Rccl answer on EOS Johnny Rockets

[Cruiserx6]

Why do so many peolple take a negative attitude and not believe what RCI says and threaten not to cruise with them again because of a $3.95 charge. You do not have to go to Johnny Rockets to eat. You have plenty of other options.

 

If you have ever observed some people abusing what they gave you for "free" maybe you would understand. People let their kids go there and take up space and just keep ordering food and wasting it and when some one else comes along they can not get a seat and have to wait for a long time for service. I have seen "adults"?? order 5 items and waste most of it. What a shame some people are so greedy and inconsiderate. That it why the put the charge on.

 

So the people that complain the loudest don't always have all the facts or maybe they are the abusers. Join the Crown and Anchor (it's free) and you will get a free meal at JR's. If that isn't enough then use the other dining options or pay the price. We are paying for the people that are selfish. Like so many other thing in this world. We pay for many people on welfare when they can work & won't or people that are tired of working and claim disability and collect social security. I know people like that don't you?

 

So please don't always shoot the messenger, most times there is a reason. Don't you think that RCI has heard the feedback and assesed the situation before making this move. Come on light up.

 

Go cruising and have fun. $3.95 really. How many times do you need to ear at JR's?

 

Carol

[MszKitty]

Why do so many peolple take a negative attitude and not believe what RCI says and threaten not to cruise with them again because of a $3.95 charge. You do not have to go to Johnny Rockets to eat. You have plenty of other options.

 

If you have ever observed some people abusing what they gave you for "free" maybe you would understand. People let their kids go there and take up space and just keep ordering food and wasting it and when some one else comes along they can not get a seat and have to wait for a long time for service. I have seen "adults"?? order 5 items and waste most of it. What a shame some people are so greedy and inconsiderate. That it why the put the charge on.

 

So the people that complain the loudest don't always have all the facts or maybe they are the abusers. Join the Crown and Anchor (it's free) and you will get a free meal at JR's. If that isn't enough then use the other dining options or pay the price. We are paying for the people that are selfish. Like so many other thing in this world. We pay for many people on welfare when they can work & won't or people that are tired of working and claim disability and collect social security. I know people like that don't you?

 

So please don't always shoot the messenger, most times there is a reason. Don't you think that RCI has heard the feedback and assesed the situation before making this move. Come on light up.

 

Go cruising and have fun. $3.95 really. How many times do you need to ear at JR's?

 

Carol

I agree....no one is forcing anyone to pay to eat at Johnny Rockets. Sheesh...there are plenty of other eating options available if you don't want to pay extra.

 

And speaking of abusing the "free" food. How about those people that fill up their plates in the buffet but leave half the food uneaten? I wouldn't be surprised if they started charging for that too someday. People are so wasteful.

[Harley-Davidson_Family]

Join the Crown and Anchor (it's free) and you will get a free meal at JR's.

Carol

We are Crown and Anchor members but they won't let our kids join until they turn 18. Therefore, we have to pay $3.95 for each of the kids to eat there. That is more than a kids meal at most places.

 

My problem is that is will cost us $16 each time we want to just stop in for fries and onion rings (which we did several times on the Navigator). This issue isn't just about one person paying $3.95. There are a lot of families on these larger ships. If the problem is about kids taking up tables and wasting food then surely there is a better way to deal with that.

 

For RCCL and others to just say that you should just get over it and go somewhere else that is free just doesn't get it. :mad:

 

The "free" meals are part of the all inclusive vacation that we pay thousands of dollars for. We all know that RCCL said it was about crowd control not money. Therefore, there is no need to freak out and say that RCCL is going to raise the price of the cruise to cover the cost if they don't inforce the cover charge. That just doesn't make andy since. Sheesh!:eek:

 

What is next? Are they going to start charging for the shows to control crowds?

[MszKitty]

I've got an idea.....maybe RCCL should just remove the Johnny Rockets altogether. Then they don't have to charge for the food and people don't need to complain when they do charge.

[Trlbnd1]

It's unfortunate of the charge of $3.95 pp at JR's. We are CC's members and would use coupons if given. Would I stop sailing with RCCL because of price change-no. There are other food alternatives on board. I'm just not going to lose sleep over it...

