Celebrity is Changing. Suggestions for New Cruise Line

[YourWorldWithBill]

22 hours ago, ScottC4746 said:

Any suggestions?

After trying three lines more expensive that Celebrity, we settled on (HAL) Holland America, which we have cruised a few times and now is our favorite. We've seen several former Celebrity fans who have switched to HAL.  Club Orange is a new feature that allows you to book a cabin at the lowest rate in the class, for example, an obstructed view verandah, and upgrade to the highest price in cabin in the same class. And there is a separate dining room in the three newest ships, other benefits that you can check out on another forum here.

[George C]

18 hours ago, zabs said:

I would suggest trying The Retreat on Celebrity before switching to NCL’s Haven or MSC Yacht Club. 

Retreat will cost at least 1k more per person than MSc Yacht Club. 

[ldubs]

3 hours ago, cruisemom42 said:

 

It may not meet the definition of "legal" discrimination, but it is still discrimination. However, let's just leave it at very unsavory and difficult to defend given that some solos do indeed spend more onboard than some couples. 

 

I'm not going to defend my take on it any longer here, it's not productive. However, I do think it is important that people know Celebrity is engaging in this behavior -- which again, has been a) confirmed by Celebrity execs and b) penalizes solo travelers above and beyond what other lines are doing.

 

 

I think it does meet the definition of legal discrimination.  

 

I do understand your point that  Celebrity has unfair (unsavory) pricing for solo folk.  I recall reading in another thread that a solo passenger was expected to buy two drink packages.   I can't recall if that was Celebrity or another cruise line and don't know if it is true.   Sure sounds like it could be.  

 

  

[JRG]

On 1/31/2024 at 3:07 PM, leaveitallbehind said:

I will continue to check at random and will report any anomalies that support the above concerns.

 

Major overkill here.  (i.e.  using a sledgehammer to swat a fly)

 

There is no right answer to beat this conundrum (no pun intended)

 

I can feel the pain of the solo cruiser and the pricing madness, but I sense the pricing is driven by the revenue matrix,  which is essentially a Profit Maximization equation (i.e.  how much wood could a wood-chuck chuck if a wood-chuck could chuck wood, without losing his axe).   Otherwise known as a linear algebraic equation.   (That's right,  its a word problem).

 

If there was no equitable solo supplement,  then ships would be booked full of solo cruisers.    Married couples who snore profusely would be booking two cabins instead of one.  Debutantes from Houston would have a field day booking entire decks.  Pink plastic flamingoes would be everywhere.

 

It makes no sense to grind your teeth on this one.

 

In other news,   I thought Celebrity began the slow descent when they pulled the free sushi in the Buffet.   It wasn't the best Sushi on the planet but it was a nice snack to tide you over until dinner.

 

 

 

Edited February 2 by JRG
change to buffet

[SoloAlaska]

26 minutes ago, JRG said:

 

Major overkill here.  (i.e.  using a sledgehammer to swat a fly)

 

There is no right answer to beat this conundrum (no pun intended)

 

I can feel the pain of the solo cruiser and the pricing madness, but I sense the pricing is driven by the revenue matrix,  which is essentially a Profit Maximization equation (i.e.  how much wood could a wood-chuck chuck if a wood-chuck could chuck wood, without losing his axe).   Otherwise known as a linear algebraic equation.   (That's right,  its a word problem).

 

If there was no equitable solo supplement,  then ships would be booked full of solo cruisers.    Married couples who snore profusely would be booking two cabins instead of one.  Debutantes from Houston would have a field day booking entire decks.  Pink plastic flamingoes would be everywhere.

 

It makes no sense to grind your teeth on this one.

 

In other news,   I thought Celebrity began the slow descent when they pulled the free sushi in the Buffet.   It wasn't the best Sushi on the planet but it was a nice snack to tide you over until dinner.

 

 

 

Solos are used to paying double and no one complains at that. The issue is paying more than double. 

[leaveitallbehind]

32 minutes ago, JRG said:

It makes no sense to grind your teeth on this one.

Would not do it for any other reason than personal curiosity.

[Hlitner]

We used to be big fans of Celebrity and cruised the line several times a year.  But when Lisa Lutoff-Perlo took over the helm, she quickly noted her belief that Celebrity was providing too much quality for too little money.  There were cut-backs (I called it "death by a thousand cut-backs) of which many were small things.  But prices quickly increased and cut-backs continued.  We stopped cruising Celebrity and focused more on the luxury lines (such as Seabourn) where we get a lot more value for our money.  In fact, it is often less expensive to cruise on a line like Seabourn than on Celebrity in a "retreat" suite.  

