Jump to content
Cruise Critic Community

dfoxinator

Members
  • Content Count

    13
  • Joined

About dfoxinator

  • Rank
    Cool Cruiser
  1. Except that's not what happened in this case... NCL's share price went down as did their market cap because they are simply worth less as a company today than 3 years ago. You even admitted this yourself when you spoke about their China snafu. And I'm sure you'll be back if someone else speaks negatively about the NCL stock. I signed up to discuss this cruise with other people who were on it, and I expressed my opinion about the poor customer service that I thought NCL exhibited, and that opinion was shared by many here. Some people, like yourself, chose to take a negative attitude towards those who were unhappy instead of just understanding that people look for different things on cruises, and this one will have satisfied some people while leaving others wanting more. And none of those people have an uneducated opinion. I'm not sure why that's a concept some don't want to grasp here.
  2. That's completely ridiculous and if you know anything about stocks, you know that. You're literally explaining what would be considered a growth stock. A company that is actively investing and might be shedding some cash because of that but is expected to grow rapidly from that investment. If investors believed NCL's premise and potential growth, the stock would go up and the market cap would go up. What are you arguing? That a company can't make an investment in their future and have their stock go up? Absolute insanity. That's almost every tech company you're describing. You're just making stuff up because investors clearly didn't like and see the potential in the debt NCL took on (or whatever investments they made), or are weary of how successful their endeavors will be.
  3. Yes, but when a company is worth less than they were 3 years ago, you generally accept that things haven't gone great for them and bad decisions/execution took place in the companies semi-recent past. And being "not far from" your market cap from 3 years ago isn't any kind of achievement.
  4. I never said stock price is a barometer for customer service. I merely said that it was an indicator of how strong the business has been in the past/is now, and a company who has a market cap that's lower now than it was 3 years ago hasn't made good business decisions along the way. You proved my point correct by pointing out their China misstep. It seems reasonable to believe they've made more than a single mistake in the history of their company that's put them in this position. Obviously I can't prove it's because of poor customer service, because I'd need additional numbers like marketing spend and retention rates relative to other cruise lines in order to calculate that. The point is simple: you, and anyone else, has no grounds to argue that questioning NCL's business practices and customer service is a flawed premise just because they fill ships. Simple put, they are worth less money now than they were 3 years ago and there's various reasons for that, and almost all of them will boil down to bad business decisions, whether it be China like you described or a possible retention/high marketing cost problem. More than likely there are multiple factors. But there's literally nothing to suggest it's unfair to question their business practices, and it's clear numerous things have gone wrong for them and other cruise lines have grown their businesses better.
  5. What's your point? It's still not even at its all-time high and has been working its way back there (and still isn't there) for 3 years. Does a stock trading below it's all-time high which was about 3 years ago shout high-growth, well-executed business to you? In 2015 the company was worth almost $15 billion. It's now worth less than $13 billion. Again, is that the indicator of a company that's done everything correctly and who's piss poor customer service shouldn't be called out because they are "filling ships"?
  6. Hmmm, interesting. You said you were done with the thread yet felt the need to refute the single statement which was “I was told NCL stock was a bad buy.” I wonder why that might be. Combined with your NCL-can-do-no-wrong attitude, I think I see what’s going on here. How many shares of NCL do you own? You also seemed to not address the original point, which was “NCL must be running a good business because they fill lots of ships, so everything they are doing is perfect including their customer service.” My argument against that was simple - NCL’s stock price is lower now than it was 3 years ago. Is that the trend of a company that’s executed perfectly and has no room for improvement? I’m sure investors who bought the stock 3-4 years ago and purchased a dud to-date wouldn’t think they are executing perfectly.
