony furniture. Princess’ furniture change (smaller table, different chairs) was very poorly received and the CC board was filled with customer complaints and requests for Princess to reverse the change. Well, after a few weeks of this, Princess did indeed announce they were changing the furniture in response to customer feedback. Will this change cost them money? Of course it will. But they clearly made the decision that it was worth it to keep their customers happy and help keep future booking demand.

 

And to those who wrote “they will sell the rooms anyway, they don’t care if you cancel” – that is simply incorrect on so many levels. Businesses (in this case, more likely the management team) that treat their customers with contempt do not survive unless they are in a pure “lowest cost/highest volume wins” environment. I doubt that is what RCL management wants. And comparing cruise lines with airlines makes no sense either. Almost nobody flies these days because they enjoy the experience that the airlines deliver, they fly because they need to get from point A to B. People cruise because they enjoy the experience. If the cruise lines stop delivering that, there are countless other holiday choices that people can and will make instead. If cruise lines (apart from mass market low cost lines) adopt airlines attitudes, then demand for their product and future profitability will be severely threatened.

 

Bottom line, RCL did not make a “business decision”, they made a “dumb business decision”, and their continued lack of any reasonable response costs them more in reputational damage and lost bookings every day.

[BecciBoo]

What they are doing now...........I don't have a word that would fit the English Dictionary.......except that I'm flabergasted!

 

Rick

 

Exactamondo! This and the other debacle concerning Port Canavral and tobacco smuggling is why I have serious concerns about how RCCL handles customer satisfaction. Both incidents just flabergast me too! But at least on this thread people have been civil to each other no matter where they stand.:)

[dz9yvr]

Here's the reason for RCCL's decision not to move the "second group" or to contact them and ask them to move. RCCL made a mistake and they know it. All of the "first group" or reservations are upset (or will be when everyone discover the problem) and even if RCCL put every back into the original cabin you will still be upset. By contacting the "second group" all RCCL will accomplish will be to upset a second group of passengers. That makes no sense from a business decision. It doesn't matter if is fair, upseting more passngers doesn't help RCCL. I agree with RCCL's business decision on this issue, it's the only thing that makes sense.

[marci22]

Here's the reason for RCCL's decision not to move the "second group" or to contact them and ask them to move. RCCL made a mistake and they know it. All of the "first group" or reservations are upset (or will be when everyone discover the problem) and even if RCCL put every back into the original cabin you will still be upset. By contacting the "second group" all RCCL will accomplish will be to upset a second group of passengers. That makes no sense from a business decision. It doesn't matter if is fair, upseting more passngers doesn't help RCCL.

 

I agree with this part. I still think they should have changed the original bookers back though, from a customer service point of view. In that respect, it was a very bad business decision.

[MDSue]

Here's the reason for RCCL's decision not to move the "second group" or to contact them and ask them to move. RCCL made a mistake and they know it. All of the "first group" or reservations are upset (or will be when everyone discover the problem) and even if RCCL put every back into the original cabin you will still be upset. By contacting the "second group" all RCCL will accomplish will be to upset a second group of passengers. That makes no sense from a business decision. It doesn't matter if is fair, upseting more passngers doesn't help RCCL. I agree with RCCL's business decision on this issue, it's the only thing that makes sense.

Actually, I disagree with this logic (of course, I'm only offering my own opinion). I recently sailed on the Caribbean Princess which suffered a mechanical breakdown 2 1/2 weeks before my sail date. The people onboard the affected cruise did not get to the islands as scheduled, but in return recieved an entire's week vacation for free and 25% off a future cruise. Princess went out of their way to make the best out of a bad situation. Unfortunately, the next two cruises had to be cancelled and some people were already in flight or in San Juan when the cancellations were announced, Some cruisers were out quite a bit of money for a vacation that they now could not take. For the most part, I believe the people at Princess tried to do right by every affected cruiser. Since everyone was affected differently, there was no one size fit all remedy.

Our group was the first sailing since the breakdown and I was quite worried the repairs would not be done and we would be out of a long awaited cruise. Luckily, the repairs were done on time and I had a wonderful cruise.

So how did I repay Princess? I kept a live blog of my trip which received over 30,000 views which for Princess was free positive advertisement for their brand. Had Princess treated me like RCI treated the OP, I would have done the same as the OP and voiced my dissatisfaction on this board, Facebook, and whatever other social media would listen. Her story has generated considerable negative attention to the brand.

