Dining question

[Pierlesscruisers]

But isn't that what we do with our surveys.

 

Or are they just a waste of time?

 

I doubt that they are a waste of time. However...

 

If you were a person who had the responsibility for implementing changes, which type of input would you tend to listen to more:

 

1. A multiple question survey which provided a 1-5 or 1-10 "score" on a number of points/questions which might or might not allow you to provide some input to explain your rationale to your answers.

 

or

 

2. An unsolicited letter from one of your customers about a point or points upon which they had strong enough feelings to take the time to sit down and compose a written document explaining the point(s) they felt so strongly about to make them want to write and tell somebody their thoughts?

 

I would suspect that #2 would make more of an impression. Why? For one reason, the time they invested. A second reason is what you would get out of the results of #1 would probably be an average score of a few hundred (or maybe a couple thousand) returned surveys from a given cruise. Would you get all the comments submitted by all the respondees? I doubt it, again, probably a condensed summary of all of them, probably stressing the positive comments and minimizing the negative. Face it people want to keep the people above them happy, not unhappy so they're probably going to, as the old song says "accentuate the positive, eliminate the negative, and don't mess with Mr. In-Between" (that song may have been way before your time ;))

 

You may not agree. I just think that a personal letter often gets more attention and is more likely to have an affect than a condensation of hundreds of comments.

 

Tom

[shredie]

Don't make the mistake of assuming that the accurate result would favor the traditional options. That would be the less likely case. So the objective would be to trump the objective result by projecting the impression that those who prefer traditional options care more about getting what they want than the average passenger.

 

I'm not sure I follow what you're saying here, but won't the outcome to this Curtis Stone experiment be based on how many of his dishes are ordered on the ship? Princess is in it to make money, after all, not to appease the foodies (or the non-foodies) just because.

[caribill]

I doubt that they are a waste of time. However...

 

If you were a person who had the responsibility for implementing changes, which type of input would you tend to listen to more:

 

1. A multiple question survey which provided a 1-5 or 1-10 "score" on a number of points/questions which might or might not allow you to provide some input to explain your rationale to your answers.

 

or

 

2. An unsolicited letter from one of your customers about a point or points upon which they had strong enough feelings to take the time to sit down and compose a written document explaining the point(s) they felt so strongly about to make them want to write and tell somebody their thoughts?

 

 

The survey also has a place to write in additional comments.

[caribill]

 

Evidently, the medallions was replaced by a flank steak (which perhaps is a more contemporary dish).

 

The medallions were initially replaced by tri-tips. Most reviews of the replacement were poor.

 

Flank steak properly prepared and sliced thin is tender and tasty. The Curtis Stone flank steak was very tough and had no flavor.

[jeromep]

Don't make the mistake of assuming that the accurate result would favor the traditional options. That would be the less likely case. So the objective would be to trump the objective result by projecting the impression that those who prefer traditional options care more about getting what they want than the average passenger.

 

I guess I am operating from the perspective that the issues brought up with the always available menu items in the current Curtis Stone branding initiative aren't limited to a few loud voices on Cruise Critic. But the few voices on Cruise Critic may represent hundreds if not thousands of other customers who remain silent on the issue.

 

What I've suggested before about the power of unsolicited input from customers to companies would be meaningful if everyone that has commented on this thread addressed their concerns about the menu, and their direct experiences with menu items, to Princess. Again, I point back to my 1 to 100 example where one unsolicited comment from a customer is generally considered equivalent to 100 customer experiences.

 

So, based on what I've seen on this tread, a preponderance of Princess guests may have issue with the Curtis Stone menu or aspects of it. This thread is a lot like a consumer focus group, which often times provides insights into consumer product offerings better than any multiple choice survey.

 

Then again, this thread might just be the loudest voices, and these are the only voices which have issue with the MDR menu, which means that the vast majority of Princesses cruisers are happy with the menu and food.

 

This discussion has become rather academic to me because my undergrad is in marketing and this whole discussion is about the effects of marketing on real world consumption experiences.

[jeromep]

The medallions were initially replaced by tri-tips. Most reviews of the replacement were poor.

