Jump to content

"Always included" - false advertising?


ak1004
 Share

Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, TeeRick said:

OP thanks for starting another thread on Always Included.  It was getting boring not seeing one in a few days.  Popular choice.  Now 100 posts and counting.

LOL, then we get the divergent 'booking without perks'....

 

A veiled request for TA recommendations etc... Oh well.

 

bon voyage

Edited by Bo1953
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, ak1004 said:

I agree with all your points. The only exception is the excursions - in oLife they are priced at $100 each, but you are allowed to take excursions priced up to $200 as part of oLife, so it's 50% discount basically.

Forgot to mention this in my other post … sorry:

 

That 50% discount is unattainable.  First, one would have to book all their OLife included excursions at $200 each to maximize this perk (good luck with that).  Second, one also would have to take into account the 25% discount Oceania would give you if you booked the same group of excursions separately.  So that 50% max savings is really a 37.5% max savings in actuality.

 

Again not false advertising, but another thing we take into consideration when comparing our options.

Edited by DenGNNJ
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, TeeRick said:

OP thanks for starting another thread on Always Included.  It was getting boring not seeing one in a few days.  Popular choice.  Now 100 posts and counting.

 

So Cruise Critic can advertise that a thread on "Alway Included" is always included, even if you don't see it on every page you consult? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, ExArkie said:

I was going to point out that, if the Celebrity fare is the AI rate, you get gratuities and a better drink package than on Oceania, which ought to be factored into the equation. Clicking on the link provided, the current balcony price was listed at C$5,767, which made the price difference C$117, or roughly the same price for three fewer nights on Celebrity. Makes it a closer call.

 

By the way, I still couldn’t tell for certain if that Celebrity price was AI. Don’t think anyone is defending Celebrity’s Web site as being superior to anything.

 

 

C$5,767 excludes taxes, taxes are $500 extra per person, so total is C$6,267. Not a close call at all, especially considering less 3 nights, an older ship and a much smaller cabin. Plus we don't drink, so we would be subsiding the drinkers on Celebrity.

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DenGNNJ said:

Great that you found a sailing where your preferred cruise line turned out to be the better value for you.  Value is precisely the reason why our 2022 Alaska Cruise will be on Celebrity, our 2023 Australia / New Zealand cruise will be on Azamara, and our next sailing out of NY to Bermuda will be on Oceania. 

 

For every example given where Oceania comes out on top, there's an example where it does not ... for instance... the cruise we're currently looking at puts Celebrity & Viking on top, and Azamara & Oceania on the bottom.  But cost and value is not what this thread is about. 

 

Not for nothing, of all the cruise lines to pick to bolster an argument against Celebrity for deceptive advertising regarding fares, Oceania is probably the worst.  IMHO the MOST shady thing ever in cruise advertising from ANY brand is Oceania's OLife OBC "perk" option.  "You pay $400 extra and we'll give you $400 in OBC" for example, is not stated on their advertising, but it sure is what happens every time that so-called "perk" is selected.  It's impossible to figure this out by simply looking at their advertised fares, or if you don't dissect and analyze the numbers during the booking process.  I've even seen well respected & knowledgeable vloggers on YouTube say this is the best perk to pick (best for Oceania, not the consumer).

 

In terms of transparency, there's OLife fares that include airfare & a perk (the ones you see online), and OLife fares with AIRFARE ONLY & OLife fares with a PERK ONLY (these are the  ones you DON'T see online).  The OLife program as a whole is so convoluted, I literally needed to create a spreadsheet to make the process of number crunching to pick the best OLife perk option and make cruise line to cruise line comparisons easier.  Are they falsely advertising? ... no & neither is Celebrity.  As a matter of fact, I'd say Celebrity's "Always Included" program to be one of the most transparent out there.

 

For me, I believe the question of "false advertising" has been answered... it's a NO.  But when it comes to cruise fares... ANY cruise fares, not just Celebrity, Oceania, Azamara or whatever the best plan of action is Caveat Emptor.

 

So if you drive drunk and are stopped by a cop, your argument would be "yes, but my friend was driving drunk too?

 

Yes, other lines do some sins too, so what? When a line is advertising Always Included, this indicates ALL fares always include the mentioned perks. Period. It doesn't matter if for only 10% of the sailings and 10% of the categories the prices are for sailings only. It is still false advertising.  I'm not sure why it's so difficult for all Celebrity fanboys to admit it.

 

As for the cost - yes, there are many sailings where Celebrity is cheaper. Also depends on a category. But for us it's not only about cost. It's about superior food, superior service, no lines, no need to come to shows 30 minutes in advance etc etc. The list is very long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I recall.. the originally started the Always included program.. and later added simply sail. I think the Simply sail option is added when booking a cruise within 90 days of sailing. It looks like the goal was to have all inclusive..but then people didn't want the extras..so they added a stripped down option...but did so closer to sailing to help get more passengers. They probably used the Always included initially because that was the intent. There have been discussions about using the term all inclusive...but then you get into the specialty restaurants and other options issue.  They should probably develop an acronym for gratuities drinks and wifi...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, ak1004 said:

I'm not sure why it's so difficult for all Celebrity fanboys to admit it.

