How about a fuel surcharge decrease?????

[FUN33]

Remember when oil prices were rising and the cruise lines couldn't wait to slap us with a fuel surcharge? Today oil dropped below $40 a bbl and prices INCREASES seem to be coming more frequently than ever. Fuel is down over 50% from 3 years ago ........................... interesting.

[Clarea]

I don't think we've had a fuel surcharge since around 2009.

[Royal2464]

Can't decrease what wasn't there to begin with.

[BillOh]

I'd be happy if they would use the stabilizers more or add one more knot to get us to the next port an hour sooner.

[Earthworm Jim]

They (for the most part) didn't charge the surcharge even when they were over the $75 a barrel price limit. They either reduced their profit margins or increased the price of the cruise to cover it.

 

Nonetheless, clearly it's costing them less money to fuel the ship now than it was in recent years. If bookings are going slowly, that does give them more room to make a price decrease if needed. However I think generally bookings are up, so there is no need for them to cut prices in most cases. So they are just making more money. (Which, after all, is the purpose of the business so you can't knock them for it)

[willing292]

We've ever been charged the fuel surcharge.

[orville99]

When oil prices began their rise to over $100/barrel, a lot of oil intensive companies (cruise lines included) hedged against the rise. I expect that some of them are now being bitten by those hedges (which were mostly in the $70- $80 range).

[coordinator23]

Have you checked the prices for Jan-March 2016? No decrease, only increases. I'm sure they're using the fuel price decreases to help fund the new ships (along with the price hikes).

As I see it, they hiked prices up for BOGO sale, then kept them the same (as in "we didn't up prices - see") and are taking advantage of lower fuel costs, and anything else they can get their hands on (including possibly not giving the crew all of the gratuities collected) to fund all the gee-wiz stuff for the new ships. I like Royal, but I am looking more seriously at HAL right now.

Note to Royal: If you want to compete with Norwegian and Carnival, you can't charge higher prices (like you did when Princess and Celebrity cruisers were your target market).

[papcx]

Hi all.

 

Lower fuel prices mean higher cruise fares.

 

If we all are spending less on fuel (at home) then we have more disposable income. We're then more likely to buy a cruise at a higher price.

[land lover]

2009 Fuel surcharges:eek: I had to pay a few but I had more refunded than paid. X had such problems that I received a refund on an Xpedition sailing from my TA and X.

 

However prior to them being implemented on cruise ships several of my land vacations tacked on a lot more than the cruise ships ever did even the airlines were getting into the game and the shuttle services to the airport.

 

BTW our gas of course different from cruise ship fuel is still in the 3.60 -3.80 range for unleaded in Southern California.

[land lover]

Hi all.

 

Lower fuel prices mean higher cruise fares.

 

If we all are spending less on fuel (at home) then we have more disposable income. We're then more likely to buy a cruise at a higher price.

 

 

Good point..

[jayblue]

Unless they get their gas from an Indiana refinery. 😐

[LMaxwell]

Hi all.

 

Lower fuel prices mean higher cruise fares.

 

If we all are spending less on fuel (at home) then we have more disposable income. We're then more likely to buy a cruise at a higher price.

Bingo

[Paulxyz2004]

Remember when oil prices were rising and the cruise lines couldn't wait to slap us with a fuel surcharge? Today oil dropped below $40 a bbl and prices INCREASES seem to be coming more frequently than ever. Fuel is down over 50% from 3 years ago ........................... interesting.

 

Interesting?

 

Yeah It´s interesting how you are talking about fuel surcharge and cruise lines when there are no fuel surcharges with RCI.

No I can´t remember when the cruiselines couldn´t wait to slap us with a fuel surcharge. Now Airlines... but that´s another Topic.

 

In your post you are then talking about Price increases. What´s that to do with fuel surcharge?

The Price will be what the market bears and as papcx said more spending income = higher Prices.

[cger61]

Well folks, we're all teetering on the the brink of the dreaded fuel surcharge. Oil just hit $63.00 a barrel and Norwegian is salivating at the thought of getting a $40,000 a day increase in their coffers when it hits $65.00. The math is easy. If every passenger coughs up $10 a day, and the ship holds 4,000 passengers, Norwegian's ship comes in! The cruise lines can get away with whatever their little hearts desire because, they are not bound by U.S. consumer protection laws. Most cruisers can afford this annoyance, but pity the newlywed couple on a limited budget who planned for x and gets slapped with y when it comes time to settle their shipboard account. So much for this rant.