So RCI executives may not realize the power of social media, but to me, it is obvious that the problem they have created by treating their customers poorly has reached many more people than the few dozen passengers that these changes have.

1. If RCI had immediately resolved the problem with the OP, this thread would not exist and tens of thousands of customers would never have known about this customer service issue.

2. If RCI had immediately recitifed the issue after the situation started drawing thousands of hits on this board, the OP would have come back and posted the positive outcome (just as I did with the Princess issue).

3. RCI, by refusing to address the problem, is generating long-term negative press of which they will never know how many lost sales they have received as a result.

4. People are forgiving. If mistakes are made, the business recognizes the mistake and takes steps to rectify them, the passengers will come back instead of taking their business elsewhere.

 

This is the third story in recent months that has made me think that RCI does not values their customers. It has influenced my opinion of them which previously was in very high regard. I know RCI offers an excellent product, but they have to offer excellent customer service as well.

 

I think they have handled this case miserably.

[TheMiz]

So RCI executives may not realize the power of social media, but to me, it is obvious that the problem they have created by treating their customers poorly has reached many more people than the few dozen passengers that these changes have.

1. If RCI had immediately resolved the problem with the OP, this thread would not exist and tens of thousands of customers would never have known about this customer service issue.

2. If RCI had immediately recitifed the issue after the situation started drawing thousands of hits on this board, the OP would have come back and posted the positive outcome (just as I did with the Princess issue).

3. RCI, by refusing to address the problem, is generating long-term negative press of which they will never know how many lost sales they have received as a result.

4. People are forgiving. If mistakes are made, the business recognizes the mistake and takes steps to rectify them, the passengers will come back instead of taking their business elsewhere.

 

This is the third story in recent months that has made me think that RCI does not values their customers. It has influenced my opinion of them which previously was in very high regard. I know RCI offers an excellent product, but they have to offer excellent customer service as well.

 

I think they have handled this case miserably.

 

 

What are the other two problems if I may ask?

 

I was on the Explorer in January that had a medical emergency on board giving us an extra day at sea, many of us who pre paid tips to conceder the extra day which was not a problem we were also told we would be getting the extra days credit as sailed for our C&A points, of course that never happened and RCL official statement was we shouldn't have been told that by the loyality dept etc , some were mad as they lost air fares etc and were given $200 obc on any up coming cruise.

 

I wasn't sure if this was one of the problems that you mentioned.

[FLACRUISER99]

Here's the reason for RCCL's decision not to move the "second group" or to contact them and ask them to move. RCCL made a mistake and they know it. All of the "first group" or reservations are upset (or will be when everyone discover the problem) and even if RCCL put every back into the original cabin you will still be upset. By contacting the "second group" all RCCL will accomplish will be to upset a second group of passengers. That makes no sense from a business decision. It doesn't matter if is fair, upseting more passngers doesn't help RCCL. I agree with RCCL's business decision on this issue, it's the only thing that makes sense.

Maybe if they offered a lot more then the $200 Cabin credit(Like a free cruise) no one would be to upset!

[jetta8300]

Some people on this board have tried to explain RCL’s incomprehensible actions regarding this mess as a “business decision”, or claimed that the incident shows that all RCL cares about is money and they do not care about customer service and the customers that have been hugely inconvenienced by this move. These are both common reactions when businesses do things consumers do not like, but they are wrong.

 

There is no such thing as a “business decision” – there are “smart business decisions” and “dumb business decisions”. Smart business decisions ultimately increase the profitability and value of a company, and dumb business decisions reduce profitability and value. The people who characterize this as a “business decision” are really saying that it is a “smart business decision”. They are wrong. This was, and still is, a “dumb business decision” by RCL, and it rightly leads people to wonder about what other dumb decisions RCL will make in the future and how that might negatively affect their future cruise vacations. The negative impact on RCL’s brand from this is obvious, even though putting a value on that negative impact is very difficult.

