With all the recent changes of RCI ships - how do you feel now?

[nolesrule]

The real message from this poll is that participants share many of the same feelings as those being expressed in the other communication channels, and RCI can't just poo-poo blowing off the feedback (unless they want to encourage defections to competitors).

 

If you have any experience in PR or communications in general, you'd know this was tempest in a teapot stuff and that it will eventually blow over and be forgotten about.

 

Sometimes you have to sacrifice a few customers who are resistant to change in order to grow your business. It's not a new concept.

[CruisingMachine]

Only 4 of the 6 options are anti-RC. Can't you provide more anti-RC options, maybe like 18 of 20 could be anti-RC. :rolleyes:

[nolesrule]

Only 4 of the 6 options are anti-RC. Can't you provide more anti-RC options, maybe like 18 of 20 could be anti-RC. :rolleyes:

 

Oh, yeah. Add that as #4 to my list of reasons why you can't rely on these results in any meaningful way. the choices. 1 pro RCI, 1 neutral RCI, 4 negative RCI. Doesn't make for an even distribution.

[negc]

That is true, but we also must consider that there are probably a lot of votes on the positive side simply because this is an RCI message board.

 

Which only goes to demonstrate the lack of any value to such non-scientifically constructed polls. Polls which reflect the biases of the person or persons constructing them can not be taken seriously as they rarely, if ever, prove a thing.:)

[CRUISEFAN0001]

If you have any experience in PR or communications in general, you'd know this was tempest in a teapot stuff and that it will eventually blow over and be forgotten about.

 

Sometimes you have to sacrifice a few customers who are resistant to change in order to grow your business. It's not a new concept.

In fact more than 20 years in the marketing business has taught me that underestimating the pulse of your customers is a monstrous business mistake.

 

"Sacrificing" any customer for the purposes of trying to gain another must be one of the most inept business concepts ever presented.

 

Justifying a bad decision trumps those things.

[Cruising89143]

From the looks of the poll it seems that the recent announcements is much ado about nothing for most. While I don't think RCI handled this recent announcement well it doesn't change my feelings in any way. I still like RCI. If I were not cruising with Celebrity I would be on RCI.

 

The QN class really does not interest me. Not crazy about the new dining setup but I'm sure the ships will do well and will be very popular.

 

In the end this poll will not mean a thing. Bookings with RCI will. ;)

Edited April 19, 2014 by cruisingator2

[setsail]

286 ='s less than .30% of cruisers sailing rci weekly. Less than one third of 1 percent

 

I feel fine

Edited April 19, 2014 by setsail

[CRUISEFAN0001]

Which only goes to demonstrate the lack of any value to such non-scientifically constructed polls. Polls which reflect the biases of the person or persons constructing them can not be taken seriously as they rarely, if ever, prove a thing.:)

Not entirely true.

 

They clearly show that others share in various perspectives. The poll numbers themselves have limited value.

 

This one demonstrates there are a measurable % of unhappy RCI customers based on a decision they made. There is no de-valuing that fact.

Edited April 19, 2014 by CRUISEFAN0001

[Sarvowinner]

The poll questions seem a bit biased towards the negative. Where is the "I'm very happy with the recent news and will cruise more with RCI in the future?"

 

 

This board is not just for US based cruisers. Many of us are indeed thrilled that Quantum is going to Asia and with Explorer coming to Australia, I see a lot more Royal Caribbean cruises in my future

 

Very biased. Seems like there are lots of interesting and exciting options offered outside of Florida & the Caribbean.

[nolesrule]

286 ='s less than .30% of cruisers sailing rci weekly. Less than one third of 1 percent

 

I feel fine

 

Not entirely true.

 

They clearly show that others share in various perspectives. The poll numbers themselves have limited value.

 

This one demonstrates there are a measurable % of unhappy RCI customers based on a decision they made. There is no de-valuing that fact.

 

As setsail points out, you can't mathematically extrapolate your point to cruisers in general.

[CRUISEFAN0001]

As setsail points out, you can't mathematically extrapolate your point to cruisers in general.

Re-read post #83 please.

 

The REAL POINT is in there - and voting % is not part of it.

[nolesrule]

In fact more than 20 years in the marketing business has taught me that underestimating the pulse of your customers is a monstrous business mistake.

 

"Sacrificing" any customer for the purposes of trying to gain another must be one of the most inept business concepts ever presented.

 

Justifying a bad decision trumps those things.

 

The customer is not always right. Especially the vocal customer who is in the minority and only thinks about themselves and not the big picture.

