Minors losing their Diamond status…

[The Fun Researcher]

On 3/28/2023 at 10:50 AM, LobsterStalker said:

 

 

I disagree that it isn't clear what the appropriate status would be . It states "adjusted back".. so if not that doesn't mean adjusted to their actual points earned what would the 'back' possibly be referring to ?

 

 

4 hours ago, moposh said:

YOUTH BENEFITS 46   Children share the same tier (up to Diamond Plus) as their parent until age 18. Children of Pinnacle Club members enjoy select onboard benefits of their parents, however, not the tier. Children will be removed from a loyalty relationship with a parent or guardian upon their 18th birthday. If it is found that a dependent or child is not immediately removed from a relationship upon their 18th birthday and accumulates a higher tier status outside of this time period, the dependent’s record will be adjusted back to the appropriate tier status without notice. 

 

 

@LobsterStalker and @moposh, I read the rules like @Ourusualbeach describes below.

 

For example, say a minor was grandfathered into Diamond before turning 18 (even though actual status is Platinum).  C&A is saying that if, after 18, they continued accidentally getting grandfathered into their parents status and the parents made D+, the child would revert back to Diamond, not all the way back to Platinum.

 

1 hour ago, Ourusualbeach said:

That is ambiguous and not how they have handled this in the past.  Up until this report, with a few exceptions as posted by others that happened not recently kids were grandfathered to the last loyalty status they held but their points reset to their actual points.

 

Even the above paragraph that you quoted could support this.

 

"If it is found that a dependent or child is not immediately removed from a relationship upon their 18th birthday and accumulates a higher tier status outside of this time period, the dependent’s record will be adjusted back to the appropriate tier status"

 

This part could easily be interpreted to mean that if they accumulate a higher status than whatb they were grandfathered at they would be reduced back to what they were previously at the last time they sailed with their parents prior to turning 18.  I've read quite a few posts where a child who was Emerald by virtue of their parents status  but gold on their own turned 18 and the parents made Diamond, the child was incorrectly made Diamond and then was caught and was moved back to the correct level of Emerald and not to Gold.

 

[Starry Eyes]

25 minutes ago, Mapleleafforever said:

If that's the case than Royal knows they're basically "stuck" and will continue to cruise with them regardless of service levels......it's all about the "perks" eh? 

 

My family continues to cruise with Royal because we perceive it to be the best value family vacation going. Take away our D perks and we'd probably continue with Royal because it ticks all the boxes. We've already considered other cruise lines (even ones that match) and we're just not willing to go into the unknown as of yet. 

 

I highly suspect there are many with the same thinking. 

 

A lot of Pinnacles are on a fixed retirement income, I can't see them going on a more expensive cruise line and I certainly can't see them going on Carnival or a budget line. 

 

 

People are only “stuck” if they want to be stuck.  If they like the perks so much that they do not even look at other options, they are stuck.

 

I suspect in addition to regular monthly retirement income many Pinnacles have a substantial amount of money in investment accounts that they can draw upon at will. Some retirees accumulated that money by spending carefully throughout their lives.  They may be able to afford any cruiseline, but that does not mean they are inclined toward the ultra luxury brands.

[The Fun Researcher]

4 minutes ago, LobsterStalker said:

Based on what you stated happened with your 2 daughters , doesn't it stand to reason that his should revert back to platinum ? or maybe Emerald if he reaches that on his own by then ?

That's not how it's worked in the past in the vast, vast majority of cases.  The level you are at when you turn 18, even if it's grandfathered, is what you have for life.   In order to get a higher status than that, you need to do it on your own points.

 

Both of our daughters were platinum, and so were we, when they turned 18.  They missed out on being grandfathered at all.  My son is only 15 and got grandfathered into Emerald with us, and will now get grandfathered into Diamond.  He'll have 60 points on his own after our Alaskan cruise this summer so he's not too far off anyway

 

Problem is, there is inconsistency with how they are treating those over 18 that were grandfathered.  The vast majority have kept whatever status they were grandfathered into at 18.  The instance by the OP is not the norm

Dan

[Jussabitconfused]

Just now, The Fun Researcher said:

That's not how it's worked in the past in the vast, vast majority of cases.  The level you are at when you turn 18, even if it's grandfathered, is what you have for life.   In order to get a higher status than that, you need to do it on your own points.

