the one thing I might never understand....

[halos]

Thanks for writing this. I couldn't agree more.

 

The constant whining here about "having to pay extra to get good food" is really annoying. The food in NCL's main dining rooms is, in fact, very good and comparable to anything we've experienced in our nine cruises. Since 2000, we've cruised NCL, Renaissance, HAL, Celebrity, and Grand Circle and we've found no significant difference in the quality of food in the main dining rooms. Some dishes are better than others, but what else is new. That can be said about every restaurant I've ever dined in, perhaps excluding places like The Four Seasons in NYC and the long-gone Ernie's in San Francisco (see the movie Vertigo).

 

There seems to be a knee-jerk reaction that if anything is not quite as good as one thinks it could be, it's because they're saving the best for the extra-charge restaurants to force people to eat there. If one's glass is refilled more than 30 seconds after one would like it filled or if dinner takes two hours (which it does on every traditional dining cruise ship, by the way), it's because there's no reason to care about giving good service because there's automatic tipping.

 

Too many people here are simply looking for reasons to whine. Too many people are overreacting to trivial incidents with rants about "NEVER AGAIN" or "NIGHTMARE," or "LAST NIGHT EVER ON SO-AND-SO SHIP" or "REALLY NEGATIVE REVIEW." This whole attitude that "the cruise line is out to screw me and now I'm going to get even by blasting them here on Cruise Critic" is dragging down the usefulness of this board to readers who want to get straight information in order to make informed vacation decisions.

 

I feel that way too.

 

As far as what you said about food, Frommer's Cruises and Ports of Call (2008) states basically just what you said. Mainstream cruiselines food is all about the same. It says that Celebrity used to have an edge but no longer does.

Based on my CCL cruises and what I had read on these boards, I expected the food on X to be better and it wasn't...I expected the food on NCL to be horrid and surprise! It wasn't. Like you stated, there were some things that were just OK, and some things that were really fabulous...which is how it's been for me on all my cruises no matter what line. I can't imagine a cruise where everything on board is just so horrible that you could come back and make a blanket statement that all the food sucked. It just seems impossible to me.

There were so many dining options on my NCL cruise that in a 15 days cruise I wasn't bored at all with the food. Did I sometimes pay extra?? You bet I did...happily. The cruise was so inexpensive that if I'd have eaten at a surcharge restaurant every night, I still would have paid under $100 pp/pd for my balcony cabin. I understand that I can't get a great deal like that all the time, but even so, if I didn't eat at any surcharge restaurants over that 15 day period, I still would have enjoyed my meals and wouldn't have been bored with the selections. To be honest, after 7 days you kinda get tired of eating. :p

 

The problem is that not everyone feels the same as you and I do. Like I said before, it's two different mind sets here and one will never understand the other.

[Catnip]

 

The problem is that not everyone feels the same as you and I do. Like I said before, it's two different mind sets here and one will never understand the other.

 

Very well said! :)

[Catnip]

We've always felt that the choices on NCL, at least, are perfectly acceptable.

What I recall, however, is that there were at least 5 entree choices -- maybe 6 in the main dining rooms. Every night included choices between beef, poultry, vegetarian, seafood, pasta, and "other" (mainly pork or lamb). To me, without coming from the "golden days" of cruising, that's about what I would expect. What other choices used to be included that are no longer available? That's not meant to be a criticism, either -- I'm just very curious.

 

 

Well, I have not cruised on NCL in a number of years, so I really can't comment on their food selection. And unfortunately, I am not one to keep menu's or take pictures of food, so this is from memory only.

In past years in the main dining room, I would say there was always half a dozen entree selections. Now, there are 4. The vegetables (or side dishes) offered was more varied. There used to be 1-2 additional dessert selections also. Once again, this is not whining, it is stating my own observations. But, as on any cruise, most people don't go away hungry!!!!!!! LOL!!