 

Do folks like switching from Celebrity to HAL?  I am sure some do and some don't.  Personally, we have stopped booking future HAL cruises (after last year's 42 day cruise on the Westerdam) because we are no longer happy with the HAL product.  That could certainly change in the future, but that will depend on HAL making some changes that make the line a better fit for our wants/desires.  For now, the only mass market line we will book is Princess, but most of our cruises are now on much smaller ship luxury and premium lines.  

[YourWorldWithBill]

2 hours ago, Hlitner said:

Do folks like switching from Celebrity to HAL?  I am sure some do and some don't.  Personally, we have stopped booking future HAL cruises (after last year's 42 day cruise on the Westerdam) because we are no longer happy with the HAL product.  That could certainly change in the future, but that will depend on HAL making some changes that make the line a better fit for our wants/desires.  For now, the only mass market line we will book is Princess, but most of our cruises are now on much smaller ship luxury and premium lines.  

We were on Viking before HAL, and Oceania most recently. We felt that the extra cost of Oceania wasn't worth it, and although Viking was great, some of the limitations didn't seem to justify the higher price.

But our last cruise on HAL was the Rotterdam, and we felt a noticeable difference from the line's older ships, so I wonder if that's part of our perception and attraction to HAL.

We're always thinking about Seabourn, however.

[Joebucks]

18 hours ago, JRG said:

 

Major overkill here.  (i.e.  using a sledgehammer to swat a fly)

 

There is no right answer to beat this conundrum (no pun intended)

 

I can feel the pain of the solo cruiser and the pricing madness, but I sense the pricing is driven by the revenue matrix,  which is essentially a Profit Maximization equation (i.e.  how much wood could a wood-chuck chuck if a wood-chuck could chuck wood, without losing his axe).   Otherwise known as a linear algebraic equation.   (That's right,  its a word problem).

 

If there was no equitable solo supplement,  then ships would be booked full of solo cruisers.    Married couples who snore profusely would be booking two cabins instead of one.  Debutantes from Houston would have a field day booking entire decks.  Pink plastic flamingoes would be everywhere.

 

It makes no sense to grind your teeth on this one.

 

You couldn't even count the number of posts on this forum about "a room should cost this much because I'm comparing 1 vs 2, 2 vs 3, or 3 vs 4. It doesn't incrementally change in the way I think it should." Largely because of a methodology that the world revolves around us. Without considering important facts such as different rooms have different capacities, and availability in general. 

 

From what I have seen, Celebrity does seem to be charging a bit over 200% solo supplement. I looked at quite a few, and it seemed to be around 210-220%. From a business perspective, that would seem to be somewhat in the ballpark of capturing similar revenue to what 2 people in the room would have spent. I haven't seen fares any that were 4-5x more. Not that they don't exist, but I didn't see enough evidence to convince of some grand conspiracy to charge solo cruisers the quintuple supplement to keep them away or rob them blind. It is possible there is broken algorithm logic or whatnot. From a business perspective, this makes no sense. 

 

[MacMadame]

On 2/2/2024 at 10:38 AM, JRG said:

Pink plastic flamingoes would be everywhere.

You say that like it's a bad thing.

[DarrenM]

Sticking with celebrity for now but the new CEO is pretty awful.

 

Watched a video of her being interviewed and she was more like a politician refusing to believe evidence put before their eyes.

 

In other words, talking to the customers like they were idiots.

 

I wil try and link the video if thats allowed.

 

Even claiming that when asking customers what they wanted, tried to suggest putting drink prices above the premium package allowance was something customers asked for.

 

Yeh right. Lol.

 

 

[DarrenM]

Or in response to claims that the menus had been reduced or downgraded, "our customers suggested this might be a good idea".

 

yeh, ok, of course they did.

[JRG]

6 hours ago, MacMadame said:

You say that like it's a bad thing.

 

I express no value judgments here.

 

But if it helps Hans Solo find his Princess Leia then it must be okay.

 

May the Force Be With You

[YourWorldWithBill]

5 hours ago, JRG said:

 

I express no value judgments here.

 

But if it helps Hans Solo find his Princess Leia then it must be okay.

 

May the Force Be With You

🦩 🦩 🦩Just trying to be helpful.