 

Flank steak properly prepared and sliced thin is tender and tasty. The Curtis Stone flank steak was very tough and had no flavor.

 

I've prepared flank on a number of occasions and it is very easy to mess it up. It isn't a very forgiving piece of beef. In general to get tender and flavorful flank, it has to be marinated or brined and then cooked low and slow. Pressure cooking flank will also lead to a tender and flavorful piece of meat.

 

In my experience, flank, plopped dry on a grill, maybe seasoned in place, and cooked like a more forgiving cut of meat like tenderloin or New York isn't going to turn out well. Post grilling, the kitchen could cut the meat against the grain, thus breaking some of the cellular structure and then present the pre-cut meat on a plate with appropriate garnishment and sauce, but that is a fairly rare manner of presentation of a steak dish.

 

Tri-tip was probably substituted for medallions (which I'm still wondering if the medallions were from the tenderloin roast or from a different cut) because tri-tip is a good cut to grill assuming that you do so with care and it is less expensive than tenderloin. I have a buddy who likes to throw BBQ parties and always wants to serve his guests steak. So, to not break the bank he orders a large tray of tri-tip from the grocery store, marinates it overnight, and then grills it with caution. The results are generally good, but again, this is a "high maintenance" piece of meat to grill and serve as a stand alone steak.

 

Just looking at the outcome you want of a steak dish served in a high volume banquet environment, you have to choose a forgiving cut of meat to take into account different chef's grilling skills, different donness levels, and to reduce the prep time prior to actually cooking the steak (no marination, salt and pepper seasoning only). This leads the conscious chef with about 2 or 3 choices for steak; tenderloin, New York/T-bone, or sirloin.

[bUU]

I'm not sure I follow what you're saying here, but won't the outcome to this Curtis Stone experiment be based on how many of his dishes are ordered on the ship? Princess is in it to make money, after all, not to appease the foodies (or the non-foodies) just because.

If you don't like the way things are going that means you want to disrupt or at least delay the effects of momentum. Change will happen. The most likely case is that Stone represents that forward motion. If what you want is what is, or worse, what was, then you have to pursue a course which runs counter to momentum. The point I was making is that the way to support the reactionary perspective is to make clear to the cruise line that people who care about what is being lost care more (about this aspect of the cruise) than those drawn by the forward motion. Providing unsolicited feedback that stands out (handwritten letters) could communicate that message.

[bUU]

I guess I am operating from the perspective that the issues brought up with the always available menu items in the current Curtis Stone branding initiative aren't limited to a few loud voices on Cruise Critic. But the few voices on Cruise Critic may represent hundreds if not thousands of other customers who remain silent on the issue.

Or they may represent a vocal but small and shrinking portion of the customer base.

 

One or the other.

[mrs and mrs]

Or they may represent a vocal but small and shrinking portion of the customer base.

 

One or the other.

 

Oh dear, now that's a very good point.

[Pierlesscruisers]

The survey also has a place to write in additional comments.

 

That is true, but I stand by my original question. Which one would you probably "listen to" more, a comment on one of up to 3000+/- (depending on size of ship, # of pax, % of people responding to survey, etc.) which might reach you only as a very brief summary of the results of the entire survey or a single letter which might (or might not, very possibly the latter) reach you? I still believe that the letter would be more impressive since the customer took the time and interest to invest extra effort to send you. I'm assuming here, always a dangerous thing :o, that the letter is well written and not explosive, etc.

 

Tom

[shredie]

Which one would you probably "listen to" more, a comment on one of up to 3000+/- (depending on size of ship, # of pax, % of people responding to survey, etc.) which might reach you only as a very brief summary of the results of the entire survey or a single letter which might (or might not, very possibly the latter) reach you?

 

 

Well, as I said earlier, I think Princess listens to the sales they make. If the Curtis Stone dishes are not selling well on board, they would make adjustments accordingly. When the Stone experiment first started, there was a choice of three Stone entrees every night (same three.) After awhile, there was one choice and that rotated. I was on a cruise this year where the Stone thing was offered only twice the entire time. An announced expansion of SHARE to the Coral didn't happen. From my uninformed position, it looks to me as if the Curtis Stone experiment is not a smashing success. I also don't think the issue of medallions vs. Stone is one of diners' sophistication. If the medallions had been replaced by some other beef dish prepared by some other name chef, there might have been another reaction. If it was a tasty beef dish people liked, they would order it and Princess would make sales. I really don't think Princess cares if the customer is a foodie or a tasteless hick. They are happy to sell food to anybody.

