Ala Carte items in MDR

[sparks1093]

You've repeated that several times in various ways, but you seem to be the only one saying it. I'd appreciate knowing where you saw that, as I follow FDR pretty closely, and I haven't seen or heard that.

 

What I do know is that he had stated several times that each cruise line in NCLH had its own demographic, and he won't do anything to change that. If there are a few like me who sail both lines (and sometimes , but not in recent years, Regent), that's because many things are similar already, like the open concept of Freestyle. But, he'd be foolish to think that everyone wants to sail Oceania; he's smarter than that.

 

It bears saying that I cruised NCL before the merger (Oceania since 2006, NCL since 2010).

 

It's all been discussed and posted here on CC in too many threads to keep track of. He's changing the demographic simply by raising NCL's prices, so if he has stated that he's not going to do anything to change the demographics he is either lying or not as smart as people say he is.

[tjt87]

why are cruisers to blame? They are playing by the cruise lines rules.

 

If you want to use the airlines as a comparison why doesn't the cruise line change the rules like the airlines and once you paid that's it unless you pay a $150-$200pp change fee.

 

There wouldn't be too many chasing rate drops anymore but then you'd have a lot of people waiting for the last minute to book hoping for cheaper fares. Kind of a catch 22 for the cruise line.

 

I don't think it would be god to change the pricing policy like the airlines unless all cruise lines did it at once.

 

I know I wouldn't book with a cruise line if they had that policy when all the others still had the old policy.

 

I still submit it's not the cruisers fault but what's the cruise line to do?

 

Bill

 

Great typo:D:D

[sparks1093]

Sorry but I don't get this.

 

If you are attracted by the base fare but don't care who you sail with, why do you have to book a year out?:rolleyes:

 

Because that is when I plan my vacations.

[NLH Arizona]

 

I'm pretty sure FDR's efforts are to move NCL up to somewhere between Royal and Celebrity (owned by Royal). That will position them as higher than the bottom but not quite premium; perhaps Upper Lower or Premium Lite, still several notches below Oceania and even more below Regent, NCLH's other sister cruise line.

 

I totally agree with your observations. I don't think NCL will ever become a luxury line or a premium line, like Crystal or Celebrity, but it could certainly compete with mainstream lines like Royal Caribbean and Princess and I think that is realistically the position in the cruising ranks that Mr. Del Rio is looking at.

[Moby0215]

The idea that some people get value and not all people get value is the bridge you can't cross. It is a lazy argument to claim that the exception disproves the rule.

 

Just because some people come out of the casino ahead does not mean that everyone will, thus you can't claim gambling is a value....to everyone.

 

 

 

I didn't say you did...it was simply an illustration of the point not a commentary on your claims.

 

 

But you said that I claimed gambling is a value. I did not. I simply said that if you were not going to be spending the $100 credit that you could use the casino as a means to cash it out. No gambling involved. Just a 3% fee.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Moby0215]

Because that is when I plan my vacations.

 

 

I think what he is saying is you can plan the vacation but you don't actually have to book it a year in advance.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[NLH Arizona]

It's all been discussed and posted here on CC in too many threads to keep track of. He's changing the demographic simply by raising NCL's prices, so if he has stated that he's not going to do anything to change the demographics he is either lying or not as smart as people say he is.

Wow, you sure are making a generalization as far as what demographic can afford what?

[tjt87]

Because that is when I plan my vacations.

 

Why If you cruise by base cost there are plenty of options much nearer sail time that will save you moey, which you appear to be saying is your biggest reason for choosing a cruise?

[maywell]

I totally agree with your observations. I don't think NCL will ever become a luxury line or a premium line, like Crystal or Celebrity, but it could certainly compete with mainstream lines like Royal Caribbean and Princess and I think that is realistically the position in the cruising ranks that Mr. Del Rio is looking at.

 

I agree as well with both observations - NCL looks more Royal with the pricing and amenities/features than Carnival, which is, let's be honest; bottom of the barrel. But at same time, it's no Oceania or Cunard - it's not whom NCL is primarily targeting in most of the regular cabins, anyway; they're aiming for people who don't mind spending $5-50 a day on the ship, definitely not Oceania level of money spending. Carnival works well for some people, not all people; likewise with NCL/Royal /Oceania/Cunard- it's not for everyone.

 

 

Sent from my SM-N910T3 using Tapatalk

[SeaShark]

But you said that I claimed gambling is a value. I did not. I simply said that if you were not going to be spending the $100 credit that you could use the casino as a means to cash it out. No gambling involved. Just a 3% fee.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I did not say you said that...reread post 475.

[tjt87]

Thai is a pretty big IF...isn't it? Which, by the way, is the point.

 

Unless you believe that NCL created and designed this program so they would end up making less money...