I guess it's just more obvious to those of us who have been cruising for many years about the cost-cutting measures now by most of the mass-market lines. They lower the price of the cruise, and now charge for a "premium" dining experience.

[halos]

about food choices....

just wanted to toss this out there.

At my house, I'm the chief cook and I do all the shopping. There are more days than not, where I'll wander through a supermarket, with all the choices that one can possibly be blessed enough to have and can't find something for dinner.

It's just like the TV...800 channels and nothing to watch.

 

Let me tell you that I literally feel guilty, thinking, "I can have anything I want to eat, and NOTHING appeals to me right now."

 

Are we spoiled??? What is it??? :confused:

[ute_fan]

about food choices....

just wanted to toss this out there.

At my house, I'm the chief cook and I do all the shopping. There are more days than not, where I'll wander through a supermarket, with all the choices that one can possibly be blessed enough to have and can't find something for dinner.

It's just like the TV...800 channels and nothing to watch.

 

Let me tell you that I literally feel guilty, thinking, "I can have anything I want to eat, and NOTHING appeals to me right now."

 

Are we spoiled??? What is it??? :confused:

 

Bingo! I think you may have hit the nail on the head with this one. I can remember, as a child, that most of the restaurants here were primarily "American" food, with a small smattering of Chinese, Mexican and Italian scattered around, but not much else. Now, there is such a wide variety that on the nights when we're eating out (which is far too often) that we have trouble agreeing on a restaurant for our family of 4. One person wants seafood, another wants Mexican, one asks for Italian, and my DH always says "I don't care". My DD won't eat at this restaurant, my DS doesn't like that place, I don't feel like the one that the two of them ask for -- and we end up feeling very frustrated.

 

When you look at the current choices here in SLC (which is NOT noted for being a world-class dining experience), we have Brazilian, Thai, Japanese, French -- and so on, giving us a much wider variety of choices than we used to enjoy. Given the wide selections available on land, it's entirely possible that we are expecting too much out of a floating restaurant without the same availability to food that our land based restaurants now enjoy.

[goodml]

I actually like the way you post..so I hope you won't take this wrong (coming from the person who had no air LOL), but I think the high and low maintenance is the exact saying that bugs me so much about the 'club'. You see, I don't see where people who have what they consider a bad experience on a cruise ship makes them high maintenance. That's the 'name calling' that I find insulting. It makes someone's complaint sound like because they made it, and another may not agree, they are a lessor person. It may upset you (and me) to not have air, but it made be equally upsetting to them to always have to ask to have the water glass filled, or their food on the buffet to be warm. Different experiences are bad for different people. I'm actually a pretty positive person..I've never had a bad cruise. However, I have to say, that if I had not read about the then service (no idea how it is now) on POH, I would have been shocked (and it was my first cruise). Instead, I was, er, expecting it. And I wasn't disappointed, the service was really bad LOL. It didn't ruin my cruise experience (or even my NCL experience..I loved our Nova Scotia cruise, and our service was great!), but I am glad people reported it. I never one thought those people were high or low maintenance. I just happen to think the label is insulting. YMMV.

 

So IMO, it's great that some of you don't let things bother you..but why feel like you can decide what things are big enough to bother someone else? Isn't it just OK, that you can read a review and say to yourself..hey, I'd be ok with that..rather than tell the person who isn't ok with it, that there is something wrong with them, and because they aren't positive, they don't belong in a rose glasses club?

 

Or in the case of another (not you) make remarks like.."let me type slower" so you can understand. I find those type of remarks, just not nice...and I have the movie Pollyanna, and I can tell you, that she would never have made comments like, and then say "have I struck a nerve" when I tried to insult you? Pollyanna found the good in everyone..she didn't make herself out to be better because she saw the good. It's not bad to be Pollyanna..but IMO, it is bad to insult or make fun of others who may have had what they thought was a problem on their cruise (i'm not suggesting you did that, but some on this and other threads have). I personally don't know why anyone, who didn't have a stellar time on a cruise would ever come and report it on these boards. I actually decided to not post my last review, (after it was writtien) because I knew someone would tell me that I should just sleep with no blankets, rather than tell people our air didn't work. Or they would drill me as to how many times I reported it, and to who.

