Are Royal Loyal to Customers - Of Course Not

[time4u2go]

1 hour ago, Iamcruzin said:

I couldn't agree more.  Free laundry service, free Bath Tub Gin in a segregated lounge or what ever else they are using to draw in loyalist isn't part of my vacation plans. All and I mean all of the mass market lines have changed over the years either by trying to target a certain market, changing itineraries,  repositioning ships and building ships so big that they have limited ports of call. If you are happy doing the same itinerary from the same port of embarkation year after year than perhaps the loyalty programs work in your favor.  I look for Itinerary and price. In the end the food has declined so much that it's not even a deciding factor any more and If I wanted top notch entertainment I would say home and go to Broadway shows, Concerts, and Comedy clubs in my own back yard. There is not a mass market cruise line that can compete with what I have access to living a stone's throw from Manhattan.  

I agree also.  I like trying different things in life.

[Iamcruzin]

1 hour ago, tinkr2 said:

I see. I just knew that I have cruised Princess and carnival out of there and they were reasonably priced. I was unaware that the ships are modified specifically for California. I am of course aware that environmental issues are stricter in Alaska and California.

Ironically with all of the environmental restrictions placed on cruise ships in both California and Alaska. The family of CCL cruise lines still managed to be fined for illegal dumping.  I don't understand what RCL ships are lacking that wouldn't be in place on newer ships.  All I no is Royal and Celebrity have little presence on the west coast.

[not-enough-cruising]

11 minutes ago, Iamcruzin said:

Ironically with all of the environmental restrictions placed on cruise ships in both California and Alaska. The family of CCL cruise lines still managed to be fined for illegal dumping.  I don't understand what RCL ships are lacking that wouldn't be in place on newer ships.  All I no is Royal and Celebrity have little presence on the west coast.

What is required is the ability to power the ships from land based electricity while in ports, and not running the engines and generators. From what I have read the retro-fit to accomplish this is in the tens of millions of dollars. When you are filling ships all over the world, I assume this investment is not worthwhile.  What will be interesting (for me) to see is if the next generation of LNG fueled ships will be built to this standard, or if this type of engine will run clean enough on its own.

[Iamcruzin]

1 hour ago, nelblu said:

Complaints, complaints--why do you even bother with them.

 

By the way, to go to a Broadway play and ancillaries, you need a small fortune.

These aren't complaints to any one cruise line. It's just a general statement that loyalty, food and entertainment are not part of my decision making when choosing a cruise line. It's Itinerary and price.  I'm considering NCL next for a 7 day Bermuda cruise which was one of the lines I vowed never to sail on after hearing so many negative reviews from family members including my 27yr old son. I want 3 days in Bermuda. Celebrity would have been my first choice but they are only doing 9 and 10 day cruises combined with New Port next year. However I am still considering them.

 

The point is that loyalty is only good until it stops working for what you are shopping for.  This is documented my the many complaints by those who are at the top tier of whatever cruise line they patronized 

P.S. Broadway show ticket don't have to cost an arm and leg. They have discounts tickets if you are flexible.

[sgmn]

1 hour ago, tinkr2 said:

I see. I just knew that I have cruised Princess and carnival out of there and they were reasonably priced. I was unaware that the ships are modified specifically for California. I am of course aware that environmental issues are stricter in Alaska and California.

Stricter environmental laws has to be a good thing doesn't it? Maybe all ports should follow California and Alaska's lead.

Edited May 19, 2019 by sgmn

[Biker19]

18 minutes ago, sgmn said:

Stricter environmental laws has to be a good thing doesn't it? Maybe all ports should follow California and Alaska's lead.

To what end? The minuscule amount of pollution saved by using shore power while in port is probably emitted elsewhere to generate that power. 

[sgmn]

3 minutes ago, Biker19 said:

To what end? The minuscule amount of pollution saved by using shore power while in port is probably emitted elsewhere to generate that power. 

Have to start somewhere. Better than doing nothing. 

[not-enough-cruising]

6 minutes ago, Biker19 said:

To what end? The minuscule amount of pollution saved by using shore power while in port is probably emitted elsewhere to generate that power. 

Exactly

[not-enough-cruising]

27 minutes ago, sgmn said:

Stricter environmental laws has to be a good thing doesn't it? Maybe all ports should follow California and Alaska's lead.

These rules do not apply in Alaska (one of the strictest environmental areas in the country) only California (to their own detriment).

[Biker19]

3 minutes ago, sgmn said:

Have to start somewhere. Better than doing nothing. 

There’s been plenty been done over the years, including requiring scrubbers and other things to lower pollution. 

[neverbeenhere]

Which line is offering bathtub gin as a perk? I want in on that? Beats My Aqua Velva cocktails any day. 

 

Loyalty is sometimes familiarity. 

 

 

[not-enough-cruising]

11 minutes ago, sgmn said:

Have to start somewhere. Better than doing nothing. 

Not always. I read somewhere (I will find the article) that postulated the engines starting up cold after sitting all day, created more pollution than if they had been left to idle all day (with the scrubbers functioning as Biker has mentioned).

Edited May 19, 2019 by not-enough-cruising

[neverbeenhere]

Clearly a job for Mythbusters. 😉

[CRUISEFAN0001]

3 hours ago, neverbeenhere said:

Clearly a job for Mythbusters. 😉

Yup - the title, the original post, and any supporting posts.

[crusinthrough]

10 hours ago, not-enough-cruising said:

Not theory, well known fact. Royals ships would require millions of dollars of renovations (each) to be able to adhere to the rules in California governing the use of shore to ship power. 

Doesn't the Jewel of the Seas do a Coastal cruise here and there?  I thought I remember seeing a sailing. 

[Reina del Mar]

10 hours ago, CRUISEFAN0001 said:

Yup - the title, original post, and any supporting posts.

 

Reading that broken original heading is like hearing fingernails scraping on a chalkboard to those of us with an English degree.

 

 

Surprised that anyone criticising others' grammar and announcing their English degree would resort to slang!

From Collins' English Dictionary

yup in American

(jʌp  )

US

adverb, interjection

Slang

yes

an affirmative reply

 

 

With apologies to those answering the OP's question !

 

 

 

[CRUISEFAN0001]

36 minutes ago, Reina del Mar said:

 

Surprised that anyone criticising others' grammar and announcing their English degree would resort to slang!

From Collins' English Dictionary

yup in American

(jʌp  )

US

adverb, interjection

Slang

yes

an affirmative reply

 

With apologies to those answering the OP's question !

Thank you for your feedback. It is typically nice to communicate on a thread topic in a manner that aligns to the content and tone of the conversation. As a show of appreciation, we are returning your kind effort to demonstrate the versatility of language, all without using large letters to shout the information.

 

Criticize means to enumerate faults or failings in a disapproving fashion. Criticize may also mean to analyze something, such as a work of art. Criticize is a transitive verb, which is a verb that takes an object. Related words are criticizes, criticized, criticizing, criticizer.

 

Criticise is the preferred British spelling, related words are criticises, criticised, criticizing. The North American spelling of criticize is also considered correct and is gaining acceptance around the world.

 

Many people have done wonderfully at explaining their reasoning in contrast to the original post viewpoint. Any cruise line has a strong financial incentive to sustain a base of returning customers, as would any business as well. Various examples have already been stated in other posts, so we'll avoid being redundant.

 

May everyone have happy sailings in the future.

[nelblu]

15 hours ago, Iamcruzin said:

Broadway show ticket don't have to cost an arm and leg. They have discounts tickets if you are flexible.

Ok, so it'll cost you only a leg if your are willing to hunt and stand in line to get some seats.  It'll get even worse if you drive into Manhattan as the" smart guys"in Albany introduced  a tax/toll from 60th street and below.

 

Rather than Manhattan, I go to see 4 plays a year at Count Basie Theatre performed by Community/High School players at a senior rate of $100 pp.  Only 15 minutes away and with some great restaurants in Red Bank.    

[Sizzlechest]

21 hours ago, John&LaLa said:

 

I feel very appreciated by Royal. Loyalty can pay off

 

I payed RCL $19.99 a day for "The Key" and got the same preferential treatment as the most loyal RCL cruisers. Maybe you meant RCL can be "payed off."

[CRUISEFAN0001]

Just now, Sizzlechest said:

 

I payed RCL $19.99 a day for "The Key" and got the same preferential treatment as the most loyal RCL cruisers. Maybe you meant RCL can be "payed off."

Then again...passengers who reach Crown & Anchor loyalty tiers are provided corresponding benefits at no additional charge. 

[Iamcruzin]

3 minutes ago, Sizzlechest said:

 

I payed RCL $19.99 a day for "The Key" and got the same preferential treatment as the most loyal RCL cruisers. Maybe you meant RCL can be "payed off."

Either way they are being payed off. It's just a matter of how much time and or money you have.

Edited May 20, 2019 by Iamcruzin

[4774Papa]

On 5/17/2019 at 1:09 AM, taglovestocruise said:

Over on West side of the pond they price match with a simple phone call.

Until last year we had only done NCL and Celebrity, but Explorer of the Seas was the best deal for our first RCI cruise, the TransPacific for 23 days.  It was nice.

 

We are Diamond due to transfer from Celebrity Elite.

 

Now, when we compare prices and itineraries with NCL, Celebrity and Royal, it seems Royal almost always comes out the best price.  Also, we get the great Diamond happy hour.  We don't need to buy a drink package and Royal doesn't force us to bundle.  

[CRUISEFAN0001]

All customers of any service industry have always paid for service.

 

The key variations tend to focus on how much one pays in contrast to how much one receives in return.  Loyalty programs are marketing tools used routinely to encourage customers to repeat their business relationships - positively impacting the revenue of the company offering the program. None of this is new nor unique to any industry. The Crown & Anchor program with Royal Caribbean is their version of an incentive program. 

 

Since a lack of "caring" about passengers' loyalty would result in reduced repeat business and therefore reduced revenue from that market segment, the original claim in the original post would seem contrarian.

 

 

 

[Sizzlechest]

33 minutes ago, CRUISEFAN0001 said:

Then again...passengers who reach Crown & Anchor loyalty tiers are provided corresponding benefits at no additional charge. 

 

Pays RCL for cruises to earn perks. Forgoes other cruise lines even when they have better deals and/or service. Claims "No additional charge." Really makes you think.

[alfaeric]

16 hours ago, not-enough-cruising said:

These rules do not apply in Alaska (one of the strictest environmental areas in the country) only California (to their own detriment).

never mind....   it's clear you've already made up your mind.

Edited May 20, 2019 by alfaeric