I'm not sure why you feel so little of the collective intellect here that we would all be duped by a company's marketing tactic. It's a little insulting actually.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, RichYak said:

I'm not sure why you feel so little of the collective intellect here that we would all be duped by a company's marketing tactic. It's a little insulting actually.

 

It's not about being duped. I don't like some marketing tactics of Oceania and Crystal, but I still sail with them. But at least I fully admit when something is wrong - like Oceania handling of air.

 

You can be a company big fan and use their products, but still have criticism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ak1004 said:

 

So if you drive drunk and are stopped by a cop, your argument would be "yes, but my friend was driving drunk too?

 

Yes, other lines do some sins too, so what? When a line is advertising Always Included, this indicates ALL fares always include the mentioned perks. Period. It doesn't matter if for only 10% of the sailings and 10% of the categories the prices are for sailings only. It is still false advertising.  I'm not sure why it's so difficult for all Celebrity fanboys to admit it.

 

As for the cost - yes, there are many sailings where Celebrity is cheaper. Also depends on a category. But for us it's not only about cost. It's about superior food, superior service, no lines, no need to come to shows 30 minutes in advance etc etc. The list is very long.

Even though “Always Included” is a service mark like “Taste the Rainbow” is for Skittles you’re trying to apply it literally and you can’t.  That’s why for the most part, your assertions are falling on deaf ears.  It’s a slogan, it’s marked as such (that’s what the little ‘sm’ means), and that’s the way it should be interpreted.

 

Then you tried to support your position of Celebrity’s false advertising by showing us an example from Oceania.  That example sucked, I laid out why, and still I’m not seeing a whole lot of folks that agree with you including me.  
 

You’re not going to convince me with extrinsic and obscure analogies about DWIs that any of these cruise companies, including Celebrity, are engaging in false advertising.  If you feel so strongly about this being false advertising, contact the Canadian counterpart of the US Federal Trade Commission and log a formal complaint.  
 

But not unlike trying to get people to agree with you in this thread, I’m thinking nothing will come of it.

Edited by DenGNNJ
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DenGNNJ said:

Forgot to mention this in my other post … sorry:

 

That 50% discount is unattainable.  First, one would have to book all their OLife included excursions at $200 each to maximize this perk (good luck with that).  Second, one also would have to take into account the 25% discount Oceania would give you if you booked the same group of excursions separately.  So that 50% max savings is really a 37.5% max savings in actuality.

 

Again not false advertising, but another thing we take into consideration when comparing our options.

But they never advertised 50% savings to begin with.. this was my calculation - and you are correct, it's the best case scenario. But in any case, you are getting the excursions at a nice discount. They offer you a choice, and it's clearly indicated on the cruise summary page, with all fares clearly indicated. Definitely no false advertising here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, DenGNNJ said:

Even though “Always Included” is a service mark like “Taste the Rainbow” is for Skittles you’re trying to apply it literally and you can’t.  That’s why for the most part, your assertions are falling on deaf ears.  It’s a slogan, it’s marked as such (that’s what the little ‘sm’ means), and that’s the way it should be interpreted.

 

Then you tried to support your position of Celebrity’s false advertising by showing us an example from Oceania.  That example sucked, I laid out why, and still I’m not seeing a whole lot of folks that agree with you including me.  
 

You’re not going to convince me with extrinsic and obscure analogies about DWIs that any of these cruise companies, including Celebrity, are engaging in false advertising.  If you feel so strongly about this being false advertising, contact the Canadian counterpart of the US Federal Trade Commission and log a formal complaint.  
 

But not unlike trying to get people to agree with you in this thread, I’m thinking nothing will come of it.

 

We can use whatever analogies you like. The simple fact is that yes, other companies use false advertising too, but it's not an excuse. The simple fact is that the first thing you see on Celebrity website is this:

 

image.png.144554aa2e8b204b41c42096cfcbd7e9.png

 

This implies that drinks, wi-fi and tips are included in all fares and all categories. It's very simple and straightforward. If I can find even one sailing that shows prices for sailing only, it's a false advertising. Plain and simple. Any objective observer will agree.

 

Sorry but I'm done. You won't let the facts to confuse you, so it's really a waste of time.

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ak1004 said:

 

C$5,767 excludes taxes, taxes are $500 extra per person, so total is C$6,267. Not a close call at all, especially considering less 3 nights, an older ship and a much smaller cabin. Plus we don't drink, so we would be subsiding the drinkers on Celebrity.

How would you be subsidizing me and my drinking when I pay for the beverage package and upgrade???