 

Let’s look at this strictly from RCL’s point of view. Based on reported remarks by their customer service reps, their decision to not switch the rooms back to the original reservations has justified by the claim that “there are not that many people affected by this anyway.” Technically they are right, the people who are DIRECTLY affected and really upset are the ones that had corner aft suites that were moved. I have not seen any exact numbers on this in this thread, but there are maybe 50-100 people (I think). RCL probably made a quick decision that it was legally easier to go with the “we are honoring the room number choice that you made” line of reasoning rather than move the people who made the new reservations, and that any fallout from upset customers would be relatively limited. I am not a lawyer and I have not read through the fine print in the contracts (I have not sailed with RCL before), so I do not know what the rights and obligations are around this (and I am a little surprised that none of the posters here are lawyers that could offer an informed opinion on this issue), but the legal aspect is only the first step here and ultimately has little bearing on what the “smart” and “stupid” business decisions in this case are. Let’s assume that RCL decided for legal reasons that the second reservations were in a stronger “legal” position to get those rooms due to room number reasons, even though common sense and fairness would result in the original reservations being honored. Fine, second reservations get the rooms, but RCI should have realized how upset their original reservation holders would be and done enough to at least keep this from becoming a PR disaster for them. The $200 OBC offer has rightly (and universally) been called a joke, insult, slap in the face, etc. It has only made this PR problem worse for them.

 

What would have been enough to keep this from exploding the way it has? First step should have been to offer the second group of reservations a more attractive reason to move - $500 OBC and a discount on a future reservation would probably have enticed at least some of them to move. For people who still did not get their rooms back, a sincere apology (not an insulting “we are honoring your original reservation, you have the same room number” that only makes people more upset), $500 OBC and a bigger discount on a future cruise would probably have done enough to prevent this from becoming the PR disaster that it has become. Sure, many if not all of the original customers that did not get their rooms back would still be upset that they did not get the corner aft view that they had booked so far in advance to secure, but outside observers (like me) would not have been so appalled by RCL’s response, and RCL’s reputation would not have taken the hit that it has.

 

And ultimately, the reputational damage almost certainly has impacted the value of RCL much more negatively than the cost of providing OBC and a future cruise discount would have. Remember, we are talking about 50-100 reservations (maybe less) affected by this. Even if it is 100, then the cost to RCL would have been relatively low. Let’s assume generously that $500 OBC costs RCL $300 (that is most likely too high, but for these purposes it is fine) due to wholesale costs, etc. So 100 reservations take $300 value away from RCI - $30,000. For the discount on future cruises, let’s say those end up being worth $1000 each (again, that is probably a little high), so $100,000 lost revenue to RCL. So in total, remuneration would probably have cost no more than $130,000, and likely much less.

 

Has RCL’s business value taken a hit of greater than $130,000 from this episode? It looks pretty obvious that it has. And every day that goes by with RCL digging in their heels and refusing to do anything more about this costs them even more in reputation and future bookings, not to mention the risk that this gets publicized in more places. I only learned about this mess two days ago while browsing through the CC message board. Like nearly everyone else on the board, I was surprised by RCL’s original incompetence that brought this situation about, but have been shocked by their response since then and their total disdain not only for their customers directly affected by this, but in how this is being viewed by potential future customers. It makes me wonder about what their response would be to any problems we might have with them in the future, and makes me much less likely to cruise with them.

 

We are booking a cruise for next summer and had pretty much settled on a Celebrity cruise. After reading about this situation, we are going to book both that Celebrity cruise and a similar one on Princess. We were looking forward to trying out Celebrity, and the Princess cruise is more expensive by about 30% (it is a few days longer), but I really do not want to support a company that behaves like this. I will wait to see how this situation is resolved, but if RCL does not make this right, then we will take the more expensive Princess cruise instead of the (still expensive - $9,000) Celebrity cruise. Of course our booking is irrelevant to their overall business, but clearly a number of other people are also not going to sail with RCL in the future based on this episode. There will definitely be a revenue hit of some sort, not to mention the cost in time for their employees who have to deal with this continuing mess. It is also worth comparing RCL’s response here to Princess’ recent response to customer dissatisfaction over changes to balcony furniture. Princess’ furniture change (smaller table, different chairs) was very poorly received and the CC board was filled with customer complaints and requests for Princess to reverse the change. Well, after a few weeks of this, Princess did indeed announce they were changing the furniture in response to customer feedback. Will this change cost them money? Of course it will. But they clearly made the decision that it was worth it to keep their customers happy and help keep future booking demand.

 

And to those who wrote “they will sell the rooms anyway, they don’t care if you cancel” – that is simply incorrect on so many levels. Businesses (in this case, more likely the management team) that treat their customers with contempt do not survive unless they are in a pure “lowest cost/highest volume wins” environment. I doubt that is what RCL management wants. And comparing cruise lines with airlines makes no sense either. Almost nobody flies these days because they enjoy the experience that the airlines deliver, they fly because they need to get from point A to B. People cruise because they enjoy the experience. If the cruise lines stop delivering that, there are countless other holiday choices that people can and will make instead. If cruise lines (apart from mass market low cost lines) adopt airlines attitudes, then demand for their product and future profitability will be severely threatened.

