Sharing drink package

[Gonzo70]

Wow... could your comparison be ANY MORE LAME? :eek:

 

It is a 100% accurate, equivalent comparison.

[julia]

It is a 100% accurate, equivalent comparison.

 

It IS NOT!! You are comparing a SERVICE (heart surgery!) to a PRODUCT (a drink!)

 

Each drink has been contractually paid for!!

 

The cruise line is NOT being deceived.

The cruise line has not lost any revenue.

There is no stealing.

 

What is so difficult to understand? :confused:

[Gonzo70]

It IS NOT!! You are comparing a SERVICE (heart surgery!) to a PRODUCT (a drink!)

 

Each drink has been contractually paid for!!

 

The cruise line is NOT being deceived.

The cruise line has not lost any revenue.

There is no stealing.

 

What is so difficult to understand? :confused:

 

Person "A" has a classic drink card permitting them to purchase drinks up to only a certain dollar value. Person A wants a $12 martini. If they have another person with a premium package purchase the drink on their behalf, and then hand it over to them it certainly does involve deception, lost revenue and stealing. The cruise line has been swindled out of $12 of revenue. It is unlikely to be noticed or enforced, but that is not the same as making it legitimate. If it is so hunky-dorey, why would they even have to trade beverages on the side? If what you say is true, Person A could just order the martini with their classic drink card straight away.

[PartyAllDaTyme]

Must-- not-- get-- dragged-- in---- Must-- resist-- Must-- not-- compare to-- a buffet-- one person-- full buffet-- other person-- only soda--

AAAAAAAAAAHHHH!!!

[Jobeth66]

It IS NOT!! You are comparing a SERVICE (heart surgery!) to a PRODUCT (a drink!)

 

Each drink has been contractually paid for!!

 

The cruise line is NOT being deceived.

The cruise line has not lost any revenue.

There is no stealing.

 

What is so difficult to understand? :confused:

 

So which part of "no sharing" is marked with an asterisk or some footnote to say "except in these situations"?

 

Because all it says on Celebrity's website is "no sharing", and those words are pretty darn self-explanatory to me.

[Jobeth66]

Must-- not-- get-- dragged-- in---- Must-- resist-- Must-- not-- compare to-- a buffet-- one person-- full buffet-- other person-- only soda--

AAAAAAAAAAHHHH!!!

 

 

:) You're awesome.

[Jobeth66]

Julia,

 

What about this. What if the OP goes into a bar and buys a $12 drink and hands it to their traveling companion, but their companion buys nothing (no trading of drinks)?

 

Is THAT stealing, or in any way a violation of the 'no sharing' rule?

[Presto2]

And I thought the dress code theads on P&O were mind boggling :eek::eek::eek:

 

I don't think I'll wander on to this thread again - I think I'll retreat now ----

[paulsang]

It is a 100% accurate, equivalent comparison.

 

 

Says you.

[CruisingChick]

If my husband and I both have drink packages that have been paid for - what is the problem? Our credit card has been charged $88 a day for liquor. Why does it matter who drinks a $12 drink and who drinks an $8 drink?

 

Another example....we are out to dinner - my husband orders an expensive $30 dinner while I order something for only $20. When the meals come we switch because his looks way better than mine and he's a great guy!! Are we stealing? No both - dinners are being paid for.

 

I agree that no one should give drinks away to people that don't have a package and one couple cannot share ONE drink package, but if both have paid for packages then the drinks are paid for.

[Rick-cruiser]

Must-- not-- get-- dragged-- in---- Must-- resist-- Must-- not-- compare to-- a buffet-- one person-- full buffet-- other person-- only soda--

AAAAAAAAAAHHHH!!!

 

PartyAllDaTime.... LOL.... you kill me...... you really do

 

People around me are wondering what I'm laughing about...

 

.

[Gonzo70]

Julia,

 

I know from you prior posts you are a good person, have offered a lot of helpful advice on Cruise Critic and are not just trying to stir the pot and encourage people to steal from the cruise line. I think your personal feeling that sharing drinks in the manner the OP described should be OK/permissable is blinding you from the purely technical (i.e. non emotional) side of doing this. From a legal stand point I can tell you with absolute 100% certainty that what the OP was asking about is a form of theft. Now, legal/technical stand point aside the chances of being prosecuted for this are miniscule and the odds of even more than a mild slap on the wrist if caught are quite small as well. Many people probably do what the OP is proposing. I have certainly done far worse things in my life on numerous occasions.

