Unfair to Solo Cruisers on Holland America

[igraf]

No surprise here. From a revenue point of view: 2 per cabin > 1 per cabin >> unsold cabin

 

It seems to me that it is easier for a single to be spontaneous than a working couple (like us), so you should try to work this to your advantage. Even with both of us working, we usually book within 60 days.

 

 

igraf

 

 

 

 

There are special rates for solo cruisers with many of the cruise lines. They are usually within 90 days of the sailing date. So you are right. The reduced single supplements are a way of filling unsold cabins. For retired people, that's great, but for those of us who still work it doesn't help much if you need to book more in advance.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[TiogaCruiser]

It looks like Swan is gone:

 

https://www.google.com/amp/www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/cruises/articles/swan-hellenic-parent-company-all-leisure-group-ceases-trading-13000-passengers-affected/amp/

[RuthC]

I just priced out the 10 day Koningsdam sailing for Nov 19th:

Solo in Solo Cabin - $2516.00

Solo in Reg Cabin - $3076.00 or $3114.00 depending on deck

P/P Double Reg Cab - $1619.00 to $1649.00 depending on deck

 

so right now, for a solo cabin, there is a significant savings

True, paying for a solo cabin on the Koningsdam is less expensive than paying for a double cabin, but there are downsides to this, too.

It is much more expensive than the per person double occupancy rate, and that for a much smaller cabin. That was also true in the past, when HAL did have single cabins on their ships, and is currently true in the single cabins on the Prinsendam.

Besides, that, the Koningsdam offers very little in the way of choice for those solo cabins. They are all in the most forward area of the ship, and except for deck, are the same style of cabin. Where are the insides? Balcony cabins? Suites of various types?

[RDC1]

However, the cruise line has to price based on the typical passenger within the demographic. There's no practicable way to price based on an individual customer's personal proclivities.

Actually I do not believe that individual pricing would even be legal.

[sail7seas]

That is my questtion........... 'Where are the balcony cabins for solos?"

 

 

These all the way forward small space c a b ins are throw away space.

. They had this space and they made these awful ca bins in order to squeaak out whatever money they could get form anyone willing to throw that money at them. I'd far rather r stay home than put up with such a cab in. JMO and my choic e. How magnaminous of them to be able gto boast , we put solo cabins on our new ship. They can have them !! :rolleyes:

Greed by any other name is simple greed.

Edited March 30, 2017 by sail7seas

[RDC1]

That is my questtion........... 'Where are the balcony cabins for solos?"

 

 

These all the way forward small space c a b ins are throw away space.

. They had this space and they made these awful ca bins in order to squeaak out whatever money they could get form anyone willing to throw that money at them. I'd far rather r stay home than put up with such a cab in. JMO and my choic e. How magnaminous of them to be able gto boast , we put solo cabins on our new ship. They can have them !! :rolleyes:

Greed by any other name is simple greed.

 

 

Simple economics. The cruise business is a very interesting one. Very high levels of capital investment, highly competitive market with other cruise lines as well as other leisure travel options, very limited ability to increase price, almost all costs per cruise fixed (the costs remain the same if the ship is 50% booked or 105% booked).

 

Overall profit margin pretty low (single digit, even in a time of very low fuel prices and very low borrowing costs, two of a cruise lines major expenses). Not a lot of room for error.

 

A cruise line needs to be as efficient as possible to remain in business. There are numerous examples of those that have not. Many of those that remain have been taken over when they were close to failing and would have if they had not been purchased.

 

So you have people complain because of the solo supplement, which is high for reasons I described earlier in this stream, and they complain because the solo cabins that are provided is in less desirable locations. The only other choice is to do what NCL did and make the solo rooms very very small with just enough room for the bed and bathroom and have a shared common area such that the total per solo space is about half of the regular room space per person.

[bUU]

Actually I do not believe that individual pricing would even be legal.

It's a good question, but I think in the end, it would be, if it was practicable. Some retailers direct discounts to specific customers based on their prior purchasing.

 

What wouldn't be legal it to price in a manner that can be shown to explicitly exclude members of a protected class.

 

This message may have been entered using voice recognition. Please excuse any typos.

[RDC1]

It's a good question, but I think in the end, it would be, if it was practicable. Some retailers direct discounts to specific customers based on their prior purchasing.

 

What wouldn't be legal it to price in a manner that can be shown to explicitly exclude members of a protected class.

