What is Celebrity Becoming?

[SusieV]

From all these changes, I can't even figure out how the brand is trying to market itself anymore.

 

I've been really disappointed to see a lot of new things changing. Kids in the T pool? "Less formality" and tableside prep in the specialty restaurants? Possible change to open seating?

 

We were already sorry to see the end of informal nights and the midnight buffet- I know not all will agree but we really liked those touches, as well as the gourmet bites in the evening.

 

We love cruising but I wonder if it is going to be the vacation we are looking for anymore. We really enjoyed the traditional formal atmosphere of Celebrity with all the little touches that made it feel special, but I don't think that is what Celebrity is becoming now.

[BBsails]

Kids in the T-pool? Since when?

[jackdiamond]

When was your last Celebrity cruise? Also, on what ship did you cruise? Additionally, what was your cabin designation?

[Texed]

From all these changes, I can't even figure out how the brand is trying to market itself anymore.

 

You've got a good point Susie. :confused: But, it is still pretty good. :)

[usha]

TEXED, I think you might be waffling;), but I agree...:D

[SusieV]

When was your last Celebrity cruise? Also, on what ship did you cruise? Additionally, what was your cabin designation?

 

My cruises are in my signature. Why does it matter what cabin I was in? But for reference, my last cruise was in February 2008 on Constellation and we had an FV.

[ghstudio]

perhaps no more midnight buffet....but it was replaced on the Constellation with a fruit buffet one night around the pool....and a chocolate buffet on another night. I think that's a fair trade....

 

I think RCL is trying to position itself as the quality family cruise line.....and Celebrity is trying to position itself to compete with Holland American and some of Princess as the "fewer children and a little more class" line. Of course with the new huge ships, the differences cloud....

[SusieV]

perhaps no more midnight buffet....but it was replaced on the Constellation with a fruit buffet one night around the pool....and a chocolate buffet on another night. I think that's a fair trade....

 

I think RCL is trying to position itself as the quality family cruise line.....and Celebrity is trying to position itself to compete with Holland American and some of Princess as the "fewer children and a little more class" line. Of course with the new huge ships, the differences cloud....

 

That's how I thought X was trying to position itself in the past. The lines seem awfully blurry now that I've seen a few people mention seeing signs that permit children in the T pool.

[Jeka]

My cruises are in my signature. Why does it matter what cabin I was in? But for reference, my last cruise was in February 2008 on Constellation and we had an FV.

 

Wow, 14 months ago, a lot of things have happened in that time, most importantly the economy has tanked.

[Ma Bell]

Susie,

 

I would say you don't need to worry. As always you need to see for yourself.

[ikelmay]

I would suggest that slowly but surely there are more similarities than differences between cruise lines than there used to be. As soon as one idea is proven to work successfully, it's copied by the other mainstream lines - e.g. restrictions on smoking, increases in balconies, flexible dining.

 

I'm finding it increasingly difficult to distinguish the 'standout' qualities on each line and as a recent cruiser, I wonder how more experienced cruisers feel comparing a line such as Celebrity to 10 years ago.

[Alaska-forget-me-not]

I just got back from a Panama Canal cruise on the Mercury and it was pretty formal.

There's a pretty large sign that says kids under 16 can't use the T-pool and it asks them to use the family pools on deck 11. Most of the time I had the T-pool to myself.

Everyone who had meals in the main dining room dressed for them, even breakfast and lunch. There was open seating for breakfast and lunch, but dinner had assigned seating. The service and food was impeccable.

There was a buffet available until 1:00am, and room service was available 24 hours at no charge.

I had the most awesome trip on the Mercury going through the Canal.

The only folks I heard griping about service, etc, were the ones who were mean to the staff and couldn't be pleased no matter what. We all know there is at least one in every crowd. By the way, those people were removed from the situation, so as not to bother us, who were enjoying ourselves.

Again, maybe it's different on each ship and I just lucked out by sailing on the Mercury.

I certainly hope Celebrity keeps offering luxury style cruises at affordable prices.

[j!m]

if you are going to psition yourself as a "luxury" or even an "upscale" vendor you need the revenue stream to provide the appropriate level of service and amenities. and, it requires attention to detail.

