Drinks package/policy changes?

[Peter Lanky]

Another angle to this argument is how cruise lines have been allowed to stop people having a drink in the privacy of their own cabin in the first place. If I stay in a hotel, we will have a drink in our room, even if it is nothing more than nightcap. The hotel, or at least the ones we stay in, don't scan your cases for a bottle of booze. Why is cruising any different?

It seems the entire industry is geared towards banning something purely to maximise profit by selling it's own stock at profiteering prices. Maybe if prices reflected the real cost of purchasing the alcohol and the cost of serving it and clearing it up, then people would not be so bothered about having a drink in their cabin or even filling up a glass and taking it into the bar.

Much as having a drink isn't a God-given right, neither should screwing the customer be a right, yet it seems it is.

[Winifred 22]

6 hours ago, S1971 said:

 

Do the cruiseline run the casino's or are they independent but rent the space??

They run them they are not independent like the shops or the spa

[Winifred 22]

8 hours ago, S1971 said:

 

Carnival in particular, I note there are now upcharges in the Golden Lion on Cunard, QA at the moment but no doubt fleet wide soon.

 

I suppose it was always going to happen once the Americans took them over, in fairness it's took longer than I thought, but now it's started where will it end??

The up charges in Golden Lion are for certain  new signature menu  items. All the usual favourites are still included with no extra charge plus new included additions. Those new items are unique to Queen Anne and nor currently available fleet wide

[janieb1962]

14 hours ago, janieb1962 said:

The same for us in February, the crows nest staff on Britannia would make anything ..eg margarita, whisky sour …unlike on Azura in September …a big no if it wasn’t on the menu 

Actually need to correct myself following input from OH … it was on Arvia in November that they wouldn’t entertain anything not on the list … the live lounge place on azura we had a fab waiter who would provide what we wanted 

[terrierjohn]

7 hours ago, Josy1953 said:

Or gin and tell everyone that it's water and you are keepjng yourself hydrated🤣

Until they ask you to drink it all just to check it is water.😯

[S1971]

2 hours ago, Winifred 22 said:

The up charges in Golden Lion are for certain  new signature menu  items. All the usual favourites are still included with no extra charge plus new included additions. Those new items are unique to Queen Anne and nor currently available fleet wide

 

I don't think £7.50 for a cheese toastie sounds like a very signature dish to me!!

[Lee Jones Jnr]

4 hours ago, Peter Lanky said:

Another angle to this argument is how cruise lines have been allowed to stop people having a drink in the privacy of their own cabin in the first place. If I stay in a hotel, we will have a drink in our room, even if it is nothing more than nightcap. The hotel, or at least the ones we stay in, don't scan your cases for a bottle of booze. Why is cruising any different?

It seems the entire industry is geared towards banning something purely to maximise profit by selling it's own stock at profiteering prices. Maybe if prices reflected the real cost of purchasing the alcohol and the cost of serving it and clearing it up, then people would not be so bothered about having a drink in their cabin or even filling up a glass and taking it into the bar.

Much as having a drink isn't a God-given right, neither should screwing the customer be a right, yet it seems it is.

Why are cars allowed to carry four, five, six passengers but motorbikes are not?

The customer has a choice. This is the policy, these are the prices, cruise or don't, buy or don't.

In the end the market determines the value, if enough people feel strongly enough to ditch cruises and drink off license in hotel rooms then the cruise market will change.

[AndyMichelle]

6 hours ago, S1971 said:

 

I don't think £7.50 for a cheese toastie sounds like a very signature dish to me!!

I agree it doesn't sound like a signature dish, you don't have to buy it though... 

The MDR on Britannia offers a signature 3 course meal for £14.95, it didn't look very inspiring, so we didn't buy it. 

It took nothing away from the included menu, and it seems like the Golden Lion is the same. 

These are not things that used to be free, at least not in recent history. 

Ice cream is not included on P&O, but many buy it. 

Is Costa Coffee 'premium'? 

Like everything on this thread, we have choices to make, and always have... 

If we don't like it, we know what to do. 

Andy 

[S1971]

21 minutes ago, AndyMichelle said:

I agree it doesn't sound like a signature dish, you don't have to buy it though... 

The MDR on Britannia offers a signature 3 course meal for £14.95, it didn't look very inspiring, so we didn't buy it. 

It took nothing away from the included menu, and it seems like the Golden Lion is the same. 

These are not things that used to be free, at least not in recent history. 

Ice cream is not included on P&O, but many buy it. 

Is Costa Coffee 'premium'? 

Like everything on this thread, we have choices to make, and always have... 

If we don't like it, we know what to do. 

Andy 

 

I agree Andy, but we can add that ethos to everything in life.

 

The overall impression they are giving me is of greed and profiteering.

