Minors losing their Diamond status…

[Ret MP]

10 minutes ago, A&L_Ont said:

I remember having a discussion with said member of what they believe Star Class guests should be tipping.  They wanted a percentage of the cruise cost charged as a tip, and that RC should make it a policy. The number 10% or more was thrown about by our fellow CC member.
 

They could not acknowledge that this was an inherently foolish idea as a NYE cruise would be a $3,000  tip charged to you on top of the cruise cost.  Also add taxes to that. However the Genie has not done any more work that they would the second week of January, when the cost of sailing was less and they would receive much less for the same amount of work. 
 

I just gave up.  Just like Ourusualbeach did here. 

I remember that discussion.  But, I don't remember it as stated.  Please link to it.

[A&L_Ont]

12 minutes ago, nelblu said:

When Royal sometimes at the top tier events they congratulate themselves on the number of C&A members and always wondered how accurate those numbers are.

I’d have to say they are not accurate.  For the appearance of brand loyalty and membership numbers why would they want to be accurate if other lines use the same approach. For marketing alone they don’t want less numbers in their advertising pool, and bragging industry rights.
 

As for deceased C&A members, the last thing a family member would think of doing is calling RC to remove their deceased family member from C&A from the program as well as Kroger, Shell and other loyalty programs. CC is probably no different.  I bet there are large numbers of members that have passed away, forgotten they are members, or haven’t posted or visited this site in years. 
 

 

[A&L_Ont]

6 minutes ago, Ret MP said:

I remember that discussion.  But, I don't remember it as stated.  Please link to it.

I suspect it was locked or deleted because it was a tipping thread. Again, “I don’t remember it as stated” would be your interpretation.  I walked away from it for a reason.

Edited March 30, 2023 by A&L_Ont

[cruisegus]

21 minutes ago, nolimits said:

Real Experience  

 

We cruise with a lot of families.We do one big one with all the kids now ages  20s to 30s We are 50s and 60s 

27 of our children are all D prior to turning 18 with less than required pts. The 8 couples have cruised multiple times a yr without children and moved on to D+ 

Our children didn’t get away with anything 
This is how RC interprets there own policy 

Also 9 of the 27 are married and or living with significant others and those 9 spouses are now cruising with D status 

Grand children 6 D status 

 

Thats the way it works and has for along time. OP is a one off. Hopefully she got her daughters status problems resolved 

Thanks for posting a Real Life example of why C & A program is buldging at the seams.

 

Will all start to suffer with benefit reductions if Royal does not do something soon 

[cruisegus]

27 minutes ago, nolimits said:

Real Experience  

 

We cruise with a lot of families.We do one big one with all the kids now ages  20s to 30s We are 50s and 60s 

27 of our children are all D prior to turning 18 with less than required pts. The 8 couples have cruised multiple times a yr without children and moved on to D+ 

Our children didn’t get away with anything 
This is how RC interprets there own policy 

Also 9 of the 27 are married and or living with significant others and those 9 spouses are now cruising with D status 

Grand children 6 D status 

 

Thats the way it works and has for along time. OP is a one off. Hopefully she got her daughters status problems resolved 

Thanks for posting a Real Life example of why C & A program is buldging at the seams.

 

We will all start to suffer with benefit reductions if Royal does not do something soon 

Edited March 30, 2023 by cruisegus

[Morecruisesplz]

14 minutes ago, A&L_Ont said:

I remember having a discussion with said member of what they believe Star Class guests should be tipping.  They wanted a percentage of the cruise cost charged as a tip, and that RC should make it a policy. The number 10% or more was thrown about by our fellow CC member.
 

They could not acknowledge that this was an inherently foolish idea as a NYE cruise would be a $3,000  tip charged to you on top of the cruise cost.  Also add taxes to that. However the Genie has not done any more work that they would the second week of January, when the cost of sailing was less and they would receive much less for the same amount of work. 
 

I just gave up.  Just like Ourusualbeach did here. 