 

there may have been a time when X was "upscale" but, at least in our opinion they were never a "luxury" product. leave that to seabourne and crystal.

 

over capacity, the economy or both have changed things for the cruise industry. its better to have people on board for $699 per week than to sail with empty cabins. but if prices are reduced costs need to be reduced also to maintain profits.

 

we agree there have been changes from say,10 years ago, most notably in the level of service but often furnishings that need replacing arent etc.

 

it all starts at the top and i guess with their scramble to maintain profits and cash flow, the attention to the little things has slipped a bit.

 

we continue to enjoy the product and do sail with X, we always have a good trip but we feel it was better "back when". lately, we have been trying Az and find it a better product in terms of service etc.

 

i think susie is correct, so do a lot of others, just read some of the comments posted here. the real annoyance is we know they can do better and wish they would. if that means higher prices so be it.

[lysolqn]

In light of the competiton's appeal to the masses with the constant introduction of new cruising innovations and more reasonable pricing, I think X found itself in a position where continuing to market itself as an upscale, more traditional, more formal cruise line with a loyal base that appreciates excellent service and equally excellent dining just wasn't enough to keep its ships full and its bottom line in the black. I suspect Azamara came into being to fill that particular upscale niche for RCI (something about which many CC members were rightly concerned when word of Azamara was first made public), thereby allowing X to slowly evolve into more of an all things to all people mainstream line that could readily compete in today's market. We've noticed a number of changes over the years but despite those not always welcomed changes, still think X is a step above the competition with respect to service, food and particularly, general onboard ambiance.

[Bridge Maven]

When Celebrity made the decision to increase its passenger capacity as much as they did, they knew they wouldn't be able to fill their ships by charging more than other mass market cruise lines. So they created Azamara for people who are still willing to pay more for a better product and made Celebrity into a more mass market product. The only difference between Celebrity and Royal Caribbean is that Royal Caribbean is geared to a younger population who enjoy an active lifestyle, while Celebrity is geared to older passengers who would prefer to entertain themselves.

[Infi]

I would suggest that slowly but surely there are more similarities than differences between cruise lines than there used to be. As soon as one idea is proven to work successfully, it's copied by the other mainstream lines - e.g. restrictions on smoking, increases in balconies, flexible dining.

I'm finding it increasingly difficult to distinguish the 'standout' qualities on each line and as a recent cruiser, I wonder how more experienced cruisers feel comparing a line such as Celebrity to 10 years ago.

 

Exactly. One of the few things that distinguishes Celebrity right now from its most direct competitors (which I believe are HAL and Princess) is the lack of anytime dining. In the past, Celebrity used to be known for its superior food (and heavily touted Michel Roux to this end) and service. I feel like that image isn't as prevalent anymore, though the service and food are still quite good.

I think Celebrity, too, is a bit confused about its niche right now - do they go with the increasingly casual atmosphere of cruising (anytime dining, 24hour buffets) to try and attract new cruisers/be more mainstream OR do they try to remain a little more upscale for their fans who have come to expect that experience? It's a tough call.

 

As someone who has been cruising Celebrity since the beginning, they have changed a lot. But what line hasn't, really? Regardless, Celebrity is still my first choice when it comes to cruising, and will continue to be, barring some horrific change.

[CathyCruises]

I think if you guys check pricing, you will see that Celebrity is MUCH less expensive than HAL or Princess, for example, for similar itineraries. I am talking half as much to sail the Med on Solstice in some instances. I booked an 11 day Med cruise in a balcony cabin for $1399--how much lower could it possibly go? My point is that I think they do a fantastic job for what they charge--comparable and then some to other lines charging much more. There are some itineraries I would love to try on Oceania, for example, but I just can't justify paying triple for the same length trip when I can get a brand new ship at such a deal. So if they have to make some changes to be able to offer these deals, so be it. I have been sailing Celebrity since 1996 and to be completely honest it seems almost identical to me.

 

Cathy

[terrierjohn]

Exactly. One of the few things that distinguishes Celebrity right now from its most direct competitors (which I believe are HAL and Princess) is the lack of anytime dining. In the past, Celebrity used to be known for its superior food (and heavily touted Michel Roux to this end) and service. I feel like that image isn't as prevalent anymore, though the service and food are still quite good.

