Larry Pimentel Post # 4 - Guest Input and Other Metrics

Before I address "Nordski's" probing question about what are the "most important metrics" that guide my decisions and the role that past guest feedback plays, I want to emphasize that Azamara Club Cruises is actually a new "brand" launched into the marketplace in April 2010. We're supported by a corporation that has a global presence which affords us a unique opportunity for a small two-ship fleet to be a global brand. That April 2010 date is the point in time when my "meter" starts to measure our revenue performance and guest satisfaction scores.

I said before that our guests originate from over 40 countries but to be more precise, a little more than half of our business comes from the United States and Canada and we've gained traction in the UK and Australia which represent the majority of the remaining total along with the other international markets. We have a small dedicated sales focus in the UK and Australia and we've been monitoring their outstanding revenue growth. Since 2010 the increase has been powerful, but their market base must increase and their revenue contributions must become sustainable and demonstrate year over year growth. We also have sales representatives in Germany and Brazil along with our sales and marketing efforts being handled by the corporation's global offices in France, China, Italy, Mexico, Singapore, Nordics, and Spain by their dual or tri-branded work force. As a side note, we believe that having an international clientele adds depth and distinction to our onboard ambiance and geniality.

I'll drill down even more and consider the mix of past guests and first-time guests, market-by-market, since growth in both buckets is critical to our long term success. Overall, our past guests represent almost a quarter of our business which is impressive considering that it was only 5% prior to April 2010 and we're eager to see it grow. While very much appreciated for the positive word-of-mouth referral business that it drives, it also implies that we need more awareness from new guests. This includes the many cruise "considerers" that have not selected a cruise brand along with those non-cruisers who have never considered a cruise as a vacation option. With our longer stays, more overnights and night touring we offer boutique hotel land travelers an option to realize their objective of destination immersion. So our challenge is one of building brand awareness and purchase intent. These needs drove my decision to add those two "evolutionary" product inclusions (spirits and AzAmazing Evenings) to enhance the onboard conviviality and provide a tangible destination immersion experience.

Azamara is measured by key performance indicators which include various revenue measurements, expense/cost containment measures, and various quality measures. Each year it is six to eight key measurable items. These are understood by my management team and clearly evaluated by our board.

Of course the majority of you, especially those on the initial October 1st announcement thread, are past Azamara guests who are asking me "why I did what I've done" and represent a very unique subset - "Cruise Critic past guests."

Perhaps you are wondering how much your input drives my decisions when I'm analyzing the objective metrics of the business. They matter to me very much and let me explain how I weigh them. Bill Leiber has provided me with an October 16 analysis of your categorized comments by each participant's user name from the "Big Announcement" thread of October 1, 2012. Without Bill and Andy, there were 137 posters producing 651 responses for an average of 4.75 posts each; however, in actuality 25% of the replies were generated by four (4) users. The number of views has surpassed 34,000!

The origin market mix was 73% US/Canada; 23.5% UK; and 3.5% Other International (Australia, New Zealand and Netherlands). If I consider each of the individual posters as couples and compare that to the year's "double occupancy" target then your unique subset represents less than 1% of the total customer base. It's interesting for me to realize that the majority of the "replies" were driven by a small group. I now understand why it was stated on the thread that "Cruise Critic can be a bit of an echo chamber."

Having said that does not discount your importance to our decision making in our onboard and shoreside operation. Your input provides us with a perspective that I must consider with those from other markets. Different point of views do exists and that is healthy. Remember, that I’m the only CEO in the cruise industry who has a Chief Blogging Officer to monitor your comments and to manage our reputation on the cruise message boards by replacing misinformation with facts. This "Q & A" is the third session and factually we are very engaged with Cruise Critic and clearly more than just about any cruise line.

Your “share of voice” about our onboard product is one of the many that I consider within the matrix of guest comment cards, sorted by market, submitted after every voyage by our guests from over 40 countries as the most significant "marker" for our onboard experience.

I consider the input that I receive from the CBO, who sometimes serves as your ombudsman, to be an "objective" report about your issues with our policies and procedures to ensure that our path-to-purchase is easier, more user-friendly and fair. I think my compromise on the Land Discoveries Savings program is an excellent example along with the reinstatement of the online booking engine. Of course there is more work to do with our website, online shore excursion booking process, and the UK's Azamara website but they are in the works and as I'm known for saying, in a matrix organization like Royal Caribbean it's not like "turning on a light switch."

