Carnival got more expensive for solos, right?

[kad56]

I'm convinced that Carnival got more expensive for solo when they started including taxes in the fare. I'm looking at casino fares for a solo, which is $200 (converted to OBC) for a solo. But there's the new "Required Cruise Fees & Expenses" fee, and swear that makes it more expensive. I'm looking at very similar itineraries to what I booked this year, and they're pricier. The difference is anywhere from $50 more expensive, to a few hundred dollars. This is a thing, right? I'm not seeing things? I just want someone to confirm I'm not crazy.

[lindacat]

Yes,  I had a cruise booked as a solo,  when I tried to take advantage of a premier cruise offer although the cost of cruise was 200  under both promotions the overall price went up by over 50. because of the new policy regarding taxes and fees.  The representative even said that the increase was due to the new "required fees and expenses" paying price of two vs price of a solo

[Old Fart Cruisers]

6 minutes ago, kad56 said:

This is a thing, right? I'm not seeing things? I just want someone to confirm I'm not crazy.

1. Yes

2.  Correct, as far as it relates to new pricing, but I can't confirm if you have any vision related issues. 

3.  Not enough data. 

[kad56]

1 minute ago, Old Fart Cruisers said:

3.  Not enough data. 

 

lol!!! Thank you.

 

This is pretty disappointing though. I'm hoping they'll change this, but it's unlikely, because price increases tend to go in one direction only.

[shof515]

they are lots of topics about this issue. i too notice it when i check my pricing for my currently booking cruises. for me there is a 100 dollar difference 

[kad56]

It's just really disappointing. This does move Carnival to the bottom of my list of lines to sail. I mostly sail Casino rates/comps and I haven't experienced the same issue with any other line (yet). It's bad enough travelling solo with these prices.

[xyzcruiser]

I talked to a casino rep about this this weekend because I was paying double on the "required fees" and she told me it was their new policy, not a glitch. So after this cruise I will probably be doing mostly Royal even though I prefer Carnival, because this chaps my a....

[firefly333]

23 minutes ago, xyzcruiser said:

I talked to a casino rep about this this weekend because I was paying double on the "required fees" and she told me it was their new policy, not a glitch. So after this cruise I will probably be doing mostly Royal even though I prefer Carnival, because this chaps my a....

I've been complaining about this for a while, that carnival no longer seems to want solos. Seems like a policy meant to discourage solo booking. I dont dislike carnival, just not willing to pay extra. 

[rainbowflag]

My PVP confirmed the only line item that is not double charged for solos is federal tax. Sad, sad, sad. This is not what the California Legislature had in mind when they passed "full disclosure in marketing" pricing plans. 

[tidecat]

1 hour ago, rainbowflag said:

My PVP confirmed the only line item that is not double charged for solos is federal tax. Sad, sad, sad. This is not what the California Legislature had in mind when they passed "full disclosure in marketing" pricing plans. 

Maybe California needs to pass some follow-up legislation.

[Badfinger]

8 hours ago, firefly333 said:

I've been complaining about this for a while, that carnival no longer seems to want solos. Seems like a policy meant to discourage solo booking. I dont dislike carnival, just not willing to pay extra. 

 

As we all know it is not that they don't want solos, it is that they want 2 people in that cabin and on the ship drinking and gambling, buying excursions, playing bingo, buying gold by the inch, whatever.  So charging you a little extra to cover that lost revenue, well, maybe time for another type of vacation if a deal breaker..  But cruise lines are not alone.  Hotels charge the same 1 or 2 adults.  Rental cars charge the same regardless number of passengers.  Parking garages, same.  On and on.  Being single, going solo, not cheap on a  per person basis.....so it goes.

[notscb]

2 hours ago, rainbowflag said:

My PVP confirmed the only line item that is not double charged for solos is federal tax

That makes zero sense. Port fees are charged per person to the cruise line. I can't imagine they're legally able to pass along an extra person's port fees to a solo cruiser.

 

It's interesting, though, how different people are getting different answers based on who they talk to (PVP, TA's, regular customer service), and John Heald mentioned the increased solo pricing was a website error (linked in another thread on this topic).

