Food for thought

[georgiaguy]

There has been ad nauseam discussing here about the reductions on cruise lines and especially Celebrity. I like data because it can help us understand why things are happening. I came across this industry level “state of the cruise industry” report and this page is one that stood out to me in particular. I know there are some that are tired of hearing how COVID hurt the industry and continues to have ripple effects but this graphic tells a lot. If you take the three years of 20-22 and bring them up to the 2019 level, the industry as a whole when without 60 million cruise fares. They would have been spending money in 2019 in preparation for 2020 that never came in, not to mention the additional cost that came in even as they had reductions of expenses over the same period. If you take an average fair of $2000 and multiply it by 60 million that is $120,000,000,000. Yes there was a reduction of overhead with ships running on skeleton crews but there we also the added expenses of interest payments on loans to keep cash flow occurring. 

My point isnt to say that the cuts are the right ones or the wrong ones but more that the reason behind the cuts does not seem to be entirely driven by “how can I squeeze another dollar out of customers?” And seems in part to be about “how to we make up for three years of substantial revenue loss?” This is just my opinion but I don’t think Celebrity is just ignoring the customers, on the contrary, I think they want to provide the best product they can in the midst of challenging financial complications. Any way. Feel free to disagree. Just one persons opinion. 

[hcat]

1 minute ago, georgiaguy said:

There has been ad nauseam discussing here about the reductions on cruise lines and especially Celebrity. I like data because it can help us understand why things are happening. I came across this industry level “state of the cruise industry” report and this page is one that stood out to me in particular. I know there are some that are tired of hearing how COVID hurt the industry and continues to have ripple effects but this graphic tells a lot. If you take the three years of 20-22 and bring them up to the 2019 level, the industry as a whole when without 60 million cruise fares. They would have been spending money in 2019 in preparation for 2020 that never came in, not to mention the additional cost that came in even as they had reductions of expenses over the same period. If you take an average fair of $2000 and multiply it by 60 million that is $120,000,000,000. Yes there was a reduction of overhead with ships running on skeleton crews but there we also the added expenses of interest payments on loans to keep cash flow occurring. 

My point isnt to say that the cuts are the right ones or the wrong ones but more that the reason behind the cuts does not seem to be entirely driven by “how can I squeeze another dollar out of customers?” And seems in part to be about “how to we make up for three years of substantial revenue loss?” This is just my opinion but I don’t think Celebrity is just ignoring the customers, on the contrary, I think they want to provide the best product they can in the midst of challenging financial complications. Any way. Feel free to disagree. Just one persons opinion. 

Sorry to disagree with your conclusion.

As my grandsons would say "c'mon now!"

 

Woman in charge was not brought in to  just make up lost revenues.  She is re-making X into  another bunch of mall-like Royal C ships...nothing special...nothing extraordinary!

 

Final death knell of a once great cruise line!

[1Virgo]

I agree and I like your chart.   . They need to make up for lost revenue. There were still many receiving salaries during shutdown, including skeletal crews.   Plus, most cruise lines had new ships on order 

 

I do think some of the cuts  should have and could have been thought out better.    

 

Dining/food cuts.  Not a good idea especially when you want to be known as “premium” cruise line.  Reducing staff.  Not a good idea.  You simply cannot operate on a shoestring budget and maintain quality of service as a premium line

 

The huge error is doing this in a sneaky underhand way

 

For us, as many do, we have to incur airline costs to travel to the ship.   We love cruising but on a cost analysis basis, we can go to a 5* all inclusive land resort (airfare in)  cheaper.    They need to be careful how quickly and deeply they make cuts to recover lost income

[horseymike]

Any of us who have been in business for ourselves have taken some financial hits over the years, and they are not easy. The last thing I would ever do is alienate a long time paying customer to appeal to a “ different “ type of customer in hopes of improving the business . The devil you know is always better than the one you don’t. 
RCCL had this business pretty well figured out for decades , especially with their 2 main lines, Royal and Celebrity. This business has already made a tremendous comeback, but it will take awhile to reach pre COVID profits. In the meantime, I truly hope they don’t ruin the entire concept, because to be honest, it sure looks that way.

