Is Simply Sail gone from Celebrity?

[NutsAboutGolf]

48 minutes ago, Islandbuoy said:

They need enough occupancy  to get sufficient tips to keep the workers happy! Insides matter a!so!

E

 

 

 

X Corporate is already on top of that, we are not yet sailing with 100% of the crew.  Reportedly, the cabin stewards maintain the same number of cabins as pre-pandemic.

 

Also, like it or not, odds are far likely that inside guests do not tip extra and/or remove auto-gratuities (when not on the AI fare) than suite guests.

[the penguins]

14 minutes ago, NutsAboutGolf said:

 

X Corporate is already on top of that, we are not yet sailing with 100% of the crew.  Reportedly, the cabin stewards maintain the same number of cabins as pre-pandemic.

 

Also, like it or not, odds are far likely that inside guests do not tip extra and/or remove auto-gratuities (when not on the AI fare) than suite guests.

Not so. Crew numbers are based on Celebrity's target and stays the same. For example if it were based on 500 cabins and a particular cruise only has 400 occupied each cabin steward has an equal share of the 400. 

Your other assumption seems at odds with our experience. We tip the same regardless of our cabin and so do all our friends. We have never removed auto grats. We would prefer it if tips were just included in the basic price which is what X has done for years in the Australian/New Zealand markets.

[NutsAboutGolf]

4 minutes ago, the penguins said:

Not so. Crew numbers are based on Celebrity's target and stays the same. For example if it were based on 500 cabins and a particular cruise only has 400 occupied each cabin steward has an equal share of the 400. 

Your other assumption seems at odds with our experience. We tip the same regardless of our cabin and so do all our friends. We have never removed auto grats. We would prefer it if tips were just included in the basic price which is what X has done for years in the Australian/New Zealand markets.

 

My cabin responsibility statements came directly from my Millie Cabin Stewart last month.  If folks want to see people remove tips, park yourself at the bar closest to guest services on the last day of the sailing.

[Islandbuoy]

A major reason we have generally been booking "X" cruises is the perksb of elite plus.

 

Doubling up paying for drinks & internet adds up. Big enough penalty to make me go shopping,when considering new cruises!

[grandgeezer]

4 hours ago, NutsAboutGolf said:

 

Overall occupancy is only one part of the equation, room category plays a big part and since day 1 of the restart, X's suites has consistently been sailing nearly 100%.  So if 75% of a sailing inside cabins are empty, as long as the suites are full, X probably doesn't really care.

Really? They should care about all cabins being occupied. For example, there are 140 inside cabins on the Equinox, so if 75% are empty, that’s 105 empty cabins. That makes 210 people who didn’t pay for the cabin or contribute to the tips, or spend any money on such things as drinks, excursions, speciality restaurants, excursions, etc. For a company that’s been operating in the red for two years it wouldn’t hurt.

[canderson]

3 hours ago, NutsAboutGolf said:

 

X Corporate is already on top of that, we are not yet sailing with 100% of the crew. 

Granted, it's not true for all sailings now, but there have been and continue to be MANY where even at the lower crew numbers, the pax/crew ratio has been lower than 1:1.  Traditionally, X cruises run closer to 2:1.

[Covepointcruiser]

Celebrity is still using the “empty” cabins to quarantine crew members.   New crew members are quarantined before starting work.   Some cabins, outside or balcony, are vacant for the purpose of quarantining positive passengers and crew members.   

[NutsAboutGolf]

51 minutes ago, grandgeezer said:

Really? They should care about all cabins being occupied. For example, there are 140 inside cabins on the Equinox, so if 75% are empty, that’s 105 empty cabins. That makes 210 people who didn’t pay for the cabin or contribute to the tips, or spend any money on such things as drinks, excursions, speciality restaurants, excursions, etc. For a company that’s been operating in the red for two years it wouldn’t hurt.

 

By getting rid of simply sail, they've increased the cost of inside cabins.  Increasing the cost of unsold cabins isn't a good way to sell them.

[NutsAboutGolf]

52 minutes ago, canderson said:

Granted, it's not true for all sailings now, but there have been and continue to be MANY where even at the lower crew numbers, the pax/crew ratio has been lower than 1:1.  Traditionally, X cruises run closer to 2:1.

 

True but the only thing about the crew to pax ratio is are we talking overall crew or only the crew who directly support guests such as waitstaff and cabin stewards?  Reportedly they're reducing the number of the crew who directly support guests

[canderson]

36 minutes ago, NutsAboutGolf said:

 

True but the only thing about the crew to pax ratio is are we talking overall crew or only the crew who directly support guests such as waitstaff and cabin stewards?  Reportedly they're reducing the number of the crew who directly support guests

Total, but a huge number support guests indirectly (not just the folks you see).  Have to include the cooks in the galley and the folks who are washing the sheets and towels and the folks who are doing all of the additional cleaning per the new protocols etc etc.  When we cruised in November, you could tell.  The crew were looking for interesting ways to make everyone's visit special.  I've noted a few of those in other threads.  A normal workload wouldn't have allowed for some of that.

