SHARE....one more time....

[shredie]

 

Part of me wonders if Princess just needs to make them a special offer: Dine in SHARE, and if you honestly don't like it, then it's free.

 

 

Sign me up.

[shredie]

 

If you are such an Elitist and big spender as you elude to, why aren't you on a premium cruise line?? The ones who are really ignorant are those who can't see that long time Princess passengers and CC members are not stupid and know the value of our vacation dollars, not easily persuaded by some PT Barnum TV chef.

 

 

That thought had crossed my mind, too.

[MrMan]

I agree that "more choices" can be a great idea. I agree that Princess is trying to change the entire dining experience to something less "elitist", to use your term. That said, "change" is not always a good thing.

 

I have stated before that I think Princess might have chose the SHARE concept because Princess perceived that this concept would be popular with a demographic they were trying to attract. After all, this concept has proven popular with a metropolitan and millennial generation. Perhaps corporate thought the concept would be wildly popular because all their friends liked it. However, there are groups other than Princess corporate.

 

Royal tried a different dining experience to attract a younger demographic, ie, Dynamic Dining, which proved to be so unpopular that the full fleet rollout was cancelled. Perhaps Princess should have considered other options that might attract that demographic without alienating their existing customers?

 

I suspect Princess will do something similar. It is interesting that Princess has chose not to roll SHARE to Coral Princess. I can see where the other ships in/around Australia might find SHARE a success. I can also see having one ship, Emerald, in the Caribbean to attract Australian customers and serve as a test for SHARE in the North American market. However, when one examines the Coral Princess itineraries, it does not appear that they would appeal to a younger dynamics. Might be why Coral will not receive SHARE.

 

Agree with the above. In addition what people forget is loyalty means little to Princess or any other line. yes they will do some marketing, put out warmed over canapies at an Elite status event, however, what is important is who is going to buy tomorrow and long term tomorrow. They don't care what you sailed in the past, thats water over the bridge.They care about the future. It's not family, its a business.

[MrMan]

Woe to those of us in our retirement years, and to all who are longtime Princess cruisers, (I myself have not been cruising very long) but I think Mr.Man has hit the nail on the head. And I think its not only Princess who is trying to change, but most of the middle of the road cruise lines. They are trying to cultivate a different age group.

 

But its not woe, it's different. Now you have more opportunities to try new things. I am not a waterslide rock climbing guy, but why do people poo poo it. It does not change your experience, its something thats available you don't use. No big deal. I don't have kids, yet I don't gnash teeth that there is child care available that I 'am paying for' but don't use. Give me options, including sitting on the promenade doing nothing, but the more options a line gives me the more likely I will throw a buck their way, happily. A win-win.

[Coral]

 

I think Princess is trying to catch up on a changing demographic, as they say change or die.

 

Honestly, if that was true, they would not have halted the change over to SHARE on the Coral Princess. They did that because reception was not what they had hoped (according to reports). In this case, they did care about their current customer base or they thought the new concept was flawed in some way. If they only cared about new customers, they would have gone forward with the change over.

Edited February 11, 2016 by Coral

[rbt001]

Agree with the above. In addition what people forget is loyalty means little to Princess or any other line. yes they will do some marketing, put out warmed over canapies at an Elite status event, however, what is important is who is going to buy tomorrow and long term tomorrow. They don't care what you sailed in the past, thats water over the bridge.They care about the future. It's not family, its a business.

 

I think your comments are off here.

 

If loyalty meant nothing to Princess, then they wouldn't invest in their Loyalty Program, nor would they reward loyalty with perks.

 

Grannie & Gramps Elite who decide to introduce their children and grandchildren to Princess when they treat them to a cruise help extend that loyalty. And it's Grannie & Gramps that are filling cabins for the longer voyages.

 

I'm in my early 50's and already Elite. Princess had made it difficult for me to even consider another cruise line, despite living in South Florida which is served by most of the majors who compete with price. And when family or friends mention they want to go on a cruise, I fight for it to be Princess.