  7. Haha, yeah, I kind of feel like that. And "filled ships" and selling out cruises is not a direct indicator of a strong business. It speaks nothing to their retention, profitability, etc. You can fill as many ships as you want if you invest tons in marketing, but that's the difference between profitability and margins. Going back to what you pointed out before, retention is extremely important. I think someone got confused about customer acquisition costs. From my understanding, it is sometimes cheaper to acquire a new customer compared to bringing back a customer who has stopped using your service or who has a negative opinion of your service. That's not to be confused though with customer retention. Retaining customers (ones who have generally enjoyed your service) is significantly cheaper than acquiring new ones, from everything I know. Retaining vs bringing back customers who have moved on is not the same thing, and I think the person before might have confused the two. I'm guessing, by many of the posts in this forum, NCL has a retention problem and that's going a long way to sinking their valuation. Very interesting. Seems to make sense - after 2015 now or any time recently seems like a bad time to buy. It wouldn't be surprising if the stock took another dive I think. Also interesting about other cruise lines. You're definitely correct. RCL just seems to be a much stronger, high growth stock. I guess their customer-centric approach is working... I wonder what their retention looks like compared to NCL.
  8. Very well said. And it's not like many of the people criticizing NCL aren't also pointing out positives. I pointed them out. I said I enjoyed the ship itself and I thought the crew made a really bad situation better. The funny/sad thing is NCL as a company did absolutely nothing in terms of customer service, and at the same time, they made the jobs of their employees on the ship more difficult and put them in a bad situation. Too bad an NCL executive wasn't onboard the ship to tell the angry customers they weren't going to be compensated at all. I don't see why it's so hard for some people to accept that the itinerary is important to some people (not everyone - I get that), and those people are going to be upset at the unprofessional changes/lack of communication/0 regard to customer experience/customer service. That's a great example of customer service that creates and keeps a loyal customer. Just look years later, you're still telling the story. Same here. Based on my on-ship experience, if they had offered me something like 25% on a future cruise, I would have been a customer and booked another cruise with them for next year. Now, I'll probably never sail with them again. Wait a second. What metric are we using to validate this? Who says their business is strong? They are a public company. How are their numbers? I'm not going to take the time to look because I'll never invest a dollar in their company, but the stock over the last 3 years paints a different picture from what you're saying. A stock price less than what it was 3 years ago does not indicate a strong business. Maybe their trending up now, but if you're someone who invested in NCL 3 years ago, you're extremely disappointed with the business at this point in time. So their business decisions? There seems to be little actual evidence that they are running an effective business. Over the last 3 years it's been a drain for investors. You're right, little has changed - their stock price has been stagnant since late 2015... The business isn't growing, clearly. So maybe they aren't doing everything right? I could be wrong because I haven't dug into their financials, but all I know is their stock seems like a terrible buy right now and there's little there right now it seems to indicate a growing business.
  9. You sound pretty out of touch and seem to be on the side that nothing is ever the cruise line's fault and everyone should just shut their mouths and say everything was great. You just argued that some here are expressing an ill-informed opinion of the handling of the itinerary/skipping of Nassau because you were privileged to the additional information directly from the captain. I know to you NCL can do no wrong, but have you stopped to think that maybe it was their job to better communicate with the passengers and inform them how these decisions were made? I get it, they are under no obligation to. But damn, if you don't communicate these things to the customers, you are almost guaranteeing your company is going to take heat, and rightfully so. You're missing the point about their Atlantis excursion. The point is it was one of the few bright spots of the planned cruise/itinerary for them, and like other stuff on the cruise, was cancelled with very little notice.
  10. Sorry that those of us in steerage didn't have access to the same info you did, so we were kind of in the dark. I'm not sure how that info excuses them making the announcement 5 minutes after we were supposed to be on our way to Nassau. If anything, it makes it worse because it seems as if they likely knew long before they made the announcement that there was no way we could go to Nassau. Not everyone measures the enjoyment of a cruise in the same way, or takes as many cruises. We met a couple from upstate NY a day or two into the cruise who's only real vacations were a single cruise every few years. They were looking forward going to Bermuda. When they found out we weren't going to Bermuda, they were a little upset because they had already taken the Bahamas cruise a few years before and were excited to do something new. They were really looking forward to finally getting to Atlantis and had planned a bunch of stuff around that. Too bad they weren't privileged enough to have access to that information that we probably wouldn't make it there, because maybe they wouldn't have gotten their hopes up and spent all of that time planning. I feel bad for people who had that experience. I also feel bad for a woman in one of our excursions who told us that someone in her party had planned for a wedding in Bermuda, and when that fell through, quickly made plans for Nassau. I can only imagine how they felt when they had that announcement come through the loud speaker. I wonder how much money/time they could have saved knowing there was a good change we weren't going to make it to Nassau. And I can only imagine how they felt after they found out they'd receive 0 compensation for their perils. But hey, let's look on the bright side - at least the Haven courtyard had the pool roof open 6/7 days!
  11. How do you figure that? They cut out Nassau. That’s literally 1/3 of the itinerary. Cancelled while already at sea, announced 5 minutes after we were supposed to depart GSC. In GSC, they cancelled 1/2 of the excursions we signed up for, making that 1/3 of our total excursions cancelled on the trip for no other reason but to help NCL’s bottom line. They even admitted such, with their “not enough people” letter. You don’t think either of those events deserves any kind of compensation, even if it’s just a small gesture? Seems like terrible customer service to me and although you’ve never had an issue with them, a number of people in this thread, including myself, claim to be lost customers at this point, so they will lose at least some business. The couple you describe sounds awful. My girlfriend and I were very happy and made the best of the cruise while on the ship. But that in no way means we can’t reflect on it as a whole and see the shortcomings. They should at least try to make it less transparent how much they are penny pinching. Announcing 15 times on the cruise “safety is our #1 priority and we know this cruise wasn’t as expected” and then offering absolutely nothing to their customers makes them seem kind of cheap.
  12. I agree with pretty much everything you said, but the problem for me is Norwegian hasn't even come close to giving the $100 OBC. Or anything. I wasn't expecting any kind of crazy refund. Heck, they could have even turned it into an upsell opportunity, "sorry you didn't get to go to Bermuda, but here, take 25% off a future cruise!" just to acknowledge in some way that they were kind of interested in keeping us as customers. And sure, NCL has different benefits compared to other cruise lines, but it's difficult to imagine any other cruise line offering this level of lack of customer service in an event like this. They cancelled one out of the two excursions we had planned in GSC because "not enough people signed up for it." When that happened, they showed the same level of customer service to us. I don't even think the note included an apology. That's after we booked the excursion, had it confirmed, and we're planning our whole day around it. They told us less than 24 hours before. "Your excursion is cancelled, you'll get a refund." But just from my observation, this company seems to be more about immediate profit than long-term customer satisfaction. Possibly lose customer(s) instead of run a parasailing excursion at maybe a slight loss for the day? On a cruise with an already very weak itinerary? Seems extremely short sighted. If I was a shareholder stuff like this would concern me. I'm in the exact same boat (pun intended haha). We enjoyed the cruise, but it just doesn't seem NCL values us as customers so I wouldn't feel right paying them my hard earned $ in the future. Like you said, it's so incredibly valuable for them to retain customers. There's absolutely no way it was a sound business decision to give nothing. Impossible. Like I said above, even as an upsell tool, "discount on a future cruise" or some kind of OBC would have even led to more profit. And now instead they are going to lose customers over it. The LTV of even an individual customer likely almost completely outweighs giving out some kind of OBC to everyone. All they had to do was offer something as a show of good faith to retain me, but they chose not to as of now, so it is what it is but I don't think we'll be back.
  13. I was on this cruise and I agree completely with those who feel NCL has not provided good customer service. I also think that some here are misinterpreting what people are saying. No one is arguing we should have sailed into the hurricane or that NCL should have put anyone at risk. I'm also aware that they are under no legal obligation to do anything. But lets look at this another way. For my girlfriend and I, this was our first cruise. We enjoyed the ship itself, but like a number of people have said here, we felt completely cheated ending up in Florida (and not a nice part of Florida), and then NCL's private island for about 2 hours (the tenders took forever) before heading home. My girlfriend and I are both young and will do a lot more cruising in the future, probably another 30 or 40 years ahead of us after this initial cruise. How many people in our situation do you think would continue to sail with NCL after they offered nothing beyond the text written in the contract, while we know other lines, like RCI, offered really nice customer-centric compensation to make up for the itineraries? For those arguing about this from a business standpoint, how can you possibly argue that's good business and good for customer retention? All it's good for is sending couples like my girlfriend and I to RCI or other competitors who will give you some form of compensation when the itinerary is jokingly bad. Anyway, we've made the decision that we won't be sailing with NCL ever again if they don't decide to offer some remedy. Again, I realize they are under no obligation to do so, but they'll certainly be losing tens of thousands (if not hundreds of thousands) of dollars in LTV from my girlfriend and I if they don't.
×
×
  • Create New...