 

While people certainly have a right to decide whether or not they would do what the OP is proposing, they should not justify it as being OK - they should realize they are taking advantage of the cruise line and do so without trying to rationalize their behavior as acceptable. It is just like with smuggling. I personally do not care if someone smuggles alcohol on a cruise ship, but what bugs me is when someone tries to justify their smuggling.

[snydermann]

What if they each buy their respective package drinks, each drink half, then trade? Is that only 1/2 stealing (Joke)

 

Come on folks, this is splitting hairs. As long as each person is drinking the same amount of drinks, one from each package, who cares who does the actual consumption of the more expensive drink!? The end result is the exact same revenue for the company.

 

Yes, giving a drink to someone without a package is against the rules. Buying a single expensive drink and handing it off to a person who didn't pay for the expensive drink package is against the rules.

 

What if I don't like my expensive drink or can't finish it, or it melts and I don't like it melted? Should I just throw it away rather than let my wife finish it?

 

You are saying, by the letter of the rules, I should throw it away. That's just wasteful. Some rules have a grey area.

[Gonzo70]

Another example....we are out to dinner - my husband orders an expensive $30 dinner while I order something for only $20. When the meals come we switch because his looks way better than mine and he's a great guy!! Are we stealing? No both - dinners are being paid for.

 

 

That has nothing to do with drink packages! If your husband paid a $400 annual feel to have free dinners each month at the restaurant and you did not and were buying a-la-carte, then you could not have your husband order the most expensive items off the menu for you and swap items. The equivalent comparison would be if nobody had drink packages, you paid $5 for a drink, your husband $12 for a drink - in that case you can switch drinks just as you could switch foods at a restaurant where you make a-la-carte purchases.

[Gonzo70]

Says you.

 

Says common sense.

[julia]

Julia,

 

What about this. What if the OP goes into a bar and buys a $12 drink and hands it to their traveling companion, but their companion buys nothing (no trading of drinks)?

 

Is THAT stealing, or in any way a violation of the 'no sharing' rule?

 

 

Of COURSE that is stealing! Please re-read my post?

[julia]

Person "A" has a classic drink card permitting them to purchase drinks up to only a certain dollar value. Person A wants a $12 martini. If they have another person with a premium package purchase the drink on their behalf, and then hand it over to them it certainly does involve deception, lost revenue and stealing. The cruise line has been swindled out of $12 of revenue. It is unlikely to be noticed or enforced, but that is not the same as making it legitimate. If it is so hunky-dorey, why would they even have to trade beverages on the side? If what you say is true, Person A could just order the martini with their classic drink card straight away.

 

 

Gonzo:

 

Your above statement is true, (and I too feel that you are a fair and helpful poster here, so I mean no disrespect), but AGAIN, you have failed to make your case.... Why??

 

Because you have not considered "PERSON B" in your equation!

To complete YOUR scenario above.... PERSON B, (who paid for a PREMIUM package), is NOW drinking the lesser ($8) drink and therefore (completing your example) is NOT getting what they paid for! Hmmm... any problems with that? I think not.

 

I am ONLY making the case for an absolute, straight up order of two persons who EACH have a beverage package.

[Denny01]

Syndermann - not only must you be 100+ years old, you've had very bad luck picking ships to 'cruise' on.....please keep us informed of your next cruises, so we can take heed!

 

As to this discussion, I'd taken the 'side' of you are committing petty theft 'sharing' drinks and still feel this way in general, but agree (at bit) with Syndermann that this specific case is a stretch saying its wrong. But only because the OP has given a very isolated case of sharing or as stated earlier, swapping drinks. Both drinks are paid for and both have a card, so 'no harm, no foul'. And I don't see it as one ordering a full buffet and one just a drink, since in this very isolated case, the 'full buffet' person just had a soft drink and the 'soft drink' person had the full buffet.

