Mexican Riviera Again????

[JHCB]

Does anyone know if there has been talk of bringing a ship back to LA or San Diego to resume Mexico itineraries?

 

I sure do miss those easy cruises...no hassle, no flying, etc...

[COMBOY]

Does anyone know if there has been talk of bringing a ship back to LA or San Diego to resume Mexico itineraries?

 

I sure do miss those easy cruises...no hassle, no flying, etc...

 

Although anything is possible I doubt if RCI will bring a ship back to the west coast anytime soon. They tried it and just wasn't that profitable. There was been lengthy past discussion about this here in Cruisecritic and even the CEO of RCI address the operational issues with west coast Mexican sailings. Carnival, Princess & HAL still offers Mexico cruises, but even these sailings are limited. Mazatlan was been dropped from most itineraries. There just isn't the demand to have huge capacity on the west coast. Here's an article about the subject:

 

http://www.cruisecritic.com/articles.cfm?ID=1175

[Ashland]

Does anyone know if there has been talk of bringing a ship back to LA or San Diego to resume Mexico itineraries?

 

I sure do miss those easy cruises...no hassle, no flying, etc...

Check under "North America Homeports" then find the thread "California Cruises" several of us have been talking about this subject...Enjoy our glimmer of hope :cool::)

[Northshorecruisers]

I am also a Mexican Riviera cruise lover. The first cruise we ever took and fell in love with Cabo & PV. I don't miss Mazatlan even though it was a fine day there. I also miss the beautiful city of San Diego as we would always spend 1-2 days before and after the cruise there.

 

HAL is still doing the cruises mixed in with trips to Hawaii, but on much smaller ships and the pricing for verandah or suites is high compared to when they did the trips with a Vista class ship. Plus, the ship they have doing it has had the aft pool (adult area) replaced by "The Retreat" and apparently due to the way they have placed things it is difficult to lay on a lounger and enjoy the sea passing by.

 

We may have to break down and pay the price to go back. I had just found it to be a great cruise.

[Let'sGo!]

I will second Northshorecruisers thoughts...

 

Catching a ship from California or Florida is a toss up for us -- we have to fly either way. But we just loved our Mexican Riviera cruise and I know we would totally do it again in a heartbeat.

 

We have so far been loyal to Royal (mostly because we've been trying to make diamond) but we will -- and have -- been looking at other lines to do this route again.

 

Ann

[StarSong]

I'd also love to see RCI return to cruising the Mexican Riviera. I wouldn't even leave the ship other than for Cabo, but it's so wonderfully convenient for those of us who live in So. Cal.

RCI is so much nicer than Carnival... sigh.

[RCKRZR]

You never know. Just look the Bayonne cruisers got their wish.

[foxesden1]

I can only wish.. until they come back we will be giving most of our travel dollars to Carnival Cruise.

[Atty]

Adam addressed it in his Ask Adam blog a month or two ago and said in no uncertain terms that they didn't make enough money and had no intention to come back

[RCKRZR]

It's back

 

Cruise ships are scheduled to return to Mazatlan this fall, tentatively ending a two-year absence prompted by violence in the region. Major players involved in the pull-out included Carnival, Disney, Norwegian Cruise Line, Holland America and Princess; of those, Norwegian and Holland America are returning this year. Norwegian Star will begin including Mazatlan on select Mexican Riviera sailings in November and December. Holland America also will return to the port, with calls resuming in November through at least early 2014. Princess also plans to return in 2014.

 

 

Maybe Royal is keeping eye on recent developments. You never know.

[PCWalton1]

Adam addressed it in his Ask Adam blog a month or two ago and said in no uncertain terms that they didn't make enough money and had no intention to come back

 

You may have embellished a bit, I didn't see any remark about not coming back. :rolleyes:

 

I am sorry to repeat this question you steadfastly refuse to answer, but here it goes again. Why does Royal Caribbean not sail the Mexican Riviera from Los Angeles anymore? – Graham M.

Graham, demand for this itinerary was not as strong as what we can achieve operating our ships in other markets.

Adam's blog link.

http://www.royalcaribbean.com/connect/blog/ask-adam-blog-series-january-2012-q-a/

[Ashland]

You may have embellished a bit, I didn't see any remark about not coming back. :rolleyes:

 

I am sorry to repeat this question you steadfastly refuse to answer, but here it goes again. Why does Royal Caribbean not sail the Mexican Riviera from Los Angeles anymore? – Graham M.

