10th and probably last Royal Caribbean Cruise.

[SportsFanatic]

Royal Caribbean's alcohol policy is so out of line with the rest of the cruise industry, that I doubt I will sail again with them.

 

Not only alcohol, but I wanted to bring a couple cans of Pepsi products onboard. I see they do not even allow bottle of water or any pop- I have never sailed with Royal before and taking my daughter on her first cruise and thought would try them based on the itinerary. It seems like Carnival offers so much more perks. I am keeping an open mind and did want to try them out but so far not happy with a lot of their policies..

[uksimonusa]

Royal Caribbean's alcohol policy is so out of line with the rest of the cruise industry, that I doubt I will sail again with them.

 

Not only alcohol, but I wanted to bring a couple cans of Pepsi products onboard. I see they do not even allow bottle of water or any pop- I have never sailed with Royal before and taking my daughter on her first cruise and thought would try them based on the itinerary. It seems like Carnival offers so much more perks. I am keeping an open mind and did want to try them out but so far not happy with a lot of their policies..

 

Water and pop, in moderation, is normally not a problem

[temple1]

Has anyone else noticed how some have turned the word PROFIT into a dirty word?

The policy came after the Smith death on that Med cruise...YES, RCI PROFITS on booze, but it also protects them from future lawsuits.

 

PROFIT

PROFIT

PROFIT

 

Whew, I said it three more times! guess that makes me evil too.

 

I don't think even the most socialist among us has a problem with a business making a profit. My question for some companies, and I don't mean RCCL in this instance, but when is enough profit enough? I was in downtown Disney back in January and I was frankly shocked at the pricing of souveniers. I would have bought a number of gifts for family but I was so appalled by the pricing I bought a mug.

 

My thoughts - they could turn a tidy profit be really rich and not Gouge the consumer.

[Kellie Poodle]

I'm just curious as to what is wrong with NCL and you saying what you are saying. How many times have you cruised on NCL to make this statement?

 

Twice in the late 80's and they were fabulous cruises. One Freestyle in 2005 was all it took to keep me from ever sailing with them again.

 

NCL and I are not a good fit. I enjoy the MDR experience on a cruise ship and that's not at all possible with the open seating on NCL for us as we travel as a couple and the ship we were on stubbornly refused to allow a reservation in the MDR for 2 people. As we enjoy the shows (their shows are great), we needed to eat in a specific time range. At that time so did everyone else so there was never a night when we did not have to stand in line for upwards of 20 minutes to get a table. We always asked for "first available".

 

The ship was dirty. The cabin steward was just awful at his job.

 

I stood in a line for 45 minutes to attend a chocolate buffet and when I finally got there I was handed a PAPER PLATE! The attitude was "take your stuff and get out of here" I was simply not used to being treated that way on a cruise ship.

 

The food in the buffet was at the level of high school cafeteria. Nothing was edible.

 

There were more things. I sent a 3 page letter to the president of the company.

 

I'm sure there are people who are a good fit with NCL, but I'm not one of them.

 

Remember.....you asked :)

[Kellie Poodle]

The wine at the Diamond event is plonk. What they served free on Mariner of the Seas at the Diamond event was some kind of house brand that was so bad I would not drink it even for free. My TA did send a bottle of wine to my cabin LOL, it was the same plonk they were serving at the evening Diamond event.

 

That said I never have and never will pack a bottle of wine in a suitcase even on cruise lines that allow a bottle. A lot can happen in the handling of a suitcase. A broken bottle might not be likely but it is conceivable. And as you say it is extra weight and takes up space. The only way I would bring an allowed bottle onboard is carry it on.

 

I agree with you about the wine. It's not the best, but I can drink it.

 

Magellan's has something called "bottle armor" which works very well in a suitcase. We flew from Texas to San Diego (including changing planes from the local airport to Houston) with one bottle in each suitcase and no mishaps. Also took home a bottle of pineapple wine from Hawaii in a bottle armor. It was fine. This was a Celebrity cruise, so we didn't break any rules.

[TEXASMUNK]

The Disney price comparision... you are right, but you did what Consumers should do, make their own decision..like which cruise line to buy a vacation from, what trinkets to buy, etc.

We truly have become a society that wants to be "protected" from the evils of the world.....

You are just about `100% right....heck maybe even more!

[Cuizer2]

They are not trying to protect themselves from being sued. They are protecting their profits. Much of their profit comes from onboard spending. Liquor is one of the best sellers.

 

They don't make enough profit off of liquor in ten sailing to cover the cost of the lawyers, let alone the seven figure settlement, that a Smith like case will cost them.

 

Look at it this way, if you were correct, and you obviously are not, Royal Caribbean would always have this policy. The policy changed. Why? Because liquor sales were down? No. The number of people who smuggled would remain fairly constant, so that was not it. What changed were the Smith like lawsuits.

