Military and shareholders OBC no longer combinable soon.

[Guest ldtr]

9 hours ago, Tigrou said:

 

In recent years I have unfortunately got used to cruise lines not valuing me as much as the 'typical cabin booking' of 2 people - even though I'm generally still paying for 2 people, it's just that my DH is now an 'invisible' passenger on account of his being dead.

 

But this move by Princess simply adds insult to injury.  I am military.  I am a shareholder.  But because I now travel solo one of those, whether it be military or shareholder, no longer holds any value.

 

 

 

There is a very clear reason. Even though you pay the same in fares as a couple, with 35% of revenue coming g from on board sales. the expected revenue from your cabin is 2.53 X the single person fare, compared to 2 people in a cabin where the average revenue expected is 3.06 X the single person fare. plus a lower share of the fees and the gratuity payments.  That is why they much prefer 2 people pertain and why they only seem to tolerate solo cruisers. A solo is better that an empty cabin but less desirable than 2 per cabin.

[Guest ldtr]

8 hours ago, whitecap said:

Ken, I agree with your DW.  Because the "new policy" doesn't take affect until June 29th and there is no mention of it being retroactive, I believe that Princess will begin the new policy on June 29th and bookings made on and after that date (that depart beginning Sept 12th) will fall under the new policy, all prior bookings, regardless of departure date, will fall under the current policy.  Fingers crossed!

I would change that to not new bookings but new approvals for the shareholder credit after that date that for cruises after the September date. I expect the enforcement to be the during the approval process for the shareholder benefit.

[moodyb1]

Just got off a chat with a representative and this is what they wrote back to us:

 

"The new update is per guest, not per cabin. If Guest 1 has the Military Benefit, and Guest 2 has the Shareholder Benefit, both Guests can apply for it."

 

We are still going to verify with a phone representative.

 

However, this new policy is a bummer! My husband complained to Customer Relations about this, not that it will do much good. 

 

Arlene

[vjmatty]

43 minutes ago, ldtr said:

There is a very clear reason. Even though you pay the same in fares as a couple, with 35% of revenue coming g from on board sales. the expected revenue from your cabin is 2.53 X the single person fare, compared to 2 people in a cabin where the average revenue expected is 3.06 X the single person fare. plus a lower share of the fees and the gratuity payments.  That is why they much prefer 2 people pertain and why they only seem to tolerate solo cruisers. A solo is better that an empty cabin but less desirable than 2 per cabin.

 

Less onboard spending yes, but also less expense for the cruise line. One person that doesn’t have to be fed three meals, use the onboard amenities, burn up hot water, etc. And if it’s a seasoned cruiser which is probably about half the passenger base, their onboard spending could easily be zero. 

[Tigrou]

1 hour ago, ldtr said:

There is a very clear reason. Even though you pay the same in fares as a couple, with 35% of revenue coming g from on board sales. the expected revenue from your cabin is 2.53 X the single person fare, compared to 2 people in a cabin where the average revenue expected is 3.06 X the single person fare. plus a lower share of the fees and the gratuity payments.  That is why they much prefer 2 people pertain and why they only seem to tolerate solo cruisers. A solo is better that an empty cabin but less desirable than 2 per cabin.

I know the reasons.  Doesn't mean I have to be happy about it.

 

In the situation under discussion, it really feels like being kicked when I'm down.  If in cabins with 2 people one can claim military and the other shareholder, then if a solo traveller is paying for 2 people they should be able to claim both benefits if eligible.

 

 

[whitecap]

7 minutes ago, Tigrou said:

I know the reasons.  Doesn't mean I have to be happy about it.

 

In the situation under discussion, it really feels like being kicked when I'm down.  If in cabins with 2 people one can claim military and the other shareholder, then if a solo traveller is paying for 2 people they should be able to claim both benefits if eligible.

 

 

I, for one, do agree.  This new policy does, I'll say, diminish the benefits for a solo cruiser.  Something that the heads at Princess should discuss and rectify.  