He will drown you in long speeches. Its his style. He expects everyone to give up. Just ignore him.

[Ret MP]

3 minutes ago, Biker19 said:

No, and re-read my post real slow again.

I did, slow, fast, sideways, upside down.  It says, and the post quoted me:  (unless they want to post whore some more).

[Ret MP]

1 minute ago, fredmdcruisers said:

He will drown you in long speeches. Its his style. He expects everyone to give up. Just ignore him.

You keep saying so but you don't follow your own advice or what you say you are going to do.  Please ignore me.

[Biker19]

5 minutes ago, Ret MP said:

I did, slow, fast, sideways, upside down.  It says, and the post quoted me:  (unless they want to post whore some more).

Read the context: but few care (unless they want to post whore some more) since they only care about 2 - it's not always about you.

 

BTW, nothing wrong with post whoring, happens a lot on CC - it just is.

 

Biker, who has left most post whoring behind and typically only answer questions now.

Edited March 30, 2023 by Biker19

[Ret MP]

6 minutes ago, Biker19 said:

Read the context: but few care (unless they want to post whore some more) since they only care about 2 - it's not always about you.

 

BTW, nothing wrong with post whoring, happens a lot on CC - it just is.

 

Biker, who has left most post whoring behind and typically only answer questions now.

Ya, right!  I've seen a lot of posts that are not "only answering questions".  But, I'm not going to start a whole different debate.  The gang mentality has kicked in, on this thread.  

Edited March 30, 2023 by Ret MP
added the word "not"

[Ret MP]

14 minutes ago, A&L_Ont said:

I suspect it was locked or deleted because it was a tipping thread. Again, “I don’t remember it as stated” would be your interpretation.  I walked away from it for a reason.

Okay, I understand.  But, if it wasn't deleted and you find it, please link to it.  LOL

[OACAggie]

10 hours ago, Ourusualbeach said:

Each section is separate from each other and refers to something else.  You cannot combine sections.

 

Kids under 18 shares their parents status but they have their own points. Just like spouses, they appear to have the same points as the highest member in the household yet each does have their own point totals.  Kids upon turning 18 now see their own point totals yet they retain the status of their parents the last time they sailed with them. To advance to the next level they must then accumulate enough points on their own to reach that level.

 

This means a 17 year old with 14 points who sailed with Diamond parents when they were 17 retains the status of her parents of diamond yet has 14 points yet is still a diamond.  If they fail to remove the child from the relationship at 18 and sails with the parents again and the parents happened to make D+ and that was incorrectly passed on to the child then that D+ level would be removed and the 18 year old would revert to being Diamond with whatever their point total is.  This is the way the policy has worked for years and there is nothing new in the policy to suggest a change.  

 

Again the only reason this thread exists is because of one person's report. 

This is exactly how I understand it to work and how it worked with our son when he turned 18 last year. He kept his diamond status but reverted to his earned 54 points. 
 

Ken, does it make a difference when the child last sailed with parents? I thought it did. Example, if child sails with parents once when they are emerald so kid becomes emerald too(kid has say 10 points) and doesn’t sail again with parents until after 18 but the parents sailed enough without child and made it to diamond before they turned 18, kid would not keep diamond status? They would only be emerald with 10 points? 
 

*long winded example I know!

 

Edited to add…Ken, you don’t need to reply. Posted before I read you are done replying. 🙂

Edited March 30, 2023 by OACAggie

[little britain]

26 minutes ago, Ret MP said:

Once again, what does this mean:

 

"A Crown & Anchor Society member can be added into a relationship with other family members in the same household and receive equivalent tier status;  However, cruise points will remain according to actual cruises taken and calculated using the Program level accrual system described above".

Each person has 2 separate points totals.

 

1️⃣ is their own personal number of actual personal accrued points 

2️⃣ is their relationship points and reflects the highest number of points / status accrued by someone they’re in a relationship with.

 

2️⃣ is the total that people see on the screens. No one apart from RCI agents can see 1️⃣

 

When they unlink the kids at 18 from their parental relationship, they “should” retain their points from 1️⃣, and that now is replicated and also becomes 2️⃣, and is the new total they start working upwards from. They should also retain the status from their parents. 

[The Fun Researcher]

25 minutes ago, LobsterStalker said:

Not at all saying you are wrong , but is it you that is clarifying this or Royal or someone else ?

And if it was Clear , then why would it need to be Clarified  ?

Yes, that’s absolutely fair.

 

To me it’s clear how Royal has been interpreting their own policy language based on their past decade of how they practice it.
 

However I also completely agree that Royal could (really should) clarify this to remove any doubt for discussions like these.

 

Dan

[Husky1987]

35 minutes ago, Ret MP said:

Once again, what does this mean:

 

"A Crown & Anchor Society member can be added into a relationship with other family members in the same household and receive equivalent tier status;  However, cruise points will remain according to actual cruises taken and calculated using the Program level accrual system described above".

 

Easy.  A child under 18 has the same tier status as their parents, but their own cruise points.  They can be (and are) separate things.   

 

The policy is pretty simple.

 

A child gets their parent's status if they are under 18.  At the same time, they also accrue their own points based on their actual cruises.

 

At 18, they retain status but points go back to actual points.  This is so AFTER they reach 18, they have to move UP in tiers on their own accord.

 

You're really making it much more difficult than it needs to be.

 

edited to add:  @little britain summed it up a bit more clearly than I did.

 

Edited March 30, 2023 by Husky1987

[Ret MP]

6 minutes ago, little britain said:

Each person has 2 separate points totals.

 

1️⃣ is their own personal number of actual personal accrued points 

2️⃣ is their relationship points and reflects the highest number of points / status accrued by someone they’re in a relationship with.

 

2️⃣ is the total that people see on the screens. No one apart from RCI agents can see 1️⃣

 

When they unlink the kids at 18 from their parental relationship, they “should” retain their points from 1️⃣, and that now is replicated and also becomes 2️⃣, and is the new total they start working upwards from. They should also retain the status from their parents. 

Where is that from?  Link?  It doesn't change what I'm saying though.  I'm saying what the written policy says, nothing else.  

[OACAggie]

8 minutes ago, Ret MP said:

Where is that from?  Link?  It doesn't change what I'm saying though.  I'm saying what the written policy says, nothing else.  

It isn’t listed anywhere. But it is correct based on how it has worked with my family. 

[nolimits]

You can read and post policy as many times as you want. What your posting is practiced in the manner We’re stating and giving Real Life Examples of working policy 

 

RCI has not practiced or enforced your explanation of policy 

OP. Still hasn’t  come back to report outcome 

[OACAggie]

Not trying to aggravate anyone that does not like the status matching of kids, etc after 18, but how many of you have no problem with having your status matched (to Elite) with Celebrity? 
I think the status match for kids, SO, etc is good and I think it helps Royal. I probably would not have sailed as much with Royal trying to get my kids to D by 18 and they may not continue to sail Royal as adults if they didn’t get there. It is a way to lock people into the brand (and for being loyal) just like Apple or Google and all the integration with there services. 

[Ret MP]

6 minutes ago, Husky1987 said:

 

Easy.  A child under 18 has the same tier status as their parents, but their own cruise points.  They can be (and are) separate things.   

 

The policy is pretty simple.

 

A child gets their parent's status if they are under 18.  At the same time, they also accrue their own points based on their actual cruises.

 

At 18, they retain status but points go back to actual points.  This is so AFTER they reach 18, they have to move UP in tiers on their own accord.  

 

You're really making it much more difficult than it needs to be.

 

edited to add:  @little britain summed it up a bit more clearly than I did.

 

Okay, I'm going to say this one last time, I just can't say it any more clearly.  Points are earned,  not granted.  I'll add, C&A points, not relationship points.  Tier/status is granted based upon relationship.  Tier/status, after 18 is based upon points earned points, not what the parents earned pre-18, not relationships.  

 

Again, if someone comes up with a RCCL policy, written, that says differently, I'll be humble.  This has, for the most part, been a very cordial discussion and I haven't not been disagreeable just to disagree.  I've not name called or made false accusations.  I'm only pointing out, by cut and paste, exactly what the policy says.  I'l be monitoring but I'm done unless someone provides provable evidence that the policy that I've quoted is in contravention of other written RCCL policies.

[A&L_Ont]

3 minutes ago, nolimits said:

You can read and post policy as many times as you want. What your posting is practiced in the manner We’re stating and giving Real Life Examples of working policy 

Thankfully our son is D+ on his actual sailings, over and above our status. He won’t have to wait and see what happens to him at 18

[Morecruisesplz]

7 minutes ago, Ret MP said:

Okay, I'm going to say this one last time...

Promise?

[The Fun Researcher]

7 minutes ago, Ret MP said:

Okay, I'm going to say this one last time, I just can't say it any more clearly.  Points are earned,  not granted.  I'll add, C&A points, not relationship points.  Tier/status is granted based upon relationship.  Tier/status, after 18 is based upon points earned points, not what the parents earned pre-18, not relationships.  

 

Again, if someone comes up with a RCCL policy, written, that says differently, I'll be humble.  This has, for the most part, been a very cordial discussion and I haven't not been disagreeable just to disagree.  I've not name called or made false accusations.  I'm only pointing out, by cut and paste, exactly what the policy says.  I'l be monitoring but I'm done unless someone provides provable evidence that the policy that I've quoted is in contravention of other written RCCL policies.

You do realize that you are interpreting the policy one way, and that there is also another accurate way to interpret it? (which happens to be the way Royal is practicing the language of their policy.)

 

The language is vague enough that your interpretation could be correct, but it's not the interpretation that Royal is following.  It's Royal's fault for making the language open for multiple interpretations.

[A&L_Ont]

Those wondering about your kids sailings and points they accumulated we have done the following. We have a note on our iPad, to which we update and print after every sailing. 
 

On it is shows the following.

- ship and date of sailing

- who from our house sailed (parents, with or without son)

- points accumulated on that sailing

 

On the bottom of the page we also list our total running points as a couple, and our son’s actual points for the cruises he was on.

 

If we ever have an issue with lost cruise points we have this as an easy reference to go from.  We also have saved our past cruise cards, on top of photos from our holidays. I have read that RC would accept/use photos of people on the ship as proof enough that you were there if their records don’t match theirs.  

[twangster]

7 minutes ago, OACAggie said:

Not trying to aggravate anyone that does not like the status matching of kids, etc after 18, but how many of you have no problem with having your status matched (to Elite) with Celebrity? 
I think the status match for kids, SO, etc is good and I think it helps Royal. I probably would not have sailed as much with Royal trying to get my kids to D by 18 and they may not continue to sail Royal as adults if they didn’t get there. It is a way to lock people into the brand (and for being loyal) just like Apple or Google and all the integration with there services. 

 

Agreed.

 

My kids have no loyalty to Royal.  They are now young adults paying for their own cruises.  They missed out on a Royal dependent match so it is what it is and Carnival gets the business.  On their limited budgets price is huge for them.  With nothing tilting the table in Royal's direction Royal doesn't look appealing to the young early career types with no status or free drinks in the equation.  

 

Young adults early in careers have limited time off so it's not like these are frequent cruisers consuming seats in Diamond lounges or frequently consuming CAS benefits at a high cost to the company.    Right before this age group is getting ready to start spending their own hard earned money is not a great time to demote and snub this age group.  In a few years time they will remember and they will book other cruise lines.  Letting them keep their status as they enter a phase when they will be cruising infrequently doesn't seem like it costs the company much at all.    Later in life as they vacation more with their own kids reaching the cruising age it would be much better to have them locked into Royal.