LetsGetWet!

I don't particularly like ripped denim fyi. But do note that by the logic you just laid out in determining costs - let's see, Paint, lets say $50, canvas and other bits say $200. So that Picasso should cost no more than $250 right?

 

I mean c'mon you don't price anything you buy by just the cost of material and manufacturing. There's a mark up, there's design, there's brand... You're just being silly.

Not nearly as silly as someone who will willingly fork over hundreds of dollars for a pair of jeans. Reminds me of that old quote attributed to P. T. Barnum...

As always this is the internet, and this is just my opinion, do with it as you will.

Well, at least after making more completely unsubstantiated & general statements like "every modern fashion standard" and similar gobbledygook you at least admit it's nothing more than your opinion vs. being any kind of factual statements.

I note you also at least added pants to your previous "nothing dressier than jeans" claim. And, I think it's the hoity-toity ones who are too ignorant to realize that Dallas is quite cosmopolitan and has more fining dining establishments per capita than most US cities who make the kind of snobbish statements you just did. As for travel and experiencing other cities I'll wager I've done at least as much and likely more and enjoy the lifetime airline top-tier status my extensive traveling earned me.

Of course, this is the internet and it's just my opinion, so do with it as you wish. :rolleyes:

Celebrity says they are "Modern Luxury" being modern means being casual yet presentable.

Really? According to who's definition is that. I'm pretty sure that you just made that up!

No one wears suits and ties to dinner anymore I don't care if you're at Mortons steakhouse or a michelin star restaurant. Nice jeans and maybe a sport coat is as dressy as it gets.

Again, really? "Nice jeans" is most definitely NOT "as dressy as it gets" around Dallas. If "nice jeans" is as dressy as you ever get, you'll find yourself out of place often, and refused admittance on occasion.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk

It's not younger cruisers that oppose dressing for formal nights but the recently retired. Which is probably why they keep quoting Dylan ('The times they are a changin'). Really? :rolleyes:

Haha! Glad I'm not the only one who's noticed that! ;) "Hey, relax the dress code because we don't want to get dressed up - Oops, I mean because THEY don't want to get dressed up - those young professionals that you should be trying to attract!"

We get dressed up to go out at night (dinner, theater, club) so we'd do that on a ship as well. :cool: Realistically, most people no longer "live" in jeans.

That's us too - and that's not going to change in a few years when we retire. Having said that, I have no problem with those who don't desire to dress and simply pick a different venue on formal nights. It's the "I'm not getting dressed up but I WILL eat in the MDR on formal night" crowd that I can't stand - but that crowd mainly exists on CC, not so much when on board the ship.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk

One has to remember that the end of cruise report is a significant deciding factor on staff future employment and no staff member wants adverse reporting.

On one occasion we did see a teenager wearing a baseball cap and graphic slogan T shirt on one formal night but a quiet word after dinner saw the cap disappear and a plain T shirt next formal night.

Hope that helps

That is exactly why I've started having a cordial discussion early in the cruise with the maitre d and letting them know that we appreciate the dress standards being enforced and will comment negatively on our end of cruise comment cards if they are not. If more would do this they might start realizing that there can be negative results for NOT enforcing the dress standards!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk

And, at least half of the other 99% of the men (those not wearing a polo shirt) are asking themselves "Now, why am I wearing this monkey suite?"

How can you wear a set of furniture for monkeys?

Already did, after someone else suggested it didn't apply to dinner. It states in the compass, "please note that bare feet, short pants, caps and tank tops are not recommended at dinner in the dining rooms or any of our specialty restaurants." Now you can debate intent all you like, but since older compasses from the same ship state they are not permitted, it seems that the change in wording is deliberate.

So in other words, with what you're claiming is the "intent" of what you quoted from the Compass, you'd be able to show up in barefooted in shorts & a tank top for dinner and would be admitted with no problem.

Good luck with that... :rolleyes:

What is "acceptable" and just "ok" is just asking what can one get away with, without being turned away. That's different than asking about actual guidelines.

Well stated!

Nothing at all wrong with doing that. But there are many who also do not get to live like the other either and who do not enjoy dressing up. Is it fair to tell them that they have to forgo dinning in the mdr on some nights?

Yes, it's ENTIRELY fair for the cruise line to state rules to that effect - their ship, their rules.

He starts by making a dig at those who enjoy dressing according to the formal night suggested attire...

