Has the class camel just stuck his nose under the tent?

[Travelcat2]

Marc and I are not denying that - we are just talking about the fact that it does not exist when you are on the ship.

After thinking more about this subject, I'm changing my mind a bit. I have less of a problem with benefits given to Seven Seas Society members than to someone who booked an upper suite and feels entitled. Seven Seas Society members have spent so much $$$ and have sailed on Regent many days - the most loyal of Regent customers!(QUOTE)

 

TC, question since you said Seven Seas Society Members spent $$$-so why not change the rules from how many nights one spends on the ship to how $$$ (your words) much spends.

That would be fair, those that buy lower cabins take longer to get to the top, this in higher suite get there faster. Problem solved. Rick

PS we're like Carololl, we mostly wouldn't use the dining, nor would we have dinner with the Capt (which is a perk)-we get a suite because that is the way we like to vacation.

 

Good to see you back. It is interesting that what you find fair is the exact reason why Oceania cannot combine loyalty points with Regent (I think you understand what I'm saying). I'm glad to see the debate on this issue going on as it gives Regent a good insight into what their passengers are feeling about "The Study".

 

On Regent, it is the days that count. That is the way it was set up and they have had a lot of success with this. Why mess around with success? IMO, it isn't fair for a person that books the Regent suite for 25 nights (for instance) to be at the same level as someone that has sailed 100 nights in the lowest cabin. I really do believe that it is the Seven Seas Society passengers that are the most valuable to Regent (followed by people new to Regent that book another cruise while onboard).

 

IMO, there is nothing wrong with you or anyone else not wanting to dine in the private dining room, not wanting dinner with the Captain, not wanting a special caviar set-up, not wanting a party in their suite, etc. We all book suites that we want to make our vacation the way we want it. For us, it is having 1 1/2 bathrooms..... but, if we do have a larger suite, we enjoy it with others.

 

What I'm seeing on this thread is that the majority of posters do not like having a private dining room for "privileged guests". IMO, all Regent passengers are special and could be considered privileged guests.

 

P.S. In this case, I accidentally brought another topic into the mix which probably confuses everything so I offer my apologies. I'll stick to the topic of this thread but would be happy to discuss Seven Seas Society benefits on another thread - it seems to have interest from a few posters. I may even start the thread myself.

Edited January 16, 2017 by Travelcat2

[freddie]

Caroldoll & Ronrick - While I do not for a moment disagree with you when you state that when you pay more you should get more, I respectfully suggest that the primary "more" that you should get and that you do in fact get for your $$$ when you book the major suites is that large and well-furnished space. After all, onboard real estate is what Regent is selling (well, in reality, "renting").

 

For example, on my next Regent cruise (on Voyager) the largest suite is 3-4 times larger (including balcony) than the cheapest standard cabin but costs just a titch more than twice the tariff of that lowly standard cabin. Aside from the total square foot matter, there are the priceless elements in those large suites, such as the extra full- or half-baths. Some of the other perks of the named suites, such as butler service, ability to dine in the specialty restaurants at one's whim, etc., could be considered gravy. One may look at other luxury lines, such as Seabourn, which does not have butlers for any class of suite but retains a fiercely loyal clientele.

 

In summary, an argument can be made that those who book the named suites are already getting their money's worth compared to those who book standard cabins.

Edited January 17, 2017 by freddie

[LynnRuns]

I have been finding all of these threads so fascinating!

At the end of the day it is about revenue.

You can say "it's about the nights sailed" but if Regents wants to give status points based on revenue dollars they certainly can.

Delta airlines did the very same thing a few years ago and high mileage fliers but low $ spenders were quick to say that it was a terrible idea. And one by one other carriers are following suit.

I agree that a company may want to sustain a certain "culture" but ultimately the balance sheet prevails.

[Travelcat2]

I have been finding all of these threads so fascinating!

At the end of the day it is about revenue.