Graham, demand for this itinerary was not as strong as what we can achieve operating our ships in other markets.

Adam's blog link.

http://www.royalcaribbean.com/connect/blog/ask-adam-blog-series-january-2012-q-a/

Graham...the key word here in Adams statement is ("WAS")....Perhaps RCI should reconsider, that may have changed and give it a try..;)

Europe and Panama don't seem to strong either...sometimes a business plan needs to be altered.

[cruisnseas]

You never know. Just look the Bayonne cruisers got their wish.

 

To be frank, Bayonne got their wish because people sail out of Bayonne at decent fairs (even on a mid-aged ship) and spent money onboard. People sailed out of LA on incredibly cheap fares and spent almost no money onboard. Everyone says they will go, but no one did when the ship was there. Or, if they did, they didn't spend onboard.

[RCKRZR]

To be frank, Bayonne got their wish because people sail out of Bayonne at decent fairs (even on a mid-aged ship) and spent money onboard. People sailed out of LA on incredibly cheap fares and spent almost no money onboard. Everyone says they will go, but no one did when the ship was there. Or, if they did, they didn't spend onboard.

 

I have never heard RCI releasing any specific metrics of Onboard spending.

[Poorplaya]

I would love for RCCL to come back to the west coast. We live in AZ and it is so much cheaper to drive or fly to cali than Florida or anywhere else, hopefully something happens in our favor, i mean our first cruise with RCCL was out of LA and it the best cruise we've been on, very sad to see nothing has come back to us. :(

[LBumb]

did one on Mariner and loved it

[JustCruisin2012]

I have never heard RCI releasing any specific metrics of Onboard spending.

 

Agreed.

 

To be frank, Bayonne got their wish because people sail out of Bayonne at decent fairs (even on a mid-aged ship) and spent money onboard. People sailed out of LA on incredibly cheap fares and spent almost no money onboard. Everyone says they will go, but no one did when the ship was there. Or, if they did, they didn't spend onboard.

 

Cruisnseas, can you share your sources from which you make these statements? Yes, I'm skeptical of these claims and would appreciate some enlightening.

[Ashland]

To be frank, Bayonne got their wish because people sail out of Bayonne at decent fairs (even on a mid-aged ship) and spent money onboard. People sailed out of LA on incredibly cheap fares and spent almost no money onboard. Everyone says they will go, but no one did when the ship was there. Or, if they did, they didn't spend onboard.

"Cheap Fares"...Check the pricing on several other RCI sailings including some Europe & Panama etc.

 

And be very careful about making general assumptions about the spending habits of those you don't know.

 

The two factors at that time that influenced RCI to pull out of the west coast on Jan 18, 2011 were the economy which affected more than just us here on the west coast (from which we have recovered nicely thank you) and the violence in Mexico. The violence that is the world we live in today happens anywhere and RCI hasn't pulled ships from those ports.

 

Should RCI decide to rethink their business plan...Many agree they should.

[SherriZ366]

To be frank, Bayonne got their wish because people sail out of Bayonne at decent fairs (even on a mid-aged ship) and spent money onboard. People sailed out of LA on incredibly cheap fares and spent almost no money onboard. Everyone says they will go, but no one did when the ship was there. Or, if they did, they didn't spend onboard.

Californians begged and begged for a ship and did not support it at either the fare level or the onboard spending. That has been hashed out many times on this board. As the poster says, NY/NJ folks pay higher fares and spend money onboard so they get the newest ship in the fleet.

 

Californians gloated all over the threads dealing with Mariner leaving Port Canaveral and then did not support the ship. We have had FR there since 2009 and she sails full with folks spending money. RCI just opened 2015 Caribbean itineraries for sale and we still have Fr in Port C.

 

It was a costly maneuver for RCI to tranfer a ship from Florida to the East Coast so the number projections would have to be stellar for RCI to homeport a ship in California. They are probably not seeing that now. Basically, RCI puts ships where they make money.

[Piepkorn]

To be frank, Bayonne got their wish because people sail out of Bayonne at decent fairs (even on a mid-aged ship) and spent money onboard. People sailed out of LA on incredibly cheap fares and spent almost no money onboard. Everyone says they will go, but no one did when the ship was there. Or, if they did, they didn't spend onboard.