Simply stated our Cruise Critic past guests are like a window into our soul and a critical component of awakening our minds to achieve the full potential from the promise of Azamara Club Cruises' deliverables.

...id like to pick up a few points.

Firstly, sorry to disagree in my first sentence, but azamara isn't a new brand. It is a fledgling brand, born from another. There is a huge difference. You have enjoyed the benefits of a parent with deep pockets as you grew, and your profile has been enhanced no end by your loyal (not just on this board) flock. To call yourself a new brand is simply wrong and misleading. Any brand that changes so radically without being able to absorb serious loss lead, as I'm sure you did early on when you changed tack, would go to the wall. You're back in the same spot now i believe.

"Nordskis probing question" is very valid and was prompted by myself in another post. We've all read that the enhancements were driven by feedback you and your team have received, but i don't believe your answer reflects the data capture. Can we see some detail please?

"If you cant measure it, you cant improve it". (Im quoting me not you). Id like to see the measure. How did you determine there was an appetite for this change? Otherwise it really is a "blink" response, but not from us.

You are quite correct that the thread got a bit, well, to use a scottish word, daft. Disproportionate. Which actually did not help our crusade for answers.

In terms of buckets and improvements, can I respectfully suggest that you need to really improve your web, social media and booking engine efficiencies. They do not reflect your brand equity.

I get everything you say. KPIs, share of voice, etc. i get it. I really do.

But sadly i am still at a bit of a loss. I love azamara and everything it stands for, so much so i spent an hour with Richard on quest asking about your recruitment and retention, inducements, brand culture etc etc.

I would love to say we will be able to cruise with you again, but sadly, i don't believe this will be the case, simply because your price point does not meet me as a consumer, and I'm sorry to add, I think you may have more of this in the pipeline than you realise.

Best. David

[quote name='150edmiston']...id like to pick up a few points.

Firstly, sorry to disagree in my first sentence, but azamara isn't a new brand. It is a fledgling brand, born from another. There is a huge difference. You have enjoyed the benefits of a parent with deep pockets as you grew, and your profile has been enhanced no end by your loyal (not just on this board) flock. To call yourself a new brand is simply wrong and misleading. Any brand that changes so radically without being able to absorb serious loss lead, as I'm sure you did early on when you changed tack, would go to the wall. You're back in the same spot now i believe.

"Nordskis probing question" is very valid and was prompted by myself in another post. We've all read that the enhancements were driven by feedback you and your team have received, but i don't believe your answer reflects the data capture. Can we see some detail please?

"If you cant measure it, you cant improve it". (Im quoting me not you). Id like to see the measure. How did you determine there was an appetite for this change? Otherwise it really is a "blink" response, but not from us.

You are quite correct that the thread got a bit, well, to use a scottish word, daft. Disproportionate. Which actually did not help our crusade for answers.

In terms of buckets and improvements, can I respectfully suggest that you need to really improve your web, social media and booking engine efficiencies. They do not reflect your brand equity.

I get everything you say. KPIs, share of voice, etc. i get it. I really do.

But sadly i am still at a bit of a loss. I love azamara and everything it stands for, so much so i spent an hour with Richard on quest asking about your recruitment and retention, inducements, brand culture etc etc.

I would love to say we will be able to cruise with you again, but sadly, i don't believe this will be the case, simply because your price point does not meet me as a consumer, and I'm sorry to add, I think you may have more of this in the pipeline than you realise.

Best. David[/quote]

valid, pertinent, respectfully and eloquently stated. excellent commentary to what we've heard so far from Mr. Pimintel.

As the poser of the original question, I want to belatedly thank Mr. Pimentel for his reply.

We've just finished what we do best, cruising on the Quest, and didn't use valuable Internet minutes to check posts on CC. As an aside, I wonder if increasing bandwidth onboard will really improve access speed, or will it be like motor traffic? Build more roads and cars will fill them.

Interesting analysis by Bill Leiber re: the statistics on poster reaction here on CC.

My thanks to both.