You can say "it's about the nights sailed" but if Regents wants to give status points based on revenue dollars they certainly can.

Delta airlines did the very same thing a few years ago and high mileage fliers but low $ spenders were quick to say that it was a terrible idea. And one by one other carriers are following suit.

I agree that a company may want to sustain a certain "culture" but ultimately the balance sheet prevails.

 

Agree but do not understand how this relates to the private dining room. The top suites are regularly booked and it does not seem that people that book them are very excited about this new dining closet (aka dining room). IMO, this is against not only Regent culture but the culture of all luxury cruise lines.

Edited January 17, 2017 by Travelcat2

[LynnRuns]

Agree but do not understand how this relates to the private dining room. IMO, this is against not only Regent culture but the culture of all luxury cruise lines.

 

TC - this was your comment in your post immeditately preceeding mine:

"On Regent, it is the days that count. That is the way it was set up and they have had a lot of success with this. Why mess around with success? IMO, it isn't fair for a person that books the Regent suite for 25 nights (for instance) to be at the same level as someone that has sailed 100 nights in the lowest cabin."

 

My post was in response to your post. Regent is likely concerned with year over year revenue growth. Culture may indeed be important to you, but Regent will still need to grow the top and bottom line. I am not saying I disagree with the perspective that an egalitarian culture is preferable (at least for me it is) but I am not Regent's CEO or CFO.

[ronrick1943]

On Regent, it is the days that count. That is the way it was set up and they have had a lot of success with this. Why mess around with success? IMO, it isn't fair for a person that books the Regent suite for 25 nights (for instance) to be at the same level as someone that has sailed 100 nights in the lowest cabin. I really do believe that it is the Seven Seas Society passengers that are the most valuable to Regent (followed by people new to Regent that book another cruise while onboard).

 

Well I think Regent makes more money on high end suite per person. Your 25 nights v 100 nights......if you sail 100 nights at a much lower right your taking 75 more nights of more drinking, eating, tours and all the other thinks. For the person that spends the same amount in 25 days that a person does for 100 days---so why shouldn't they get more points for dollars spend. "O" doesn't do $$, they do cruise time almost like Regent-up not the same. Your the one talking being fair, this would do it.

 

Rick

[ronrick1943]

Caroldoll & Ronrick - While I do not for a moment disagree with you when you state that when you pay more you should get more, I respectfully suggest that the primary "more" that you should get and that you do in fact get for your $$$ when you book the major suites is that large and well-furnished space. After all, onboard real estate is what Regent is selling (well, in reality, "renting").

 

For example, on my next Regent cruise (on Voyager) the largest suite is 3-4 times larger (including balcony) than the cheapest standard cabin but costs just a titch more than twice the tariff of that lowly standard cabin. Aside from the total square foot matter, there are the priceless elements in those large suites, such as the extra full- or half-baths. Some of the other perks of the named suites, such as butler service, ability to dine in the specialty restaurants at one's whim, etc., could be considered gravy. One may look at other luxury lines, such as Seabourn, which does not have butlers for any class of suite but retains a fiercely loyal clientele.

 

Agree, read above post. You get what you pay for-it's all about profit & $. Rick

[poss]

freddie: I'm assuming that your phrase "that lowly standard cabin" was at least half tongue-in-cheek. For some of us that cabin just about breaks the bank.

[Travelcat2]

Agree, read above post. You get what you pay for-it's all about profit & $. Rick

 

Rick, think that you and I posted at the same time. I also agree with Freddie's post - especially when he said "While I do not for a moment disagree with you when you state that when you pay more you should get more, I respectfully suggest that the primary "more" that you should get and that you do in fact get for your $$$ when you book the major suites is that large and well-furnished space" Just the fact that you booked the Grand Suite is giving you what you paid for.