 

Oh, and I pass on the warmed over canapés.

[MrMan]

Honestly, if that was true, they would not have halted the change over to SHARE on the Coral Princess. They did that because reception was not what they had hoped (according to reports). In this case, they did care about their current customer base or they thought the new concept was flawed in some way. If they only cared about new customers, they would have gone forward with the change over.

 

Maybe, maybe not,we are relying on a message board and ship employees for information, both items have a perilous track record.

Either way if it's not SHARE it will eventually be something else. I don't know Shares fate, but I do know change is constant. Hey it's not just Princess, go to the NCL boards and see the gnashing of teeth of those who don't want change as NCL is trying to move more upscale, new venues, more upscale venues, more upscale entertainment. Old timer elites are scared fares will go up. NCL even had a short lived policy one could not take food to the room as managment thought empty dishes in hall did not cater to an upscale feeling. That was change the was tried and failed. But I quarantee there will be more change. There has to be to compete.

[TNTLAMB]

I agree that "more choices" can be a great idea. I agree that Princess is trying to change the entire dining experience to something less "elitist", to use your term. That said, "change" is not always a good thing.

 

I have stated before that I think Princess might have chose the SHARE concept because Princess perceived that this concept would be popular with a demographic they were trying to attract. After all, this concept has proven popular with a metropolitan and millennial generation. Perhaps corporate thought the concept would be wildly popular because all their friends liked it. However, there are groups other than Princess corporate.

 

Royal tried a different dining experience to attract a younger demographic, ie, Dynamic Dining, which proved to be so unpopular that the full fleet rollout was cancelled. Perhaps Princess should have considered other options that might attract that demographic without alienating their existing customers?

 

I suspect Princess will do something similar. It is interesting that Princess has chose not to roll SHARE to Coral Princess. I can see where the other ships in/around Australia might find SHARE a success. I can also see having one ship, Emerald, in the Caribbean to attract Australian customers and serve as a test for SHARE in the North American market. However, when one examines the Coral Princess itineraries, it does not appear that they would appeal to a younger dynamics. Might be why Coral will not receive SHARE.

 

Are you sure they are alienating existing customers or are the same folks who whine about everything doing what they always do? Which is of course is puffing their importance by whining.

 

That's a form of elitism that is becoming ever less acceptable to most. The "its my vacation/cruise" crowd haven't YET figured out they are sharing "their vacation/cruise" with 3000 other folks. The cruise lines have figured out they need to offer alternatives for all. The days of "this is what we do, take it or leave it" are over. There simply are too many other choices.

 

But be prepared for a real outcry as the buffets are down sized and no longer self service. That has to do with health regulations however not that it will be understood.

Edited February 11, 2016 by TNTLAMB

[RocketMan275]

But its not woe, it's different. Now you have more opportunities to try new things. I am not a waterslide rock climbing guy, but why do people poo poo it. It does not change your experience, its something thats available you don't use. No big deal. I don't have kids, yet I don't gnash teeth that there is child care available that I 'am paying for' but don't use. Give me options, including sitting on the promenade doing nothing, but the more options a line gives me the more likely I will throw a buck their way, happily. A win-win.

 

Yes, but SHARE, if extended across the fleet does "change my experience" since it would replace my favorite specialty restaurant. It does reduce the number of options I would consider. Now, if they wish to segment off a place in the Horizon Court, like they do for Crab Boil/Fondue, then go for it. I honestly think the concept would be more appropriate for the buffet anyway. One of the features of the small plate sharing restaurants is large tables, bright lights, and bare floors and tables to enhance sounds and excitement. Sounds perfect for SHARE!

[Coral]

Maybe, maybe not,we are relying on a message board and ship employees for information, both items have a perilous track record.

Either way if it's not SHARE it will eventually be something else. I don't know Shares fate, but I do know change is constant. Hey it's not just Princess, go to the NCL boards and see the gnashing of teeth of those who don't want change as NCL is trying to move more upscale, new venues, more upscale venues, more upscale entertainment. Old timer elites are scared fares will go up. NCL even had a short lived policy one could not take food to the room as managment thought empty dishes in hall did not cater to an upscale feeling. That was change the was tried and failed. But I quarantee there will be more change. There has to be to compete.