Dressing up is a game that people play to pass the time.

And then turns around & tries to feign ignorance:

I don't think that I "dig at people who want to participate".

And follows THAT up with a red herring argument:

I fully support anyone's right to wear a tux anytime they want to. I just do not understand why they want to tell someone else to wear a tux or choose a different cruise line. I certainly don't go around telling people to take themselves and their tuxedo's to cunard.

Please find & quote anyone here who's argued that others should "wear a tux or choose a different cruise line." I'm quite positive you won't find anyone to quote. So could you stop with the silly red herrings? You WILL find arguments that people should be willing to follow the cruise line's minimum stated dress, or eat elsewhere than the MDR, or find a line with a dress code that they are more agreeable with. But that's much different than your (false) contention that they should "wear a tux or choose a different cruise line."

I have no hard data, it's just my opinion based upon what I read here on cruise critic. The people who love traditional dining just seem to be the ones who like formal nights. It seems to be so 'hand in glove'.

 

The big problem with that idea is that there are a significant number of cruisers who would insist that the ambiance of formal nights is ruined unless everyone participates. I have a problem with that because it is the equivalent of someone saying my incremental pleasure of seeing you dressed up is more important than your displeasure at dressing up. I don't believe I have the right to make someone do something just because it makes me feel better.

Well said, but it is a hopeless battle to make some posters understand this.

I'm not sure I've ever heard that argument made. For the record, I most definitely don't feel I have "the right" to make any passenger on the ship do anything at all. On the other hand though, I most definitely think RCI has every right to do so. And by extension, I have the right to expect a certain cruise experience, based on the policies & rules that RCI states in writing via their website & in other spots. I'd never call a passenger out myself - be it for ignoring the dress code, smoking on their balcony or whatever. But I WILL complain to RCI and ask that they enforce their own policies.

Unfortunately, it also misleads passengers to think that "NY has a new ship" by stating that claim along with showing the Statue of Liberty up close. Bayonne is in NJ and not NY!!! Please get it right!:(

PUH-LEAZE! When the folks up there quit calling their football teams the New York Giants and the New York Jets when the Giants have played all their home games in New Jersey since 1976 and the Jets since 1984 - then you might have a valid gripe against RCI. :rolleyes:

But, I wouldn't think of telling someone else that they have to dress up to increase my dining pleasure. I'm a big boy and I can tolerate seeing someone in blue jeans on formal night. It won't affect my enjoyment one bit.

An oft-made argument, but one that's simply untrue. The dress of those around you is part of the ambiance of the dinner. And ambiance does affect one's enjoyment, whether you admit it or not. If that wasn't the case, than one of your cost/benefit analyses could quickly determine that Royal (and every other cruise line & fine dining restaurant in the world) are wasting good money on furnishings & decor in their dining rooms. Might as well just paint them all grey using the same paint from the engine room & broom closets, and light them with the cheapest industrial lighting you can get. No tablecloths either - a cheap laminate table and plastic chairs will be much cheaper & easier to keep clean.

You're probably right about the wine. But you did have another good idea. Why not make formal nights only for early/late traditional dining? Let the MDT dinners dress as they will. Generally speaking, it seems the traditional diners are the ones who like formal nights. It would be made known at booking that choosing MTD meant you'd be in a casual environment.

If you're correct about those preferring early/late traditional dining vs. MTD being the same as those in favor of formal nights/attire, that certainly has merit. Not sure whether or not that's a valid assumption though.

No, just my opinions. Mostly based upon Royal's press releases. You can also make some logical inferences from those releases. Royal paid a bunch for this research and I doubt they're going to freely give it to their competitors.

 

Here's why I have these opinions. You may disagree but there is some logic here.

 

It is my opinion that Royal did the research and it confirmed the things I said. If you believe I'm wrong, then you have to also believe that Royal commissioned the Quantum Class and instituted Dynamic Dining without doing any research and without having clear objectives for these changes. Corporations simply do not make strategic decisions of this magnitude without gathering data and analyzing that data.

 

I think you can make some inferences about the research without actually seeing the data. I believe that if you want to know what Royal sees as the future of cruising, take a look at Quantum. Now ask yourself this: Who would Quantum, as originally conceived, appeal to? The traditional cruiser who loves classic dining with the same waiter, the same wait staff, the same table mates? Of course not. Quantum was designed for a different type of cruiser, a new demographic.

 

Why a new demographic? The simple answer is Royal wants to expand and the market for traditional cruisers is saturated. Too many cruise lines and too many ships with too much capacity. It's also clear from other comments by Royal is not interested in attracting new passengers by cutting rates. That means you have to attract more people, different people.

 

Now what would a corporation do in a case like this? Market research. Find out who isn't currently interested in cruising and what are the reasons they don't want to cruise. I think it is safe to say that spending two hours having dinner with strangers wasn't what those new cruisers said they wanted. Which leads us to Dynamic Dining. Look at the entertainment and other features and you'll see other answers.

 

OK, so this is just my opinion. But this opinion is consistent with all the press releases and statements made by Royal. It is also consistent with the things Royal has done. It answers some critical questions. For example, why would Royal go in this direction knowing that it would upset it's loyal past customers? Why not survey their long term, loyal passengers? Answer: they were more interested in expanding beyond the current market.

 

Royal may have misjudged. This decision may rank up there with New Coke. Could be. But the fact that Royal may have misjudged doesn't mean they didn't do their analysis. Nor does the fact that some traditional cruisers dislike the conclusions prove the research wasn't done.

Thanks, as I thought. You're certainly entitled to your opinions, and I appreciate you explaining your thought process of how you came to hold those opinions.

But unlike opinions, you're not entitled to your own facts - or to claim your opinions as facts. The facts are - neither you nor I know what research Royal did or didn't do, or exactly what conclusions they did or didn't arrive at. As others have mentioned, they may have relied on surveys & data from travel industry trade groups. Or they may have read Cruise Critic forums to see how other line's various dining options were being perceived and gone from there.

About all we know as facts right now are that they obviously thought DD was a good idea, that the initial rollout of DD was less than a stellar success, and that they've delayed DD rollouts to other ships and are already making significant changes to the original DD concept as a result.

People like to discuss whether someone is willing to dress up or not. Let's forget that for a second. What could or should the cruise line incorporate to make it a real event? What do people that like formal night now think would take it to another level where more might want to participate.

 

I like hearing the different viewpoints, I think some get derailed and lose the forest for the trees.

I think the idea of offering drinks - maybe a bottle of house wine per couple - for those who participate & dress to a certain minimum - I'd suggest dress shirt/slacks with jacket/tie minimum - would be a great idea that would cost the cruise line very little, given the markup & true cost for the wine. Seat those who participate on one floor, those who don't on a different floor.

Problem is - I think pretty much the same " vocal minority" would still refuse to dress according to the minimum but demand the free wine, because of course, they paid the same for their cruise so should get the same benefits - but without having to conform to the stated dress standards, of course!

Actually the "double naught triple gold platinum diamond" was my attempt at poking fun at how many different status levels the airlines have. :)

 

Sorry for being unclear on my original message. The intent is more along the lines of "for those that have to pay baggage fees it would be a minimum of $$$ (on average)". Yes, the assumption was you were having to pay baggage fees.

 

You seem to just want to argue. (in my opinion) Sorry but I am not biting. :)

Nope. I really just wanted to point out that, at the same time you were criticizing someone else for only presenting one point of view, you were doing the same, yourself. :cool:

Yep, exactly. There does appear to be one here just arguing for argument's sake - but it's not Paul...

So at a minimum it is a 2nd checked bag which is costing you at least $50 round trip in baggage fees. (unless your are driving to port of course)

Southwest flies to a limited number of cities compared to United, American, or Delta for example. No baggage fees is the exception rather than the rule.

 

Of course if you arer double naught triple gold platinum diamond status on an airline then you don't pay baggage fees.

 

I was talking an average case.:) Your mileage may vary. (literally)

Well, no, you were NOT "talking an average case", rather you were making a completely incorrect claim that "at a minimum it is a 2nd checked bag which is costing you at least $50.

"I notice you have a knack for seeing things from exactly one point of view: your own." :)

"Try to be a little more open minded and consider other people's point of view as well." :)

I notice you have a knack for seeing things from exactly one point of view: your own. :)

Gee, duh! Yes, most ALL of us are going to post here based on our own point of view - you included!

Not a valid argument?