[lvcruiser]

You can argue for or against the stance RCCL has taken on the JR issue all you want and it won't do any good. Instead, I suggest you begin looking at the bigger picture that RCI is beginning to paint and begin thinking about what to do about it.

 

Seven months ago when the two week "test" on two ships began, which then extended to eight weeks, which then became permanent and extended to all ships that have a JR in the fleet, there were at least a half dozen threads on this forum very similar to this one, bipolar arguments about whether or not RCCL should charge for every little thing or be all inclusive. Many people, including myself, expressed the opinion that we would be happier if RCCL raised the price of cruising back to what it was 15 years ago, provided they also brought back everything they used to have and make the cruises as nearly all inclusive as they used to be. Arguments were made about why the cruise lines nickel and dime their passengers on an increasing number of things after embarking, with the general concensus believing this has been caused by 9/11 more than anything else, forcing the cruise lines to reduce their prices to attract more customers to the point of not remaining satisfactorily profitable without finding other avenues to generate income - hence, the nickel and diming. In addition, it was noted that there is much more on today's ships than there was 15 years ago and arguments were made on whether or not ala carte pricing for things such as the rock climbing wall would be a good idea provided the appropriate cost would be deducted from the cruise fare, thereby ensuring that the users of said venues were actually the ones paying for it rather than everyone onboard. I stated on several occasions earlier this year that my biggest concern wasn't being charged $3.95 at JR's; it was the thought that this is not the last time we will see the cruise industry get further away from the all inclusive vacation it used to be and find more and more things for which they can charge. An argument was posed that as long as the fares remain low, there was nothing wrong with this, and I agreed with one stipulation: I didn't mind paying for my vacation ala carte provided the price stayed low. But what will happen when the industry as a whole recovers from the slump they have been in for the past several years and have the ability to raise their cruise fares to a more profitably acceptable level as in the past?

 

Well, that time is now upon us. Have you checked next year's cruise prices lately, especially after the discontinuance of discounts? The cruise industry has made their recovery with full or nearly full cruises on every ship and as any smart industry will do, they are now raising their prices and allowing supply and demand to run its course. I predict the cruise prices will be back up to their highest point within the next two to three years. But here's the kick in the teeth: do you think RCCL will drop the surcharge for JR or reduce the price to eat at Chops or Portofino back to its original price? Or instead, do you think they will find more things to make ala carte, such as the rock climbing wall, the inline skating or the ice skating? Obviously, they will continue to charge the surcharges all the while continuing to raise the cruise fares, making more and more money in the process as long as we, the sailing public, the passengers, the life blood of any business allows it to happen.

 

The problem with this whole dissertation is that the general public WILL allow it to continue happening because there are always new cattle to slaughter. The old timers that remember what it used to be like, what cruise fares used to include and how little one had to pay on a cruise after the final payment was made might complain and even balk at paying these new surcharges because it is human nature to resist change and no one wants to pay for something that used to be free. But they aren't the target audience the cruise lines are going after. Instead, RCCL is now catering to the younger set who doesn't have the experience in cruising to realize just how much less they are getting dollar for dollar than their predecessors. And as long as there are new sheep to shear, the process will go on unabated.

 

Having a $3.95 charge to eat a 3,000 calorie meal isn't going to make or break my cruise coming up this weekend on the Navigator. But the bigger picture and what may lie down the road for us habitual cruisers worries me. I have absolutely no problem with RCCL or any other company making a fair profit - that's part of life. But it seems the cruise industry is about to begin double dipping and that is something the general public should not allow.

[bUU]

Why do so many peolple take a negative attitude and not believe what RCI says and threaten not to cruise with them again because of a $3.95 charge.

I think some folks perhaps use hyperbole to make their discontent sound more extreme than it really is. "Gosh, those Yankees suck!" You can be sure that almost no New Yorker really believes that, but you will probably hear it said this morning somewhere in the New York area. Hyperbole.

 

However, I think the issue is more a matter that many folks hold proprietary feelings towards service providers they've received good service from.