 

I actually wish Princess would increase fares and increase spending on food and offer other alternatives for dining (and not do cutbacks). Make it a more premium experience. Though - I think it is sort of tacky to take a beautiful nautical lounge and turn it into a speciality dining. If Princess wants to have more pay for restaurants, they should not have made 10 ships identical with out this space to do this. The other lines factored in for speciality dining and have more rooms to play with.

 

I am for the more upscale experience and wish Princess would go more upscale.

 

I think Princess is having an identity crisis. Just a few years ago, they would not let adults buy the Ultimate Kids beverage package (that included soda and mocktails). Now, Princess is eliminating the soda package and the once restricted package for kids is the only option that advertise.

 

I think they can't make up their mind. Are they attracting families, do they want young people, do they want their loyalty group, do they want to be an economical line and compete with NCL and RCCL or do they want to rise above that and compete with Celebrity....

 

I wish I knew what Princess thought their direction was and who they wanted as their demographics..... This is the part that I find missing since Carnival Corp purchased them.

[shredie]

Which is of course is puffing their importance by whining.

 

 

Interesting choice of words from an expert on all things.

[RocketMan275]

Well said!

 

What a shame there are so many posts here from people that have not and will not try the concept yet they speak of how bad and wrong it is of Princess!

 

And they continue-- even after reading (if they do read them) a post from a "convert." I'm referring to the post by a SHARE patron, who in her own words, said her husband had to (figuratively, I'm sure) drag her kicking and screaming to SHARE. She went on to say that she really liked her meal. Hers is the BEST post on the thread because it demonstrates that DESPITE thinking that she really would not like it, she actually did.

 

I was just a step away from that: I knew I would go to try it. I was skeptical as I reviewed the menu. But the food is really good! Thankfully I was not so CLOSE-MINDED to turn my nose up and say "I don't like that 'ingredient', so I won't try this dish," otherwise I would have missed out on the Beef Cheek Pie which is very tasty.

 

Yet others remain steadfast in their belief: "I know what I don't like."

 

Gosh, I just see from cartoons that ignorant mule, heels dug in and resistant.

 

Part of me wonders if Princess just needs to make them a special offer: Dine in SHARE, and if you honestly don't like it, then it's free.

 

Problem with that, I think, is that those pessimistic posters would take the voucher for the $39 cover charge and FIGURE OUT A WAY TO CONVERT IT TO A REFUNDABLE OBC, so they can take home the cash without going near the restaurant: THAT's the demographic to which THEY belong!

 

Let me begin with this. The use of derogatory language, describing me as a stubborn mule or "CLOSED MINDED", etc., does nothing to change my mind. You would be well advised to drop that kind of language. It will turn more people off than it will sway to your side.

 

Let me be perfectly clear, I would not dine in SHARE if it were complementary. If I were given a voucher, I wouldn't convert it to OBC. Assuming it was transferable, I would give it to some other person on the cruise. If not, I would return it to SHARE with a 'thank you' note that I wasn't interested in their venue.

 

I have had many dining experiences. There are simply some things I will not try (again). I have tried many of the basic ingredients of many of the dishes and I see no reason to try them again. A different preparation or sauce won't change them.

Edited February 11, 2016 by RocketMan275

[TNTLAMB]

Yes, but SHARE, if extended across the fleet does "change my experience" since it would replace my favorite specialty restaurant. It does reduce the number of options I would consider. Now, if they wish to segment off a place in the Horizon Court, like they do for Crab Boil/Fondue, then go for it. I honestly think the concept would be more appropriate for the buffet anyway. One of the features of the small plate sharing restaurants is large tables, bright lights, and bare floors and tables to enhance sounds and excitement. Sounds perfect for SHARE!

 

Hey I'm still unhappy about The Sante Fe being eliminated. That table side guacamole was wonderful I get it.