 

And sacrificing one customer to gain 10 is perfectly normal in business. Sometimes growth requires change, and there will always be some customers lost in the process. Resisting change because it will piss off a small segment of your existing customer base is bad for business. If the net result is growth, then you come out ahead. If the ships are still filled to capacity, it doesn't matter if it's a repeat customer or a new customer. Heck, new customers tend to spend more anyway.

 

Again, tempest in a teapot.

 

Not to mention the Anthem cancellation in your signature clearly shows your bias in this discussion. And your bias is not representative of the target market as a whole, unless you can prove otherwise... and your poll is certainly not proof.

[TM38Rob]

Sorry if I misunderstood you, but you say the News about Dynamic Dining is disappointing (which I agree with btw), but then you say NCL is now a viable Option for you. NCL´s Freestyle is exactly what RCI calls Dynamic Dining. No MDR and many small(er) venues with or without Charge. I´ve tried it and hated it.

The difference between NCL's Freestyle Dining and RCCL's Dynamic Dining is that NCL still has a MDR with a different menu nightly whereas Dynamic Dining has the same menu each night for each venue.

 

Also, the only complimentary restaurant that I would want to eat in is the American Icon Grill. Not enough menu options for a 5 night or more cruise.

 

Royal Caribbean is known for trying new concepts on a select ship or two, then expanding it fleetwide. So when this happens, Norwegian will look a whole lot better. While I don't like the Freestyle Dining, there is another difference between Norwegian and Royal Caribbean I learned on a recent Norwegian sailing (1st time). Norwegian actually provides a host for the singles/solos event and actually encourages people to get together and meet each other. Royal Caribbean just puts a meeting time on the cruise compass, but with no host, nobody knows who's a single/solo as there may be other people at the venue for something else. Getting to know other people on the ship is a great way to find someone to sit with at dinner.

With the current traditional dining, the Maitre'Ds already arrange to have me sit with other people, so there's one meal a day I don't have to eat alone.

 

Furthermore, the changes to C&A discounts with lowering or eliminating discounts/OBC for non-suite guests takes away a deciding factor in Royal's favor when choosing between RCCL and NCL. Now that I'm a Latitudes member, their offers could help tip the scales in Norwegian's direction. In the past, a savings certificate or a NCC would be the difference between sailing Royal Caribbean instead of trying the similar itinerary on Norwegian.

[Cruising89143]

The customer is not always right. Especially the vocal customer who is in the minority and only thinks about themselves and not the big picture.

 

And sacrificing one customer to gain 10 is perfectly normal in business. Sometimes growth requires change, and there will always be some customers lost in the process. Resisting change because it will piss off a small segment of your existing customer base is bad for business. If the net result is growth, then you come out ahead. If the ships are still filled to capacity, it doesn't matter if it's a repeat customer or a new customer. Heck, new customers tend to spend more anyway.

 

Again, tempest in a teapot.

 

Not to mention the Anthem cancellation in your signature clearly shows your bias in this discussion. And your bias is not representative of the target market as a whole, unless you can prove otherwise... and your poll is certainly not proof.

 

Spot on post.

[CRUISEFAN0001]

The customer is not always right.

That has virtually NOTHING to do with this topic.

 

Put another way...if people can't trust a business based on how they treat their existing customers...both existing and new customers tend not to do business with them. It's about trust.

 

That is neither a new or original concept.

 

Unfortunately, some companies learn this lesson the hard way.

 

P.S. - Yes...I am one of many customers impacted by the Anthem decision...and even my view counts...just like any alternative perspective. No more, no less.

Edited April 19, 2014 by CRUISEFAN0001

[nolesrule]

Re-read post #83 please.

 

The REAL POINT is in there - and voting % is not part of it.

 

I was arguing your point about demonstrating a measurable percentage. It does nothing of the sort.

 

It only shows that there are some people who feel negatively toward some of the changes. What it doesn't show is that it is statistically relevant, which makes it not measurable in a meaningful way.

 

Now, go do your poll in a mall, ask the same question without giving a presentation on all these changes (biased or not) and see what kind of answers you get. I bet almost all responses would be of the "I don't care" variety.

[Ander026]

I don't mind all of the moving around of the ships. I will still plan on sailing on RC. I like the fact that there are different class of ships around FL. I just booked Serenade for December 2015 on a great Southern Itinerary.

 

I hope that they do bring a 3rd ship to Port Canaveral after Explorer leaves.

[CRUISEFAN0001]

I was arguing your point about demonstrating a measurable percentage. It does nothing of the sort.