 

cheers and bon voyage

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, ak1004 said:

 

We can use whatever analogies you like. The simple fact is that yes, other companies use false advertising too, but it's not an excuse. The simple fact is that the first thing you see on Celebrity website is this:

 

image.png.144554aa2e8b204b41c42096cfcbd7e9.png

 

This implies that drinks, wi-fi and tips are included in all fares and all categories. It's very simple and straightforward. If I can find even one sailing that shows prices for sailing only, it's a false advertising. Plain and simple. Any objective observer will agree.

 

Sorry but I'm done. You won't let the facts to confuse you, so it's really a waste of time.

For some reason, me thinks you’re not quite done…

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, ak1004 said:

Any objective observer will agree.

And yet, no one did.

 

Seems to me only one person in this entire thread wasted their time, and it wasn’t me.

Edited by DenGNNJ
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Bo1953 said:

How would you be subsidizing me and my drinking when I pay for the beverage package and upgrade???

 

cheers and bon voyage

 

Because I'm paying for something that I don't use and won't consume. If I wasn't forced to pay for it, your cost would be higher.. It's a simple math.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, ak1004 said:

 

We can use whatever analogies you like. The simple fact is that yes, other companies use false advertising too, but it's not an excuse. The simple fact is that the first thing you see on Celebrity website is this:

 

image.png.144554aa2e8b204b41c42096cfcbd7e9.png

 

This implies that drinks, wi-fi and tips are included in all fares and all categories. It's very simple and straightforward. If I can find even one sailing that shows prices for sailing only, it's a false advertising. Plain and simple. Any objective observer will agree.

 

Sorry but I'm done. You won't let the facts to confuse you, so it's really a waste of time.

I would think that 'most' North Americans who have good access to U.S. newspapers, TV news and the like, would understand U.S. advertizing and take that understanding into consideration. Even if it differs from anothers sensibility or desired approach...

 

It makes me smile, at least.

 

Apparently here on CC I Am incorrect. WOW

 

bon voyage

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ak1004 said:

 

Because I'm paying for something that I don't use and won't consume. If I wasn't forced to pay for it, your cost would be higher.. It's a simple math.

See post #114…

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ak1004 said:

 

Because I'm paying for something that I don't use and won't consume. If I wasn't forced to pay for it, your cost would be higher.. It's a simple math.

Thanks for your contribution to my AI package, very much appreciated!

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ak1004 said:

 

Because I'm paying for something that I don't use and won't consume. If I wasn't forced to pay for it, your cost would be higher.. It's a simple math.

Okay, since you believe this ask anyone on your next sailing to contribute to your beverage package that you may or may not use....

 

That will solve the issue, do you not think?

 

Then we can ask passengers to contribute to the food which you may or may not eat because you do not like it or it is not your style or taste.

 

Will that issue be solved, as well do you think?

 

Is there not another line that fits your requirements in these areas regardless of your preference to sail X?

 

bon voyage

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, ak1004 said:

 

Because I'm paying for something that I don't use and won't consume. If I wasn't forced to pay for it, your cost would be higher.. It's a simple math.

Also, by the same logic, if you were not sailing my pricing for the cabin and Perks would be just about the same rather you were on the ship or not....

 

Therefore, IMO, my simple math dictates that it does not matter who is or is not on the ship, one can find fares which do not include what they do not want... no need to cry foul when it is clear that there are alternatives, if you or others choose to take advantage of them is a whole different issue to be sure.

 

bon voyage

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Bo1953 said:

Also, by the same logic, if you were not sailing my pricing for the cabin and Perks would be just about the same rather you were on the ship or not....

 

Therefore, IMO, my simple math dictates that it does not matter who is or is not on the ship, one can find fares which do not include what they do not want... no need to cry foul when it is clear that there are alternatives, if you or others choose to take advantage of them is a whole different issue to be sure.

 

bon voyage

Bo, May you please return the abacus if you are done with it.  I need to figure out how much $$ ak is contributing to my AI package so I can buy him/her an AI beverage.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, LGW59 said:

Bo, May you please return the abacus if you are done with it.  I need to figure out how much $$ ak is contributing to my AI package so I can buy him/her an AI beverage.

Confucius's abacus calculates your individual contribution is approximately 455.93 CNY including gratuity, same as for me. Now if the full ship at a reduced capacity is contributing, then the share is 6.38 CNY including grats...

 

😎

 

Cheers and bon voyage (catch you at The Martini Bar over a large one)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Bo1953 said:

Confucius's abacus calculates your individual contribution is approximately 455.93 CNY including gratuity, same as for me. Now if the full ship at a reduced capacity is contributing, then the share is 6.38 CNY including grats...

 

😎

 

Cheers and bon voyage (catch you at The Martini Bar over a large one)

Yes sir, but I will be drinking Southern Comfort Manhattan str8 up please!

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Welcome to Cruise Critic
      • Hurricane Zone 2024
      • Cruise Insurance Q&A w/ Steve Dasseos of Tripinsurancestore.com Summer 2024
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Cruise Critic News & Features
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • Canadian Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...