 

This message may have been entered using voice recognition. Please excuse any typos.

 

There are a number of legal cases that have a counter view. Retailers can discount, they can have clubs where people earn points that can be cashed in. But that is about it. You can negotiate price. But it pretty much has to be open to everyone. Any business trying to set individual prices would be over whelmed in legal cases, that would be almost impossible to defend. That is why the hotels, retailers, airlines, etc do what they do in the US. You even run into issues that limit volume discounts to some degree (the Morton Salt Case).

[bUU]

Disney regularly does this, issuing discounts tied to the individual and not valid for anyone else. I've never heard anything about them losing any lawsuits in that regard, and they still do it.

 

This message may have been entered using voice recognition. Please excuse any typos.

[Bostonjetset]

OP, whilst I don't sail solo, I can certainly empathize with you. Holland America Line has some of the most confusing pricing schemes of any line I've sailed and let's not even begin to talk of their website. As others have stated numerous times, they are in their right to only give half the OBC if it is stated per person. However, and it is a big however, it would be MUCH more passenger friendly to just give you the extra $50. It is a drop in the bucket for them and would make the whole experience better right from the start. When a customer feels cheated, regardless of the legality of it, they tend to talk about it. This creates unneeded negative associations with the brand in question. I am not one to think the "customer is always right" as that cannot be further from the truth and can create a sense of entitlement. But in this case, at least to me, you are right. You paid for two people and thus should get the OBC that would have been allotted to two people sharing the stateroom. In fact, I got a brochure from Cunard in the post yesterday and it specifically stated, in the fine print, that "Singles paying the single supplement earn the equivalent of the per stateroom Onboard Credit applicable to the category booked." Clearly other lines [even under the same corporate umbrella] realize that this is the right thing to do. I should also note that for most sailings on Cunard, the single supplement is only 175% for Britannia-class staterooms. Something to think about for the future if you are a frequent solo cruiser.

 

With all that said, don't judge the whole line based on this one snafu. HAL ships are lovely and they are staffed with some of the best crew at sea. Please do enjoy your cruise!!

[Bostonjetset]

Disney regularly does this, issuing discounts tied to the individual and not valid for anyone else. I've never heard anything about them losing any lawsuits in that regard, and they still do it.

 

This message may have been entered using voice recognition. Please excuse any typos.

In fact, HAL also does this with their casino rates that are not valid for anyone other than the person issued the offer. Even those in the same household are not eligible if the person who was issued the offer is not traveling in the same stateroom.

[igraf]

The OP paid for one cabin, not two people. I would also point out that HAL is not obligated to give OBC to anyone. We didn't get any OBC on our last cruise.

 

igraf

 

 

 

 

...You paid for two people and thus should get the OBC that would have been allotted to two people sharing the stateroom. In fact, I got a brochure from Cunard in the post yesterday and it specifically stated, in the fine print, that "Singles paying the single supplement earn the equivalent of the per stateroom Onboard Credit applicable to the category booked." ...

[RDC1]

Disney regularly does this, issuing discounts tied to the individual and not valid for anyone else. I've never heard anything about them losing any lawsuits in that regard, and they still do it.

 

This message may have been entered using voice recognition. Please excuse any typos.

 

What is the criteria that they use for the discounts? That is the question. Any program must have clearly defined criteria. The way points are earned have to be open to everyone. Such a system is valid. Having a system where each person logs in and gets a different price based upon some criteria that the company wants to use is not. If the company does not have consistent and well defined and well published criteria and have records to show the criteria is met and that there is not any discrimination in the application of the criteria. I am using discrimination to mean equally apply to everyone, not just in terms of legally protected classes. If you apply different fares tied to individuals, and do not have them as part of a well defined point system, it is very very easy to sue and win.

 

So as I said before having a system where there is a defined price and earned discounts can be applied is fine. Players club systems are fine where people are awarded cruises based upon casino play is fine (similar to the earned discount system). OBC for shareholders is fine (anyone can become a shareholder.) For that matter OBC for military veterans is fine, as is teacher or police discounts)

 

When I say open to everyone, the criteria must be clearly defined and that anyone that meets that criteria gets the same thing. Now the cruise lines could start a program where people earn points for dollars spent and those points could be traded for discounts. That is legal.

 

If you are saying that there is not any point system and John Smith gets a lower fare just because the company had a program that took a look at prior spend, and Tom Jones, who spends less gets a higher fare for the same room at the same time. That would not hold up.