 

Both of our daughters were platinum, and so were we, when they turned 18.  They missed out on being grandfathered at all.  My son is only 15 and got grandfathered into Emerald with us, and will now get grandfathered into Diamond.  He'll have 60 points on his own after our Alaskan cruise this summer so he's not too far off anyway

 

Problem is, there is inconsistency with how they are treating those over 18 that were grandfathered.  The vast majority have kept whatever status they were grandfathered into at 18.  The instance by the OP is not the norm

Dan

My 13 year old has 28 points. My 23 year old has 8 points despite the fact that she has been on every cruise the 13 year old has been on and more. At this point RC is unwilling to fix her account but we will be on the Navigator on April 7 and are going to visit the LA and see if they are willing to fix her C&A points. I have 47 and my 23 year old should be at 37.

[moposh]

6 minutes ago, The Fun Researcher said:

That's not how it's worked in the past in the vast, vast majority of cases.  The level you are at when you turn 18, even if it's grandfathered, is what you have for life.   In order to get a higher status than that, you need to do it on your own points.

 

Both of our daughters were platinum, and so were we, when they turned 18.  They missed out on being grandfathered at all.  My son is only 15 and got grandfathered into Emerald with us, and will now get grandfathered into Diamond.  He'll have 60 points on his own after our Alaskan cruise this summer so he's not too far off anyway

 

Problem is, there is inconsistency with how they are treating those over 18 that were grandfathered.  The vast majority have kept whatever status they were grandfathered into at 18.  The instance by the OP is not the norm

Dan

If he's not Diamond at 18 then he'll go back to Emerald.  But he has 3 years so if you keep cruising, he may make it on his own.

[nelblu]

1 hour ago, Mapleleafforever said:

Shouldn't people be doing this regardless of status? This is the double edge sword with having a high loyalty status.....you  basically get "stuck" with a cruise line. 

Not stuck really.   I enjoy the Royal experience (new ships, entertainment, etc,) and including almost $1k in amenities on every sail.  The big selling point is that I'm 25 minutes from port and don't have the hassle of flying.  Why take a chance on NCL and Carnival sailing form NYC when I don't know their product and I feel comfortable with Royal.

 

 

[A&L_Ont]

1 hour ago, The Fun Researcher said:

 

 

@LobsterStalker and @moposh, I read the rules like @Ourusualbeach describes below.

 

For example, say a minor was grandfathered into Diamond before turning 18 (even though actual status is Platinum).  C&A is saying that if, after 18, they continued accidentally getting grandfathered into their parents status and the parents made D+, the child would revert back to Diamond, not all the way back to Platinum.

That has always been my understanding as well. 

Edited March 29, 2023 by A&L_Ont

[LobsterStalker]

1 minute ago, nelblu said:

Not stuck really.   I enjoy the Royal experience (new ships, entertainment, etc,) and including almost $1k in amenities on every sail.  The big selling point is that I'm 25 minutes from port and don't have the hassle of flying.  Why take a chance on NCL and Carnival sailing form NYC when I don't know their product and I feel comfortable with Royal.

 

 

Absolutely reasonable assessment

If I lived 25 minutes from port I'm sure I'd have reached D+ by now instead of just reaching D

The cost to cruise for me is almost doubled by the time we Fly , nights in hotels pre and post , food , transportation 

... I envy your situation !

[nelblu]

18 hours ago, Tatka said:

They needed money during pandemic and right after, so they ran double points. 

I know, but I tried to point to the post one of the many causes for the increases in the various levels.

[cruisegirl1]

11 hours ago, Kbonner said:

Diamond + and up should get twice daily cabin service😇

 - Pinnacle don't even get that!    Pinnacle (Not in a suite) get one service a day.  

 

M

[marci22]

1 hour ago, Jussabitconfused said:

My 13 year old has 28 points. My 23 year old has 8 points despite the fact that she has been on every cruise the 13 year old has been on and more. At this point RC is unwilling to fix her account but we will be on the Navigator on April 7 and are going to visit the LA and see if they are willing to fix her C&A points. I have 47 and my 23 year old should be at 37.

Let us know what happens. When I talked to LA about a points discrepancy, they would only go back X number of years, no matter what proof you have.

[LobsterStalker]

1 hour ago, The Fun Researcher said:

 

 

@LobsterStalker and @moposh, I read the rules like @Ourusualbeach describes below.

 

For example, say a minor was grandfathered into Diamond before turning 18 (even though actual status is Platinum).  C&A is saying that if, after 18, they continued accidentally getting grandfathered into their parents status and the parents made D+, the child would revert back to Diamond, not all the way back to Platinum.

 

 

I'm not sure what to think... It seems there are different interpretations of the wording not just among us , but also at HQ as well . I can certainly see how it could be read the way you are asserting. 

 What happened to OP's child would lead me to believe that is actually the correct interpretation of an until now little or unenforced rule. Hard to believe the LA would go to that much trouble on his own ... that must have come from the higher ups.