Edited August 20 by notscb

[n6uqqq]

1 hour ago, tidecat said:

Maybe California needs to pass some follow-up legislation.

This was a Carnival decision, despite the fact that CA likes to pass lame laws. The change had nothing to do with the law itself. 

[Viajera7]

3 hours ago, notscb said:

That makes zero sense. Port fees are charged per person to the cruise line. I can't imagine they're legally able to pass along an extra person's port fees to a solo cruiser.

 

Maybe that is the point. Is this legal?

[kad56]

9 hours ago, rainbowflag said:

My PVP confirmed the only line item that is not double charged for solos is federal tax. Sad, sad, sad. This is not what the California Legislature had in mind when they passed "full disclosure in marketing" pricing plans. 

And this isn't what's legislated. It's how Carnival is choosing to implement it. I have booked other lines since the legislation came into being, where I was clearly only paying taxes for one person (this is also casino rates).

[kad56]

8 hours ago, Badfinger said:

But cruise lines are not alone.  Hotels charge the same 1 or 2 adults.  Rental cars charge the same regardless number of passengers.  Parking garages, same.  On and on.  Being single, going solo, not cheap on a  per person basis.....so it goes.

All true, but hotels advertise per room, rental cars advertise per car, parking garages per space...

 

Carnival advertises per person, not per cabin.

 

And I'm looking at casino rates, which are $100 per person, and I know I'm going to have to pay $200 for myself. I'm fine with that. The part that bothers me is that they've added this "Required Cruise Fees & Expenses" fee, which doesn't actually the port fees per person, and they're going to pocket anything over the fees. It feels a dishonest.

[d9704011]

9 minutes ago, kad56 said:

The part that bothers me is that they've added this "Required Cruise Fees & Expenses" fee, which doesn't actually the port fees per person, and they're going to pocket anything over the fees.

How do you know that?  

[kad56]

The port fees are per person. I know it because I know what I paid a few months ago, and I see what's required double occupancy. It's not like Carnival is going to pay extra fees to the port authorities.

[d9704011]

1 minute ago, kad56 said:

The port fees are per person. I know it because I know what I paid a few months ago, and I see what's required double occupancy. It's not like Carnival is going to pay extra fees to the port authorities.

So, you have (from a few months ago) a price breakout that clearly shows one passenger fare and two 'taxes and port fees'?

[kad56]

Yes. Port taxes can go up, but not as dramatically as they did after Carnival started advertising all in prices. I've also booked other lines that still break out port fees in the final tally, and they're way lower. The only thing this law did is require lines to display the final price. They can still break out price components. Carnival seems to have used it as an opportunity to obscure port fees. 

 

Anyway, I should get off my high horse. I'm just really annoyed with Carnival. I still have a few bookings at the old pricing, and I have nice options for future bookings. It's just annoying that for casino rates, Carnival is actually coming up pricier than premium lines.

Edited August 20 by kad56

[shof515]

16 minutes ago, d9704011 said:

So, you have (from a few months ago) a price breakout that clearly shows one passenger fare and two 'taxes and port fees'?

 

i am solo and on a cruise i booked many months ago the total port taxes and fees was only 250 dollars. Now with this recent changed when i check prices i noticed the cruise fees is 200 dollars and port taxes is 150, bringing the total port taxes and fees to 350. That is a 100 dollar difference

 

port taxes can go up as that is something i noticed but it was like 5-25 dollars. This new 100 dollar increase is a big difference

[firefly333]

9 hours ago, Badfinger said:

So charging you a little extra to cover that lost revenue, well, maybe time for another type of vacation if a deal breaker..  

 Naive outlook. There are other cruiselines ready to take them. Ncl has solo areas. Royal recently announced for TA TP and transits now instead of me paying 150% I pay 125% ... for any cabin. Not the 1A carnival used to offer to solos. My TA and Panama transit in a balcony cabin on royal were about $100 a day and my TA repriced them down 25%. .. though he said now the rates are so low he cant pay extra obc. That's ok I took it. 