 

I absolutely agree with your posts on this thread.

[CanadianTwosome]

I feel that way too.

 

As far as what you said about food, Frommer's Cruises and Ports of Call (2008) states basically just what you said. Mainstream cruiselines food is all about the same. It says that Celebrity used to have an edge but no longer does.

Based on my CCL cruises and what I had read on these boards, I expected the food on X to be better and it wasn't...I expected the food on NCL to be horrid and surprise! It wasn't. Like you stated, there were some things that were just OK, and some things that were really fabulous...which is how it's been for me on all my cruises no matter what line. I can't imagine a cruise where everything on board is just so horrible that you could come back and make a blanket statement that all the food sucked. It just seems impossible to me.

There were so many dining options on my NCL cruise that in a 15 days cruise I wasn't bored at all with the food. Did I sometimes pay extra?? You bet I did...happily. The cruise was so inexpensive that if I'd have eaten at a surcharge restaurant every night, I still would have paid under $100 pp/pd for my balcony cabin. I understand that I can't get a great deal like that all the time, but even so, if I didn't eat at any surcharge restaurants over that 15 day period, I still would have enjoyed my meals and wouldn't have been bored with the selections. To be honest, after 7 days you kinda get tired of eating. :p

 

The problem is that not everyone feels the same as you and I do. Like I said before, it's two different mind sets here and one will never understand the other.

 

Tired of eating? Is that even possible when I don't have to do the dishes? :p ha ha ha ha ha

 

I agree with you completely (well... except for that 'tired of eating' thing... that's just crazy talk! :eek: ) Anyway... Something that I see quite often is that someone will say that they would be happy if the fare went up and included more, but that they hate having to pay extra for 'good food'. Of course, I'm in agreement with those who think the food in the dining rooms is 'good food'. I would even go so far as to say it's great - and when I add in the 'no dishes' part, it becomes quite spectacular some days!!

 

As a math person, though, I see (higher fare with more inclusions) and (lower fare with surcharges) to be pretty much equivalent - unless you count the amount of interest your money earns in the bank between final payment and the day you pay your on board charges. :) For instance, since we're on the NCL board, and also since I know nothing about how other lines charge for specialty restaurant, what if all of the specialty restaurants were included in the fare? Well... they run anywhere from $15 to $30 I think - with the $30 being for the 'big' lobster that so many seem to want.

 

So, over a seven day cruise, they might add an extra charge of $20 per day, and add on another $20 to cover the commission that will be going to any booking agents. If your base fare was $500, then the new fare is $560 +taxes +other charges.

 

OR, on the same seven day cruise, what if the person has to pay the surcharges? If we assume that they are going to eat at a specialty restaurant every night (but not that they eat lobster every night), their additional charges will likely be quite similar - about $140... except that there is no commission add up, no taxes added on, and as I mentioned, your money is in your own bank earning interest for months after final payment (it's not much on $140, but if we're talking about 'nickel and diming', then isn't a dime important? :) ) Also, this is assuming that the person eats every night in a specialty restaurant, which most people do not.

 

So... as Halos was saying, even with the surcharges, with today's fares, it's still a really low pp/pd amount. It's especially low if you choose not to eat in the specialties, as many people do.

 

My question now, in an effort to understand another's point of view, is 'What's the difference?' Aside from the slight additional charge due to commission and taxes that make the included fare a little higher... what is the difference between having the additional amount added to your fare, or having the additional charges you incur added to your on board account, and why do you think is it better to pay in advance?