Only sailed on X once but thought the food was great.

I think Celebrity, too, is a bit confused about its niche right now - do they go with the increasingly casual atmosphere of cruising (anytime dining, 24hour buffets) to try and attract new cruisers/be more mainstream OR do they try to remain a little more upscale for their fans who have come to expect that experience? It's a tough call.

Anytime dining does not need to be more casual, possibly more relaxed but still fairly formal.

 

As someone who has been cruising Celebrity since the beginning, they have changed a lot. But what line hasn't, really? Regardless, Celebrity is still my first choice when it comes to cruising, and will continue to be, barring some horrific change.

I think the main issue for X is that of capacity, once the fifth Solstice ship is in service it will be well over double it's current capacity; X have already announced that Galaxy is going, I wonder how many more they will release before 2012.

As a Princess stalwart I don't think you should worry too much about the introduction of a flexible dining option; just as long as X maintains the standards it currently has in it's traditional DR.

As someone who has only just re-started watching the Celebrity board I am very surprised how much it is dominated by the Solstice brand which currently only has one ship. If this is translated into bookings then a lot of the others are going to be sailing part empty. With the extra capacity and the credit crunch Celebrity may just become the cheapest cruising option.

[hondorner]

...lately, we have been trying Az and find it a better product in terms of service etc.

 

...So they created Azamara for people who are still willing to pay more for a better product and made Celebrity into a more mass market product....

 

...I suspect Azamara came into being to fill that particular upscale niche for RCI...thereby allowing X to slowly evolve into more of an all things to all people mainstream line that could readily compete in today's market.

 

In the face of so many traditional cruisers wanting Celebrity to stay with traditional dining and strict dress codes, it's ironic that Azamara is the upscale, premium member of the family, when it has true open dining and no formal nights. There's a message there...

[cruzeluver]

Just off the Connie.....

 

Children were not allowed in the T-pool. Signs still state must be over 18, and I saw crew members ask children to leave more than once.

 

MDR still more formal than Carnival, NCL or RCCL, and guests retained the dress codes after dinner.

 

Tableside prep still happening in Oceanliners.

 

The aforementioned fruit and chocolate buffets were very nice and well-attended.

 

In all matters of service we found the Constellation to be at least a couple steps ahead of the mass market lines we have sailed.

[Ma Bell]

The message is they have smaller ships, different itineraries and a different focus. It's nice to have a choice.

[pyrogy]

Any attempt to equate formal nights and fixed dining with "upscale" or "premium" or "luxury" is misguided. Virtually all luxury or upscale cruise lines do NOT have these features.

 

Formal nights and fixed dining can probably be attached to a "traditional cruise" experience, but thats about it.

 

Also, we all have to remember that Cruise Critic Board posters represent a very small minority of cruisers. By nature, these boards will attract more opinionated cruisers. The majority of Celebrity's customers might not care about these issues. I am not saying that is definitely the case, but it is possible.

[Bridge Maven]

In the face of so many traditional cruisers wanting Celebrity to stay with traditional dining and strict dress codes, it's ironic that Azamara is the upscale, premium member of the family, when it has true open dining and no formal nights. There's a message there...

 

I think the message is that the Celebrity passengers that Azamara is trying to attract enjoyed formal nights and traditional dining when that was consistent with their lifestyle, and now prefer a cruise experience that is consistent with their current lifestyle.

[Ma Bell]

There are obviously people who prefer a traditional style cruise and those who don't. There are also many who can enjoy either but would still prefer to have the choice. I wouldn't presume to decide what everyone should do.

 

My concern is that some people seem to think that every single cruiseline needs to be exactly the same.

[bob278]

There are obviously people who prefer a traditional style cruise and those who don't. There are also many who can enjoy either but would still prefer to have the choice. I wouldn't presume to decide what everyone should do.

 

My concern is that some people seem to think that every single cruiseline needs to be exactly the same.

 

Unfortunately, it seems that it's the cruise lines themselves that are minimizing the differences. It may be that they perceive that's what the cruising public wants, but it is a shame. It could get to the point that you have to look at the logo on the ship to tell what line you are on. That will be a sad day, indeed.