 

What you dont seem to get is carniva is pushing people to book other cruiselines, just not carnival. And taking their friends so they can all cruise together. As a shareholder I think it's a mistake. I dont need to take other kind of vacations. That's where you are not seeing what's going on. The cruising deals are so good I wish I could separate myself and be on 2 cruises at once. A TP just came up for calif to Tokyo so good I sure wish I could do it too. There cruising deals for solos are out there, just not here. Some have such a myopic view they cant see what's going on. My solo deals are only limited by my time I see ... not a one on carnival. Even princess has many lower supplement deals. Carnival is becoming a gamblers cruise. If you dont get casino rates, the rates shrink. And then people wonder why the casino so crowded. I took a friend and she had trouble finding a machine and said no more carnival..

 

I'm watching mardi gras rates and if a last minute rate is low and I'm not booked I'll jump on it, if not there are lots of other deals.

[DeniseTr]

3 hours ago, kad56 said:

All true, but hotels advertise per room, rental cars advertise per car, parking garages per space...

 

Carnival advertises per person, not per cabin.

 

And I'm looking at casino rates, which are $100 per person, and I know I'm going to have to pay $200 for myself. I'm fine with that. The part that bothers me is that they've added this "Required Cruise Fees & Expenses" fee, which doesn't actually the port fees per person, and they're going to pocket anything over the fees. It feels a dishonest.

EXACTLY!  It is dishonest. 

[DeniseTr]

1 hour ago, firefly333 said:

 Naive outlook. There are other cruiselines ready to take them. Ncl has solo areas. Royal recently announced for TA TP and transits now instead of me paying 150% I pay 125% ... for any cabin. Not the 1A carnival used to offer to solos. My TA and Panama transit in a balcony cabin on royal were about $100 a day and my TA repriced them down 25%. .. though he said now the rates are so low he cant pay extra obc. That's ok I took it. 

 

What you dont seem to get is carniva is pushing people to book other cruiselines, just not carnival. And taking their friends so they can all cruise together. As a shareholder I think it's a mistake. I dont need to take other kind of vacations. That's where you are not seeing what's going on. The cruising deals are so good I wish I could separate myself and be on 2 cruises at once. A TP just came up for calif to Tokyo so good I sure wish I could do it too. There cruising deals for solos are out there, just not here. Some have such a myopic view they cant see what's going on. My solo deals are only limited by my time I see ... not a one on carnival. Even princess has many lower supplement deals. Carnival is becoming a gamblers cruise. If you dont get casino rates, the rates shrink. And then people wonder why the casino so crowded. I took a friend and she had trouble finding a machine and said no more carnival..

 

I'm watching mardi gras rates and if a last minute rate is low and I'm not booked I'll jump on it, if not there are lots of other deals.

Your post gave me a lot to think about. 

Only reason I haven't considered NCL for solo rates is that I want a balcony. 

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, DeniseTr said:

EXACTLY!  It is dishonest. 

I don't think it is dishonest, somewhat deceptive marketing, perhaps.  Under the old pricing model, it benefited the cruise lines to push as much as possible into the "port taxes and fees" as possible, in order to keep the advertised fare as low as possible.  This went to an extreme, and a lawsuit resulted in them being regulated as to what could be included in the "port taxes and fees", which were allowed to be broken out of the fare as they constitute a "pass through" expense (passed from passenger to third party).

 

Under the new model, there is no longer a benefit of stuffing all kinds of fees into the "port taxes and fees", so you now see a "port taxes", that is still refundable if a port is canceled, as this is paid directly to a port, while the rest of the fees are paid to third party entities (pilot's association, tug company, etc), and so these are now pushed to the new "required fees and expenses", and are no longer refundable (note that the new category does not mention "port" anywhere in the name, so it is no longer tied to any port).  Carnival created this new category of charges so that the base fare is maintained as low as possible, even though it is included in the advertised fare.

 

So, my point is, that under the old pricing model, they were giving back more than they needed to, because they were inflating the "port taxes and fees", so if they hadn't inflated those taxes and fees, as separate broken out charges, you would have paid twice for them as a solo anyway, because it would have been in the fare.  It was a marketing decision that they would garner more money from lower advertised fares (increased occupancy) than from possible refunds of inflated "port taxes and fees".