 

Please understand that this is something that really confuses me, and I'm honestly asking in an effort to understand. I know that I will pay LESS with additional charge restaurants, because I will not order the $30 lobster and I'll eat most of my meals in the included dining rooms. So it's hard for me to understand the benefit of having my fare increased enough so that everyone on board could eat the specialty fare.

[Retired not Expired]

It’s not just food these people have been talking about. It’s also service and services.

 

Maybe a Cabin attendant use to take care of 10 cabins. Now they have two working together taking care of 30. People wonder why the carpet wasn’t vacuumed, dust on railings, etc.

 

Where a waiter and assistant use to take care of say two tables, they now have three or four and the assistant may have to assist two or more waiter. People are saying their drinks are not kept full, rolls not brought, waiting for coffee, etc.

 

There’s more but when people see service go down along with cheaper cuts of meat, etc., these things are noticed.

 

I was on RCI right after some cuts and people were complaining right and left. Did I still see good service and food? Yes, but not what I had seen even a year earlier.

 

It was the attention to detail. They still do well and try hard, but when staff is cut and the quality of food bought is less, they just can’t do what was done before unless they raise the fares enough to rehire that staffing level and keep the food budget in line plus inflation.

 

There is no right answer. Some are OK with it and some are not and would like to see it back to the level it was.

[CanadianTwosome]

It’s not just food these people have been talking about. It’s also service and services.

 

Maybe a Cabin attendant use to take care of 10 cabins. Now they have two working together taking care of 30. People wonder why the carpet wasn’t vacuumed, dust on railings, etc.

 

Where a waiter and assistant use to take care of say two tables, they now have three or four and the assistant may have to assist two or more waiter. People are saying their drinks are not kept full, rolls not brought, waiting for coffee, etc.

 

There’s more but when people see service go down along with cheaper cuts of meat, etc., these things are noticed.

 

I was on RCI right after some cuts and people were complaining right and left. Did I still see good service and food? Yes, but not what I had seen even a year earlier.

 

It was the attention to detail. They still do well and try hard, but when staff is cut and the quality of food bought is less, they just can’t do what was done before unless they raise the fares enough to rehire that staffing level and keep the food budget in line plus inflation.

 

There is no right answer. Some are OK with it and some are not and would like to see it back to the level it was.

 

I don't expect a 'right' answer. I am just hoping someone will explain their point of view to me. Also, all of the things you say here are true, but are not what I asked about. I asked a specific question about something I have seen people talk about that CAN be answered. Service and all the rest are a matter of personal perception - I thought our service on our last cruise was absolutely flawless, but I'm sure many on the same ship thought it stunk. My feelings about how and when I spend my money are much less ambiguous, however. I didn't ask 'Do you think you get your money's worth?' I asked why someone would prefer to pay more in advance rather than pay the difference at the end. (again, neither is 'right') If you would like to answer, I would love to know - what your preference is and why? :)

[halos]

It’s not just food these people have been talking about. It’s also service and services.

 

Maybe a Cabin attendant use to take care of 10 cabins. Now they have two working together taking care of 30. People wonder why the carpet wasn’t vacuumed, dust on railings, etc.

 

Where a waiter and assistant use to take care of say two tables, they now have three or four and the assistant may have to assist two or more waiter. People are saying their drinks are not kept full, rolls not brought, waiting for coffee, etc.

 

There’s more but when people see service go down along with cheaper cuts of meat, etc., these things are noticed.

 

I was on RCI right after some cuts and people were complaining right and left. Did I still see good service and food? Yes, but not what I had seen even a year earlier.

 

It was the attention to detail. They still do well and try hard, but when staff is cut and the quality of food bought is less, they just can’t do what was done before unless they raise the fares enough to rehire that staffing level and keep the food budget in line plus inflation.

 

There is no right answer. Some are OK with it and some are not and would like to see it back to the level it was.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I guess I don't see it.