 

I've seen a lot of this sort of thing, with regard to Walt Disney World. There are numerous web site assailing every sound business decision Disney makes . Does anyone else remember the national campaign to "save Mr. Toad's Wild Ride"? Poor JD must have spent hundreds of hours of his time railing against that closure, because of the proprietary feelings he felt towards a specific business. (Of course, the attraction that replaced it is, to this day, more heavily patronized than the old ride ever was. However, that doesn't matter... see below.)

 

I've seen the same thing develop between the general public and television networks, book authors (ask me about the RJ deathwatch), toy manufacturers -- even utilities like cable television and cellular telephone service providers.

 

I've had the same feelings myself, at times. I had a physician move away. I was truly upset and said some rather base things to his receptionist when she delivered the news. However, in retrospect, it was his life, and just because he was my doctor for so long, didn't earn me any rights. He probably wanted to raise his children in the country, and I ended up having to start over with a new GP. Oh well.

 

What's really interesting is that these proprietary feelings almost NEVER develop when the service provider has been mediocre, but rather develop almost exclusively when the service provider has exceeded expectations. People want good things to stay the same -- it's just human nature.

 

Your explanation about the possible rationales for this business decision is lucid, and emminently valid, IMHO. That doesn't mean bunk in the context of proprietary feelings. In that context, "why" doesn't matter. I sure didn't care why my doctor moved away. Discussion of "why" is irrelevant, since the explanation exists on a different plane than the question. The explanation is business; the question is human.

 

I vigorously disagree with your guess that the complainers are the biggest abusers. I think that the complainers are those that care the most about the service, and see this policy as a restriction on their personal enjoyment of it.

 

In a way, I can readily believe that the imposition of a surcharge, on this specific service, especially after it has been surcharge-free in the past, would feel punative to anyone who derived any significant level of enjoyment from the service. I would feel the same way if they started charging a surcharge on the gym. I lost 100 pounds in 2001-2 and struggle every day of my life to maintain my hard-earned fitness. Even though I've not used the gym aboard ship yet (my first cruise didn't have a gym, regardless), I am already heavily invested -- emotionally invested -- in that service, since it represents so much in terms of my personal situation. I feel that any outrage I feel as a result of the introduction of a surcharge there would be justified as emotion. By the same token, I recognize that if such a business decision was made, that it wouldn't be personal, and my feelings about the decision wouldn't indicate whether the decision is sound or not. As a matter of fact, I would almost surely pay the surcharge, so if it could be assumed that I'm typical (bad assumption, I suppose) it would mystify me, as a businessman, why there isn't one.

 

You really hit the nail on the head though, when you wrote about shooting the messenger: The folks running RCI are, by all appearances, fine professionals applying their expertise in the best interests of the owners.

[bUU]

Ivcruiser: From what I've read, I think there is one thing missing from your analysis. The surcharging need not be a matter of making up for the low fares. Pricing typically is established based on knowledge of the market, knowledge of the customer-base, etc. Therefore, it makes sense that the low fares were a reflection of what the market was willing to pay for (probably in response to 9/11, but also in response to the anemic economy of the GWB-era). Similarly, it makes sense that the surcharging was a reflection of what the market was willing to pay for aboard ship. This are fundamental economic conclusions, and there is no reason to think that anything has changed. If the economy is less anemic, then that would only relieve downward pressure on prices. It need not have any impact on the balance between fares and surcharges. More likely, a stronger economy, barring other considerations, will simply increase both fares and surcharges.

 

What would change the balance would be a change in the market itself. However, the initial swing towards lower fares and an increase in surcharges seems to have stemmed from the change in the market a decade ago. And I don't think we can say it was some amorphous "change" but rather, more specifically, an expansion, and even more specifically, an expansion whereby the customer-base was expanded to include folks who weren't as affluent. The more affluent customer-base is still there, and perhaps even a little larger than before, but what really changed is that less affluent folks (like my wife and I) entered the market, and products were offered that we could afford, whereas in the past we couldn't afford anything the market had to offer.

 

So, unless the market itself was to shrink, losing its less-affluent customers, I don't see any reason to believe that the practice of surcharging will reverse itself. That is, unless, overall affluence increases, i.e., we all get richer. That doesn't seem to be the trend now, as the US standard of living has decreased over the past years.