Edited February 11, 2016 by TNTLAMB

[shredie]

 

Let me be perfectly clear, I would not dine in SHARE if it were complementary. If I were given a voucher, I wouldn't convert it to OBC. Assuming it was transferable, I would give it to some other person on the cruise. If not, I would return it to SHARE with a 'thank you' note that I wasn't interested in their venue.

 

Now the CSCS may start calling you one of those OBC "cheats." :) You can give me the voucher, my friend. I will try everything (including the EF!) if I don't have to pay for it. Granted, I might find it difficult to find something that really sounds appealing to me, but that's just how we "closed-mined ignorant mules" are. :p I think we are supposed to acquiesce to the sermons, plunk down the $39, and then decide we really LOVE everything because we were told to. I also think we are supposed to LOVE it so much that we are willing to pay even more for another helping. (I think this is called "change or die.")

 

For the edification of the CSCS, let me reiterate that I do not care if you want to spend your $39 in SHARE (which some of them need to learn to spell correctly) but I don't want to spend that much on a meal on a cruise ship. You go do what you do. I have never once told anyone NOT to go to SHARE, but I certainly have been told plenty of times that I must.

Edited February 11, 2016 by shredie

[RocketMan275]

Hey I'm still unhappy about The Sante Fe being eliminated. That table side guacamole was wonderful I get it.

 

We did the mexican restaurant on Oasis and the wife loved the table side guacamole. I wish I could say I enjoyed it too. There was nothing wrong with the restaurant or the food. I wasn't feeling good when we sat down. I knew I was getting sick. I'm fairly certain it was the onions on I had with one of their hot dogs I had a couple of hours earlier. After dinner I got very sick but it was over quickly. (No, it wasn't noro. Only involved the upper GI, there was no fever, and was over in about 5 minutes. Felt fine afterwards.)

[RocketMan275]

Now the CSCS may start calling you one of those OBC "cheats." :) You can give me the voucher, my friend. I will try everything (including the EF!) if I don't have to pay for it. Granted, I might find it difficult to find something that really sounds appealing to me, but that's just how we "closed-mined ignorant mules" are. :p I think we are supposed to acquiesce to the sermons, plunk down the $39, and then decide we really LOVE everything because we were told to. I also think we are supposed to LOVE it so much that we are willing to pay even more for another helping. (I think this is called "change or die.")

 

For the edification of the CSCS, let me reiterate that I do not care if you want to spend your $39 in SHARE (which some of them need to learn to spell correctly) but I don't want to spend that much on a meal on a cruise ship. You go do what you do. I have never once told anyone NOT to go to SHARE, but I certainly have been told plenty of times that I must.

 

You have first dibs on any SHARE vouchers I might receive.

 

I guess you're not interested in the $15 cups of coffee currently the rage in San Francisco. Finca Sophia, I think it's called.

Edited February 11, 2016 by RocketMan275

[MrMan]

if I don't have to pay for it. .

 

And there is Princess’ problem summed up. They are forced to change the business model as their competition is going to the get you on the boat as cheaply as they can. That is what the customer in general wants. The airlines have gone the same route. Competition has forced a low fare which is good for the consumer. Cruises prices in real dollars are quiet cheap compared to the past years/decades. They make their profit from the upsale, excursions, booze, casino, specialty dining, excursions, a great wine list, Diamonds International. So ask yourself, if you were Princess, and have an elite customer buying in on a cheap fare and not spending on board the boat on what makes their business profitable, and have limited inventory that expires weekly, would you not fire that customer and get a new one that would make you profitable. That’s why there is change, they have to change their customer base.

[shredie]

So ask yourself, if you were Princess, and have an elite customer buying in on a cheap fare and not spending on board the boat on what makes their business profitable, and have limited inventory that expires weekly, would you not fire that customer and get a new one that would make you profitable. That’s why there is change, they have to change their customer base.