Am I missing soemthing?? :confused:

My first cruise was in 1990. My cabin steward was no better then than the ones I've had during the past 3 years of cruising. The food (on Carnival) has actually drastically improved over the years (can't say anythign about other lines because I cruised only CCL for a long time)

As far as cleaning...even on our Spirit cruise (that we were on together) I saw crew vacuuming, cleaning, painting and sanitizing continually during the 15 days we were on that ship. The only thing I did notice was that some of the carpet could use replacing (hell, most of my carpet at home needs replacing too:p )...but I never felt any part of the ship was dirty.

My dining service experience was my first at Fresstyle. I don't know if it used to be better. I will say that it wasn't great, but I assumed that it was just the difference between Freestyle & Traditional.

I did love the crew...I thought they were all friendly...very friendly and very cheerful. I guess for me, this is more important than perfection in their job. I'd personally rather have a waiter who is friendly though a little unefficient, than a very efficient waiter who isn't friendly.

But that's just me.

[Catnip]

It’s not just food these people have been talking about. It’s also service and services.

 

Maybe a Cabin attendant use to take care of 10 cabins. Now they have two working together taking care of 30. People wonder why the carpet wasn’t vacuumed, dust on railings, etc.

 

Where a waiter and assistant use to take care of say two tables, they now have three or four and the assistant may have to assist two or more waiter. People are saying their drinks are not kept full, rolls not brought, waiting for coffee, etc.

 

There’s more but when people see service go down along with cheaper cuts of meat, etc., these things are noticed.

 

I was on RCI right after some cuts and people were complaining right and left. Did I still see good service and food? Yes, but not what I had seen even a year earlier.

 

It was the attention to detail. They still do well and try hard, but when staff is cut and the quality of food bought is less, they just can’t do what was done before unless they raise the fares enough to rehire that staffing level and keep the food budget in line plus inflation.

 

There is no right answer. Some are OK with it and some are not and would like to see it back to the level it was.

 

 

BINGO!!!! You are exactly correct!!!! People that have only been cruising for the last 2-3 years might not notice a decline, or even a change in the food/service/attitudes. Sometimes it's hard to put your finger on it, but I think it's sometimes the feeling you get from some of the crew. They seem to be overworked & stressed more now than ever before. In my experience, they are always polite & helpful. It's just when you actually talk to them, that you find things are much differerent with the crew now than it used to be.

[Retired not Expired]

I don't expect a 'right' answer. I am just hoping someone will explain their point of view to me. Also, all of the things you say here are true, but are not what I asked about. I asked a specific question about something I have seen people talk about that CAN be answered. Service and all the rest are a matter of personal perception - I thought our service on our last cruise was absolutely flawless, but I'm sure many on the same ship thought it stunk. My feelings about how and when I spend my money are much less ambiguous, however. I didn't ask 'Do you think you get your money's worth?' I asked why someone would prefer to pay more in advance rather than pay the difference at the end. (again, neither is 'right') If you would like to answer, I would love to know - what your preference is and why? :)

I wasn’t trying to answer your question which is why I didn’t quote your post. People on here have been stuck on the food thing, main dining room vs. specialty restaurants, when discussing increased fares for better vs. lower fares with add ons.

 

I was making a general statement that it is more than just food these people have been concerned about which affects the whole cruise experience.

 

That’s also why I said there is no right answer. No matter what the cruise line does at this point, it can’t win.

[halos]

I asked why someone would prefer to pay more in advance rather than pay the difference at the end. (again, neither is 'right') If you would like to answer, I would love to know - what your preference is and why? :)

 

LOL..no one is answering you. I can't help you because I agree with you. I don't want the cruise fares raised. I'd rather pay for the extras, when I want them, as I want them.

I don't think paying anywhere from $10 to $30 extra for a more elegant meal is a big deal. I was under the impression that surcharge is actually the gratuity for the wait staff in the specialty restaurants. I certainly don't mind tipping extra for extra attention.

If the cruise lines built in the extra cost to the cruise fare I might not be able to spend 3 to 4 weeks on a ship per year as I do now.