Then you wasted your post - there was no disputing the actual limited value of specific % numbers. I stated just that in a previous post as well.

 

Change is generally a good thing...many of us live and breathe it every day. Change based on deception, however, is not a good thing as it leads a lack of trust - bad for any business.

Edited April 19, 2014 by CRUISEFAN0001

[Cruising89143]

I get the feeling that when someone was young and didn't get their way they took all of their marbles, would stomp their feet and head home.;)

Edited April 19, 2014 by cruisingator2

[CRUISEFAN0001]

I get the feeling that when someone was young and didn't get their way they took all of their marbles and went home.;)

Perhaps it was actually someone who learned to recognize when others lost their marbles... :D:D:D

 

Touche'

 

Seriously though...a company's brand is nearly sacred to them, and is based on customer trust and loyalty. If that company does anything to lose the trust, they lose the loyalty. On that point, I suspect most people would agree. This is the underlying issue at hand.

Edited April 19, 2014 by CRUISEFAN0001

[nolesrule]

Then you wasted your post - there was no disputing the actual limited value of specific % numbers. I stated just that in a previous post as well.

 

Change is generally a good thing...many of us live and breathe it every day. Change based on deception, however, is not a good thing as it leads a lack of trust - bad for any business.

 

But that's the thing, there will always be someone who gets upset about something. And some people seem to always be "happier" when they are upset about something, so they try to find the negative in everything.

 

 

Personally, when I read between the lines, I don't find it deceptive. I find it diplomatic. Rather than throw Bermuda under the bus for effectively trashing their previously announced plans, they spun it as an expansion into an emerging market.

 

There's just no way that RCI could afford to keep Quantum in Bayonne without the Bermuda itineraries.

[CRUISEFAN0001]

But that's the thing, there will always be someone who gets upset about something. And some people seem to always be "happier" when they are upset about something, so they try to find the negative in everything.

 

Personally, when I read between the lines, I don't find it deceptive. I find it diplomatic. Rather than throw Bermuda under the bus for effectively trashing their previously announced plans, they spun it as an expansion into an emerging market.

 

There's just no way that RCI could afford to keep Quantum in Bayonne without the Bermuda itineraries.

I can both respect and appreciate your view.

 

Taking a step back for a moment...on another site I read an interesting perspective on the RCI announcement put simply:

 

The problem many cruisers have with the RCI announcement is not the actual announcement itself, rather, it is the year-long marketing and expectations set up in advance, only to be radically changed and causing a mis-trust of the company.

 

That pretty much echos my view. Somebody else said it eloquently.

[nolesrule]

I can both respect and appreciate your view.

 

Taking a step back for a moment...on another site I read an interesting perspective on the RCI announcement put simply:

 

The problem many cruisers have with the RCI announcement is not the actual announcement itself, rather, it is the year-long marketing and expectations set up in advance, only to be radically changed and causing a mis-trust of the company.

 

That pretty much echos my view. Somebody else said it eloquently.

 

I can understand that point of view. I'm one of those planner types and tend to be resistant to change. A few years ago, this sort of thing probably would have bothered me a lot. But the last few years I've gotten a more "go with the flow" attitude and don't let things I can't control bother me.

 

And I can agree that on its surface, it does look like RCI was misleading. It's a tight line they have to walk when something like this happens. Bermuda was out of their control. They probably waited as long as they could before they had to pull the trigger on announcing deployment plans for Quantum in the hopes they could stick to the original plan.

[CRUISEFAN0001]

I can understand that point of view. I'm one of those planner types and tend to be resistant to change. A few years ago, this sort of thing probably would have bothered me a lot. But the last few years I've gotten a more "go with the flow" attitude and don't let things I can't control bother me.

 

And I can agree that on its surface, it does look like RCI was misleading. It's a tight line they have to walk when something like this happens. Bermuda was out of their control. They probably waited as long as they could before they had to pull the trigger on announcing deployment plans for Quantum in the hopes they could stick to the original plan.

Kumbaya...we are both in a warm and fuzzy place. :)

 

You actually inspired some further thought.

 

Given all these changes...perhaps more of them will be forthcoming...such as the plans for Oasis III and Quantum III...oops...sorry to stir that pot. :eek::D

 

Ironically during all of this "drama"...I've never been more looking forward to an upcoming cruise than the one we have to Alaska (on RCI). Cruise life after that one, however, is the great unknown. Cheers.

[CRUISEFAN0001]

Nice...more than 300 votes in just a short time. :)