 

Bottom line, RCL did not make a “business decision”, they made a “dumb business decision”, and their continued lack of any reasonable response costs them more in reputational damage and lost bookings every day.

 

I know a lot of people are considering other cruise lines after reading about this (myself included), however isn't Celebrity Also owned by RCI???:(:confused::(

[LucysCruise]

What a different outcome this post would have seen, had things been handled differently. Say it starts out, something like this:

 

1) I'm so angry with RC. I was one of the lucky ones that was able to book an aft cabin on Rhapsody at the last minute. Imagine my total disapointment when I get a phone call from their CSR telling me that they made a mistake. That the cabins were previously booked, prior the to remodel and re-numbering. And she offered us a lousy $200 OBC and told me we were being moved to another cabin, portside. This is so unfair of RC.

 

2) I'm sure you're extremely disapointed. But the cabin wasn't really yours. Could you imagine the disapointment the first customer would have felt, having made their reservations 1-2 years earlier only to find out that, because RC made a mistake; they let a new booking keep it? I'm sorry your good luck ran out, but at least you have $200 OBC to help cheer you up.

 

1) But it isn't fair. RC made the mistake, not me. They booked me in that Aft. cabin and that's where I should be.

 

3) You don't get it, do you? It was a mistake, mistakes happen. But they can't give the one cabin to two different groups. The first booking was there first, by a good year or two; and they are entitled to keep it. RC tried to be fair by giving you a simular cabin and $200. And, if RC hadn't made a mistake....you're now probably in the same cabin you would have booked in the beginning. Only now you're $200 ahead.

 

1) That doesn't make it right. They gave me that cabin and I want what was promissed.

 

4) You're just being unreasonable. It is too bad that a mistake was made, but RC did the right thing to try to fix it. Get over it.

 

5) #4, I agree. I was one of the lucky-second bookings and received the same phone call and was moved too, with the $200 OBC. And, in the back of my mind; I already knew it. An Aft. cabin being available this close to our sail date. I knew that it was too good to be true. Anyway, now I have $200 to spend that I didn't have before.

 

Had this have happened me, I would have been very disapointed too. But the majority of people do understand. And they would have continued to have respect and support for RC.

 

I am so amazed. Not only by the number of people who do understand the right and wrong way to correct an unfortunate mistake....but just look at all of the "Loyal to Royal" customers that are turning their backs on them. Not because they made a very dumb mistake. But because they made a "DUMB BUSINESS DECISION" on chosing the worst possible solution to fix it and to then throw fuel on the fire by ignoring their "Loyal" customers outcry's to make this right again.

 

Loyalty goes both ways. If RC can't be loyal to their customers, they lose the "Loyal to Royal" award. To see so many Diamond, D+ customers ready to walk (cruise) away is so amazing. Most of us posters were not affected, directly; by the cabin number changes. But all of us see that we are greatly affected in our faith in RC. The actions taken by RC enlightens the rest of us as to where we stand in their eyes. A number that can easily be replaced. Or, can it? There are a lot of fish in the sea.

[MDSue]

What are the other two problems if I may ask?

 

I was on the Explorer in January that had a medical emergency on board giving us an extra day at sea, many of us who pre paid tips to conceder the extra day which was not a problem we were also told we would be getting the extra days credit as sailed for our C&A points, of course that never happened and RCL official statement was we shouldn't have been told that by the loyality dept etc , some were mad as they lost air fares etc and were given $200 obc on any up coming cruise.

 

I wasn't sure if this was one of the problems that you mentioned.

 

Hi, The other issues that concerned me was the handling of an early departure in San Juan due to an impending hurricane. Some cruisers missed the ship because it departed early. The other cruise ships in port (owned by Carnival) also left early. Royal Caribbeans response to the customers that missed the ship was basically too bad, so sad and Carnival reimbursed their cruisers the extra expense of missing the departure and helped them get to the next port.

 

The other issue is the heavily discussed other issue going on right now about the couple who was denied boarding because security found tobacco in a baggie and thought it was illegal drugs. Even after they were cleared by the police, they were still not allowed to sail. I haven't passed judgment on them for that situation alone, but the handling of customers in San Juan left a bad taste and combined with this issue makes me believe that Royal Caribbean needs some serious customer service revamping.