 

Yes, I can see how Princess telling me to stick it and go elsewhere is a very sound business practice. :p

 

Who was it who mentioned the generational argument, that the geezers tend to bring along their adult children and all the grandkids? I can see that given that scenario, it's an even better idea to run off the loyal Princess base. "Let's get rid of those deadbeat loyalty customers and their equally useless offspring so we can load the ships up with all new, one-shot customers. The LAST thing we want is repeat business." :rolleyes:

Edited February 11, 2016 by shredie

[TNTLAMB]

Yes, I can see how Princess telling me to stick it and go elsewhere is a very sound business practice. :p

 

Actually its a very sound business practice. While you would sooner engage in insults and sarcasm substituting those things for real knowledge of the situation you might actually take some time and learn something. This is a pretty simple explanation of customer retention metrics which is what we are talking about and yes I am expert along with several other posters on this thread which has made for some great discussion. Be aware it involves math:

 

http://faculty.som.yale.edu/ksudhir/papers/Customer%20Cost%20Based%20Pricing.pdf

Edited February 11, 2016 by TNTLAMB

[shredie]

Actually its a very sound business practice. While you would sooner engage in insults and sarcasm substituting those things for real knowledge of the situation you might actually take some time and learn something. This is a pretty simple explanation of customer retention metrics which is what we are talking about and yes I am expert along with several other posters on this thread which has made for some great discussion. Be aware it involves math:

 

Oh gee whiz! I am so impressed my toes are tingling. I couldn't tell you how many of them are tingling because that would mean I would have to "do math."

 

Okay, everybody, it's time to stop arguing with The Expert here because he knows everything!

Edited February 11, 2016 by shredie

[Matcodixon]

Every time I read another thread about food, I am always amazed at some of the comments. One of the best things about a Ship like the Ruby is the number of choices available. I challenge anyone to try ALL of the options and not find something to their liking. Adding this venue is simply adding another choice. I am sure that it will never be for everyone, but there are those that will love it. Personally I love the MDR on every ship I have cruised on so far, but often go to the IC for lunch. I did try the Pub Lunch one day on our last cruise and found it not to be for my tastes and preference. So I won't go back. I seldom visit the Buffet, but have never gone to any of the other extra $$ places, as I am quite satisfied with the MDR food choices, variety and service. But that is just me. The more choices the better, If you try it and don't like it, simply don't go back.

 

Dixon:cool:

 

Ps I will definitely try Share on the next cruise I am on if it is available. I love trying new things.

[Elkhorn20fan]

We are from the Wisconsin, where Friday fish is our best nigh out to eat. We tried SHARE last week on the emerald and really liked it as something we would not do at home. We did not like everything we had, but the item we liked were really good. Try it as something different, that's what we like to do on a cruise.

[shredie]

We are from the Wisconsin, where Friday fish is our best nigh out to eat. We tried SHARE last week on the emerald and really liked it as something we would not do at home. We did not like everything we had, but the item we liked were really good. Try it as something different, that's what we like to do on a cruise.

 

That's good. I'm glad you liked it. I assume you got your money's worth?

 

Now, according to the "experts" here, you have had your SHARE experience, so you are no longer wanted on Princess ships since their business plan, based on something called the "Lorenzo Lama curved theory of comely protestants," the whole point of SHARE is to draw in new, one-time customers and repel any repeat customers. New customer=good. Repeat customer=bad. The staff at Princess HQ wear cute little T-shirts that read "Change or Die" (At least that's what I was told by an "expert.")

 

BTW, I once had some delicious fish in a restaurant in Green Bay. I wish I could remember the name of the place. It was outstanding.

[rbt001]

We are from the Wisconsin, where Friday fish is our best nigh out to eat. We tried SHARE last week on the emerald and really liked it as something we would not do at home. We did not like everything we had, but the item we liked were really good. Try it as something different, that's what we like to do on a cruise.

 

Do you think you would have dinner in SHARE again, on your next cruise?

[LewesBeach]

OMG! Thank you all for this thread, giving me some good LOL moments every day :D. Haven't had this much fun since the Royal pro/con wars.