[What A Market]

Interesting to think about this.

But companies, publicly traded or private, do not make up “for lost revenues.”

You just move forward after losses.

 

Maybe you raise capital or debt (to deal with negative cash flows) and all publicly traded cruise holding companies did so. High cost debt raised by cruise companies is a new burden to bear.

 

All you can do going forward is try to make money. That’s what all companies do. I don’t think CEOs and their boards are trying to do anything sneaky or nefarious.  They exist to provide a product and generate profits. Tough to do at times, but not that complicated.

[Jeremiah1212]

The common thought here is people want better service, better food, better alcohol, more included, less passengers, handsomely rewarded for their loyalty at a cost that is lower than in years past despite higher prices on labor and literally every provision and supply involved, near crushing debt levels and with demand that ultimately warrants and supports a higher priced product, despite doing business with a public company whose purpose is to produce profits above all else.

 

Good luck to any C level person that can make that happen! They will need an award. 

[C4HCG]

10 minutes ago, Jeremiah1212 said:

The common thought here is people want better service, better food, better alcohol, more included, less passengers, handsomely rewarded for their loyalty at a cost that is lower than in years past despite higher prices on labor and literally every provision and supply involved, near crushing debt levels and with demand that ultimately warrants and supports a higher priced product, despite doing business with a public company whose purpose is to produce profits above all else.

 

Good luck to any C level person that can make that happen! They will need an award. 

Spot on, people hankering for a product they used to have at a price they like when the company providing it as had to make some very tough commercial decisions. 

[C4HCG]

33 minutes ago, hcat said:

Sorry to disagree with your conclusion.

As my grandsons would say "c'mon now!"

 

Woman in charge was not brought in to  just make up lost revenues.  She is re-making X into  another bunch of mall-like Royal C ships...nothing special...nothing extraordinary!

 

Final death knell of a once great cruise line!

People will take your place who enjoy it and think it’s great, such is life. And you will move on to a line that you think is great, again such is life. Death knell for you and others like you, a new adventure for others.

[fenton04]

We began cruising 1987.  You would be shocked on how much cruising has changed.  We still continue to cruise because in our humble opinion we still get more bang for our buck.  Just sayin...

[ECCruise]

36 minutes ago, Jeremiah1212 said:

The common thought here is people want better service, better food, better alcohol, more included, less passengers, handsomely rewarded for their loyalty at a cost that is lower than in years past despite higher prices on labor and literally every provision and supply involved, near crushing debt levels and with demand that ultimately warrants and supports a higher priced product, despite doing business with a public company whose purpose is to produce profits above all else.

 

Good luck to any C level person that can make that happen! They will need an award. 

That is absolutely not true for the bulk of us here.

We don't want MORE anything or BETTER anything.

How about maybe just maintaining what we've had for (for us, decades) even if it means a higher price, which is understandable.

 

Less for LOTS more $$$ is a losing proposition, frankly. 

[georgiaguy]

41 minutes ago, hcat said:

Sorry to disagree with your conclusion.

As my grandsons would say "c'mon now!"

 

Woman in charge was not brought in to  just make up lost revenues.  She is re-making X into  another bunch of mall-like Royal C ships...nothing special...nothing extraordinary!

 

Final death knell of a once great cruise line!

You are welcome to disagree. Like I said not trying to defend or put down the cuts as right or wrong. Just understanding the bigger picture. 

And at the risk of being disagreeable, I don’t think they are making it into Royal C. They don’t have a robust enough children’s program or kid friendly interest to become Royal so they wont be attracting families at the same level. Also the largest celebrity ship is about the same size as the voyager class and there are three ship classes larger and in some cases by 100,000 tons. And I will eat my own hat if Celebrity ever puts a slide on the ship because I just don’t see that happening either. But you are right, that is my conclusion.

[C4HCG]

8 minutes ago, ECCruise said:

That is absolutely not true for the bulk of us here.

We don't want MORE anything or BETTER anything.

How about maybe just maintaining what we've had for (for us, decades) even if it means a higher price, which is understandable.

 

Less for LOTS more $$$ is a losing proposition, frankly. 