 

People are not naive enough to know that they are a profit making business, but there has to be a line in which it stops, that line has been crossed for me at least.

 

The difference pre covid to what it is available now is considerable, so many small things have been removed, alongside reduced menu, bar increases, reduced cabin services, less staff so slower service, this alongside other things already mentioned on this thread.

 

When all things are taking into consideration I don't feel they now offer good value for money, more especially on the older adult only ships.

 

P&O used to be a quality product, now it's nothing other than ordinary and basic.

 

I fully appreciate that this is only my opinion and others won't agree, but when I read through this thread again and noted all the changes and the inability to deal with some serious bad behaviours, I don't feel P&O suits my need anymore.

 

Great thread by the way, thanks for starting.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Selbourne]

12 minutes ago, S1971 said:

When all things are taking into consideration I don't feel they now offer good value for money, more especially on the older adult only ships.

Whilst I agree that there have been a large number of changes, and the combined effect is that the P&O product has evolved from a mid-market to mass-market product over the last 10 years or so, I personally feel that the prices (in the main) reflect that shift and consequently can still offer good value. 
 

The way that we got our heads around it was to revise down the price that we’d be prepared to pay for a P&O cruise to a maximum of £100 pppn for a balcony cabin. This is quite easy to achieve on the family ships, but challenging on the adult only ones, which is why we book far less cruises on those ships now as we don’t feel that they represent value for money any more. That being said, our recent 65 nighter on Aurora cost us £73 pppn for a balcony cabin and we considered that to be exemplary value. In fact, deduct from that the money we saved by not being at home for that time during the winter and it was a net cost of around £50 pppn. I don’t think we could have done that on any other cruise line. So yes, it’s not what it was, but neither are the prices (if you look hard enough). 

 

[Megabear2]

49 minutes ago, S1971 said:

 

I agree Andy, but we can add that ethos to everything in life.

 

The overall impression they are giving me is of greed and profiteering.

 

People are not naive enough to know that they are a profit making business, but there has to be a line in which it stops, that line has been crossed for me at least.

 

The difference pre covid to what it is available now is considerable, so many small things have been removed, alongside reduced menu, bar increases, reduced cabin services, less staff so slower service, this alongside other things already mentioned on this thread.

 

When all things are taking into consideration I don't feel they now offer good value for money, more especially on the older adult only ships.

 

P&O used to be a quality product, now it's nothing other than ordinary and basic.

 

I fully appreciate that this is only my opinion and others won't agree, but when I read through this thread again and noted all the changes and the inability to deal with some serious bad behaviours, I don't feel P&O suits my need anymore.

 

Great thread by the way, thanks for starting.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Apart from the opinion this is a step too far for those who want to bring alcohol onboard and say its therefore a deal breaker, have any of the defectors checked prices and terms on all these supposedly better cruise lines?  If so may I ask which lines and how they compare price wise and rule wise?  To be fair it would be interesting ti say price a 7 night Fjords cruise in a balcony and a 14 day Mediterranean in an inside cabin.

 

Anyone want to take the challenge?

[S1971]

11 minutes ago, Selbourne said:

Whilst I agree that there have been a large number of changes, and the combined effect is that the P&O product has evolved from a mid-market to mass-market product over the last 10 years or so, I personally feel that the prices (in the main) reflect that shift and consequently can still offer good value. 
 

The way that we got our heads around it was to revise down the price that we’d be prepared to pay for a P&O cruise to a maximum of £100 pppn for a balcony cabin. This is quite easy to achieve on the family ships, but challenging on the adult only ones, which is why we book far less cruises on those ships now as we don’t feel that they represent value for money any more. That being said, our recent 65 nighter on Aurora cost us £73 pppn for a balcony cabin and we considered that to be exemplary value. In fact, deduct from that the money we saved by not being at home for that time during the winter and it was a net cost of around £50 pppn. I don’t think we could have done that on any other cruise line. So yes, it’s not what it was, but neither are the prices (if you look hard enough). 

 

 

I don't disagree, there will always be exceptions to the rule across all cruiselines, given the time of year etc.

 

Whilst I am not in a position to know your personal circumstances, I like many others are not in a position to travel 65 nights given work commitments and or an approx £10,000 outlay for such a cruise financially affordable.

 

My work circumstances only allow me to travel during school holidays, therefore I'm very limited when I can travel, deals such as yours whilst good are not available to me, therefore P&O's cuts for a better word impacts directly on my experience so therefore no longer offer value for money.

[S1971]

12 minutes ago, Megabear2 said:

Apart from the opinion this is a step too far for those who want to bring alcohol onboard and say its therefore a deal breaker, have any of the defectors checked prices and terms on all these supposedly better cruise lines?  If so may I ask which lines and how they compare price wise and rule wise?  To be fair it would be interesting ti say price a 7 night Fjords cruise in a balcony and a 14 day Mediterranean in an inside cabin.