 

On the other hand, I strongly disagree with your view of sailing in an upper suite vs. a regular suite. My TA (who I obviously cannot name) is a top seller for Regent. Most of their clients book lower category suites. On our next Explorer cruise, they have over 50 suites booked (and their customers book many, many suites on several itineraries during the year). Also, many of their clients are Platinum or Titanium. So, when you are thinking about profit, you need to think about people that have 400+ nights on Regent. I have a friend with over 1,000 nights on Regent (not in an upper suite). IMO, it does not make business sense to do what you are suggesting.

 

Thinking about our March cruise, I doubt if Regent is making more money on upper suites than they are getting from 50+ lower category suites. Admittedly, math isn't my thing but it does seem that the 50+ regular suite bookings brings in more money than the handful of upper suites.

Edited January 17, 2017 by Travelcat2

[ronrick1943]

Rick, think that you and I posted at the same time. I also agree with Freddie's post - especially when he said "While I do not for a moment disagree with you when you state that when you pay more you should get more, I respectfully suggest that the primary "more" that you should get and that you do in fact get for your $$$ when you book the major suites is that large and well-furnished space" Just the fact that you booked the Grand Suite is giving you what you paid for.

Thinking about our March cruise, I doubt if Regent is making more money on upper suites than they are getting from 50+ lower category suites. Admittedly, math isn't my thing but it does seem that the 50+ regular suite bookings brings in more money than the handful of upper suites.

 

Your not reading what I wrote---Your the one that said $$$ matter. And we were talking about SSS program. READ what I wrote an others have, you just don't get it. Also no matter what we think your just not open minded about Regent. And asked the airlines about the way they changed their programs with $$$ spend per point(mile) it works and is far to everyone.

[ronrick1943]

TC, sorry but this time I'm done with this one-it's just not worth the time.

[AuntiElaine's boat]

TC - this was your comment in your post immeditately preceeding mine:

"On Regent, it is the days that count. That is the way it was set up and they have had a lot of success with this. Why mess around with success? IMO, it isn't fair for a person that books the Regent suite for 25 nights (for instance) to be at the same level as someone that has sailed 100 nights in the lowest cabin."

 

My post was in response to your post. Regent is likely concerned with year over year revenue growth. Culture may indeed be important to you, but Regent will still need to grow the top and bottom line. I am not saying I disagree with the perspective that an egalitarian culture is preferable (at least for me it is) but I am not Regent's CEO or CFO.

 

The thing is...if you book the high level suites you get many (most) of the amenities o platinum/Titanium members anyway. The loyalty program effectively gives the greatest additional benefits to those in the lowest level suites once they attain the high number of days.

[CruisetheCs]

I have been finding all of these threads so fascinating!

At the end of the day it is about revenue.

You can say "it's about the nights sailed" but if Regents wants to give status points based on revenue dollars they certainly can.

Delta airlines did the very same thing a few years ago and high mileage fliers but low $ spenders were quick to say that it was a terrible idea. And one by one other carriers are following suit.

I agree that a company may want to sustain a certain "culture" but ultimately the balance sheet prevails.

 

I agree. If a company is appealing to the 1%, it certainly seems the company is focussing on where the money is since money is what defines the 1%. Del Rio said that "wealth is not something to hide." It sounds like it is what he is trying to attract.

 

My guess is that Regent is going to go the way of airlines and hotel chains trying to squeeze more revenue out of guests. And to do so Regent may try to bring in a whole new class of guests whose prime concern is not egalitarianism, but rather exclusivity and appearances.

 

It is unfortunate for many of us who have valued Regent's all inclusive, egalitarian (more or less) family-like aura.

 

But if Regent thinks it can attract some new one-percenters who like dining in a small exclusive room and somehow pay extra for the privilege, it appears that is where Del Rio is headed.

[UUNetBill]

But if Regent thinks it can attract some new one-percenters who like dining in a small exclusive room and somehow pay extra for the privilege, it appears that is where Del Rio is headed.

 

If I want to dine in a tiny room, I'll call room service and have them bring a sirloin to my lowly Cat F cabin.