 

I have sailed with RCI twice and have had wonderful experiences on both occasions, but I want them to do the right thing here. I feel like they have cheated their customers out of what they rightfully booked and paid for and I find it disturbing that they refuse to recognize and rectify their error.

[satxdiver]

I know a lot of people are considering other cruise lines after reading about this (myself included), however isn't Celebrity Also owned by RCI???:(:confused::(

 

Yes, Celebrity is part of RCI. As for this fiasco, a paltry $200 OBC for taking away a desired cabin is a mockery. If this happened to me, I would cancel and book on another cruise line never to return to RCI. This is absolutely the peak of RCI's arrogance towards their customers. May they reap their just reward. At least we all know now where we stand with them.

[rubrrick]

I know a lot of people are considering other cruise lines after reading about this (myself included), however isn't Celebrity Also owned by RCI???:(:confused::(

 

 

Celebrity is run by a different President, who is an honest and decent man, unlike the bald headed fellow that's the President of Royal Caribbean, who can't count, can't apologize, and many times can't seem to get much right.....except to care for the bottom line, no matter what it costs in customer care.

 

And because of the costs of cruising being lower than most forms of vacation, he does not care, as there are more first timers cruising, and spending money, and when they get tired of being jerked around, many head for Celebrity......and it keeps the stockholders happy, and it keeps Mr. baldys bottom line great.......with all of the newcomers.

 

Someday this will backfire, but by then he can retire, has a great golden parachute....and will continue to thumb his nose.

 

Then it will be up to someone new, to rebuild a company that has been riddled with problems that stem from, just lately, the Rhapsody fiasco, the Ft. Lauderdale burp, and other items that stem from customer service, set up by the President!:eek:

 

Rick

[critterchick]

Technically they are right, the people who are DIRECTLY affected and really upset are the ones that had corner aft suites that were moved. I have not seen any exact numbers on this in this thread, but there are maybe 50-100 people (I think).

 

I agree with the rest of your excellent post, but wanted to note that all of the people booked on the stern of the ship on Deck 8 (5 JS cabins) were relocated to less-desirable cabins along the sides of the ship. A few of the people who were booked in the corner cabins got them back (us included), but those whose cruises are this summer and fall either got other aft cabins or side cabins. So it's more like 250-500 people affected. Barely enough to fill a lifeboat on Oasis, but enough to keep this thread alive.

 

And there were other passengers relocated to something they didn't book - every cabin on the portside and all of the cabins aft of the Centrum were re-numbered. Many of those changes are inconsequential, but there is at least one accessible cabin that was renumbered - what happens if somebody in a wheelchair arrives onboard only to find that s/he can't wheel through the cabin door? Less critically, some have been moved to connecting cabins. Somebody reported that s/he was on Deck 3 and moved to a porthole instead of a window. All because somebody at RCI couldn't be bothered to ensure that locations weren't changed, AS PROMISED BY THE DIAMOND PLUS REPRESENTATIVES I spoke with several times.

 

Exactamondo! This and the other debacle concerning Port Canavral and tobacco smuggling is why I have serious concerns about how RCCL handles customer satisfaction. Both incidents just flabergast me too! But at least on this thread people have been civil to each other no matter where they stand.:)

 

We all seem to agree that it was a massive failure on RCI's part, so there's not much to squabble about.:)

 

Here's the reason for RCCL's decision not to move the "second group" or to contact them and ask them to move. RCCL made a mistake and they know it. All of the "first group" or reservations are upset (or will be when everyone discover the problem) and even if RCCL put every back into the original cabin you will still be upset. By contacting the "second group" all RCCL will accomplish will be to upset a second group of passengers. That makes no sense from a business decision. It doesn't matter if is fair, upseting more passngers doesn't help RCCL. I agree with RCCL's business decision on this issue, it's the only thing that makes sense.

 

Why would people still be upset if they got their original cabins back? We might say, "wow, somebody really messed up, but thank goodness the company has our backs and made it right," but I have a hard time believing that people would be complaining to CC, BBB and the FL AG if RCI made them whole again.