 

Anyone want to take the challenge?

 

I trust someone will try offer a comparison, however there are a lot of factors to consider before it becomes truly comparable so it's unlikely it can be done like for like.

[nosapphire]

P&O is a business. It has to make a profit to continue being a business.

The level of profut it can make is determined by many things - including the customer.

If the customer is willing to pay, then they can keep their profit margins.

If the customer is not willing to pay, and goes elsewhere, then they have to reduce their profit margins.

If they get reduced too much - then the business ceases to exist.

Most of us book (whoever we book with) for the experience itself, and while we may grumble sometimes about the cost, it is the experience itself that matters - and if we (a) can actually afford it, and (b) enjoy it, then the cost itself is not very important.

So comparisons are not really possible - how do you compare one person's enjoyment with another person's enjoyment?

[david63]

There are, in my opinion, two significant factors in the cuts from P&O.

 

The first is that for several years now Carnival have been redefining where P&O are in the UK marketplace especially in relation to Cunard, and Princess.

 

Secondly Carnival are still, and will be for some time, suffering from the effects of Covid and have a massive debt to finance and there are only two ways to do that - increase prices or reduce costs. Increasing prices will have a negative effect as it will reduce passenger numbers but that can be offset by removing items that were included and making them paid for items.

 

What will be interesting is to see what happens once the debt has been paid off - my guess is that things will stay as they are and that will become the new "normal"

[AndyMichelle]

1 hour ago, S1971 said:

 

I agree Andy, but we can add that ethos to everything in life.

 

The overall impression they are giving me is of greed and profiteering.

 

People are not naive enough to know that they are a profit making business, but there has to be a line in which it stops, that line has been crossed for me at least.

 

The difference pre covid to what it is available now is considerable, so many small things have been removed, alongside reduced menu, bar increases, reduced cabin services, less staff so slower service, this alongside other things already mentioned on this thread.

 

When all things are taking into consideration I don't feel they now offer good value for money, more especially on the older adult only ships.

 

P&O used to be a quality product, now it's nothing other than ordinary and basic.

 

I fully appreciate that this is only my opinion and others won't agree, but when I read through this thread again and noted all the changes and the inability to deal with some serious bad behaviours, I don't feel P&O suits my need anymore.

 

Great thread by the way, thanks for starting.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Totally agree with all you say. 

It is nothing like the pre covid offering, but a lot of the cuts haven't really affected my ability to have a good holiday, but I drastically have to adapt my expectations. 

We are looking elsewhere and have Cunard booked, but as you have pointed out, things are changing there too. 

P&O still offer enough for me to have a good time, at the moment... 

The bigger worry for me is that like for like prices are creeping up, whilst standards continue to drop. The argument of being so much cheaper is diminishing. 

We did see a few instances of not great behaviour, but there is still thousands of lovely people having a great time without offending anyone. 

Andy 

[AndyMichelle]

31 minutes ago, Megabear2 said:

Apart from the opinion this is a step too far for those who want to bring alcohol onboard and say its therefore a deal breaker, have any of the defectors checked prices and terms on all these supposedly better cruise lines?  If so may I ask which lines and how they compare price wise and rule wise?  To be fair it would be interesting ti say price a 7 night Fjords cruise in a balcony and a 14 day Mediterranean in an inside cabin.

 

Anyone want to take the challenge?

Not quite taking on your challenge MB, I am not that brave... 😊

But I have been comparing like for like for 7 nights Fjords next year and there isn't much between P&O, Princess and Cunard, if you take into account the expected better experience. 

Our balcony, select fare, same cabin as this year on Britannia is £350 dearer then we paid this year, with slightly less obc. 

Princess, including Plus, was obviously dearer, but if you take into account what we spent on board and if we used the WiFi, there was about £100 difference. (I would definitely drink more) 😂

Iona was slightly higher than Britannia, but had better ports (Flam). 

I know the bargains can still be found, but I think they are getting less and less on the popular cruises. 

Andy 

 

[Selbourne]

10 minutes ago, AndyMichelle said:

The bigger worry for me is that like for like prices are creeping up, whilst standards continue to drop. The argument of being so much cheaper is diminishing. 

Certainly the last two launches have had what I would describe as ‘ambitious’ prices. As a result, but also due to not wishing to commit two and a half years out due to my wife’s health, we haven’t made any bookings. I remain optimistic that, as with last year, we may pick up the odd cruise well within our price cap, especially after balance due date, but if we don’t then so be it.  
 