But maybe an economic necessity. And maybe new cruisers like us are naive and think we are getting value for money. Or maybe seasoned cruisers have been lucky to cruise on the cheap. Who knows, it is what it is.

[ECCruise]

Just now, C4HCG said:

But maybe an economic necessity. And maybe new cruisers like us are naive and think we are getting value for money. Or maybe seasoned cruisers have been lucky to cruise on the cheap. Who knows, it is what it is.

Sorry, but your idea of "cheap" doesn't equate with the well over $6 figures that we've spent on =X= in the last 2 decades.  30+ sailings.  15 different ships. 6 continents. 

 

So yes, as a newbie you have every right to voice your opinion.  But please don't decide what our thinking or our experience is as you weigh in from the new seats.

[C4HCG]

Just now, ECCruise said:

Sorry, but your idea of "cheap" doesn't equate with the well over $6 figures that we've spent on =X= in the last 2 decades.  30+ sailings.  15 different ships. 6 continents. 

 

So yes, as a newbie you have every right to voice your opinion.  But please don't decide what our thinking or our experience is as you weigh in from the new seats.

I caveated my post by saying who knows, I certainly don’t. So absolutely no need for the tone of your response. And I never once opined on what your experience or thinking was, not quite sure why you thought I did.  And I wasn’t weighing in. You having a bad day?

[CNSfromHI]

1 hour ago, 1Virgo said:

The huge error is doing this in a sneaky underhand way

I'm guessing this will draw the ire of some here, but sometimes, companies are not trying to slip anything past customers.

 

Sometimes, companies are just really lousy at communicating. I've read this lament about Celebrity many times on this site, and I've thought it too.

 

1 hour ago, georgiaguy said:

...I don’t think Celebrity is just ignoring the customers... I think they want to provide the best product they can in the midst of challenging financial complications.

☝️☝️☝️☝️

 

cjr

 

[Jeremiah1212]

9 minutes ago, ECCruise said:

That is absolutely not true for the bulk of us here.

We don't want MORE anything or BETTER anything.

How about maybe just maintaining what we've had for (for us, decades) even if it means a higher price, which is understandable.

 

Less for LOTS more $$$ is a losing proposition, frankly. 

 

Nature of the beast. Look around. Finding the middle ground between cost cuts and maintaining pricing is the name of the game. Read any board on this site and it's largely the same converstion.

 

Royal Caribbean - same conversations here including a giant thread about charging for pizza. 

Princess - majorly changed complementary dining, reduced included offerings and upped pricing on Plus and Premium. Some unhappy campers about the amount of kid-friendly features on the new Sun. 

NCL - constant trimming and upcharge adjustments going on, terrible drink package, Haven entry level prices are now often significantly higher than Celebrity. 

MSC - always a hot mess where you can never really be sure you're getting what you thought you paid for. 

HAL - same story...paying more getting less. 

Oceania - despite being the Celebrity objectors eureka, lots of complaints about the new pricing structure.

 

Read any airline or hotel loyalty complaints. Major devaluations, less perks, harder to redeem rewards, more restrictions...

 

2022 and beyond cruising isn't going to be the same as 2019 cruising. 

 

 

 

[retird]

I believe cruising is still a good bang for my buck.  I believe that because I can still cruise for a week in a balcony cabin, with very good dining and entertainment thrown in , for what I have to pay for a return economy airline seat for two of us from Toronto to Heathrow.  just my two cents worth.  I am surprised the cruising industry survived as well as it did after more than two years of little or no revenue coming in.   

[C4HCG]

2 minutes ago, retird said:

I believe cruising is still a good bang for my buck.  I believe that because I can still cruise for a week in a balcony cabin, with very good dining and entertainment thrown in , for what I have to pay for a return economy airline seat for two of us from Toronto to Heathrow.  just my two cents worth.  I am surprised the cruising industry survived as well as it did after more than two years of little or no revenue coming in.   

Me too, and I feared it wouldn’t.

[ECCruise]

8 minutes ago, C4HCG said:

I caveated my post by saying who knows, I certainly don’t. So absolutely no need for the tone of your response. And I never once opined on what your experience or thinking was, not quite sure why you thought I did.  And I wasn’t weighing in. You having a bad day?