 

But.....and this is the main point I'd make....this is a very isolated case. If each time, the couple aways ordered two drinks and only swapped and so on, then, in my view, OK. But that is a real single-instance issue. Go ahead, and by the way, why ask. Most of the negative responses are because these 'its OK since I paid to give my drink away' approach has been discussed beyond rationale thought...this one, in my view, presented a minimal, if not nonexistant, moral issue, but again, only because it is a very specfic situation.

 

What I find odd is a poster who has been on CC for over 3 years and posted 5 times thinks this is worth starting a post about. But what the heck.....I'm sure after reading 45+ posts, we all have our moral compasses reset.

 

Denny

[julia]

Deeeep sigh......

 

I'm going for a drink... anybody want one while I'm up? :eek::p

[Gonzo70]

Gonzo:

 

Your above statement is true, (and I too feel that you are a fair and helpful poster here, so I mean no disrespect), but AGAIN, you have failed to make your case.... Why??

 

Because you have not considered "PERSON B" in your equation!

 

To complete YOUR scenario above.... PERSON B, (who paid for a PREMIUM package), is NOW drinking the lesser ($8) drink and therefore (completing your example) is NOT getting what they paid for! Hmmm... any problems with that? I think not.

 

I am ONLY making the case for an absolute, straight up order of two persons who EACH have a beverage package.

 

 

I think you are just overthinking this and trying to rationalize/justify the behavior. Person A (with the classic package) is only entitled to beverages $8 and under ($5 and under for beer) unless they pay a la carte. Person B (with the premium package) is entitled to beverages $12 and under. They can purchase a cheap beverage (i.e. a $5 beverage) if they desire such a beverage. However Person A cannot purchase a $12 beverage with their package. If person A want a $12 maritini and person B wants a $5 beer, then person B can use their drink card for their beer, but person A has to pay $12 on their charge card for the martini. That is how the packages work.

 

If you think what the OP is doing is OK fromt he cruise line perspective, I would encourage you to ask the cruise line if it is OK. I am quite certain they would say no and agree with what I outlined. To say that it is OK because both person A and person B bought a drink package and the drinks are covered under the package is a rationalization/justification - the drinks cards are not community drink cards between person A and person B; person A has their own card for certain beverages and person B has their own card for certain beverages.

 

Again, I personally do not care what person A and person B do with their beverages. I am not even saying what I would do in that situation. The only way I dragged myself into this mess was to make the point that if people want to share beverages in this manner, do so, but do so knowing you are "cheating" the system.

[Gonzo70]

Deeeep sigh......

 

I'm going for a drink... anybody want one while I'm up? :eek::p

 

Make mine a $12 martini. :D

[Choochala]

Okay - so say OP purchased one excursion package and OP's other purchased a totally different excursion package that cost way less than OP's. Is it okay for OP to go on the cheaper excursion and OP's other to go on the more expensive one????? Both were paid for - I think as far as swapping, one gets more, one gets less - no one is worse for the wear and no one concerned looses anything - it all works out.

 

Now purchasing 'one' drink package and consistantly 'sharing' is theft and immoral.

 

JMHO

[Gonzo70]

Okay - so say OP purchased one excursion package and OP's other purchased a totally different excursion package that cost way less than OP's. Is it okay for OP to go on the cheaper excursion and OP's other to go on the more expensive one????? Both were paid for - I think as far as swapping, one gets more, one gets less - no one is worse for the wear and no one concerned looses anything - it all works out.

 

JMHO

 

Whether or not it is fine would be up to Celebrity. So far as the drink package scenario being debated, I am 99% confident that Celebrity would say it is not permitted and it is their word that counts. It is then up to individuals to determine whether or not they will abide by the terms Celebrity has laid out (and to deal with any consequences if caught).

[snydermann]

I can't help but wonder . . .

 

. . . do you think the drink police folks that follow the cruise rules to the letter ever drive faster than the speed limit? . . . . That would be wrong you know, might even crash and kill someone. . . .

 

Hopefully, Ill be belted into my lounger and my Carnival souvenir glass is equipped with an airbag in case I share a Coke with my wife.

 

(No, we don't share drink packages, just saying). :D

[GeorgeL]

Deeeep sigh......

 

I'm going for a drink... anybody want one while I'm up? :eek::p

 

LOL ... I think I will go get something too.

I did try to prevent this...I really did..

It's that darn bone that everyone is fighting over and just can't let go until everyone is bloodied (metaphorically speaking :))