THAT would totally SUCK.

JMO.

[ute_fan]

BINGO!!!! You are exactly correct!!!! People that have only been cruising for the last 2-3 years might not notice a decline, or even a change in the food/service/attitudes. Sometimes it's hard to put your finger on it, but I think it's sometimes the feeling you get from some of the crew. They seem to be overworked & stressed more now than ever before. In my experience, they are always polite & helpful. It's just when you actually talk to them, that you find things are much differerent with the crew now than it used to be.

 

Since our first cruise was about 4 years ago, we may very possibly be in the group that hasn't noticed a decline. We do spend quite a bit of time talking with the crew -- both our room stewards and our "waiter" since we tend to request the same one each night and haven't heard any specific complaints from them. If anything, the service that we had on the Pearl last year had improved from what we had on our first cruises -- but that may have just been because at the time it was NCL's newest ship, and as such, probably had the "cream of the crop" onboard.

 

One interesting comment we did get from talking with the crew is that most of them don't like the newer, larger ships. Not only do they very possibly have more rooms and passengers per staff member, but just the increased size of the ships makes their jobs harder as there is more often more walking involved as they move from one part of the ship to another. We had a very interesting conversation with a couple of the staff on the Jewel. My DH happened to be wearing a shirt from the NCL Sun. They looked at it, sighed and both remarked that they wished they were back on that ship, as it was a "perfect size" (in their words) and the way it was laid out made it easier for them to get their jobs done.

 

I guess one other comment that I'd like to make is that customer service and attitudes have changed (for the worse) almost everywhere --- from restaurants to hotels to retail stores to my Doctor's office. I'm not to sure how realistic is it to expect that those changes won't occur in the cruising industry. As much as we may like to blame the "American worker's" attitudes for downgrade in customer service, it's probably showing up in the international work force too.

[Catnip]

LOL..no one is answering you.

 

It has been already been stated before somewhere earlier in this thread, but I'm not willing to go back and re-read all this entire thread to find it. :cool: Sometimes, when people don't respond, it might be because it has already been answered before.

Let me give you my opinion on this one last time. I would be willing to pay more for the cruise (like I did years ago) for the service and quality we used to get. I would prefer not to be nickel-and-dimed to death, like they do nowadays. (Keep in mind spa services, alcohol, shore excursions, and the casino were always extra and that's not what I'm talking about.).

 

Again, that is just my opinion. Obviously, there are many others that don't mind paying extra. To each, his own!

[Retired not Expired]

I guess I don't see it.

Am I missing soemthing?? :confused:

My first cruise was in 1990. My cabin steward was no better then than the ones I've had during the past 3 years of cruising. The food (on Carnival) has actually drastically improved over the years (can't say anythign about other lines because I cruised only CCL for a long time)

As far as cleaning...even on our Spirit cruise (that we were on together) I saw crew vacuuming, cleaning, painting and sanitizing continually during the 15 days we were on that ship. The only thing I did notice was that some of the carpet could use replacing (hell, most of my carpet at home needs replacing too:p )...but I never felt any part of the ship was dirty.

My dining service experience was my first at Fresstyle. I don't know if it used to be better. I will say that it wasn't great, but I assumed that it was just the difference between Freestyle & Traditional.

I did love the crew...I thought they were all friendly...very friendly and very cheerful. I guess for me, this is more important than perfection in their job. I'd personally rather have a waiter who is friendly though a little unefficient, than a very efficient waiter who isn't friendly.

But that's just me.

Hi Angel,

 

I wasn’t saying those were my feelings. I was just relating what those who are saying the cruise experience is less than it was has been saying

I have no real complaints about any, including the later, cruises I’ve been on. I have seen some of these examples but it just doesn’t affect me. I’m one of those types who does not need or want a lot of pampering. I can, however, understand and respect what those who are not satisfied with the way things are going are saying. It doesn’t mean I have to agree with them 100 %, but I’ll respect their views.

