free passenger places but solos have to pay 70% extra

[KarenR_UK]

not too happy

 

been researching next years cruise as the full pricing structure including single supplements has just come out (I found the web site had been updated today)

 

i have a particular destination/line in mind, so have got details of about 10 cruises.

 

what has upset me is that on one cruise they are offering 3 & 4th passengers free places, but they still want a 70% single supplement from solo cruisers - even if they were charged 20% my extra would be a much more palatable 50%

 

just doesnt seem fair

 

3 & 4th passengers need us as much as we need them - we give the space in the ships maximum allowed load to allow additional additional passengers. (This is an adult ship, another ship, same line but allows kids has a 45% supplement albeit in a slightly different time slot).

so refusing to do that one then, but NOW just noticed that the cruise i am actually considering is offering free child and free 3&4th passengers, but i have a 60% supplement - i feel like refusing that one too (obviously would need some sort of actual protest to the cruise line, they are unlikely to notice one person hasn't booked:D ), but it so early in the season its actually among the cheapest of the 10 i am looking at:rolleyes:

 

how can we get cruise lines to acknowledge that we exist and are a valuable asset as well.!!!

 

karen

 

rant over for today:D

[kitty9]

This has been an issue for solo cruises forever and nothing is going to change anytime soon. Your only out is to find ships that have dedicated single cabins, such as the QE2 has, and book one of those. For the most part, the third and fourth rates is usually the fare paid for kids traveling with their parents, so that's why they are so cheap. Yes, at times adults will squeeze four into a cabin to make the fares cheaper, but it's rare that you find four adults willing to share tiny cabins and one bathroom. For now, and probably for a long time to come, single supplements are here to stay.

[Lois R]

Hi Darcie:) I had replied to another post of yours but not sure

you saw it. Hope you come back here:D

I am going on Galaxy, March 7-17, 2008. It is to celebrate

my big 50;)....I wondered if you want to look at that cruise!

She sails out of San Juan......

Yes, I am going solo for it too.

[FranKes2000]

I mentioned this problem to a Travel Company Rep, his response was that singles need as much cabin staff as a couple sharing. I agreed but asked about the cheaper price for children as they require more work by all staff, not just cabin staff. He had no answer to that.

It is the cruises where they come down to second passenger 50%, but singles still have to pay supplement!

[ancldaca]

Paying 70% extra is still cheaper than paying 100% for the 2nd person...

[FranKes2000]

Paying 70% extra is still cheaper than paying 100% for the 2nd person...

 

170% is cheaper than paying 100% for 2nd person but some cruises offer 2nd person at 50%, that is 1 person 170% and 2 people 150%. Hmmmmmmmm? Do you see something wrong here?

[Roz]

Keep in mind that the second person not only pays a fare, they make purchases on their shipboard acct. (shops, casino, bar, excursions, etc.), so that is additional lost revenue to the cruise line.

 

I'm not defending them; I'm just explaining where they're coming from. After 2 people pay full fare, the cruise line can afford to discount the 3rd and 4th person in the cabin. On top of which, the 3rd and 4th person generate additional revenue.

 

I pay school district taxes even though I don't have children. It's the price I pay for having an educated citizenry. As Jimmy Carter said "life isn't fair".

 

Roz

[Stevesan]

A 150% single supplement, which I can usually find, is a fair price. 170% is exorbitant, but not unheard of.

 

It's certainly unrealistic to expect NO sgl supp. If that were the case, the cruise line would be cutting its own throat. An admittedly extreme, but useful, analogy is selling all the ship's cabins to singles without a supplement would result only half of the booking revenues not to mention lost sales in stores, casinos, etc.

 

You'll find single supplements charged by land tour companies as well. They are often not as high, but are in the 125-150 percent neighborhood. I've nooked a London/Paris trip for September at a 140% rate. That seems high, but it's really a bargain because I can't match equivalent hotel prices on my own, especially the onvelievably low add on nights as well as other amenities such as the Eurostar train, a few tours, dinners, etc. Even though I booked my own air, the tour company provides airport land transfers. It would be nice if cruise lines would do that, too. Of course Fort Lauderdale will freeze over before that happens.

 

I dedicate most of my cruise research to HAL and Princess because I favor them. The great majority of their cruises are in the 145-150% range. Inexplicably, a few cruises are a full 200%, even though these are not especially exotic or guaranteed sellouts.