 

With passenger loads bouncing all over the place, they have to have crew in place and ready on each ship, even when there are low numbers on particular itineraries on either side.  The crew count isn't so dynamic.

 

 

 

Edited March 5, 2022 by canderson

[markeb]

1 hour ago, canderson said:

Total, but a huge number support guests indirectly (not just the folks you see).  Have to include the cooks in the galley and the folks who are washing the sheets and towels and the folks who are doing all of the additional cleaning per the new protocols etc etc.  When we cruised in November, you could tell.  The crew were looking for interesting ways to make everyone's visit special.  I've noted a few of those in other threads.  A normal workload wouldn't have allowed for some of that.

 

With passenger loads bouncing all over the place, they have to have crew in place and ready on each ship, even when there are low numbers on particular itineraries on either side.  The crew count isn't so dynamic.

 

 

 

 

Crew salaries are all fixed costs. If there margin on suites is enough to exceed their fixed costs, they're making money. Tips don't count for margin; they're a pass through. So the lower priced cabins are just gravy if they're making up for fixed costs on the suites. And that margin is almost certainly huge.

[markeb]

I'm sometimes amazed that people who are convinced that Celebrity is out to extract every dime they can believe they can't do effective revenue management and understand their own margins on their cabins...

 

They're not selling suites preferentially because they're great people and we're all great customers. Their margin could be  80-90% plus on suites. That goes a long ways towards covering fixed costs. Which makes every Aqua, Veranda, or inside gravy.

 

In the long term, they're most profitable with every cabin full (again, revenue management), but for now, suites pay the bills.

[canderson]

1 hour ago, markeb said:

 

Crew salaries are all fixed costs. If there margin on suites is enough to exceed their fixed costs, they're making money. Tips don't count for margin; they're a pass through. So the lower priced cabins are just gravy if they're making up for fixed costs on the suites. And that margin is almost certainly huge.

I believe the question was one of tips as part of employee income based upon number of crew aboard, not salary and corporate expense.

 

With a higher than normal pax:crew ratio (which we usually still have, even with somewhat lower crew numbers), the 'included' per-person tips (which don't depend upon cabin class apart from the butler's extra portion) that provide an income to non-front-facing crew would necessarily be spread thinner.  It's more a question of cabins occupied for that part of the equation.  Since they can't dynamically adjust crew levels from one week to the next to meet the considerable fluctuations in passenger counts, the pax:crew ratio will often be out of whack to the high side.  Great for passengers but not so much for crew who often have to split a smaller pie.

[markeb]

13 minutes ago, canderson said:

I believe the question was one of tips as part of employee income based upon number of crew aboard, not salary and corporate expense.

 

With a higher than normal pax:crew ratio (which we usually still have, even with somewhat lower crew numbers), the 'included' per-person tips (which don't depend upon cabin class apart from the butler's extra portion) that provide an income to non-front-facing crew would necessarily be spread thinner.  It's more a question of cabins occupied for that part of the equation.  Since they can't dynamically adjust crew levels from one week to the next to meet the considerable fluctuations in passenger counts, the pax:crew ratio will often be out of whack to the high side.  Great for passengers but not so much for crew who often have to split a smaller pie.

 

Saturday night and second glass of a nice red...

 

It was an earlier post lumping cabin costs and tips and everything else together. There's yet another tipping thread running and like in that one, I have no idea if X generally follows US labor law precedent (the tipping precedent seems to) and if they "make up" missed gratuities for crewmembers up to minimum wage, or if they're operating over that level normally. But yes, if there are the same number of people in the pool, and fewer tips going into it, the crew will get a smaller slice. Salary would still be a fixed cost to the corporation. And the smaller tip pool still wouldn't impact corporate expenses.

 

My reply was more relevant to the other comment on selling less expensive cabins. Back to the wine.

[grandgeezer]

4 hours ago, NutsAboutGolf said:

 

By getting rid of simply sail, they've increased the cost of inside cabins.  Increasing the cost of unsold cabins isn't a good way to sell them.

The question is, by cutting the Simply Sail did they lose customers that don’t want to pay for the drinks and internet that they don’t want or need.

That would pertain to all categories of cabins, just not insides.

[canderson]

3 hours ago, markeb said:

 

My reply was more relevant to the other comment on selling less expensive cabins. Back to the wine.

Regardless of any minor unintended consequences, I like you thread reading protocol.  😁

Edited March 6, 2022 by canderson

[NutsAboutGolf]

2 hours ago, grandgeezer said:

The question is, by cutting the Simply Sail did they lose customers that don’t want to pay for the drinks and internet that they don’t want or need.

That would pertain to all categories of cabins, just not insides.

 

1)  Simply sale or the "perkless"-fare is CURRENTLY gone, six months from now or even six years, will this still be the case?