 

Look at the flip side - you're the second person to book (and you've held the cabin for less than 3 weeks, since that's about the time that the new numbers popped up as available for booking), and RCI calls you up to say, "We are sorry to tell you that we cannot confirm your choice of cabin. We understand that your vacation time is precious to you. Therefore, as a gesture of goodwill, please accept our apology and $xxx onboard credit to enjoy during your cruise. If you prefer to cancel, you may do so without penalty, and we will credit you with $xxx toward a future cruise. In addition, we will reimburse you for the cost of changing any nonrefundable airline or hotel arrangements, subject to documentation of those expenses." Yes, some people will flip out and post here, FB and wherever else that RCI is a bunch of incompetent idiots. But I bet that more would say, "OK, $xxx is a good sum of money and I guess that if I were in the first booker's position, I'd be really pi$$ed off, so it's good to know that RCI looks out for their customers."

 

So I must civilly disagree with your conclusion that RCI's "solution" is the only one that makes sense.

[Pushka]

It seems that there have been 3 rather nasty PR incidents by RCL in the past six months (hurricane, tobacco and the cabins).

 

The tobacco thread has now been locked, but it seems that there are some who think that these are "isolated" incidents and they are not deterred in the least from cruising with RCL. And they say they are "banging their heads against brick walls" when they come across people who say that these incidents are becoming more than just a "once off" and they will therefore reconsider cruising with RCL.

 

Just because some people have enjoyable holidays on RCL, does not mean that others have had quite the opposite experience. The reputation of any business is not based on the good times, but how they handle the bad issues. And seriously, to those who banged their heads on the wall, don't bother, I got your argument but you did not get mine.

 

At least we can be prepared in future for the customer to not be in the right!

[Guest intercruise]

I know a lot of people are considering other cruise lines after reading about this (myself included), however isn't Celebrity Also owned by RCI???:(:confused::(

 

Yes, Celebrity is owned by RCI. That is why I wrote that while we are planning to cruise Celebrity next summer, if RCI does not make this mess (which does not impact us directly) better, then we are going to cancel that cruise and take a similiar one on Princess instead. While I understand that Celebrity seems better managed and more consumer friendly than RCL, and we are unlikely to experience similiar problems on Celebrity, ultimately both RCL and Celebrity report to RCI.

 

A good comparison example might be: Assume that Ford did something that really upset you. If you were about to buy a Lincoln, you might decide to buy a Cadillac instead.

[The_Big_M]

Here's the reason for RCCL's decision not to move the "second group" or to contact them and ask them to move. RCCL made a mistake and they know it. All of the "first group" or reservations are upset (or will be when everyone discover the problem) and even if RCCL put every back into the original cabin you will still be upset. .

 

Like others I disagree with the above, but also because of the first part of your statement. Why would people who were put back be upset? Some who have participated in this thread may understandably be because of the time and energy it may have taken. But on the whole I would expect very few - let alone all - of the first group would be upset at staying in the cabin they had booked.

[marci22]

So I must civilly disagree with your conclusion that RCI's "solution" is the only one that makes sense.

 

Well it must make sense -to them-, or they wouldn't have attempted that route.

 

I -do- understand how they might think that by going this route, they are only annoying one group of people, rather than two groups. In their view, they are limiting their damages by keeping the mixup consequences confined to the initial bookers.

 

No, it isn't right, no, we wouldn't do that, but Adam seems to think it's the best solution.

[TheMiz]

It seems that there have been 3 rather nasty PR incidents by RCL in the past six months (hurricane, tobacco and the cabins).

 

The tobacco thread has now been locked, but it seems that there are some who think that these are "isolated" incidents and they are not deterred in the least from cruising with RCL.

 

 

Locked really ?

 

Why would that get locked?

[FLACRUISER99]

Locked really ?

 

Why would that get locked?

1351 posts - large threads seem to slow CC down.

[TheMiz]

1351 posts - large threads seem to slow CC down.

 

 

Gee, we are at 10,190 post on a Jewel thead.

[papakaiser]

Speaking strictly for myself, had RCI returned us to the original cabin location that we booked when they were contacted, that would have been the end for me. I would not have thought that I was entitled to an onboard credit, or any other compensation at that point. IF that had happened, I would have been a happy camper.

 

I realize there are others that look for any excuse to squeeze a few bucks out of a simple mistake. I don't. But that window closed 2 months ago, when this stopped being a simple mistake. Instead of taking care of those affected, RCI dug in their heels, and refused the opportunity to show that they did in fact care about their guests.

 

Had RCI taken care of me 2 months ago, I would have had no reason to write to anyone, complain to anyone, or cause RCI any grief whatsoever. Would the second bookers have been upset ? Of course they would. But how many would have agreed with their argument that they were rightfully entitled to that cabin ?

 

Not nearly as many as have voiced their displeasure at what actually took place.