[Roz]

Royal Caribbean and Celebrity are notorious for making singles pay double. On Costa, they make you pay double and then charge you a supplement on top of it to make up for the lost 2nd passenger revenue. :eek:

 

Guess I'll be sailing with HAL and Carnival for the time being.

 

Roz

[Stevesan]

Royal Caribbean and Celebrity are notorious for making singles pay double. On Costa, they make you pay double and then charge you a supplement on top of it to make up for the lost 2nd passenger revenue. :eek:

 

Guess I'll be sailing with HAL and Carnival for the time being.

 

Roz

 

 

PG Rated version:

Forget that!

[Roz]

PG Rated Version....I get it! :D I get the message loud and clear that they don't want singles.

 

Roz

[FranKes2000]

QE2 has single cabins, now they will be a thing of the past as of Oct 2008. No more single cabins, no more Ocean Liners just floating classless hotels. She will be missed on the North Atlantic.

[KarenR_UK]

Royal Caribbean and Celebrity are notorious for making singles pay double. On Costa, they make you pay double and then charge you a supplement on top of it to make up for the lost 2nd passenger revenue. :eek:

 

Guess I'll be sailing with HAL and Carnival for the time being.

 

Roz

 

Another very good reason for not sailing Costa then:)

 

I still maintain I spend more as a single than I would (did) as part of a couple/group - On the cruise I have just got off, I went on ship's tours at all 8 ports (not keen on getting off alone & exploring, I do now shop, but remaining in the vicinity of the pier) - including several all dayers - I visited the bars & had wine every evening for dinner - a couple on my table, took 2 ships tours, drank very little at dinner and spent their time together on deck, in (free) lectures & films etc. I would imagine their combined final ships bill was half mine! (they were a very nice, fun couple by the way)

I am still reeling from the shock of the final bill:D (though it did come down from earlier in the week when I discovered that despite taking 8 tours, somehow I was paying for 14:eek: - it was soon sorted out, but that intermediate bill was a real SHOCK :D)

 

Karen

[flag fan]

Regarding the 200%+ charged to singles on Costa--I was wondering when this would happen. For a ship sailing full, a single supplement of less than 100% makes sense, but for full ships, the cruise line is probably losing money, even with charging double to single passengers. Each passenger is a source of extra revenue--beverages (particularly alcoholic ones), extra-charge meals in alternative restaurants, shore excursions, casino bets, and spa treatments add up and a solo passenger is not going to be paying as much as a couple would for those charges. I also wonder whether the cruise line saves any money in lower food costs--it probably has to buy enough food for a full ship, even if as many as 10% of cabins are singles (and the percentage is probably much lower). Therefore there is no savings to the cruise line from solo passengers and they do not generate as much income.

 

The trend seems to be for cruise lines to have more and more of these extra-cost items, which makes single cruisers less and less desirable. So I think us solo travelers should cruise now while we can; costs are just going to increase in the future.

[FranKes2000]

The way the world is aging, cruise operators should not shun single women. We will be the ones with money and wanting to sail solo without supplement. They should have single cabins available, as with QE2. The cost is higher than per person in a double cabin but it is a smaller cabin and it is less than a supplement.

[Jimsgirl]

Is it not amazing that while we have to pay 70%-100% in supplement to occupy a cabin when it come to a "shipboard credit" we do not get nealy the amount equal to the 70%-100% supplemtn we have to pay.

 

Example: A well known national agency advertised " $300 per cabin shipboard credit", I asked "suppose it is a cabin that sleeps 4", and was told "it is per cabin so it is still $300"

However when I booked the cruise for solo ocupancy (paying the 100 %supplement) the credit dropped from $300 to $75! I was told the $300 was for a minimum of 2 people in the cabin!

I cancelled the cruise, because frankly I do not like being scammed . Wish we had a law re TRUTH in advertisiing.

[Sansouci]

Royal Caribbean and Celebrity are notorious for making singles pay double. On Costa, they make you pay double and then charge you a supplement on top of it to make up for the lost 2nd passenger revenue. :eek:

 

 

Roz

 

Roz,

 

I'm late coming to this thread, but at last -- the answer to my question regarding the single supplement on Costa!!!! I was hoping that if I searched long enough, I'd find it. So this explains why the VTG agent suggested that I make up a phony name for an imaginary cabin mate and declare her a "no-show" at check-in. Apparently it's a way to pay only 200% for a solo without paying the additional supplement.

 

Mille grazie!!

--Deb in Orlando