 

First, wearing a jacket is not always appropriate at the originating airport. Someone flying from Phoenix in July is not going to be wearing a jacket. Not to mention that a tuxedo jacket doesn't really go well with shorts and a t-shirt. (or even khakis and a polo) With the increased security screening and hassle it is easy to see why people want to dress more comfortable and casual when flying. (not to mention the sardine can that the aircraft has become)

 

Baggage fees are real. I don't do formal night anymore but when I did I wore a tuxedo with multiple shirts, cumberbunds, and vests. These were all in a separate hanging garment bag. You don't fit that into another checked bag. So at a minimum it is a 2nd checked bag which is costing you at least $50 round trip in baggage fees. (unless your are driving to port of course)

First, I'll be flying from Dallas, which isn't all that much cooler than Phoenix in the summer, and wearing a nice summer weight sport coat along with khakis & a polo works just fine. No, it's not a tuxedo jacket, but I addressed that previously, making that argument of yours pretty dumb.

Finally, your argument about just not having a tux or suit and just having jacket and tie ... well this sounds a whole lot like the argument the jeans and polo crowed would make ... less formal.

I really hope you're not trying to argue that jeans and a polo are as close to formal as dress slacks, sport coat & tie are.

Try to be a little more open minded and consider other people's point of view as well. :)

Ditto, is all I can say about that.

I agree completely. The cruise lines could provide a complimentary tuxedo and I still wouldn't wear it. We just don't like to dress up.

 

For the record, we don't go anywhere near the MDR on formal nights.

For the record, I totally respect your position of not liking to dress up, AND your practice of not going to the MDR on formal night. Some (like us) enjoy dressing up - it's a nice "date night" - but others don't and there's nothing wrong with that. Different strokes for different folks!

The ones I take issue with are the ones who belligerently state "I paid for the MDR dinner and I'm going to eat there" BUT at the same time state that they have no intention of following the cruise line's clearly stated minimum dress code for MDR dining.

Just something to throw out for discussion:

 

Do the airlines have any role in the decline of many people not dressing up as much for formal nights?

 

I mean with there bag fees and weight restrictions, bringing along a tux/suit could generate more cost for many.

 

Thoughts?

I would agree that is a valid issue. It's a good point. Whenever someone mentions it on here they get shouted down with a bunch of "You signed a crrrrruuuuuise contract and knew what it required of you!!!!! ASSIMILATE!!!! YOU WILL PAY THE BAGGAGE FEE OR EAT IN YOUR BATHROOM!"

LMaxwell, your posts are generally quite intelligent and well-reasoned, but on occasion you come out with one of these and have me shaking my head and going "huh"?

I honestly think the whole baggage fees argument is much more of a convenient excuse than a really valid argument. If the cruise line insisted on tuxedos - or even suits - for formal nights, than it might have more validity. The fact is, they don't. A jacket & tie, along with dress slacks - is perfectly acceptable for formal night. The jacket is easily worn on the plane, the tie weighs essentially nothing, and the dress slacks weigh less & take less room (and are cooler & more comfortable) than the jeans that the "vocal minority" here are constantly insisting they prefer.

Please royal dont bring formal night back again ,I am happy with the freestyle system on board royal lol

Hate to break it to you, but Royal can't "bring formal night back again" because they've never stopped having it. ;)

RCI has done studies on how to attract passengers new to cruising. RCI found that this new demographic is not attracted to traditional dining. They do not want to spend two hours having dinner. They do not wish to eat with strangers. They have no interest in forming a relationship with their waiters. Nor do they like formal nights.

Any sources you can provide for this research and all the detailed conclusions you're claiming - other than yourself?

Nope. I paid for the MDR, I'm going to the MDR. If you want to have "relive the Titanic" night, do it in a specialty restaurant and make it optional for people that insist on doing that.

Unfortunately for you, fortunately for most of the rest of us; your bold pronouncements carry exactly zero weight. Celebrity gets to make the rules, not you. :rolleyes:

Oasis - No

Allure - Yes

Freedom - Yes

Enchantment - Yes

Brilliance - Yes

Liberty - No

Splendour - Yes

Vision - Yes

Independence - No

Rhapsody - Yes

Navigator - Yes

Quantum - Yes

Freedom didn't in Feb. Sign was in front of the main door and overflow door. Personally I have never been in the dl and had kids there.

And therein lies the problem, as I stated earlier. Sorry LMaxwell, I appreciate your good intentions, but this list can never be reliable, as its always subject to change at any moment without notice on any given ship. Its essentially out of date even as you're still compiling it.