We'll see how it all plays out I guess

[The Fun Researcher]

1 hour ago, moposh said:

If he's not Diamond at 18 then he'll go back to Emerald.  But he has 3 years so if you keep cruising, he may make it on his own.

Regarding this topic, you can't say anything with that much certainty, other than...  "We'll find out"  🙂

[Husky1987]

19 minutes ago, LobsterStalker said:

I'm not sure what to think... It seems there are different interpretations of the wording not just among us , but also at HQ as well . I can certainly see how it could be read the way you are asserting. 

As with a lot of things (like the....ahem...."dress code"), Royal tends to word things so wishy-washy that people can interpret it both ways.

 

i.e. the first line reads:  Children share the same tier (up to Diamond Plus) as their parent until age 18.

 

BUT...does that mean children share the same tier as their parent ONLY until age 18 (and then go back to their own points)?  Or does that mean that AFTER age 18 they can no longer share the parents' (new, higher) tier?  

 

In law school, we were taught to read laws/rules like this so every word has meaning.  The trouble starts when they purposely leave words out that would give their own rules a lot more clarity. 

[Mapleleafforever]

2 hours ago, LobsterStalker said:

Hard for me to count all the ways I disagree with above statements... but I'll give it a go !

 

>>> "stuck "... your description , not mine . Perks do mean a lot to people and how they make choices . Do I believe some put too much weight into that aspect ... ABSOLUTELY ! I never claimed that their decision would be right or wrong , just that it would be the decision of many .

>>> "perceiving" Royal to be the best for you and not being willing to venture out could be very inconclusive. Not telling you what to do with your vacation dollars by any means , and if you are happy where you are that is the main thing . I have done 13 cruises , 12 being with Royal for just this reason , we have always had good experience , however , we did take one cruise with NCL and were pleasantly surprised that there were several things that actually beat Royal in our opinion. Since then we have been very open minded about other lines , if the right situation presented !

The value of our loyalty perks is just one of many factors to go into those decisions

>>> "fixed income"... Don't disagree that a lot are , but disregarding the ones who do have the means would be shortsighted .  

But more than any of that the simple fact that people receive perks and recognition makes them feel special.. and obviously the more perks the better . Just out of the blue taking those status away (especially to reward in some way those who have not earned it ) would feel like a slap in the face that many would simply not tolerate .

Do people get too caught up in status ? as I said ...ABSOLUTELY ! but that is why the lines know how important they are .

 

Cheers

Happy sailing !

 

I have a good friend who swears by NCL and we have considered them in the past and are very open to trying them one day. Heck, we'd even try MSC I think as the prices seem to be pretty low compared.......mind you I'm guessing they're lower for a reason but you never know until you try right?

[Mapleleafforever]

2 hours ago, Starry Eyes said:

People are only “stuck” if they want to be stuck.  If they like the perks so much that they do not even look at other options, they are stuck.

 

I suspect in addition to regular monthly retirement income many Pinnacles have a substantial amount of money in investment accounts that they can draw upon at will. Some retirees accumulated that money by spending carefully throughout their lives.  They may be able to afford any cruiseline, but that does not mean they are inclined toward the ultra luxury brands.

Just to be clear I am not anti Pinnacle by any means.....and I hope I don't come across that way. 

[Mapleleafforever]

1 hour ago, nelblu said:

Not stuck really.   I enjoy the Royal experience (new ships, entertainment, etc,) and including almost $1k in amenities on every sail.  The big selling point is that I'm 25 minutes from port and don't have the hassle of flying.  Why take a chance on NCL and Carnival sailing form NYC when I don't know their product and I feel comfortable with Royal.

 

 

I hear you. If I lived that close to port I'd probably sell the cottage and go on long weekend cruises instead. 

 

[Oceansaway17]

9 hours ago, Mapleleafforever said:

Some day down the road there will also be less pinnacles as well though. Evens itself out. Also, as some finally reach pinnacle they're approaching the age where cruising becomes more difficult. 

 

Must keep in mind that all new ships are geared towards families and fun factor.

yes I will be on the Icon just to experience it.  I actually do like being around kids and that is why I like to sail Disney too.

But this point system is for in a way a gimmick.  I rather like spreading my dollars around all the cruise lines (except Virgin and HAL)

[Tatka]

15 minutes ago, Mapleleafforever said:

I hear you. If I lived that close to port I'd probably sell the cottage and go on long weekend cruises instead. 

 

 

We are closer than you to for example NJ (4 hours)/Baltimore (6.5 hours)/Boston (1 hour)... but we would probably still drive for our 5 cruises. 🙂 We usually do 4 out of NJ and 1 out of Baltimore lately.

