If NCL offered completely non-smoking cruises, would you book?

[katiecat]

Smokers have very limited sections to smoke and non-smokers come in and complain in our space.

The cruise lines already lost money from smokers not booking balconies.

[Barnkitty]

1) Yes!!!!

 

2) Yes!!! (depending on how much but up to at least $250 per person)

[Barb Nahoumi]

YES, if it was a destination I want to go.

[tinkandpan]

I'd be all over a smoke free cruise. It's a filthy disgusting habit and I shouldn't have to smell of it just by luck of location. Or at least no smoking indoors. I don't however think I'd pay a premium for it though.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

[Two Wheels Only]

The cruise lines already lost money from smokers not booking balconies.

How are they losing money if those balconies are still being booked? If smokers don't book them, non-smokers will.

[NLH Arizona]

Smokers have very limited sections to smoke and non-smokers come in and complain in our space.

The cruise lines already lost money from smokers not booking balconies.

I would think that if the first cruise line that did this lost enough money for it to be noticeable, other lines would not have followed suit.

[Chopsmom]

Yes!!!

No!!

[DMH15]

NCL has the following...

 

 

 

"Electronic cigarettes cannot be used in public areas where there is a No Smoking policy in force; simply because these cigarettes look so realistic and therefore other guests' perception is that we are not enforcing the No Smoking rule."

 

 

 

I was once at a booth in a restaurant eating when a guy standing there exhaled vapor and I was in a huge fog. No, it had no odor but it was very unsettling.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[riclop]

I wonder if NCL ever looked into having specific cruises be 100% non-smoking? If they did:

 

1. Would you book one?

 

2. Would you be willing to pay a premium to book a cruise that was 100% smoke-free?

Yes indeed.

[CruisingUS]

1. Yes

2. No

me too

[kevmoley]

1- Yes, my wife and I don't smoke.

2- No, even though we don't smoke, I don't mind too much that other people smoke on my cruise.

[sexycpl613]

Yes

No

[StatenIslandCruises]

I'm not a smoker and actually went on a. Smoke free cruise fleury the carnival paradise was smokefree. Was the most boring cruise of my life....though I was in costa this spring and it was awful with everyone smoking in their cabins

[jessMN74]

YES!!!!

No

[poffles]

Absolutely YES!

 

Premium? Hmmm ... define premium. No I would not pay big dollar for non smoking as I consider NCL to already getting up there in cost. Instead I would continue to turn to Celebrity. In fact, that is one of the reasons I turned to Celebrity over NCL (that and included drink package but NCL does that now too so I would consider returning). My last sailing on NCL was the Epic and it was terrible smokey in main areas down the middle of the ship.

 

Actually, I would love if NCL just disallowed smoking on the inner areas of the ship, especially near the main thoroughfare. Celebrity allows smoking on their ships, but only on outer areas which is so nice. Friends that smoke can sail with me and those that don't smoke don't 'have' to walk through. I even have friends that smoke that chose to sail Celebrity with me for their first cruise ever and they are currently hooked/booked for their third sailing with them in April, so they are perfectly fine with the designated areas. Win win in my books.

[KarimaJ]

I'm not a smoker and actually went on a. Smoke free cruise fleury the carnival paradise was smokefree. Was the most boring cruise of my life....though I was in costa this spring and it was awful with everyone smoking in their cabins

 

On Costa they are allowed to smoke in cabins> I would think this is a fire hazard in such confined quarters. My hubby smokes BUT not inside and we wouldn't want a cabin that people have smoked in, you can't get the smell out and it makes me stuffy.

[poffles]

Smokers have very limited sections to smoke and non-smokers come in and complain in our space.

The cruise lines already lost money from smokers not booking balconies.

 

The small designated smoking areas are not all contained on NCL ships, if they were it might be a totally different discussion. Unless this has changed since I last sailed on their ships.

[Maraprince]

YES!!!!

 

Allowing smoking on a ship in only certain areas does not prevent the smoke from going into non-smoking areas of the ship.

 

 

MARAPRINCE

[NLH Arizona]

I wouldn't have an issue if the casino was non-smoking and they improved the walls around th cigar room, because the smoke travels outside that room into common areas.

[katiecat]

How are they losing money if those balconies are still being booked? If smokers don't book them, non-smokers will.

 

I would think that if the first cruise line that did this lost enough money for it to be noticeable, other lines would not have followed suit.