Like you we have branched out beyond P&O now, but certainly not abandoned them - even though we currently have no future cruises booked with P&O. Our next two cruises are with Cunard. Both are in Britannia Club on Queen Anne. The first one is expensive (booked at launch - lesson learned) but the second one was booked well after launch and is much cheaper. There is no equivalent of Club on P&O (although I would argue that, cabin size aside, the benefits of Club are far better than having a suite with P&O) but after deducting OBC (inc shareholder benefit) the cheaper cruise nets out at £136 pppn. So there are even bargains to be had with Cunard!

[S1971]

16 minutes ago, david63 said:

There are, in my opinion, two significant factors in the cuts from P&O.

 

The first is that for several years now Carnival have been redefining where P&O are in the UK marketplace especially in relation to Cunard, and Princess.

 

Secondly Carnival are still, and will be for some time, suffering from the effects of Covid and have a massive debt to finance and there are only two ways to do that - increase prices or reduce costs. Increasing prices will have a negative effect as it will reduce passenger numbers but that can be offset by removing items that were included and making them paid for items.

 

What will be interesting is to see what happens once the debt has been paid off - my guess is that things will stay as they are and that will become the new "normal"

 

What debt? Pre covid Carnival enjoyed year on year huge multi billion pound profits, Covid in reality impacted cruiselines for around 6 to 9 months, post covid they are again making huge profits.

 

I don't buy into the effects of covid are still impacting on the business, like the UK, the USA provided significant financial support to businesses directly impacted, I don't know the figures but I'm sure Carnival took that up.

 

Nothing will go back to how it was, that's one thing that is guaranteed.

[david63]

10 minutes ago, S1971 said:

What debt?

https://companiesmarketcap.com/carnival-cruise-line/total-debt/

 

An increase from pre Covid of around $10 billion to over $30 billion

[S1971]

7 minutes ago, david63 said:

https://companiesmarketcap.com/carnival-cruise-line/total-debt/

 

An increase from pre Covid of around $10 billion to over $30 billion

 

Depends where you Google.

 

8 billion profit 22-23.

 

 

 

 

[JeanieC,Aston]

27 minutes ago, S1971 said:

 

What debt? Pre covid Carnival enjoyed year on year huge multi billion pound profits, Covid in reality impacted cruiselines for around 6 to 9 months, post covid they are again making huge profits.

 

I don't buy into the effects of covid are still impacting on the business, like the UK, the USA provided significant financial support to businesses directly impacted, I don't know the figures but I'm sure Carnival took that up.

 

Nothing will go back to how it was, that's one thing that is guaranteed.

Hi

Foreign registered cruise companies got no financial support from the US government.and nor did they ask for any,,,,,to get that aid they would have had to open their companies into paying US taxes.

Unlike the UK who helped Royal Caribbean with a £25m soft loan agreement and Carnival with the same worth £300m.

Although both companies are registered in ‘tax havens’ of Panama and Liberia.

Edited May 11 by JeanieC,Aston

[terrierjohn]

2 hours ago, S1971 said:

 

I agree Andy, but we can add that ethos to everything in life.

 

The overall impression they are giving me is of greed and profiteering.

 

People are not naive enough to know that they are a profit making business, but there has to be a line in which it stops, that line has been crossed for me at least.

 

The difference pre covid to what it is available now is considerable, so many small things have been removed, alongside reduced menu, bar increases, reduced cabin services, less staff so slower service, this alongside other things already mentioned on this thread.

 

When all things are taking into consideration I don't feel they now offer good value for money, more especially on the older adult only ships.

 

P&O used to be a quality product, now it's nothing other than ordinary and basic.

 

I fully appreciate that this is only my opinion and others won't agree, but when I read through this thread again and noted all the changes and the inability to deal with some serious bad behaviours, I don't feel P&O suits my need anymore.

 

Great thread by the way, thanks for starting.

 

 

 

 

 

 

We are on Princess at present and the regulars have similar complaints. I appreciate both P&O and Princess are Carnival brands, but I bet Royal Caribbean, Cebrity, MSC, NCL, Saga, Fred etc are all saying the same thing. If cruise lines need to increase revenue to satisfy shareholders, then prices will need to rise, and we have the choice to accept the increase or not.

[JeanieC,Aston]

9 minutes ago, S1971 said:

 

Depends where you Google.

 

8 billion profit 22-23.

 

 

 

 

Hi

A company can be in profit and have huge debt.

Most companies carry debt,,,how do you think they finance their Huge ship building programmes.

The question is are they making enough profit to service the debt and increasing costs.

[S1971]

9 minutes ago, JeanieC,Aston said:

Hi

Foreign registered cruise companies got no financial support from the US government.and nor did they ask for any,,,,,to get that aid they would have had to open their companies into paying US taxes.

Unlike the UK who helped Royal Caribbean with a £25m soft loan agreement and Carnival with the same worth £300m.

Although both companies are registered in ‘tax havens’ of Panama and Liberia.

 

Then Carnival are paying the price for tax avoiding.