 

You sound like a RCCL corporate executive telling us why ships were pulled. Or how "it's just a short flight to the east coast" - yeah...2 days additional vacation time needed + airfare and hotel. Tell me....they said the same thing about Monarch, yet 6 months after redeploying to Florida, fares on every trip dropped by $100pp. And they stayed there. Mariner fares were generally higher than what Explorer is bringing - with a few exceptions, and Europe - just look at Navigator for summer 2013. When LA had 2 ships here, it was 3-4 cruises yearly.....since Mariner left (on RCCL) - 1. They put the ships where it (supposedly) will make the most money. Bayonne got the ship because RCCL wanted to put it there. Simple as that.

 

Californians begged and begged for a ship and did not support it at either the fare level or the onboard spending. That has been hashed out many times on this board. As the poster says, NY/NJ folks pay higher fares and spend money onboard so they get the newest ship in the fleet.

 

Californians gloated all over the threads dealing with Mariner leaving Port Canaveral and then did not support the ship. We have had FR there since 2009 and she sails full with folks spending money. RCI just opened 2015 Caribbean itineraries for sale and we still have Fr in Port C.

 

It was a costly maneuver for RCI to transfer a ship from Florida to the East Coast so the number projections would have to be stellar for RCI to homeport a ship in California. They are probably not seeing that now. Basically, RCI puts ships where they make money.

 

I take it you've never been on a cruise out of CA. Most of us didn't gloat - we were surprised to get such a new ship. We didn't beg for anything, except for a different itinerary. We didn't expect anything. Today - we just want something - ANYTHING, and most of us couldn't care less what it is. We don't care if its homeported here or not. Just run a few trips for a month (like Celebrity) and test the waters. Most of us like the brand, and what it represented. But that is all changing now. It is apparent RCCL does not want to serve the west coast, so I will be taking my business elsewhere. I really don't want to see another ship back here. Nor do I want to fly to Bayonne in the dead of winter for a caribbean cruise. Cancelled my 3 existing reservations and am looking at other lines, that can provide diverse ports of call, yet can provide for my local trips.

[RCKRZR]

Californians begged and begged for a ship and did not support it at either the fare level or the onboard spending. That has been hashed out many times on this board. As the poster says, NY/NJ folks pay higher fares and spend money onboard so they get the newest ship in the fleet.

 

Californians gloated all over the threads dealing with Mariner leaving Port Canaveral and then did not support the ship. We have had FR there since 2009 and she sails full with folks spending money. RCI just opened 2015 Caribbean itineraries for sale and we still have Fr in Port C.

 

It was a costly maneuver for RCI to tranfer a ship from Florida to the East Coast so the number projections would have to be stellar for RCI to homeport a ship in California. They are probably not seeing that now. Basically, RCI puts ships where they make money.

 

Californians did not beg for a ship we had 2 ships Vision and Monarch (RCI abandoned the 3 and 4 day market). They where both deployed to the Caribbean and Mariner was deployed to California.

 

This topic has been debated not hashed out! Still till this day no one has provided a financial statement proving low Onboard spending. Just look at the prices Navigator is demanding in Rome and also Mariners prices in Texas looked to be on par with the MR.

 

I would say Oasis and Allure fares are higher than the Explorers, Time will tell how Quantum does in NJ/Ny (congrats on the new ship) please send the Explorer to L.A. I promise I will adore her.

 

Cruiselines will take a loss to deploy a ship to a profitable market. Everybody will mention the Mariner loss repositioning to LA but I also recall the Radiance was just as bad if not worse on her around the horn trip in January of 2009. You could have also got Onboard Monarch in PC for 99 dollars for 4 nights during that period. I never seen that price for her when she was in LA!!

[critterchick]

Californians begged and begged for a ship and did not support it at either the fare level or the onboard spending. That has been hashed out many times on this board. As the poster says, NY/NJ folks pay higher fares and spend money onboard so they get the newest ship in the fleet.

 

Californians gloated all over the threads dealing with Mariner leaving Port Canaveral and then did not support the ship. We have had FR there since 2009 and she sails full with folks spending money. RCI just opened 2015 Caribbean itineraries for sale and we still have Fr in Port C.

 

It was a costly maneuver for RCI to tranfer a ship from Florida to the East Coast so the number projections would have to be stellar for RCI to homeport a ship in California. They are probably not seeing that now. Basically, RCI puts ships where they make money.

 

Or not. If I were willing to fly to a port more often, I would be paying quite a bit less to sail from Florida, Louisiana or Texas than I paid to sail from LA or San Diego.