 

I doubt that I'll spring for any of the upper tier suites anytime soon, but even if I did, I don't think I'd prefer dining in that closet back there. But apparently some folks dig that scene.

[CruisetheCs]

If I want to dine in a tiny room, I'll call room service and have them bring a sirloin to my lowly Cat F cabin.

 

I doubt that I'll spring for any of the upper tier suites anytime soon, but even if I did, I don't think I'd prefer dining in that closet back there. But apparently some folks dig that scene.

 

I agree with you about the closet--uh, excuse me, luxurious (formerly secret) dining venue. Whether this is a good business model or not we will have to wait and see, I guess. I know that hotel chains and airlines that I used to be quite loyal to have lost my loyalty for a number of reasons and I fear Regent may end up in the same category.

 

I think Regent's strength is in its on-board product and service. Its weakness is marketing and communications. It will be interesting to see how this plays out from a marketing and financial standpoint.

[hvsteve1]

As you can see from my signature, we sailed three times on Regent (Radisson) a few years back. During the time I retired and we moved, finding ourselves owning two homes for a long time due to the recession, we stopped cruising. Now we are back into it. However, while we were away, Regent added extras such as free shore excursions. They also made most of their cruises longer. As a result, we looked for an alternative. We tried two cruises on HAL and proved that, once you've sailed Regent, you're not satisfied with anything else. Our TA recommended Celebrity. He said they were offering free beverage cards, free gratuities and a generous OBC to cover other expenses. The other important thing was we were able to sail in Aqua Class, which included a private restaurant a cut above the MDR in both food and service. As with most mass-market lines, service and quality in the MDR has declined. It wasn't Regent but the food and service was good, we didn't get nickeled and dimed to death and the crew was very good.

 

We just got off another Celebrity cruise in a suite. It was about the size of a Regent F suite. There was a butler, but we couldn't figure out what to do with him. We, again, had free drinks, covered gratuities, OBC and, this time, internet. We ate in the newly opened suites only restaurant, Luminea. The food and service was on a par with the extra cost specialty restaurants. We had priority boarding, which didn't save an awful lot of time. There was also a private lounge, Michael's Club, for suite quests and upper level frequent cruises. There was an open bar, afternoon tea (nothing like Regent) and coolers where you could help yourself to soda, beer, etc. to take back to your suite. My next two bookings are in Aqua Class as I don't think a suite is worth it unless you get a super deal. And yes, with two private restaurants and a special lounge there is a class system being developed on Celebrity and others. After Regent I sail on Cunard so will find out what a class system is really like. We're in the lowest "class".

 

I think there are two kinds of people who book Regent. Some are like us and try to get the lowest cost suite we can find as, once you walk out the door, you're in the same luxury as everyone else. There are others for whom an expensive car, flying first class and a top suite on Regent are no big deal. The one thing they're not looking for on Regent is status. If Regent starts to develop a class system throughout the ship, it won't mean an awful lot to those people. However, it would be a big blow to those of us for whom Regent is an expensive luxury and who feel our lower fares get us the same cruise as everyone else.

[UUNetBill]

FWIW, we usually sail in letter suites, not in the hoity-toity named suites, but there have been a few occasions where we took the upsell to a nicer suite...for me, being in the larger, more opulent suite was it's own reward. I didn't feel the need to have any other special treatment - in fact, I'd rather NOT have it. I'm on vacation to relax and unwind, not worry myself with petty displays of "Ooh, look at me, I'm special" - which, fortunately has been VERY rare on my previous cruises. But it's been rare specifically because Regent didn't support, allow, or encourage any real class distinction on board.

 

I'm sure people will disagree with me, but for us, that was one of the major draws of a Regent cruise - get on board and enjoy my time traveling with other like-minded people. I would much rather get the treatment I get on Regent than to be even more pampered or cosseted on a mass-market ship. I, for one, enjoy Regent the way it is right now, where the only real perks apply to the people who keep coming back, not who throws the most $$ at a cabin.