 

No, my point is that if you choose at $100 (or whatever) OBC that is exactly what it is worth, unless of course you spend more or less than $100.

 

If you get the UBP then the value is related to how much (Value) you drink, and yes it is subsidised by those who choose another freebee.

[SeaShark]

No, my point is that if you choose at $100 (or whatever) OBC that is exactly what it is worth, unless of course you spend more or less than $100.

 

If you get the UBP then the value is related to how much (Value) you drink, and yes it is subsidised by those who choose another freebee.

Thus the point of the fake and what we've been saying all along.

 

OTOH, it's still wrong to say that OBC and the equivalent in cash are the same. That is why $899 isn't the same value as $999 with a $100 OBC.

[Moby0215]

I did not say you said that...reread post 475.

 

 

Well you did say "you can't claim". Either way I'm not sure what point you were trying to make as I didn't say anything about gambling. Nor have you given valid reasoning why they are not the same value.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SeaShark]

Well you did say "you can't claim". Either way I'm not sure what point you were trying to make as I didn't say anything about gambling. Nor have you given valid reasoning why they are not the same value.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They aren't the same thing, they are illustrative of the same point. You keep saying that you aren't sure of the point, but the point is that some won't understand (IOW, be "not sure") and that is exacyly what they are counting on for the success of the fake that you cant/won't see.

 

To your other comment, you would benefit by recognizing the difference between the figurative you and the literal you.

[Moby0215]

They aren't the same thing, they are illustrative of the same point. You keep saying that you aren't sure of the point, but the point is that some won't understand (IOW, be "not sure") and that is exacyly what they are counting on for the success of the fake that you cant/won't see.

 

To your other comment, you would benefit by recognizing the difference between the figurative you and the literal you.

 

 

You are mixing up different parts of our conversation. When I said I wasn't sure what point you were trying to make I was asking about why you brought up gambling when I did not mention it or how it might even pertain to our discussion?And I'm still waiting on your reasoning of why the $899 vs $999 and &100 on board credit are not the same value.

 

Lastly, I do realize the difference between the figurative and literal you. It was not clear the first time I read it, so thanks for clearing that up but your condescension was not necessary.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LMaxwell]

I also think you are over reacting saying things like breakfast menus will have upsell items unless you are talking about something like crab cakes or 8 oz steaks.

 

Just you wait. I'll entertain bets on it if you want. It's coming.

[swedish weave]

I agree as well with both observations - NCL looks more Royal with the pricing and amenities/features than Carnival, which is, let's be honest; bottom of the barrel. But at same time, it's no Oceania or Cunard - it's not whom NCL is primarily targeting in most of the regular cabins, anyway; they're aiming for people who don't mind spending $5-50 a day on the ship, definitely not Oceania level of money spending. Carnival works well for some people, not all people; likewise with NCL/Royal /Oceania/Cunard- it's not for everyone.

 

 

Sent from my SM-N910T3 using Tapatalk

 

The thing many of you are overlooking is that the "bottom of the barrel" made their money by catering to those looking for low cost cruising, and CCL now owns most of the cruise lines that tried to maintain the upper level status. That hasn't worked in the past. It didn't work for Del Rio with his two cruise lines. (If you dispute this, look at the numbers ie debt that NCL took on with the merger) If he can find enough people to support his grandiose ideas, his vision will prosper. If not, he will take NCL into the same position many others have experienced, and that is to become a subsidiary of a low cost cruise line that appeals to the greater number of people.

 

Look at the most successful companies in the world, and all of them cater to the masses, instead of just the upper segment of the population.

Edited November 7, 2015 by swedish weave

[luvtheships]

Just you wait. I'll entertain bets on it if you want. It's coming.

 

 

I don't remember if it was ccl or princess but they were charging for fresh squeezed oj years ago

 

 

Yes....I know both lines are under the same corporate umbrella

[LMaxwell]

I don't remember if it was ccl or princess but they were charging for fresh squeezed oj years ago

 

 

Yes....I know both lines are under the same corporate umbrella

 

That's been a "thing" on many lines. Concentrate is free, fresh squeeze there is a charge.

 

How long until $$$ symbols appear next to lox, eggs benedict, waffles, and made to order omelettes? That's the shoe I am waiting for to drop.

[SeaShark]

You are mixing up different parts of our conversation. When I said I wasn't sure what point you were trying to make I was asking about why you brought up gambling when I did not mention it or how it might even pertain to our discussion?And I'm still waiting on your reasoning of why the $899 vs $999 and &100 on board credit are not the same value.

 

Lastly, I do realize the difference between the figurative and literal you. It was not clear the first time I read it, so thanks for clearing that up but your condescension was not necessary.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No...I'm perfectly clear. I made one comment and you've backed it up repeatedly. No need for me to continue a point when you've given a better demonstration than I could've expected.