[RDC1]

In fact, HAL also does this with their casino rates that are not valid for anyone other than the person issued the offer. Even those in the same household are not eligible if the person who was issued the offer is not traveling in the same stateroom.

 

The point is that anyone can sign up for whatever they call their players club, have their play tracked and earn offers. That is what is meant by open to anyone. Of course no one else can use someone's earned discount.

[igraf]

The solo cabins are larger than half a regular oceanview cabin, so the pricing seems fair to me on a person per cabin size basis. I also don't think that it is reasonable to expect a private cabin to be less expensive per person than a shared cabin.

 

igraf

 

 

 

 

It is much more expensive than the per person double occupancy rate, and that for a much smaller cabin. ...

[sail7seas]

The point is that anyone can sign up for whatever they call their players club, have their play tracked and earn offers. That is what is meant by open to anyone. Of course no one else can use someone's earned discount.

 

The point system of discounting is ridiculously easy for cruise lines, if they wish to make use oft this method :................. Theire repeaters club. IF H AL wanted, they couldg vie added disscount, for solo or otherwise to Mainers with high number of days. AnyONE and Everyone is permitted to go on whatever number of sailing days they want on HAL. IF thedy get to high number of days, THEY, too, could get an additioanl discount.

[Hlitner]

I will be going on my first cruise with Holland America in September. I was charged double the "double occupancy" rate for my inside cabin. A single supplement of 100%. The current promotion of $100 per cabin OBC was cut in half because I am a solo. I'm only getting $50 instead of $100. Since I am literally paying for two people I feel I should get the entire OBC. I think Holland America is being cheap and unfairly discriminating against solo cruisers. Am I wrong?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

We think you are correct :). So your best option is to simply cancel your cruise and book with a different line (who may, or may not treat you better). Your complaint is akin to somebody buying a $3000 TV set and then later complaining that they should have only been charged $2000. If you don't like the price or terms, then buy something else.

 

Hank

[Bostonjetset]

The OP paid for one cabin, not two people. I would also point out that HAL is not obligated to give OBC to anyone. We didn't get any OBC on our last cruise.

 

igraf

 

You are correct that HAL is not obligated to give OBC to anyone; I also do not have any for my upcoming cruise on the Zuiderdam. However, for the OP's trip they chose to and since he is paying the full amount for the cabin he, IMO, should get the full OBC associated with such. It may not be legally required but it sure seems like the right thing to do from a customer service perspective. The one cabin vs 2 people argument is basically semantics. OP paid 2x what he would have paid if someone was travelling with him. $1000 pp double occupancy is the same amount of money for the cabin as $2000 pp single occupancy. HAL is getting the exact same amount of money for that piece of real estate on the ship either way. The fact that they MIGHT make a bit more money from onboard spending if there were two people is not relevant in my eyes [nor the eyes of many others, including the OP, apparently] as that is always a guess and could go either way. Cunard gives the full amount, Princess gives the full amount, and I'm fairly certain others lines may as well; for HAL not to comes across as cheap at the very least and certainly has a air of "penny-wise, pound foolish".

[RDC1]

It's a good question, but I think in the end, it would be, if it was practicable. Some retailers direct discounts to specific customers based on their prior purchasing.

 

What wouldn't be legal it to price in a manner that can be shown to explicitly exclude members of a protected class.

 

This message may have been entered using voice recognition. Please excuse any typos.

 

 

Just to be clear, the reason why companies stick to the systems that they do is because someone can come in after the system is in play, sue and use the data in the system against the company. For example such a system might not be intended to discriminate against a protected class. But if the data shows that a protected class has been disadvantaged, the company loses. That is why companies stay with well defined and very specific programs for earning discounts and then having an open price to which the earned discounts are applied.

[42CruiseCrazy]

We think you are correct :). So your best option is to simply cancel your cruise and book with a different line (who may, or may not treat you better). Your complaint is akin to somebody buying a $3000 TV set and then later complaining that they should have only been charged $2000. If you don't like the price or terms, then buy something else.

 

 

 

Hank

 

 

 

I'm not sure if you are implying that I'm being petty. Perhaps I am but IMHO so is HAL. It's only 50 bucks to me and 10 bucks to them. I have family members going on this cruise which is why I booked in the first place. At the time I made the booking I thought I would be treated the same as Carnival and NCL. HAL wouldn't have been my choice. I'm a Norwegian man myself. I guess this HAL policy has only strengthened my loyalty to NCL.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bUU]

What is the criteria that they use for the discounts? That is the question. Any program must have clearly defined criteria. The way points are earned have to be open to everyone.