You might be right but I think they are up for auctions to get what they can out of them.

[grandmarnnurse]

YES!!!!

 

Allowing smoking on a ship in only certain areas does not prevent the smoke from going into non-smoking areas of the ship.

 

 

MARAPRINCE

 

Precisely! And when I suggest a smoke free cruise, I'm looked at as someone trying to take somebody's rights away! I really do not see smoking as a "right" when it affects the health of those around them, and second hand smoke does travel. I know when a car has passed me with a smoker inside! The smell, the smoke, is there polluting the air we breathe. I know that this idea of a smoke free cruise was tried several years ago by Carnival on, I believe, the Paradise, and it was unsuccessful. But many years have passed. More and more people have quit smoking because of health concerns, and far fewer are starting up that horrible habit. We are raising a much more educated generation, who would never put one of those cancer sticks in their mouths. More and more public areas have banned smoking, not only in their facilities, but anywhere even in their parking lots. So, YES! Let's make cruise ships smoke free too. I feel for the people addicted to this habit, but it does not mean I want to expose myself or my family to their unhealthy habits. They come off so righteous, like we are the ones with the problem. As a retired RN, I've seen many a patient die as a result of this habit, including my own mother in law. Besides COPD and heart disease, the list of cancers continues to grow. There is NO justification for keeping this allowed on ships. And I feel that the ships would still be totally full. So I no longer buy that argument. It may have been the case when Carnival tried it, but that excuse will no longer work. Far more people are non smokers than smokers.

[grest]

1. Yes

2. No

 

Exactly!

[pascalburns]

yes to the questions.

[Two Wheels Only]

There is NO justification for keeping this allowed on ships.

I am by no means "pro-smoking" (read my posts in this thread) but the "justification" (right or wrong) is financial.

 

Look at how many times the word "casino" is mentioned in this thread. From NCL's perspective, the link between smoking and gambling is a cash cow. Even the wording of their own policy shows that NCL wants the people who enjoy smoking to continue to gamble...

 

Active Casino players may smoke cigarettes in the Casino during gaming hours.

 

...which means that if people who are in the casino want to continue to smoke (feed their addiction), they can do so if they continue to gamble (fill NCL's pockets).

 

 

There are numerous studies that show the link between smoking and gambling and how they both trigger the brain (no need to delve into that subject, for now) but as long as NCL's bean counters decide that the money brought in from gambling is more with a casino that allows smoking than from a casino that doesn't allow smoking, there will be smoking allowed in NCL's casino (look at Escape's history).

 

 

With better design, ventilation, filtration, etc. almost everyone could be happy. If casino A allowed smoking and the smoke was contained to that area and casino B didn't allow smoking, NCL would get maximum dollars from smokers and non-smokers. There would still be some who wouldn't be happy such as a "vaper" who doesn't like the smell of smoke. The vaper doesn't want to be in the smoking area and cannot vape in the non-smoking area. (Vaping isn't popular enough for a special area to vape :p)

 

 

 

And I feel that the ships would still be totally full. So I no longer buy that argument. It may have been the case when Carnival tried it, but that excuse will no longer work. Far more people are non smokers than smokers.

I agree but non-smokers (on average) gamble less than smokers. NCL would have to make up for that lost revenue. Yes, there are some who would like to gamble more but currently don't because of the smoke but the amount lost from them not gambling isn't as much as the amount gained from the smokers (from NCL's point of view).

 

The best (but not perfect) solution is better design/engineering of the ships. As a smoker leaves the smoking area, the smell may bother some non-smokers but that's life. The smoker may not like having to smoke in a confined area of such a large ship but that's life. Even if NCL split the fleet into "entire ship is non-smoking" and "smoke almost everywhere", people would still complain...

 

"My favorite ship is wrong..."

"The itinerary that I want is with the wrong ship..."

"My significant other and I can't be on the same ship..."

 

I'm not a smoker and have never been one but if NCL gave out patches and gum for gamblers while making the casino (and the rest of the ship) non-smoking, could that work for everyone? The "pleasure" of smoking wouldn't be there but the majority on board wouldn't be adversely impacted by the minority on board.

[Laurie7]

Depends on the ship.

 

1. Yes

2. No....shouldn't have to. If anything, the cruises that allow smoking should cost more. :p

 

I agree 100%