 

Again, it is not the profits that Royal Caribbean is concerned with. Royal Caribbean is simply trying to protect its assets.

 

Look at it another way, to make up the lost profits Royal Caribbean could simply charge an extra $1 per day per person. That would amount to an extra $15,000 to $40,000 per week, which would more than make up for the amount of lost liquor sales.

 

It is obvious that the concern is not a few dollars in lost sales, but rather the few million a Smith like lawsuit would cost them.

[onyourtoes]

I've been cruising mostly Royal Caribbean since 1995 and they didn't allow anyone to bring on wine even back then. Even back then, when we bought a bottle in the store onboard it was delivered the last night of the cruise.

 

I beg to differ. I remember cruising Sovereign in 1998 and bought a bottle of Banana rum (from a vendor in the Bahamas) for a friend. I was able to bring the bottle back to my room. It was not taken from me and delivered on the last night of the cruise. I can't remember when that policy started, but I know it could not have been 1995.

 

Happy cruising to all:)

[onyourtoes]

One thing about RCCL...they'll cater to your every need...for the right price.

 

 

That holds true for hotels, resorts, airlines, Carnival, Disney, Princess, Norwegian ...

[PhoenixCruiser]

I beg to differ. I remember cruising Sovereign in 1998 and bought a bottle of Banana rum (from a vendor in the Bahamas) for a friend. I was able to bring the bottle back to my room. It was not taken from me and delivered on the last night of the cruise. I can't remember when that policy started, but I know it could not have been 1995.

 

Happy cruising to all:)

 

You are correct, Royal changed their policy on August 5, 2005.

 

###

[onyourtoes]

If people who agree with policies, procedures, etc of a cruise line and disagree with a poster who does not is called a "Cheerleader," what do you call a poster who creates a thread in a crazy font to intentionally incite other posters with negativity of a specific cruise line on a board dedicated to that line? Particularly when they go on to latter play the sympathy card (I feel battered) after receiving just the response they expected. :confused:

 

 

A Drama Queen?;)

[suzyed]

I don't think even the most socialist among us has a problem with a business making a profit. My question for some companies, and I don't mean RCCL in this instance, but when is enough profit enough? I was in downtown Disney back in January and I was frankly shocked at the pricing of souveniers. I would have bought a number of gifts for family but I was so appalled by the pricing I bought a mug.

 

My thoughts - they could turn a tidy profit be really rich and not Gouge the consumer.

 

My brother always says: "Disney doesn't just want some of your money, they want all of your money."

 

LOL! I happen to really enjoy Disney World...nobody does it like Disney, but you are right...the prices are really high. I sometimes wonder how whole families can afford to stay on Disney property, go to the parks, eat the food, buy their t-shirts and hats...etc. I know they have packages, but yikes! It's so expensive! I guess if they budget for it all year, many can swing it.

[suzyed]

 

Water and pop, in moderation, is normally not a problem

 

But it is not "allowed".

[Charles4515]

 

But it is not "allowed".

 

I am waiting to hear the "Smith" people explain how the banning of non alcoholic beverages is not about revenue enhancement.

[cruiseclues]

Early March 2012. On the Explorer of the Seas coming back aboard from St Maarten, I had two bottles of the local liquor and expected someone at a table to stop me and register my bottles to be returned the last day. No one was at the desk, so I went to to the service desk and asked them if I could turn it in to them. They said to just take it to my cabin. At all the other ports, there was always someone at the table to register your liquor, and take it from you.

 

I'm certainly not complaining about it, but it seems very strange for a Cruise Line so concerned about bringing liquor on board. :)

[suzyed]

 

I am waiting to hear the "Smith" people explain how the banning of non alcoholic beverages is not about revenue enhancement.

 

I have been waiting for the same thing. ;)

[Finbar127]

Water and pop, in moderation, is normally not a problem

It may not be a problem but is a violation of the cruise line policy. From the RCI FAQ :

Q: Can I bring liquor or non-alcoholic beverages (from home or from a port) onboard?

A: Guests are not allowed to bring alcoholic or non-alcoholic beverages onboard for consumption or any other use. Alcoholic beverages that are purchased in ports-of-call or from Shops On Board will be stored by the ship and delivered to your stateroom on the last day of the sailing. Alcoholic beverages seized on embarkation day will not be returned.

While it does not say that non-alcoholic beverages will be confiscated, it does say that they are not allowed.

Those among us that loudly denounce people that bring alcohol onboard should be equally committed to denouncing those who would bring soda onboard. After all, it is a violation of the rules. Many that pontificate about the evils of "smuggling" alcohol have no problem bringing on board soda, extension cords, power strips or other banned items.