It's a secret. The company will not share any details about how it decides who to issue PIN codes to. Then again I've been doing this for years and years and years and as far as I know they've never lost a lawsuit about it.

 

If I had to guess they are able somehow to determine the pattern of how people have spent money with them in the past and figured which ones are likely to come back of their own accord, and those folks don't get PIN codes, and which folks are likely not to return without a real incentive, and those folks do get PIN codes.

[igraf]

It is a given that aggregate onboard spending easily outweighs food costs. The few passengers that do not follow this rule makes little difference in the big picture.

 

The fact that HAL did provide for a few solo cabins on their newest ships shows that they were willing to do something for solos, and quite frankly all I see on this thread in this regard are complaints. Did anyone offer a "thank you" for the solo cabins?

 

igraf

 

 

 

You are correct that HAL is not obligated to give OBC to anyone; I also do not have any for my upcoming cruise on the Zuiderdam. However, for the OP's trip they chose to and since he is paying the full amount for the cabin he, IMO, should get the full OBC associated with such. It may not be legally required but it sure seems like the right thing to do from a customer service perspective. The one cabin vs 2 people argument is basically semantics. OP paid 2x what he would have paid if someone was travelling with him. $1000 pp double occupancy is the same amount of money for the cabin as $2000 pp single occupancy. HAL is getting the exact same amount of money for that piece of real estate on the ship either way. The fact that they MIGHT make a bit more money from onboard spending if there were two people is not relevant in my eyes [nor the eyes of many others, including the OP, apparently] as that is always a guess and could go either way. Cunard gives the full amount, Princess gives the full amount, and I'm fairly certain others lines may as well; for HAL not to comes across as cheap at the very least and certainly has a air of "penny-wise, pound foolish".

[42CruiseCrazy]

It is a given that aggregate onboard spending easily outweighs food costs. The few passengers that do not follow this rule makes little difference in the big picture.

 

The fact that HAL did provide for a few solo cabins on their newest ships shows that they were willing to do something for solos, and quite frankly all I see on this thread in this regard are complaints. Did anyone offer a "thank you" for the solo cabins?

 

igraf

 

 

 

The fact that some cruise lines (including HAL) are starting to introduce solo cabins on their new ships is very much appreciated by me and many other solo cruisers. Some still prefer the larger cabins and are willing to pay for it. However, I prefer the solo cabins and the savings can be used to enjoy more on the ship.

 

So ..........THANK YOU

[Aquahound]

The fact that HAL did provide for a few solo cabins on their newest ships shows that they were willing to do something for solos, and quite frankly all I see on this thread in this regard are complaints. Did anyone offer a "thank you" for the solo cabins?

 

I noticed that too. You'd think some people expect these solo cabins to be connected to the Neptune Lounge with a personal butler and their own extended balcony or something.

 

OP, I'm not referring to you...I actually understand your beef, although I also understand why they don't give the full $100.

[Bostonjetset]

It is a given that aggregate onboard spending easily outweighs food costs. The few passengers that do not follow this rule makes little difference in the big picture.

 

The fact that HAL did provide for a few solo cabins on their newest ships shows that they were willing to do something for solos, and quite frankly all I see on this thread in this regard are complaints. Did anyone offer a "thank you" for the solo cabins?

 

igraf

 

I fail to see how solo cabins have anything to do with the OP not getting the full $100 OBC. He did not book a solo cabin and the OBC was not attached to a solo cabin; he paid the the full rate [double] for a standard cabin that had $100 OBC attached to it but HAL did not give him the full amount. Sure, it there may be a legal way for them to do this based on the T&C for the offer and if they state it is per person, but that also it not being disputed. From a good will and pleasant customer service experience, I personally feel HAL should have given him the full amount, just as their sister lines ,Cunard and Princess, do for the same situation.

 

I quite like HAL and think they offer a wonderful cruise experience. Even if the OP's situation happened to me I would likely still sail with HAL since I know that I like their product. That is not to say I wouldn't be annoyed by it, or even complain about it.

 

I also don't think a "thank you" is in order for HAL providing solo cabins. This was done because they know there is a market share for them and they thought it would be a good business decision; it was not done as a "favor" to solo cruisers.