[Guest ldtr]

58 minutes ago, vjmatty said:

 

Less onboard spending yes, but also less expense for the cruise line. One person that doesn’t have to be fed three meals, use the onboard amenities, burn up hot water, etc. And if it’s a seasoned cruiser which is probably about half the passenger base, their onboard spending could easily be zero. 

Lets see average CCL onboard revenue per passenger per day last quarter  was $77.38, the amount of food spend per passenger per day was $15.40 (and I believe that includes not only the passenger food but the crew food as well).  The rest is pretty much fixed labor, fuel, etc for a given itinerary.  The amount of other consumables such as soap and tp, might be a few cents per day but certainly not more than $1.  So the savings by not having a second passengers is pretty small to the potental revenue loss.

 

If they are not spending anything on board then even more of a reason for the cruise line to not really want to embrace them.

[Guest ldtr]

40 minutes ago, Tigrou said:

I know the reasons.  Doesn't mean I have to be happy about it.

 

In the situation under discussion, it really feels like being kicked when I'm down.  If in cabins with 2 people one can claim military and the other shareholder, then if a solo traveller is paying for 2 people they should be able to claim both benefits if eligible.

 

 

On a 7 day cruise you lose $100.  On a 7 day cruise based upon last quarters numbers the cruise line loses a potential $541.66 by not having a second person in that cabin.  They might save 107.80 in food cost.  However the crew gives up $112 in gratuity amount, even though they clean the same number of bathrooms, change the same towels, make the same beds. etc.

 

[Happiest when cruising]

7 hours ago, HaveDogWillTravel said:

I really hope this is true!  But I do empathize with veterans who feel their service us being equated to shareholders.  Yes there are younger veterans. My son is only 42 he served 8 years.  He spent one year getting shot at daily in Afghanistan. 

It is true. Please thank your son for his service. 

[vjmatty]

1 hour ago, ldtr said:

 

If they are not spending anything on board then even more of a reason for the cruise line to not really want to embrace them.

 

Sorry, I should have been more clear.... I meant the missing passenger when one sails solo would just as likely have been paying zero in onboard spending.  I was thinking lot of solo are widowed experienced cruisers, who's lost partner didn't spend much either.  Seasoned cruisers don't spend on pictures, rarely buy ship excursions, don't shop in the stores and almost never buy artwork.  What little they spend on is usually covered by some form of OBC.

 

To put it bluntly and a bit morbidly, whichever one of hubby or me goes first, the survivor traveling solo will be spending the same on their cabin and onboard expenses as we now do when traveling as a couple, but costing the cruise line less than if it were accommodating two people.  Given the number of Platinum and Elites on most sailings, I imagine that we are not atypical in our stingy spending.

 

The people you speak of, with the average $77+ per day onboard spending, are younger, newer to cruising and would not likely be traveling solo, or be the lost passenger.

 

 

Edited June 23, 2023 by vjmatty

[Guest ldtr]

23 minutes ago, vjmatty said:

 

Sorry, I should have been more clear.... I meant the missing passenger when one sails solo would just as likely have been paying zero in onboard spending.  I was thinking lot of solo are widowed experienced cruisers, who's lost partner didn't spend much either.  Seasoned cruisers don't spend on pictures, rarely buy ship excursions, don't shop in the stores and almost never buy artwork.  What little they spend on is usually covered by some form of OBC.

 

To put it bluntly and a bit morbidly, whichever one of hubby or me goes first, the survivor traveling solo will be spending the same on their cabin and onboard expenses as we now do when traveling as a couple, but costing the cruise line less than if it were accommodating two people.  Given the number of Platinum and Elites on most sailings, I imagine that we are not atypical in our stingy spending.

 

The people you speak of, with the average $77+ per day onboard spending, are younger, newer to cruising and would not likely be traveling solo, or be the lost passenger.

 

 

Then people wonder why the cruise lines seem to lose interest in retaining older cruisers and tend to focus on lowering age demographics. 

 

I expect the onboard spend by those of us that get both benefits is one of the reason for the change in policy.

 

That is 77 per person per day.  if one buys a package that is a good portion of it by itself.

Edited June 23, 2023 by ldtr

[jwattle]

46 minutes ago, vjmatty said:

 

Sorry, I should have been more clear.... I meant the missing passenger when one sails solo would just as likely have been paying zero in onboard spending.  I was thinking lot of solo are widowed experienced cruisers, who's lost partner didn't spend much either.  Seasoned cruisers don't spend on pictures, rarely buy ship excursions, don't shop in the stores and almost never buy artwork.  What little they spend on is usually covered by some form of OBC.

 

To put it bluntly and a bit morbidly, whichever one of hubby or me goes first, the survivor traveling solo will be spending the same on their cabin and onboard expenses as we now do when traveling as a couple, but costing the cruise line less than if it were accommodating two people.  Given the number of Platinum and Elites on most sailings, I imagine that we are not atypical in our stingy spending.

 

The people you speak of, with the average $77+ per day onboard spending, are younger, newer to cruising and would not likely be traveling solo, or be the lost passenger.

 

 

The generalizing that seasoned cruisers don't spend onboard is a mistake that I doubt the Cruiselines make. We have over thirty under our belts and still spend onboard almost like we did in our youth. Feel free to judge, we earned it, we spend it. 😁🤗😘🍾

Edited June 23, 2023 by jwattle

[whitecap]

1 minute ago, jwattle said:

The generalizing that seasoned cruisers don't spend onboard is a mistake that I doubt the Cruiselines make. We have over thirty under our belts and still spend onboard almost like we did in our youth. Feel free to judge, we earned it, we spend it. 😁🤗😘🍾

Couldn't agree more!  We have been cruising since 2010, over 39 with Princess, plus Disney, Carnival, Celebrity and Royal.  On the morning we leave for our vacation I send our children an email to let them know that the value of their inheritance had just decreased by several thousand dollars. 😄

[cruiserdf]

6 hours ago, Astro Flyer said:

On Veterans Day 2010 the military benefit began when Vietnam Army combat veteran Alan Buckelew was the Princess president.

 

A Soldier Returns on a Cruise to Vietnam, as a Tourist

 

https://www.princess.com/cruise-tips-vacation-ideas/cruise-blog/50-essential-experiences/a-soldier-returns-on-a-cruise-to-vietnam-as-a-tourist.html

 

Astro Flyer, you are 100% correct .... EXCELLENT memory.  Alan Buckelew knew how to make a veteran feel appreciated!  While I think Alan retired sometime ago, I think he is still leading as the Chairman of the Board for the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund.

[damiross]

7 hours ago, cr8tiv1 said:

Does anyone have a guesstimate on what percentage of the company are passenger stock holders?

According to Fidelity's research page, the types of stockholders for CCL are

34.1% Intuitional

16.9% Institutional mutual fund ownership

2.5%  Mutual fund ownership

7.5% inside ownership

39.0 other

I may be wrong but I've always taken "other" to mean mainly individuals.

 

 

[cruiserdf]

2 hours ago, vjmatty said:

 

Sorry, I should have been more clear.... I meant the missing passenger when one sails solo would just as likely have been paying zero in onboard spending.  I was thinking lot of solo are widowed experienced cruisers, who's lost partner didn't spend much either.  Seasoned cruisers don't spend on pictures, rarely buy ship excursions, don't shop in the stores and almost never buy artwork.  What little they spend on is usually covered by some form of OBC.

 

To put it bluntly and a bit morbidly, whichever one of hubby or me goes first, the survivor traveling solo will be spending the same on their cabin and onboard expenses as we now do when traveling as a couple, but costing the cruise line less than if it were accommodating two people.  Given the number of Platinum and Elites on most sailings, I imagine that we are not atypical in our stingy spending.

 

The people you speak of, with the average $77+ per day onboard spending, are younger, newer to cruising and would not likely be traveling solo, or be the lost passenger.

 

 

After 46 Princess cruises I don't remember a cruise where we did not have one or several "ship" excursions.  Yes we have repeated excursions sometimes on accident and sometimes on purpose.

 

On our April cruise we actually bought our balcony dinner pictures.

 

Additionally I would submit the older cruiser has many more cruise days per year than the younger families.  Say a family of 5 on a 14 day cruise equates to 70 passenger days.  An older couple with only four 14 day cruises per year would have 112 passenger days per year.  It seems the older we get, our cruise day goals have been increasing each year.  I don't think we are unique. 

[cruiserdf]

3 hours ago, ldtr said:

On a 7 day cruise you lose $100.  On a 7 day cruise based upon last quarters numbers the cruise line loses a potential $541.66 by not having a second person in that cabin.  They might save 107.80 in food cost.  However the crew gives up $112 in gratuity amount, even though they clean the same number of bathrooms, change the same towels, make the same beds. etc.

 

Why does the crew give $112 in gratuity amount?  Has it changed where solo travelers do not have to pay 2x gratuities when traveling alone in a cabin?

[cr8tiv1]

11 minutes ago, cruiserdf said:

Why does the crew give $112 in gratuity amount?  Has it changed where solo travelers do not have to pay 2x gratuities when traveling alone in a cabin?

 

Solo cruises never had to pay 2x gratuities when traveling alone.  They most often have to pay single supplement up to 100%. I have found a cruise that I want to go on with no solo penalties.  I understand they are out there...just haven't found them.  They also only pay insurance and port fees/taxes only once.

[Guest ldtr]

3 hours ago, cruiserdf said:

Why does the crew give $112 in gratuity amount?  Has it changed where solo travelers do not have to pay 2x gratuities when traveling alone in a cabin?

question already answered

Edited June 24, 2023 by ldtr

[MissP22]

15 hours ago, moodyb1 said:

Just got off a chat with a representative and this is what they wrote back to us:

"The new update is per guest, not per cabin. If Guest 1 has the Military Benefit, and Guest 2 has the Shareholder Benefit, both Guests can apply for it."

 

Arlene

I sure hope this is true. 

The only problem I can see is if the stock is joint ownership and not individually owned. 

[vjmatty]

12 hours ago, ldtr said:

Then people wonder why the cruise lines seem to lose interest in retaining older cruisers and tend to focus on lowering age demographics. 

 

I expect the onboard spend by those of us that get both benefits is one of the reason for the change in policy.

 

That is 77 per person per day.  if one buys a package that is a good portion of it by itself.

Why would anyone buy the package at over 77 per day when they can get Plus for 60?  I’m not a solo cruiser, but does buying Plus as a solo also increase the single supplement from what it would be without Plus, or just the base fare?

Edited June 24, 2023 by vjmatty

[whitecap]

5 minutes ago, MissP22 said:

I sure hope this is true. 

The only problem I can see is if the stock is joint ownership and not individually owned. 

We'll have to wait and see what happens after June 29th but for DW and I, our new booking 2 days ago my military was automatically added on and the shareholder, which is joint ownership, was applied to her account.  

[vjmatty]

10 hours ago, cruiserdf said:

 

Additionally I would submit the older cruiser has many more cruise days per year than the younger families.  Say a family of 5 on a 14 day cruise equates to 70 passenger days.  An older couple with only four 14 day cruises per year would have 112 passenger days per year.  It seems the older we get, our cruise day goals have been increasing each year.  I don't think we are unique. 

Exactly why they need to hang on to the older cruisers just as much, if not more than the younger generation. 

[vjmatty]

9 minutes ago, MissP22 said:

I sure hope this is true. 

The only problem I can see is if the stock is joint ownership and not individually owned. 

That’s easy to fix 😉

[MissP22]

5 minutes ago, whitecap said:

We'll have to wait and see what happens after June 29th but for DW and I, our new booking 2 days ago my military was automatically added on and the shareholder, which is joint ownership, was applied to her account.  

We've got only 2 future cruises booked & haven't sent in the request for stock OBC yet. Today is the day. 

 

 

2 minutes ago, vjmatty said:

That’s easy to fix 😉

Oh, I realize it's easy to put the stock account in my name only but I think I'll wait it out until others have posted their experiences after June 29th.  

It shouldn't be necessary but you'll never know with Princess.