 

I haven’t dropped over to your new roll call for a while … I may have to look in to see how things are going and perhaps post on the old as we have some better news on my wife

[halos]

I would be willing to pay more for the cruise (like I did years ago) for the service and quality we used to get. I would prefer not to be nickel-and-dimed to death, like they do nowadays. (Keep in mind spa services, alcohol, shore excursions, and the casino were always extra and that's not what I'm talking about.).

 

 

That's where we don't see eye to eye.

I see no decline since my first cruise in 1990. I see more options..my first cruise didn't give me the option of a surcharge restaurant. Other than the surcharge for different dining venues, where else do you feel nickeled and dimed??? :confused:

 

I guess I'm also thinking that if I'm going to pay a lot more (in basic fare) to cruise, then I'd probably go to a more luxury line. Why would I stick with mainstream if the cost was high?

[CanadianTwosome]

It has been already been stated before somewhere earlier in this thread, but I'm not willing to go back and re-read all this entire thread to find it. :cool: Sometimes, when people don't respond, it might be because it has already been answered before.

Let me give you my opinion on this one last time. I would be willing to pay more for the cruise (like I did years ago) for the service and quality we used to get. I would prefer not to be nickel-and-dimed to death, like they do nowadays. (Keep in mind spa services, alcohol, shore excursions, and the casino were always extra and that's not what I'm talking about.).

 

Again, that is just my opinion. Obviously, there are many others that don't mind paying extra. To each, his own!

 

Thank you for answering part of my question. :) I guess I haven't been clear, though. Yes, people have said in this thread and others that they would prefer to pay everything in a lump sum ahead of time. I stated that as a prelude to asking my question, in fact. My question is simply 'Why?'. As I illustrated, the amount you spend is going to be basically the same either way if you use the services I mentioned (which are the easiest to compute) - in advance or at the end of the cruise - so while I have stated my reasons for preferring to pay at the end, I am very curious to understand why someone would want to pay in advance.

 

Again, I am NOT asking about 'service and quality' because that is entirely based on personal perception. I enjoyed my first cruise in 1975, so I think I've got a pretty good basis to say that I have NOT noticed a decline in service or quality. This is my opinion. My question is about preferring to pay up front rather than being billed later. It's like income tax - some people prefer to pay installments, and some would rather pay one lump sum in April. Each have their reasons for preferring the method they do; each are 'right' for themselves. I'm just interested in understanding the 'other' point of view regarding cruise fares. Just like taxes, if we want to cruise, we all have to pay the fare. I would just like to understand something that doesn't make any sense to me.

[halos]

I haven’t dropped over to your new roll call for a while … I may have to look in to see how things are going and perhaps post on the old as we have some better news on my wife

 

That's great to hear Jim! :) By all means pop over there because I'm sure everyone would love to hear the good news.

 

 

I can, however, understand and respect what those who are not satisfied with the way things are going are saying. It doesn’t mean I have to agree with them 100 %, but I’ll respect their views.

 

Yeah..I guess the problem I have is that if I were so unsatisfied with cruising (for whatever reason) I'd stop cruising. I wouldn't keep booking them, nitpicking every detail and then come here to complain.

If someone (and a few people have) comes on here and says, "you know, this cost more than it used to, the service isn't the same, I don't feel like I'm treated special anymore so I'm going to stop cruising for a while.', THEN I'd TOTALLY be able to respect their opinion.

If someone has complaints, no matter how valid and yet they keep booking cruises anyway...how am I supposed to respect that???

[mbisson]

When I pasted the "Sunshine Cruisers" into my signature, it wasn't to join a clique or try to have any conflict. I'm just the type that if something happens, I try to make the best of it.

 

Debbie

 

ditto, Thank you Debbie.