 

[soremekun]

21 minutes ago, Mapleleafforever said:

I hear you. If I lived that close to port I'd probably sell the cottage and go on long weekend cruises instead. 

 

I live 15 minutes from the port in Boston.  However, I am not a fan of the ships and itineraries.

[Starry Eyes]

1 hour ago, Mapleleafforever said:

Just to be clear I am not anti Pinnacle by any means.....and I hope I don't come across that way. 

I did not take it that way.  I am not anti Pinnacle either.  I probably will make Pinnacle eventually, though I am not taking any special steps to do so.  The points just accumulate as we enjoy our cruises.  

[nelblu]

2 hours ago, marci22 said:

Let us know what happens. When I talked to LA about a points discrepancy, they would only go back X number of years, no matter what proof you have.

I had some issues with some of my old sails which showed 1 point which was the old points accumulations.  Called the C&A desk and they corrected it.  I find that the ship's LA are unable to resolve any issues of any magnitude.   They do however correct any issues that arise while sailing.

Edited March 29, 2023 by nelblu

[twangster]

22 hours ago, nelblu said:

So, you want to slow down the increase in Pinnacles--here' are some ideas--just make all reservations 1 point/night each and not double or tripled.  Sail the repositioning ships empty so that a 15 niter does not accumulate from 15 to 45 points per sail.  There was a poster that marveled that in past the repositioning used to sail at max 35-40% capacity.  Now they are around 70%+.  

 

With more new and bigger ships, it's creating a larger cruising population which of course generate increase membership in all tiers.  Also, passengers with means can afford the many suite cabins. therefore, reaching the upper tier levels at a quicker pace.

 

To me, this is win win for the cruise industry especially since they are running at almost 100% capacity.

 

Ps.  If Royal was really concerned, they should not have had the double points promotions.  Wonder, how many Pinnacles were created during this promotion.

 

My post was in jest.  It really doesn't matter to me how easy or not they make any level including Pinnacle.  

 

I don't sail Royal exclusively.  I enjoy Royal the most and I appreciate the Pinnacle benefits I receive but they are not why I cruise or why I pick Royal.  DP340 was a game changer for me and it makes looking at other lines harder because when you combine the CAS perks and lower rates from DP340 it makes Royal a winner in many pricing exercises.    The newly adjusted DP340 time frames will cause Royal to come out on the losing side for a few more cruises now but in the bigger picture it doesn't really matter as price isn't the only factor when playing the field.  Sometimes I book elsewhere at a higher cost just to try something different.

 

I don't think Royal sees the numbers of any level as a "problem" but they do need to contain the cost of the program.  That will always be an ongoing exercise for them but it does drive a lot of repeat business so it's a balancing act for them.  

 

As numbers grow eventually they will have to boot Pinnacle from the Suite Lounge and Coastal Kitchen on a permanent basis.  Celebrity already does that so there is some precedent in the family for it.  That won't impact me personally or cause me to stop booking Royal and I book suites occasionally now I'll just savor it more in the future when it happens.  

 

I think the double promo swelled the D+ level the most as it shortened the distance to 175 so that was very easy to accomplish.  Many folks simply got to where they would have been if the pandemic never happened so I really don't think the overall impact was that dramatic.  Some very frequent cruisers made out well but for the most part I don't think it changed the landscape that much.  For anyone already Pinnacle (like me) it did nothing for me except bring me to a free cruise threshold I would have received during the shutdown.   There is no advantage to having way more than 700 compared to any other amount over 700 except for the free cruises every 350.  I'm betting there was greater attrition experienced at the Pinnacle level due to the average age through natural effects so a few more new Pinnacle just kept the numbers intact.  

[Jussabitconfused]

2 hours ago, marci22 said:

Let us know what happens. When I talked to LA about a points discrepancy, they would only go back X number of years, no matter what proof you have.

I will. We lost a couple cruises that were booked during the shutdown or we would have noticed sooner.

[OACAggie]

We made it to diamond last year before my eldest son turned 18. He was matched with our status and points (90) until he turned 18 last Sept. After he turned 18, his status stayed diamond and his points reverted to his own accumulated of 54. He would then only move up to D+ once he accumulated the required points on his own. This was the way I understood it to work and how it shows on his profile. We took a short 4 nt cruise in Dec. and his points went to 58 and status is still diamond. He also received a diamond pin from the LA and enjoyed the 4 drinks/day no problem. One thing that I was told/read somewhere was that he had to be the cruise when we hit diamond or on a cruise with us as diamond before he turned 18 for him to keep diamond after he reached 18. Based on that we made sure he was on the cruise when we hit diamond. Not sure if that is true or not or if it makes a difference?

 

 

Edited March 29, 2023 by OACAggie