 

Expressing pleasure at getting a new ship isn't gloating. Yes, ungracious people are everywhere, but I recall that most people who were happy to see Mariner come out here were just happy, not trying to rub anybody else's nose in it, rather like the people who are happy to see Quantum sailing from New Jersey.

 

It's true that many West Coast CCers wanted to see a newer and bigger ship than Vision or Monarch, but we already had two ships that I, for one, was quite happy with. RCI brought Mariner to LA and then poached her customers by putting Radiance in San Diego. We live 15 minutes from the port in LA but, as working professionals, we like to maximize our vacation time. We sailed on Radiance for 10 nights for the same number of vacation days as 7 on Mariner. Better ship, better itinerary, no brainer.

 

I will believe a bartender or Hotel Director onboard over a corporate bigwig any day. More than one bartender has told me that he makes less money on the cruises sailing from Florida, and more than one HD has said the same. Just sayin'.

 

I'm sure that RCI wasn't making as much money on the West Coast as they thought they could make elsewhere. The market was saturated, the economy was in the toilet and Mexico wasn't helping. They left the market, and Carnival and Princess have filled it.

 

We love RCI once we step onboard, but we're ok with sailing another line for convenience. If they come back, we're there, but if they don't, we'll manage just fine.:)

[travelgoddess1]

Or not. If I were willing to fly to a port more often, I would be paying quite a bit less to sail from Florida, Louisiana or Texas than I paid to sail from LA or San Diego.

 

Expressing pleasure at getting a new ship isn't gloating. Yes, ungracious people are everywhere, but I recall that most people who were happy to see Mariner come out here were just happy, not trying to rub anybody else's nose in it, rather like the people who are happy to see Quantum sailing from New Jersey.

 

It's true that many West Coast CCers wanted to see a newer and bigger ship than Vision or Monarch, but we already had two ships that I, for one, was quite happy with. RCI brought Mariner to LA and then poached her customers by putting Radiance in San Diego. We live 15 minutes from the port in LA but, as working professionals, we like to maximize our vacation time. We sailed on Radiance for 10 nights for the same number of vacation days as 7 on Mariner. Better ship, better itinerary, no brainer.

 

I will believe a bartender or Hotel Director onboard over a corporate bigwig any day. More than one bartender has told me that he makes less money on the cruises sailing from Florida, and more than one HD has said the same. Just sayin'.

 

I'm sure that RCI wasn't making as much money on the West Coast as they thought they could make elsewhere. The market was saturated, the economy was in the toilet and Mexico wasn't helping. They left the market, and Carnival and Princess have filled it.

 

We love RCI once we step onboard, but we're ok with sailing another line for convenience. If they come back, we're there, but if they don't, we'll manage just fine.:)

 

 

<< Like >>

[cruisnseas]

I have never heard RCI releasing any specific metrics of Onboard spending.

 

Agreed.

 

Cruisnseas, can you share your sources from which you make these statements? Yes, I'm skeptical of these claims and would appreciate some enlightening.

 

As my signature indicates, I formally worked for the line and was in several positions during the time that they moved Mariner to California (and again when she was removed) to be party to internal conversations. Beyond that, any employee at the time can tell you we were told in no uncertain terms that the ship would have stayed if people were spending more money onboard. Compared to other ships the onboard revenue was around 30% of what was needed.

 

Anything I have seen would have been internal documents that are proprietary. But rest assured, a ship that has very low fares can still stay in place IF onboard spending metrics are met. This did not happen in California.

[RCKRZR]

As my signature indicates, I formally worked for the line and was in several positions during the time that they moved Mariner to California (and again when she was removed) to be party to internal conversations. Beyond that, any employee at the time can tell you we were told in no uncertain terms that the ship would have stayed if people were spending more money onboard. Compared to other ships the onboard revenue was around 30% of what was needed.

 

Anything I have seen would have been internal documents that are proprietary. But rest assured, a ship that has very low fares can still stay in place IF onboard spending metrics are met. This did not happen in California.

 

Then answer this question for me that Adam still will not answer. How in the hell can there competitor meet Onboard metrics and Royal cannot?

 

I was on 4 sailing on the Mariner during her deployment in La and out of 13 cruises my highest Onboard bill was a 14day Panama cruise1800 the next one was Mariners in LA they averaged around 1200. For my family of four. My lowest was on Vision I just got off in December 10 night Caribbean 625.

 

I'm still skeptical because of a conversation (someone from Miami) I had on the Radiance Before her dry dock. Knowing what has happened in last 18 months RCI worst fears did not come to light!