 

I don't think the public will "allow it to continue" because "there are always new cattle to slaughter." Rather, they public will allow it to continue because the perceive the service provided to be the best value available to them, overall. The public doesn't behave like a labor union, striking and engaging in collective bargaining with the some Supreme Council of product and service providers. Rather, each member of the public behaves as is best for themselves, as they see it at the moment. There is no question that business, itself, capitalizes on this open-market structure to find the most profitable means of offering their products and services. This is a fundamental Republican principle, but one that even many Democrats support. I don't see it changing anytime soon.

[Ocean Boy]

And speaking of abusing the "free" food. How about those people that fill up their plates in the buffet but leave half the food uneaten? I wouldn't be surprised if they started charging for that too someday. People are so wasteful.

This sort of reminds me of elementary school where one kid would mis-behave and everyone had to stay in for recess. If the concern us about waste then find a way to deal with the offenders. I am sick and tired of being the one to pay the price for the actions of others. My father brought me up with strange idea that you are held accountable for your own actions. Now I have to pay the price for someone who leaves a half eaten heaping plate of food on the table. Makes you wonder.....

[Ocean Boy]

I vigorously disagree with your guess that the complainers are the biggest abusers. I think that the complainers are those that care the most about the service, and see this policy as a restriction on their personal enjoyment of it.

Bicker, I completely agree with you there. And I think that you can expand that beyond the JR issue to RCI as a whole. People who really like the company and the product that the company offers, or offered, are the ones likely to be the most reactive to change and to take things personally..

 

I think that an analogy to your physician moving really holds here. The relationship between a patient and physician is entensely personal. And in your case you probably felt somewhat betrayed by the fact that he would move and end that relationship. You made the relationship a personal one. Often times physicians feel betrayed by patients. The physician starts to take the relationship personally and can feel quite hurt when a patient changes doctors. When it comes to cruising the level of service tends to be intensely personal also and we start to feel that a relationship exists between us and the company. Of course, from RCI's perspective the relationship is a business one. WE make it a personal one. That causes us to take actions by the company quite personally. That can lead to statement being made on these boards that some have little comprehension of. People feel betrayed by a company that never had a "personal" interest in them in the first place. It is very much like people becoming attached to their waiters, cabin attendents, and bar tenders aboard ship. We loose sight of the business relationship and make it personal.

 

The JR issue does tend to be a bit of a personal one for me. When we first started cruising the midnight buffet was a place for my family to all meet together and catch up before either going to bed or on to other activities. It was our tradition. As the buffets disappeared we discovered JR's and that became our place to meet and catch up with each other. That became our new tradition. Then the charge came along and suddenly it wasn't such a good place for five people to meet up anymore. The charge for five people over seven nights does add up. So now I guess we move on to something else for our end of the evening get to gether. I think you get the picture.

[mllyle]

I will not say I agree with the extra cost of having a burger at Jonny Rockets, but I can see why they are charging for it. I was on the Voyager back in August and when you are up in Jonny Rockets at 11:00pm having an evening Milk Shake, the place is full of pre-teens/teens who are only there because they can have free fries. I saw on several occasions a child asking for a soda or milk shake and told that it was extra, they changed there minds, and just ate the fries. It is things like that, that do bring up prices, the people who take advantage of free stuff.

[bUU]

I am sick and tired of being the one to pay the price for the actions of others.

Amen. I think, though, that society needs get its own house in order before we can expect businesses to operate counter to their own best interest. We cannot even get citizens to voluntarily comply with copyright laws, tax laws, traffic laws, etc., without enforcement that adversely affects law-abiding folks as much as law-breakers (digital copy protection, tax witholding, holiday-weekend highway checkpoints).

[bUU]

So now I guess we move on to something else for our end of the evening get to gether.

In a way, I find that to be a very healthy and positive characteristic of the market: We're cruising this year precisely because the rate at which we were able to find "new traditions" to embrace at Walt Disney World subsided, to the point where we weren't driven back there, to enjoy those "old traditions" yet-again. Many of the experts in consumer marketing have noted that the key to success in consumer markets is either to have something new to offer every year, or at least seem to. While "traditions" appeal to many, and many feel that traditions appeal to them, more and more, people are seeking "new traditions" (which of course aren't traditions at all).