 

(and for anyone wondering that doesn't mean I don't try to have bad situations corrected-it just means I don't dwell on it and let it ruin my day-sometimes I'd rather be happy than right)

[Toyz711]

i'm with monte!!:)

[mbisson]

i'm with monte!!:)

 

 

And I'm with you Cathi, but I'm really confused how anyone could be offended by our attitude, but some seem to! :eek:

[bulgargirl]

Thank you for answering part of my question. :) I guess I haven't been clear, though. Yes, people have said in this thread and others that they would prefer to pay everything in a lump sum ahead of time. I stated that as a prelude to asking my question, in fact. My question is simply 'Why?'. As I illustrated, the amount you spend is going to be basically the same either way if you use the services I mentioned (which are the easiest to compute) - in advance or at the end of the cruise - so while I have stated my reasons for preferring to pay at the end, I am very curious to understand why someone would want to pay in advance.

 

Again, I am NOT asking about 'service and quality' because that is entirely based on personal perception. I enjoyed my first cruise in 1975, so I think I've got a pretty good basis to say that I have NOT noticed a decline in service or quality. This is my opinion. My question is about preferring to pay up front rather than being billed later. It's like income tax - some people prefer to pay installments, and some would rather pay one lump sum in April. Each have their reasons for preferring the method they do; each are 'right' for themselves. I'm just interested in understanding the 'other' point of view regarding cruise fares. Just like taxes, if we want to cruise, we all have to pay the fare. I would just like to understand something that doesn't make any sense to me.

 

I can answer why to your question! That is about paying the lump sum up front...

 

First of all, I like to think I can out consume most people. It might be a fallacy on my part, but thinking that I am going to pay the same no matter how much I consume inspires gluttony in me that makes me think I'm getting a good deal.

 

Secondly, and no kidding so most importantly, when I pay a lump sum up front I don't get in trouble. It's easy on a cruise to start spending a little more on the extras. Oh just one more thing here and one more thing there. If I have paid for it all up front then I don't have to worry about an extra drink here or a fancier dinner there.

 

So up front paying helps me budget and that's why I'd prefer it. If I could afford it. But I can't and I'm happy with NCL. I wouldn't describe it as nickel and diming so much as just not as all-inclusive.....

[bulgargirl]

Just re-read my post. I meant the first part to be tongue in cheek. But I honestly like being able to consume as much or as little as I like (and I guess we're talking about sodas, alcoholic beverages, smoothies, specialty restaurants) and not have to worry about how it adds up and if I've just overspent my budget. Up-front pricing takes care of that for me. And I really am a little piggie with a drinking problem so I probably can out-consume people and get my money's worth. :p

[nasvhillecruise]

I can answer why to your question! That is about paying the lump sum up front...

 

First of all, I like to think I can out consume most people. It might be a fallacy on my part, but thinking that I am going to pay the same no matter how much I consume inspires gluttony in me that makes me think I'm getting a good deal.

 

Secondly, and no kidding so most importantly, when I pay a lump sum up front I don't get in trouble. It's easy on a cruise to start spending a little more on the extras. Oh just one more thing here and one more thing there. If I have paid for it all up front then I don't have to worry about an extra drink here or a fancier dinner there.

 

So up front paying helps me budget and that's why I'd prefer it. If I could afford it. But I can't and I'm happy with NCL. I wouldn't describe it as nickel and diming so much as just not as all-inclusive.....

 

I'm like you. I love paying up front just to know where I am with $. We're going to NYC in 2 weeks, & airfare & hotel is paid for. All I have to worry about now is what I spend rather than having to see that hotel bill at the end of the trip.

 

The same with the cruise. I know once I get there, I'll want to try everything, especially since this is my 1st cruise. I don't want my final bill to be twice the cost of the additional cruise. :eek: It would be GREAT for me if they offered an upfront drinking package or an upfront specialty restaurant package; if I chose it, I could budget for it & have it paid for before the cruise. & that wouldn't make the price go higher for other passengers.

 

Debbie