 

Rant over. Back to work (so I can afford more cruises).

[Travelcat2]

But if you spend a lot more on a suite you should get extra perks. If you chose to fly First Class on a plane you get extras, so why not on the ship. Even with trains you get extras when you book the upper cabin on the train. If you book a upper suite on the ship you get the same points as an inside cabin with the Regent loyal program-why?

Rick

 

Rick, I apologize for my part in this thread getting confused between onboard benefits and loyalty benefits. I thought that I may have started the mix-up (and definitely contributed to it) so I went back a few pages and found your post above (post #25) where the loyalty program was entered into the discussion (BTW, there are no inside cabins on Regent).

 

In any case, my $$$ comments were related to the loyalty benefits - not the onboard benefits. While it was better late than never, I started a thread regarding Seven Seas Society benefits so that the two can be discussed separately. What appeared to be my lack of reading your posts was actually my confusing the two types of benefits.

 

In terms of onboard benefits, my perspective may be a little different since we have sailed in so many suite categories (years of staying in PH and below until the upsell offers started coming through my TA - when cruises were not selling well which put us into what Bill calls the "high roller suites".) We were amazed when we were able to book a Grand and Master suite on the Explorer transatlantic cruises for less money than a PH suite on most itineraries on any of the other ships. I bring up this point because I understand what it is like to be in an "F" suite vs. a Grand suite (for instance) since I have been in both and understand the impact the "class system" would have on Regent passengers.

 

My perspective isn't right or wrong - it is what it is. hvsteve1 gave a great description of what it is like on Celebrity being in an upper suite. This is not what I would like to see Regent become (as I've stated before, if you want "class" benefits, they are available on many non-luxury cruise lines).

 

Strongly agree with CruisetheCs post "I think Regent's strength is in its on-board product and service". Hope it stays that way!

Edited January 17, 2017 by Travelcat2

[warburg]

As you can see from my signature, we sailed three times on Regent (Radisson) a few years back. During the time I retired and we moved, finding ourselves owning two homes for a long time due to the recession, we stopped cruising. Now we are back into it. However, while we were away, Regent added extras such as free shore excursions. They also made most of their cruises longer. As a result, we looked for an alternative. We tried two cruises on HAL and proved that, once you've sailed Regent, you're not satisfied with anything else. Our TA recommended Celebrity. He said they were offering free beverage cards, free gratuities and a generous OBC to cover other expenses. The other important thing was we were able to sail in Aqua Class, which included a private restaurant a cut above the MDR in both food and service. As with most mass-market lines, service and quality in the MDR has declined. It wasn't Regent but the food and service was good, we didn't get nickeled and dimed to death and the crew was very good.

 

We just got off another Celebrity cruise in a suite. It was about the size of a Regent F suite. There was a butler, but we couldn't figure out what to do with him. We, again, had free drinks, covered gratuities, OBC and, this time, internet. We ate in the newly opened suites only restaurant, Luminea. The food and service was on a par with the extra cost specialty restaurants. We had priority boarding, which didn't save an awful lot of time. There was also a private lounge, Michael's Club, for suite quests and upper level frequent cruises. There was an open bar, afternoon tea (nothing like Regent) and coolers where you could help yourself to soda, beer, etc. to take back to your suite. My next two bookings are in Aqua Class as I don't think a suite is worth it unless you get a super deal. And yes, with two private restaurants and a special lounge there is a class system being developed on Celebrity and others. After Regent I sail on Cunard so will find out what a class system is really like. We're in the lowest "class".

 

I think there are two kinds of people who book Regent. Some are like us and try to get the lowest cost suite we can find as, once you walk out the door, you're in the same luxury as everyone else. There are others for whom an expensive car, flying first class and a top suite on Regent are no big deal. The one thing they're not looking for on Regent is status. If Regent starts to develop a class system throughout the ship, it won't mean an awful lot to those people. However, it would be a big blow to those of us for whom Regent is an expensive luxury and who feel our lower fares get us the same cruise as everyone else.