 

As to your other questions, they've also been answered during the discussion...I don't see the need to keep repeating the answers to you, nor do I think anyone else does. You can reread and get the answers or not. Totally up to you.

[luvtheships]

Prices jacked up or not I still have a very cheap cruise with UBP and SDP included. Also it is only about 4.5 drinks per day (if the drink is $15) to reach the regular cost of the UBP. I wouldn't call that drinking to excess, however I will admit that I do drink more than that.

 

Why would including bottle wine in the MDR make a difference? Just order it by the glass instead. Just wondering why that would would make a difference to you.

 

Also you can't really compare what the price is now vs when you booked. As the prices fluctuates whether there is a promo or not.

 

Of course I'm not foolish to think that base fare is not subsidizing some of the promos value but like I said previously, I still am receiving great value.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

Well keeping it simple.....my base fare was $1800 when I booked

 

Now my base fare is $2600 and includes free drinks

 

 

It's no deal at all to me....they just added the fee for ubp to my base fare but are saying its a free ubp....which it is not because they raised my fare

 

If my base fare was still $1800 including the ubp...then the ubp is indeed free

 

 

Not sure why I mentioned bottled wine other than the fact that not all bottled wines are sold by the glass

[luvtheships]

Well, until there are changes to the current NCL model that I'm not good with, I'll continue to sail with NCL. If and when NCL makes a change that I'm not in favor of, I'll readdress my stance at that time. It is all about choices, one can choose to accept the changes and continue to sail with the line or one can choose not to sail with them.

 

 

Agree totally....

 

However with all of these changes....which don't really bother me at this juncture.....I am starting to look at rccl

 

Who knows if I'll like them or not. Who knows if I'll get a good deal or not. Who knows. However in my thinking....what the heck...I might as well try them

 

Now I always look for and usually book great deals on Ncl and look to them first.....so its actually a big deal that I want to check out rccl regardless of their product....which I know very little about at this time but will probably experience on my 2017 cruise...

 

I bet Ncl never expected a cruiser like me to actually be willing to probably pay more elsewhere....

 

I'm actually looking forward to rccl.

 

The point is Ncl has succeeded in pushing me to look elsewhere. Why not? Might as well experience something different.

 

I never would have said this a year ago though. That speaks volumes.

Edited November 7, 2015 by luvtheships

[Moby0215]

No...I'm perfectly clear. I made one comment and you've backed it up repeatedly. No need for me to continue a point when you've given a better demonstration than I could've expected.

 

As to your other questions, they've also been answered during the discussion...I don't see the need to keep repeating the answers to you, nor do I think anyone else does. You can reread and get the answers or not. Totally up to you.

 

 

You are incorrect. You haven't answered any of the questions. That's fine you don't want to respond that's your prerogative. You made a statement, which I questioned and gave you a reasonable example why/how they are equal value and asked you to refute that. You were unable to. In addition I asked you about what gambling had to do with the conversation and you have not answered that either.

 

And I certainly don't know what you mean by me giving a better demonstration than you could have expected. Are you implying that I helped make your point or that I debunked your point? Please reference what this is in reference to.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Moby0215]

Well keeping it simple.....my base fare was $1800 when I booked

 

Now my base fare is $2600 and includes free drinks

 

 

It's no deal at all to me....they just added the fee for ubp to my base fare but are saying its a free ubp....which it is not because they raised my fare

 

If my base fare was still $1800 including the ubp...then the ubp is indeed free

 

 

Not sure why I mentioned bottled wine other than the fact that not all bottled wines are sold by the glass

 

 

Like I said before, you really can't compare the fare from when you booked to what it is now. Fares can go up and down based on occupancy and factors other than a promo being added.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SeaShark]

You are incorrect. You haven't answered any of the questions. That's fine you don't want to respond that's your prerogative. You made a statement, which I questioned and gave you a reasonable example why/how they are equal value and asked you to refute that. You were unable to. In addition I asked you about what gambling had to do with the conversation and you have not answered that either.

 

And I certainly don't know what you mean by me giving a better demonstration than you could have expected. Are you implying that I helped make your point or that I debunked your point? Please reference what this is in reference to.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Responding isn't the issue...anyone here who know me will tell you I don't have a problem responding. This all went off the rails starting with the silly statement in post 429. I see no way that it benefits me to repeat to you over and over and over what I've already said....the answers ARE there, but I'm not here to read them to you. If you really want to know, start re-reading. If you don't, then don't...that is fine too. Or you can keep right on trying to make this something it isn't.

 

My point has been made, and proven, and I'm quite happy with that. Even if you are not. You have to decide what you're trying to get to. Everyone, but you, understands the concept of the fake promo....although, I believe that you really do understand it, but you appear to enjoy the back-and-forth too much to admit it and let it go.