[bUU]

I'm confused about what you're saying. If the dishes are not selling well onboard, what are people eating instead? What you see on board at least with regard to the main dining room is a reflection of passengers making decisions between the options that are made available to them. If people are ordering the dishes that are unique each night instead of the every night dishes then that may very well just appear as if the unique dishes are more attractive. It's not necessarily going to say anything absolute about the everyday dishes.

 

You keep going back to this aspect of it that it was a beef dish that was removed from the everyday menu. That is a really clear reflection of changing American tastes. I don't understand why you would assume that a greater variety of rotating proteins must be viewed as a negative thing by most passengers.

[shredie]

I'm confused about what you're saying. If the dishes are not selling well onboard, what are people eating instead? What you see on board at least with regard to the main dining room is a reflection of passengers making decisions between the options that are made available to them. If people are ordering the dishes that are unique each night instead of the every night dishes then that may very well just appear as if the unique dishes are more attractive. It's not necessarily going to say anything absolute about the everyday dishes.

 

You keep going back to this aspect of it that it was a beef dish that was removed from the everyday menu. That is a really clear reflection of changing American tastes. I don't understand why you would assume that a greater variety of rotating proteins must be viewed as a negative thing by most passengers.

I guess you and I just confuse each other. There are two categories of entrees on the menu--the Always Available and the unique daily offerings. The Stone dishes are part of the Always Available category (even though each variety is not really always available, a confusing distinction.) What I am saying is that if the Stone dishes are not selling as well as the other Always Available entrees, then perhaps people don't really want them. My beef (haha--a pun) all along has been that Stone replaced too many of the standard Always Available dishes, especially the beef dishes.

 

I guess you haven't perused the many threads here on the Princess board where more people complain about losing the beef dishes to Stone's stuff than praise the replacements. I don't really care about "changing American tastes," since it well known that I am an unsophisticated food hick born in Toronto. I think I'll just keep complaining that I want my medallions back.

 

Let's just continue to confuse each other.

[bUU]

Everyone has read a lot of threads but what we cannot see is how many people don't complain. That is always hidden from us. Hence, we talk about surveys, and then we talk about letters and phone calls. Not caring about the passengers who aren't complaining doesn't mean they don't exist and more importantly doesn't mean their ratification of changes shouldn't affect you.

[dtb55]

I often get the "always available" tenderloin and ask for Bearnaise sauce.

 

 

I too wish the medallions would be brought back so I can do what Pam mentioned.

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Edited November 29, 2016 by dtb55

[yuccaman]

I'm confused about what you're saying. If the dishes are not selling well onboard, what are people eating instead? What you see on board at least with regard to the main dining room is a reflection of passengers making decisions between the options that are made available to them. If people are ordering the dishes that are unique each night instead of the every night dishes then that may very well just appear as if the unique dishes are more attractive. It's not necessarily going to say anything absolute about the everyday dishes.

 

You keep going back to this aspect of it that it was a beef dish that was removed from the everyday menu. That is a really clear reflection of changing American tastes. I don't understand why you would assume that a greater variety of rotating proteins must be viewed as a negative thing by most passengers.

 

But if you've truly read each entry of this thread, myself and others have made it clear that not only is the beef missed, but the alternative Stone 'always available' selections (especially pork belly, the only "substitute for what was a beef dish) are often/usually terrible! - especially in not lending themselves towards banquet style cooking- and yes, MANY have complained about this in multiple threads ad nauseum.

[bUU]

I haven't said anything indicating that people aren't posting what you say they're posting. You do seem to be overlooking what I've written.

Edited November 29, 2016 by bicker

[yuccaman]

I haven't said anything indicating that people aren't posting what you say they're posting. You do seem to be overlooking what I've written.