2)  We would have to imagine X has done their homework and has decided enough people buy the perks to justify AI

3)  Very few will give up on X solely based on their principle of being forced to pay for AI; if an X fare with AI is 25% lower then all other competitors, most people would give up on their principle to save money by booking with X

 

[NutsAboutGolf]

3 hours ago, markeb said:

 

Saturday night and second glass of a nice red...

 

It was an earlier post lumping cabin costs and tips and everything else together. There's yet another tipping thread running and like in that one, I have no idea if X generally follows US labor law precedent (the tipping precedent seems to) and if they "make up" missed gratuities for crewmembers up to minimum wage, or if they're operating over that level normally. But yes, if there are the same number of people in the pool, and fewer tips going into it, the crew will get a smaller slice. Salary would still be a fixed cost to the corporation. And the smaller tip pool still wouldn't impact corporate expenses.

 

My reply was more relevant to the other comment on selling less expensive cabins. Back to the wine.

 

Unfortately they do not follow US laws, they leave the responsibility; including a screenshot from NCL's employment FAQ showing that it says its the crew members responsibility to pay tax in your home country.  

 

Worse, even the only US flagged ocean going cruise ship, the NCL PoA, attempted to skirt US labor laws.

 

[the penguins]

2 hours ago, NutsAboutGolf said:

 

1)  Simply sale or the "perkless"-fare is CURRENTLY gone, six months from now or even six years, will this still be the case?

2)  We would have to imagine X has done their homework and has decided enough people buy the perks to justify AI

3)  Very few will give up on X solely based on their principle of being forced to pay for AI; if an X fare with AI is 25% lower then all other competitors, most people would give up on their principle to save money by booking with X

 

Love your "if" on point 3. 

[cublet]

4 hours ago, NutsAboutGolf said:

 

<snip>

3)  Very few will give up on X solely based on their principle of being forced to pay for AI; if an X fare with AI is 25% lower then all other competitors, most people would give up on their principle to save money by booking with X

 

Hello,

 

Fortunately my principles are unlikely to be tested. Because of my status with RCI I only pay a 50% single supplement not 100%; (b) Ditto my status with MSC not only has lots of benefits but also very fluid pricing and and an even more fluid single supplements policy that is akin to the peace of God - it passeth all understanding.

 

So the chances of finding an X price 25% less than a competitor even with AI is as close to zilch as makes no difference.

 

Regards,

 

Cublet

Edited March 6, 2022 by cublet
add comment

[radarcruiser]

So sorry, but I got all confused with the tipping thing in this thread.  Is it true that only AI fares are available now, with no option to purchase cruise only?  
Does anyone know if the casino can still offer complimentary cruise only cruises?

[terrydtx]

We had booked a RCL cruise for June 2023 on the Allure from Galveston TX as we are taking our Granddaughter and summer school recess is the only time she can go. At the time we booked, Celebrity did not have any 2023 summer cruises from Florida so RCL was our best choice. We booked a Grand Suite which has no OBC, no drinks package, no tips and no WIFI included. When Celebrity made the wise decision to have the Equinox sail from FLL year-round we compared what we would get in a Sky Suite on the Equinox compared to the booked RCL cruise. The Allure with basically no suite amenities was within $50 of the Sky Suite on Equinox with everything included. Add in $900 OBC this made the Equinox a $2400 better deal for us, so we switched immediately. So, for us looking at Princess, HAL, NCL and RCL in suites, makes no sense, as the Retreat pricing beats booking suites in all of them because we want everything included when we book a suite. Take away the all included suite amenities and Celebrity is no different than the other lines.

[grandgeezer]

10 hours ago, NutsAboutGolf said:

 

1)  Simply sale or the "perkless"-fare is CURRENTLY gone, six months from now or even six years, will this still be the case?

2)  We would have to imagine X has done their homework and has decided enough people buy the perks to justify AI

3)  Very few will give up on X solely based on their principle of being forced to pay for AI; if an X fare with AI is 25% lower then all other competitors, most people would give up on their principle to save money by booking with X

 

Try doing something different and give a reasoning for point #3. Do you have some inside information or do you just know. Adding an “if” at the end means you skewing your comment to make it true. What if the price is higher than the competitors? My post was in the form of a question.

[NutsAboutGolf]

8 hours ago, the penguins said:

Love your "if" on point 3. 

 

37 minutes ago, grandgeezer said:

Try doing something different and give a reasoning for point #3. Do you have some inside information or do you just know. Adding an “if” at the end means you skewing your comment to make it true. What if the price is higher than the competitors? My post was in the form of a question.

 

Exactly.  It may not be sailing date, ship or room category that works for you but there are deal to be had if it works for someone else.

[Jim_Iain]

 

I may be a contrarian but being around Celebrity for many years,   I would say it is GONE until it BACK.   Marketing is always looking for a way to increase Revenue and Bookings. 

 

If total bookings start dropping I think we will again see "Sales" without some or all perks.