[Biker19]

[Clarea]

Well folks, we're all teetering on the the brink of the dreaded fuel surcharge. Oil just hit $63.00 a barrel and Norwegian is salivating at the thought of getting a $40,000 a day increase in their coffers when it hits $65.00. The math is easy. If every passenger coughs up $10 a day, and the ship holds 4,000 passengers, Norwegian's ship comes in! The cruise lines can get away with whatever their little hearts desire because, they are not bound by U.S. consumer protection laws. Most cruisers can afford this annoyance, but pity the newlywed couple on a limited budget who planned for x and gets slapped with y when it comes time to settle their shipboard account. So much for this rant.

The last time the oil price was over $65 (2014), RC did not charge a surcharge. I think the economy is doing well enough now that they just raise cruise fares, no need to call it a surcharge like back in 2008/2009.

[LMaxwell]

I am sure the FL Attorney General's office would pursue this as aggressively as they did 10 years ago and the companies would be quick to refund paying guests. Non-issue.

[Clarea]

I am sure the FL Attorney General's office would pursue this as aggressively as they did 10 years ago and the companies would be quick to refund paying guests. Non-issue.

I wish they would take up the whole fake sale thing.

[LMaxwell]

I wish they would take up the whole fake sale thing.

 

[Clarea]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tazqv8glf4

Funny, and appropriate.

[cger61]

It all boils down to this. "Let the buyer beware"! The cruise industry is rife with snake oil salesmen. Never, ever, be surprised by any of their tricks used to part the uninitiated from their hard-earned cash. Most of their employees got their training and credentials in the "Arizona Lakefront Realty" business! No disparagement intended to Arizona or the real estate industry!

Edited January 10, 2018 by cger61

[chengkp75]

The last time the oil price was over $65 (2014), RC did not charge a surcharge. I think the economy is doing well enough now that they just raise cruise fares, no need to call it a surcharge like back in 2008/2009.

 

First off, as I've said many times, there is no correlation between crude oil price and marine bunker fuel price, or even marine diesel oil price. For example, in 2011, when crude was $111/barrel, IFO380 fuel was $467/metric ton. Today, with $63/barrel crude, IFO380 is at $398/metric ton. And in 2016, when crude was $29/barrel, IFO380 was $367/metric ton. Use of bunker hedges as well as slightly reduced demand (as ECA's require more and more higher priced low sulfur fuels) have kept bunker prices much more stable than crude.

 

I am sure the FL Attorney General's office would pursue this as aggressively as they did 10 years ago and the companies would be quick to refund paying guests. Non-issue.

 

The FL Attorney General did not strike down the fuel surcharge, what they did prohibit was charging the fuel surcharge for a cruise after the surcharge was triggered, but that had been paid in full before the surcharge trigger.

[Clarea]

First off, as I've said many times, there is no correlation between crude oil price and marine bunker fuel price, or even marine diesel oil price. For example, in 2011, when crude was $111/barrel, IFO380 fuel was $467/metric ton. Today, with $63/barrel crude, IFO380 is at $398/metric ton. And in 2016, when crude was $29/barrel, IFO380 was $367/metric ton. Use of bunker hedges as well as slightly reduced demand (as ECA's require more and more higher priced low sulfur fuels) have kept bunker prices much more stable than crude. ...

So I think what you are saying is that the fuel surcharge that RC imposed back in 2008/2009 did not correlate with any increase in the cruise line's fuel expenditures.

[chengkp75]

So I think what you are saying is that the fuel surcharge that RC imposed back in 2008/2009 did not correlate with any increase in the cruise line's fuel expenditures.

 

No, I am saying that the swings in bunker prices do not correlate to swings in crude prices. Back then, they did not use hedges (futures) to moderate bunker price swings. From mid-2006 to early 2008, crude went from about $65/barrel to near $100/barrel, but bunker prices went from $230/ton to $680/ton. So, while crude only went up 53%, bunkers went up 195%. And, by mid 2008, while crude was just starting it's slide from the $100/barrel mark, and was still around $80-90/barrel, bunkers had crashed back to $200/ton. Go figure. So, having seen this vast rise in bunker price, the lines wanted to insulate themselves from similar swings by imposing a fuel surcharge. Cargo lines did the same. So, yes, the cruise lines saw an increase in fuel expenditure, but it had no linear correlation with crude oil price, and with today's hedges it bears even less linearity with crude price. So, to worry about fuel surcharges just based on crude price is pretty much useless worrying. Bunker hedges have allowed all shipping lines to incorporate fuel price swings into their fares/tariffs as a business model, and don't rely on fuel surcharges much anymore. The last fuel surcharge I saw was this year, in Canada, where the speed restriction zone for right whales in the Gulf of St. Lawrence caused the major container shipper there to impose a surcharge for the additional fuel required, rather than any fuel price change.