 

Because you keep insisting this to various people- "You keep going back to this aspect of it that it was a beef dish that was removed from the everyday menu. That is a really clear reflection of changing American tastes. I don't understand why you would assume that a greater variety of rotating proteins must be viewed as a negative thing by most passengers."...

 

And we are telling you why! The "greater variety" of proteins replacing the beef 'always available' selection are terrible! (Covered in my last, and previous posts)

[bUU]

And we are telling you why!

No. You're telling me what your opinion is, and as worth of respect as it is, you cannot legitimately speak for all Princess passengers. Those posting in these forums cannot even legitimately speak for all Princess passengers on Cruise Critic. That's the disconnect here - the difference between the personal perceptions of those who post in these forums and the way the cruise line will see things. That's why we keep going back to how to bridge the gap between the personal opinion of the posters on the forum and what will be used by the cruise line to actually know whether things are "terrible" - the surveys, and the letters they get aside from the surveys. I don't know how to explain it any plainer.

[MrMan]

Two thoughts on this conversation:

 

* 95% of the passengers on any given sailing don't even know whats on, or even if there is an always available item or what it is until they sit down for their first meal on a sailing, so this is an non issue for most customers. They don't know what it was like a week, month, day, years ago.

 

* I'm doubt Princes takes much stock on the opinions of this or any message board, especially if it is the same group of posters with high counts repeating the same opinions over and over again Not much of a great sample, and those who don't like something tend to post on message boards, which also wrecks the sample

Edited November 29, 2016 by MrMan

[bUU]

Two thoughts on this conversation:

 

* 95% of the passengers on any given sailing don't even know whats on, or even if there is an always available item or what it is until they sit down for their first meal on a sailing, so this is an non issue for most customers. They don't know what it was like a week, month, day, years ago.

 

* I'm doubt Princes takes much stock on the opinions of this or any message board, especially if it is the same group of posters with high counts repeating the same opinions over and over again Not much of a great sample, and those who don't like something tend to post on message boards, which also wrecks the sample

Yes that's precisely the points.

[yuccaman]

No. You're telling me what your opinion is, and as worth of respect as it is, you cannot legitimately speak for all Princess passengers. Those posting in these forums cannot even legitimately speak for all Princess passengers on Cruise Critic. That's the disconnect here - the difference between the personal perceptions of those who post in these forums and the way the cruise line will see things. That's why we keep going back to how to bridge the gap between the personal opinion of the posters on the forum and what will be used by the cruise line to actually know whether things are "terrible" - the surveys, and the letters they get aside from the surveys. I don't know how to explain it any plainer.

 

NO ONE said I was speaking for all Princess passengers. If you READ what I said, I was talking about the PREPONDERANCE of negative comments on the above topic ON THESE BOARDS. Duh.

 

And given that these are high-frequency, high-involvement cruisers, they may not represent the general public skew, but when enough high-frequency, high-involvement cruisers tell you here that the pork belly is prepared badly most of the time- that's solid proof. In none of my postings did I get into the topic of how to communicate this to the cruise lines, so I don't know why you are addressing me on that.

Edited November 29, 2016 by yuccaman

[bUU]

that's solid proof.

We will have to agree to disagree.

[shredie]

* I'm doubt Princes takes much stock on the opinions of this or any message board, especially if it is the same group of posters with high counts repeating the same opinions over and over again Not much of a great sample, and those who don't like something tend to post on message boards, which also wrecks the sample

 

I'm going to try this again. Princess will base its decisions on the sales it makes in the dining room. If the Stone dishes do not sell, then they will go away. However, expressing an opinion about the choices on this or any other board or on a survey or in a letter or email can't hurt.

 

(I see this "high post count" nonsense more often on this board. Why is that?)

Edited November 29, 2016 by shredie

[caribill]

I'm going to try this again. Princess will base its decisions on the sales it makes in the dining room. If the Stone dishes do not sell, then they will go away. However, expressing an opinion about the choices on this or any other board or on a survey or in a letter or email can't hurt.

 

 

The beef medallions "sold" very well. So the reason they were removed had nothing to due with lack of demand.