[bUU]

mllyle raises an interesting point: "Taking advantage of the free stuff." I think, to a great extent, cruise ships do promote that there is so much free stuff. RCI surely doesn't claim to offer an all-exclusive experience, but they do advertise you can eat as much as you wish. I can't fault, except on the basis of health and fitness :), anyone for capitalizing on that offer.

 

However, the point is still there: How much does the provision of an aspect of the service rely on the fact that the business case for that aspect of the service factors in "add-on" sales, such as beverages as JRs. I don't think that can be dismissed out-of-hand. If folks stop buying drinks in the casino, I think it will have some impact, at least on how much is invested in the casino. No one should feel an obligation to engage in "add-on" sales, when patronizing an aspect of the service where much of what is offered is free. However, by the same token, where a structural change to the service will result in more "add-on" sales without decreasing other revenues as much, thereby resulting in greater long-term profitability, it makes sense for the business to make that change. Cover charges in night-clubs, for example.

[Ocean Boy]

I will not say I agree with the extra cost of having a burger at Jonny Rockets, but I can see why they are charging for it. I was on the Voyager back in August and when you are up in Jonny Rockets at 11:00pm having an evening Milk Shake, the place is full of pre-teens/teens who are only there because they can have free fries. I saw on several occasions a child asking for a soda or milk shake and told that it was extra, they changed there minds, and just ate the fries. It is things like that, that do bring up prices, the people who take advantage of free stuff.

However, If the teens are in JR's eating fries is that not better than having them hijack elevators, roaming passageways loudly on cabin decks or, worse, defacing areas of the ship and being destructive? Remember the fire on Explorer's sports deck? Not that I am saying they would all be doing that but we have all read the stories. If all it takes to keep them happy and out of mischief is some french fries then I would think that the cost for RCI would be well worth it from a monitary standpoint.

[bUU]

Kinda OT: Are there french fries available at either Windjammer or Seaview Cafe?

[Ocean Boy]

Windjammer has fries only during lunch hours. There is no Seaview Cafe on Voyager class ships. Cafe Prominade has neither fries nor burgers.

[MszKitty]

II've seen a lot of this sort of thing, with regard to Walt Disney World. There are numerous web site assailing every sound business decision Disney makes . Does anyone else remember the national campaign to "save Mr. Toad's Wild Ride"? Poor JD must have spent hundreds of hours of his time railing against that closure, because of the proprietary feelings he felt towards a specific business. (Of course, the attraction that replaced it is, to this day, more heavily patronized than the old ride ever was. However, that doesn't matter... see below.)

Whaaaat???? :eek: They got rid of "Mr Toad's Wild Ride"??? Thats it!...I'll never go to Disney World ever again!

 

LOL !!:D

[bUU]

So does that make Disney the "worst company in the world"? :rolleyes:

 

:D :D

[MszKitty]

However, If the teens are in JR's eating fries is that not better than having them hijack elevators, roaming passageways loudly on cabin decks or, worse, defacing areas of the ship and being destructive?

 

That would depend on if you wanted a seat in Johnny Rockets or if you were trying to get on the hijacked elevator.

 

Just trying to add a little levity here....LOL

[MszKitty]

So does that make Disney the "worst company in the world"?

 

You might want to ask Brad1185 that question....LOL

[bUU]

Just trying to add a little levity here....LOL

Me too. :D

[Ocean Boy]

That would depend on if you wanted a seat in Johnny Rockets or if you were trying to get on the hijacked elevator.

 

Just trying to add a little levity here....LOL

And I did find it funny, too! :D

 

And for both you and bicker.... I think Brad was also trying to be funny. You know, making an outrageous statement after admitting to stopping his medication. Then again on second thought.... ;)

[MszKitty]

And I did find it funny, too! :D

 

And for both you and bicker.... I think Brad was also trying to be funny. You know, making an outrageous statement after admitting to stopping his medication. Then again on second thought.... ;)

Hmmm...I'm not quite so sure about that. He has posted pretty much the same thoughts on "another" message board and it didn't appear to be meant as humor on those boards either.

 

Brad1185...if it was meant to be humor, maybe a little :), or LOL, might make us understand it better. ;)

[Firefighterhoop]

As of today, All Ships will start charging for it now!