 

Greetings from South Beach, hvysteve1. You are correct about learning the class system on Cunard. Our Cunard career began with a simple B level balcony. as part of a Vantage package. We dined in the huge MDR, with two sittings. The QM2 is a three class ship, although we didn't notice it at first. However, before we got off the ship, we booked a 24 day cruise with two crossings and 12 days in the Med. The woman we booked with said that we should try the Brittania Club, a special room behind the MDR where we would have our own table, and no set dining hour, and a much nicer stateroom. And so it went. Finally, Princess and Queen Grills. These levels have special everything.

 

We sailed QM2 so often because it was convenient. Moored in Brooklyn, it was a cab ride from Manhattan. Now, we feature lines that sail from Miami, 20 minutes from our condo on South Beach. We enjoyed the Queen every time we sailed on her. The class stuff is just part of the package.

 

Mary

Edited January 17, 2017 by warburg

[mrlevin]

In 20+ cruises on Radisson/Regent, except for one Diamond and one Paul Gaugin which did not have H cabins, I have "paid" for H on all except two cruises. One was a segment of GAP where H were allocated to full GAPpers and the other was a Cat G on Navigator as we would put my mother-in-law in a balcony across the hall. Sometimes i have had to waitlist for an H but it always cleared. From my first 19 day holiday trip on Mariner, I have learned that the best value for me is to find a ship where I love the lowest cabin onboard the ship. It works with all Regent ships and it has worked for us on Sliversea Expedition ships.

 

I have gone through the changes in hotel and airline programs to make the programs more reflective of revenue; I understand that. If Regent wanted to give double night credit for high end suites, I would understand that, too. To me, Regent is still the best value out there, for me, and I hope it stays that way for the next thirty years.

 

Marc

[Travelcat2]

In 20+ cruises on Radisson/Regent, except for one Diamond and one Paul Gaugin which did not have H cabins, I have "paid" for H on all except two cruises. One was a segment of GAP where H were allocated to full GAPpers and the other was a Cat G on Navigator as we would put my mother-in-law in a balcony across the hall. Sometimes i have had to waitlist for an H but it always cleared. From my first 19 day holiday trip on Mariner, I have learned that the best value for me is to find a ship where I love the lowest cabin onboard the ship. It works with all Regent ships and it has worked for us on Sliversea Expedition ships.

 

I have gone through the changes in hotel and airline programs to make the programs more reflective of revenue; I understand that. If Regent wanted to give double night credit for high end suites, I would understand that, too. To me, Regent is still the best value out there, for me, and I hope it stays that way for the next thirty years.

 

Marc

 

Marc - bite your tongue;) If Regent gave double night credit for high end suites only, I would be ........ hmmmmm, trying not to use a word that would be bleeped....... angry (that will do).

 

Some posters are not aware that many passengers that book the lowest suites also cruise 3 to 4 times more than those of us in higher suites. IMO, people booking the lowest suites should not be penalized in any way and are just as important to Regent.

 

P.S. Marc, with all of that said, I hope you are okay with the "G" suites on the Explorer.

[mrlevin]

 

P.S. Marc, with all of that said, I hope you are okay with the "G" suites on the Explorer.

 

We have three adults in a G2 suite; we are looking forward to it. I have already found the closest restroom and figure I can be there in less than 90 seconds. :D

[Travelcat2]

We have three adults in a G2 suite; we are looking forward to it. I have already found the closest restroom and figure I can be there in less than 90 seconds. :D

 

That is a good thing:D Where is the third person going to sleep?

 

I think that you will enjoy the Explorer. We are looking forward to the pre-cruise activities as well as being back on the Explorer. If you feel like it, say hi when you see us...... I think that we're understanding each other a bit better on CC.