[Finbar127]

 

I am waiting to hear the "Smith" people explain how the banning of non alcoholic beverages is not about revenue enhancement.

 

Don't hold your breath.

[Julesben]

Your decision, so bye bye enjoy your future cruises, more room onboard for others. RCI will have to cry themselves to sleep over the loss:rolleyes:

 

Obviously, you would be a loss then!

[Paulxyz2004]

[/size]

 

 

 

It may not be a problem but is a violation of the cruise line policy. From the RCI FAQ :

 

Q: Can I bring liquor or non-alcoholic beverages (from home or from a port) onboard?

A: Guests are not allowed to bring alcoholic or non-alcoholic beverages onboard for consumption or any other use. Alcoholic beverages that are purchased in ports-of-call or from Shops On Board will be stored by the ship and delivered to your stateroom on the last day of the sailing. Alcoholic beverages seized on embarkation day will not be returned.

 

While it does not say that non-alcoholic beverages will be confiscated, it does say that they are not allowed.

 

Those among us that loudly denounce people that bring alcohol onboard should be equally committed to denouncing those who would bring soda onboard. After all, it is a violation of the rules. Many that pontificate about the evils of "smuggling" alcohol have no problem bringing on board soda, extension cords, power strips or other banned items.

 

I´m right there with you about the other banned items. To me it´s the same regardless what the banned item is and I´m not in favor of smuggling non-alcoholic items either.

 

While it doesn´t matter to me, as I don´t need to bring anything to drink onboard, there´s plenty onboard available for me, I have closely checked my cruise contract for my upcoming cruise. It´s only mentioning alcohol. There´s no word about non-alcoholic beverages in there.

I know it´s been on and off in the past and that´s why I checked. At this time it´s definitely not in there. I guess it´s one of the inconsistencies with RCI.

[teajak]

Don't hold your breath.

Only place to get it is from the grieving widow, they settled with her not the Smith family.Just what i read in the news reports.

[3dog]

I am waiting to hear the "Smith" people explain how the banning of non alcoholic beverages is not about revenue enhancement.

 

While I am not a "Smith" person' date=' luggage that does not contain fluids and cans is much easier to check for other banned or potentially dangerous items, and is therefore not about "revenue enhancement", but instead would be about lowering costs (and therefore increasing profits).

 

 

Though this is picking some nits, the point here is that this policy is not strictly about "revenue enhancement" or "stopping lawsuits", but about both, and then some (ever considered that they might actually be testing some waters about where there is a price/performance threshold?).

 

While I believe that allowing a bottle of wine per person is not going to significantly impact profits (and even if the above scanning scenario were an issue, it could easily be stated that one bottle per legal adult could be [i']carried on[/i] and not packed), the cruise line has set this policy and not CC, such that the arguments here are mostly moot (including this one), but only help provoke additional flaming.

[Cuizer2]

I am waiting to hear the "Smith" people explain how the banning of non alcoholic beverages is not about revenue enhancement.

 

At least three people have told you this. Ignoring the post doesn't make you any more correct.

[Ocean Dancer]

Revenue aside, some of us responsable adults would like a nightcap on our balcony. I do not wish to take of my robe and get redressed to go to a bar. So I don't. That revenue is lost anyway.

[Artemis]

I agree with those who think money is the primary motivation for the policy. It sure has been the age-old rationale for banning outside food and drink at all kinds of places.

 

I don't think "the Smith like lawsuits" has anything to do with it. Royal Caribbean doesn't pay personal injury and wrongful death liabilities. Its liability insurers "cover the cost of the lawyers" and "the seven figure settlement that a Smith like case will cost them." Consequently, Royal Caribbean doesn't view this type of litigation exposure as a risk to its assets. (All quoted phrases come from Cuizer2's post.)

 

See, e.g., the Legal Proceedings paragraph on page 35 of the current (2011) Annual Report. Here, the company is required by SEC and similar law to disclose legal claims that may materially impact its financial well-being. Royal Caribbean accounts for a shareholder class action, a Florida labor class action and a dispute over the way it does business in Puerto Rico (all three of which claims it would owe "out of pocket," i.e., they are non-insurable exposures). Then, in the last paragraph, the company states:

 

"We are routinely involved in other claims typical within the cruise vacation industry. The majority of these claims are covered by insurance. We believe the outcome of such claims, net of expected insurance recoveries, will not have a material adverse impact on our financial condition or results of operations and cash flows."

 

http://216.139.227.101/interactive/rcl2011/

 

(You can flip through prior years' reports and find the same thing, i.e., no mention of Smith or similar suits. You can also read the annual list of factors Royal Caribbean does consider material to its financial condition.)

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk