Shore Experience??

[jeanlyon]

So I know we now have changed as follows:-

 

Cabin = room

Cruise Director = Entertainments Manager

 

and today I have received my Holiday Information and apparently

 

Shore Excursion is now = Shore Experience

 

For goodness sake!!

 

[yorkshirephil]

Gotta get with it Jean😉

[jeanlyon]

LOL - luckily I have rarely done excursions, so shan't be bothering with Shore Experiences!  What a ridiculous name.

[yorkshirephil]

44 minutes ago, jeanlyon said:

LOL - luckily I have rarely done excursions, so shan't be bothering with Shore Experiences!  What a ridiculous name.

A shore experience actually sounds like something you do if you don't take a shore excursion, maybe they should have called a cabin; not much room, and to think the people who sit and make these things up actually get paid. 

[kenhem]

3 hours ago, jeanlyon said:

So I know we now have changed as follows:-

 

Cabin = room

Cruise Director = Entertainments Manager

 

and today I have received my Holiday Information and apparently

 

Shore Excursion is now = Shore Experience

 

For goodness sake!!

 

One more to add to the list: ocean view is now sea view

[AchileLauro]

 

You forgot the purser is now the hotel manager and decks have become floors. 

How long before the captain becomes the driver? 😉

 

I suppose dumbing down is inevitable as now there is a lesser class of person cruising. 😈

 

All joking aside I find it all very irritating, after all  I don't know about you but I want to sail on a ship not just stay in a hotel that just happens to float.

Edited July 29, 2019 by AchileLauro

[brian1]

I always thought a cabin is called a stateroom.

[P&O SUE]

13 hours ago, jeanlyon said:

So I know we now have changed as follows:-

 

Cabin = room

Cruise Director = Entertainments Manager

 

and today I have received my Holiday Information and apparently

 

Shore Excursion is now = Shore Experience

 

For goodness sake!!

 

 

It does sound ridiculous!

[Selbourne]

15 minutes ago, brian1 said:

I always thought a cabin is called a stateroom.

 

I know that term is used by many other cruise lines, but as far as I can recall never by P&O (even though some on the P&O forum use it when referring to cabins). Happy to be corrected if I am wrong. In fact, I thought they were still called cabins and have only ever heard them called ‘rooms’ by first time cruisers (along with other terms such as ‘boat’ rather than ship), so if there has been an official change in terminology then it has passed me by!

[Clodia]

And for a while now passengers have been "guests". Sorry, on a ship I am a passenger!

[AchileLauro]

3 hours ago, brian1 said:

I always thought a cabin is called a stateroom.

 

Yes I've also heard cabins referred to as staterooms too, a vast overstatement in my opinion considering the size of many cabins. LOL.

 

For myself when I look from a distance at many modern ships and the multi layers of window box balconies I can't help thinking of pigeon holes and aviaries. To then use the term stateroom seems a bit ridiculous.

[jeanlyon]

Fred Olsen refers to rooms now as well.

 

I agree with poster above.  I want to feel I am on a ship, therefore I am a passenger, not a guest.  I sleep in my cabin.  I am not on a floating hotel, I am on a ship.

 

But Shore Experience is written throughout my Holiday Info Brochure.  On their website it's still shore excursions.

[Emmandjay]

Sometimes when tenders are used in choppy seas it's more of an experience!

[Britboys]

Totally agree Jean.  Some people are paid huge salaries to come up with these stupid new terms.  I have been cruising with P&O since 1997 and cabins were always called cabins.  And before "Sea View" started being used, they were "outside" cabins.  It is all dumbing down imho.  If they want us to have an 'experience' they should stick to nautical terminology instead of trying to pretend it is just a hotel at sea.  Another example is the Purser's Desk becoming Reception.  Some cruise companies seem intent on making a cruise just another holiday instead of it being something different and special. 

[Denarius]

I suspect that the reason for the changes in terminology is that cruises are now marketed as a holiday in a mobile resort hotel with a keel rather than as a voyage to interesting ports. Many passsengers (sorry, guests) are more interested in the entertainment and dining facilities onboard than the ports to be visited, which are viewed as a mere distraction. Or am I being too cynical?

[jeanlyon]

Nope, you're dead right, which is a shame.  I know that is why I prefer the smaller ships,because it still feels like a ship, so I won't be going on the big ones.  Tried it once, didn't like it.

Edited July 30, 2019 by jeanlyon

[philred]

at the end of the day we all know what the new terms mean but why change when the old meanings work so well

[AchileLauro]

3 hours ago, Denarius said:

I suspect that the reason for the changes in terminology is that cruises are now marketed as a holiday in a mobile resort hotel with a keel rather than as a voyage to interesting ports. Many passsengers (sorry, guests) are more interested in the entertainment and dining facilities onboard than the ports to be visited, which are viewed as a mere distraction. Or am I being too cynical?

 

Half of the "guests" don't know anything about where they are going and care even less. Passengers on the other hand may be slightly more discerning. 😉

[Ranchi]

Well, I am just grateful that we again can disembark rather than the debark as was prevalent a few years ago. 

Edited July 30, 2019 by Ranchi

[hansol1966]

Better still is ...Shore RIP Off ...how the prices for excursions/experiences are arrived at baffle me. Captive audience ...what can we charge especially if the ship is far enough away from a major destination you are obliged to book an Experience..Rotterdam..Bruges..etc.

[jh1809]

On 7/30/2019 at 7:08 AM, Selbourne said:

 

I know that term is used by many other cruise lines, but as far as I can recall never by P&O (even though some on the P&O forum use it when referring to cabins). Happy to be corrected if I am wrong. In fact, I thought they were still called cabins and have only ever heard them called ‘rooms’ by first time cruisers (along with other terms such as ‘boat’ rather than ship), so if there has been an official change in terminology then it has passed me by!

It's passed me by too. One of the things prejudicing me against cruising with Fred Olsen is that they call their cabin "rooms". Petty of me, I know. 

[brian1]

12 hours ago, Ranchi said:

Well, I am just grateful that we again can disembark rather than the debark as was prevalent a few years ago. 

I still post debark cos I forget how to spell disemthingy sometimes,lol.

[DamianG]

18 hours ago, Denarius said:

I suspect that the reason for the changes in terminology is that cruises are now marketed as a holiday in a mobile resort hotel with a keel rather than as a voyage to interesting ports. Many passengers (sorry, guests) are more interested in the entertainment and dining facilities onboard than the ports to be visited, which are viewed as a mere distraction. Or am I being too cynical?

 

Absolutely right, especially on August summer holiday cruises where you see the same families sat around the central pool in the same positions every single day (how on earth do they get the same sun loungers every day, what good fortune!!!). They don't get off the "boat" in "rubbish" ports like Civitavecchia or Livorno, prefering to stay on board in their "reserved" positions. These families are also amongst the few where the drinks package actually works in their favour and I would even go as far as to guess that P&O launched it with them in mind.

Yes, I'm a cynic too!

Edited July 31, 2019 by DamianG

[Selbourne]

27 minutes ago, jh1809 said:

It's passed me by too. One of the things prejudicing me against cruising with Fred Olsen is that they call their cabin "rooms". Petty of me, I know. 

 

This thread is quite amusing. It’s funny how different things can irritate different people, isn’t it? The one that really gets my goat is when people put ‘the’ in front of a cruise ship name e.g. the Britannia. I have given up explaining to people that unless the name written on the side of the ship has ‘The’ in front of it then you just refer to it by the name only. I think it stems from the fact that because it would be grammatically correct to refer to ‘the cruise ship Britannia’, people erroneously shorten it to ‘the Britannia’ rather then the correct ‘Britannia’. It’s a bit like the number of times people use the term ‘would of’ when the correct term is ‘would have’, because the latter is often pronounced ‘would’ve’ which people mishear as would of. Oh, the joy of the English language!

[DamianG]

7 minutes ago, Selbourne said:

 

This thread is quite amusing. It’s funny how different things can irritate different people, isn’t it? The one that really gets my goat is when people put ‘the’ in front of a cruise ship name e.g. the Britannia. I have given up explaining to people that unless the name written on the side of the ship has ‘The’ in front of it then you just refer to it by the name only. I think it stems from the fact that because it would be grammatically correct to refer to ‘the cruise ship Britannia’, people erroneously shorten it to ‘the Britannia’ rather then the correct ‘Britannia’. It’s a bit like the number of times people use the term ‘would of’ when the correct term is ‘would have’, because the latter is often pronounced ‘would’ve’ which people mishear as would of. Oh, the joy of the English language!

 

You are my kind of person, if we ever happened to share a dinner table I think we would get on very well. The use of "Would of" is a growing epidemic that I find hugely irritating!