Having a wonderful day, frankly.

 

"Or maybe seasoned cruisers have been lucky to cruise on the cheap"

is absolutely opining on what our experience was. 

 

[C4HCG]

2 minutes ago, ECCruise said:

Having a wonderful day, frankly.

 

"Or maybe seasoned cruisers have been lucky to cruise on the cheap"

is absolutely opining on what our experience was. 

 

 

23 minutes ago, C4HCG said:

But maybe an economic necessity. And maybe new cruisers like us are naive and think we are getting value for money. Or maybe seasoned cruisers have been lucky to cruise on the cheap. Who knows, it is what it is.

I will quote my full post, note the “who knows”. Are you a journalist? How could I possibly offer an opinion on your cruising experience?

Edited August 20, 2023 by C4HCG

[georgiaguy]

1 hour ago, hcat said:

Woman in charge was not brought in to  just make up lost revenues.  She is re-making X into  another bunch of mall-like Royal C ships...nothing special...nothing extraordinary!

 

Also I will be on Ascent in March and from what I have heard is that the ships are beautiful and really liked (minus the infinite verandas. They seem like a miss for many folks). I can let you know after if it feels like an ordinary mall. 

[miched]

You don’t make more by providing less.  Many companies went out of business by trying to do that.  
 

Kmart use to be one of the best places to shop.  You could get almost anything there.   They kept cutting their product line and lost their customers.   Someone decided that they could make more money by selling Kate Jackson’s clothing line.   Didn’t work. 

 

There was a chain here called Service Merchandise.   It went out of business because it eventually didn’t provide any service or the merchandise. 
 

If people don’t find value in something they will move on to find something else.  
 

Cruising is a luxury, or novelty and not a necessity.   I lived many years before my first cruise.   I do enjoy being on a cruise but I can live without it and can always find something else to do.   
 

As I write this I am sitting on my deck enjoying the summer having a beer.  A lot cheaper than being on a cruise and not restricted by what they have to offer.   

I know that I can’t take it with me but I don’t believe in throwing away my money for a product that doesn’t deliver what was promised.

 

 

Happy cruising 🌊🚢🇺🇸🌅
 

 

[Jeremiah1212]

2 minutes ago, miched said:

You don’t make more by providing less.

 

Airlines would disagree. 

[ECCruise]

37 minutes ago, Jeremiah1212 said:

 

Nature of the beast. Look around. Finding the middle ground between cost cuts and maintaining pricing is the name of the game. Read any board on this site and it's largely the same converstion.

 

Royal Caribbean - same conversations here including a giant thread about charging for pizza. 

Princess - majorly changed complementary dining, reduced included offerings and upped pricing on Plus and Premium. Some unhappy campers about the amount of kid-friendly features on the new Sun. 

NCL - constant trimming and upcharge adjustments going on, terrible drink package, Haven entry level prices are now often significantly higher than Celebrity. 

MSC - always a hot mess where you can never really be sure you're getting what you thought you paid for. 

HAL - same story...paying more getting less. 

Oceania - despite being the Celebrity objectors eureka, lots of complaints about the new pricing structure.

 

Read any airline or hotel loyalty complaints. Major devaluations, less perks, harder to redeem rewards, more restrictions...

 

2022 and beyond cruising isn't going to be the same as 2019 cruising. 

 

 

 

Since I've sailed 4 of those lines in the last year, some of your points are valid, some are not.

 

In the final analysis, I can still get better pricing with more included on both Princess and HAL (have several of those booked in the future).  Meanwhile the prices of the 4 =X= cruises I have booked have nearly doubled in the last 6 months (these are sailings in Europe and Asia in mid-2024 and early-2025).  If we booked those cruises direct, and refundable, they would be closing in on even more ridiculous pricing.   No way on earth I would pay those prices today, which anyone booking today would encounter.  Our HAL and Princess cruises in the same time frames (2024 and 2025) have increased either $0 or, one of our HAL sailings, $100.  And all of those, BTW, are fully refundable. 

[ECCruise]

1 minute ago, Jeremiah1212 said:

 

Airlines would disagree. 

True, to an extent.

But air travel is way more a necessity than cruising.