Time to Take A Stand - Elimination of In Room Consumption

[LonW]

"AND they are diminishing my cruising pleasure by instituting this policy and that angers me"

 

If it bothers you that much, you might have a problem.

[truffles2]

Critterchick, as a stockholder I also think they should look out for the bottom line but without alienating their loyal repeat customers--without which the bottom line really suffers.

Schplinky...perhaps I did not express myself simply enough....it means that I enjoy a drink in my cabin while getting ready for dinner. I would not go to a bar to get this and bring it back--I would just do without. If I am at the pool or anywhere else and wish a drink, I order it from the bar. I do not fix drinks in the cabin and take them around the ship.

[critterchick]

Truffles, I think you'll still have the opportunity to do that, it will just cost you a few more dollars (or maybe a lot more dollars, remains to be seen) and your selection won't be as great. Or maybe they will revamp the room service menu to increase the selection. Time will tell. Now, if you get onboard your next cruise and report back that you can't get anything or that it was $50 for a bottle of Smirnoff vodka, then I would understand your angst - you'll feel the pain the wine drinkers already do.

 

I'm a loyal RCI passenger, and I'm not nearly as upset by the surcharges for Johnny Rockets, specialty coffees and alcohol as I am by the base price of a JS cabin on the Jewel 12-night Baltics itinerary. It's gone from $3300pp to $4999pp in 2 years. If we do that itinerary, it'll be in a D-1 or lower category. Somebody else will have my JS 1100.:(

[joeinwpb]

As a shareholder, I applaud them looking out for the bottom line. It's what they're supposed to do. I agree that they can't just toss customer service out the window, but they have to make up for increased fuel costs and inflation, however modest, somehow. And conforming to an industry standard seems perfectly reasonable to me.

As I am just a passenger, being stepped on by your company.

You as an owner, who seems to be astute on the company’s bottom line, and “applaud ” the actions of RCI. How much do you estimate your profit will be, for your shares? Please be honest with us.

 

Are you sure angering so many is good for the bottom line?

[Dolphin-dan]

I just got off the phone with RCCL customer service regarding this idiotic, short-sighted decision by RCCL elimnating our ability to purchase our favorite spirits in the gift shop, pay the $9.50, and enjoy a pre/post dinner cocktail in our staterooms. The person in Customer Service was very nice, made note of my views, but suggested that I write a letter as it may be more effective. While I was talking to him, I could hear another person next to him responding to a similar complaint from another customer.

 

If we are serious about taking issue with this decision, we need to be vocal about our views and communicate them in a constructive manner to the management of RCCL. E-mail is great, but working for the greatest? bureaucracy on earth, the U.S. Government, I speak from experience whe I say a written letter gets more attention than an e-mail. E-mail generally results in a "head count" whereas a letter requires someone to put a hand on it and, in the interest of "keeping the customer satisfied", generally results in a personalized,written response, not a canned e-mail reply.

 

Also, if you're a member of Crown & Anchor, make it known to them They make such a big deal about the C&A people being the core to their success, let them know how we feel. We're Diamond members, made a mention of it and suggested they take a page from Princess if the distribution is an issue and let us buy it up front like you do with Princess.

 

It seems like the PR department at RCCL is out to lunch.

 

You People do realize that maybe this will eliminate some under aged drinking right?

[Fury1995]

As a shareholder, I applaud them looking out for the bottom line. It's what they're supposed to do. I agree that they can't just toss customer service out the window, but they have to make up for increased fuel costs and inflation, however modest, somehow. And conforming to an industry standard seems perfectly reasonable to me.

 

So, is that the explaination you were given at the last shareholders meeting? :confused:

[Fury1995]

Dup. Post

[Schplinky]

I doubt the elimination of this consumption fee would hurt RCL too much. We were surprised you could even take stuff back to your room and would not have expected to at a land-based resort or any other place. Sure, change is hard if that's what you're used to but the same people would be carping about higher prices.

 

RCCL is changing a lot of policies. The new standard pricing policy may mean that their ships run less full but it also means they will derive more revenue per paying pax. This liquor thing may annoy some for whom drinking cheaply in their room is paramount to the cruise experience but I suspect far more people would not have expected to be able to and will pay for their cocktails through room service or other venues.

 

They are a company that tries to balance customer service with revenue and I think that for most, this isn't a deal-breaker. Even if it is, it doesn't sound like you can pay a consumption fee someplace else, anyway.

 

It might be time to get over it and move on.

[critterchick]

I don't attend shareholder meetings, and I haven't a clue what the bottom line implications are. I'm just speculating, like most everybody else. I don't know what the real reason is for eliminating the ability to take a bottle back to your room anymore than anybody else does. I assume it has to do with profit. Maybe they will save money by reducing the number of bottles they carry and hence lightening up the ship, or by eliminating the number of people working in the shop (even if they're employed by another entity they still take up space, eat food, etc.). I am skeptical that passenger safety or prevention of underage drinking is a motive, noble as it may sound. If that were the case, the bartenders would be instructed not to serve drinks to anybody who appeared to inebriated and you would not be able to buy a bottle of anything from room service, either. I think it's purely profit-driven. Maybe it will backfire as people start bringing gallon bottles of "shampoo" or "hand sanitizer" on board. We'll see.

 

 

 

I haven't read anywhere that you won't be able to enjoy that pre-dinner, pre-breakfast, pre-nighttime drink in your cabin. You'll just have go about doing it differently by ordering from room service or drinking "Head & Shoulders." Maybe you'll pay more. Maybe you won't. Maybe they'll stock what you want. Maybe they won't. We don't know. I assume you will pay more, but maybe cutting out the middleman will allow them to increase their room service profits without imposing a huge penalty on you.

 

 

 

As for the "angry people," I'm estimating that it's a negligible percentage of the cruising population. I find it hard to believe that an extra $xx for cocktails would be the "make or break" part of a decision whether to cruise on Royal Caribbean for all that many people. If all of the cruiselines other than the super-premium ones have the same policy, where will they go?

 

 

 

Nobody likes changes that cost them more money, but I'd rather pay an extra $20 for the extras that I want and have you pay an extra $20 for the extras that you want than have us both pay $10 to pay for the extras whether either of us uses them or not.. OK, it sounds right in my brain, don't know if I'm communicating it properly.

[joeinwpb]

Critterchick - You have made an honest and straightforward answer to my question,

I respect you very much for that. But you do miss the point of why people are so angry, and that is they (RCI), are taking a privilege away that has always existed. And their attitude is very arrogant.

 

Our point is - If they need more money they should simply charge more for the cruise. Not take away peoples privileges.

 

Where can people go if cruise lines pursue their present course? I'm so angry at their attitude I will be doing more resorts. They are out of this world gorgeous. The suites are nicer, they afford the privacy of your own home, there are none of the Gestapo like tactics that security always puts you through, when you check in, and they're all in beautiful areas of the country, and abroad.

 

Cruising is not without competition, as you seem to think.

 

After my talk with the man in RCI Customer relations, the other day. The company I loved, and respected so much - just is no more. His arrogance has turned me completely around.

 

I respect you, even like you. But I can not agree with taking away privileges, as a source of revenue, nor can I applaud their attitude either.

[Fury1995]

I doubt the elimination of this consumption fee would hurt RCL too much. We were surprised you could even take stuff back to your room and would not have expected to at a land-based resort or any other place. Sure, change is hard if that's what you're used to but the same people would be carping about higher prices.

 

RCCL is changing a lot of policies. The new standard pricing policy may mean that their ships run less full but it also means they will derive more revenue per paying pax. This liquor thing may annoy some for whom drinking cheaply in their room is paramount to the cruise experience but I suspect far more people would not have expected to be able to and will pay for their cocktails through room service or other venues.

 

They are a company that tries to balance customer service with revenue and I think that for most, this isn't a deal-breaker. Even if it is, it doesn't sound like you can pay a consumption fee someplace else, anyway.

 

It might be time to get over it and move on.

 

I can understand your rebuttle on the revenue issue, however, only some people are upset on this point. As far as I'm (and others I've noticed) are concerned, let them make their money. Again, why not let pax enjoy a "more expensive" bottle in their own cabin with fellow friends and family on their "own" time? Everyone gets what they want. Why be forced to wait for cabin service to bring the "exact-amount-requested" to your cabin? Kinda takes the buzz away, huh?

[Merion_Mom]

MMMM.....that was a delicious 16.9 oz plastic bottle of Tropicana OrangeAde I just finished.............whatever shall I do with this empty plastic bottle?

 

Carol

 

IN EXACTLY THREE AND A HALF DAYS, I WILL HAVE BEEN ON BOARD THE ENCHANTMENT OF THE SEAS FOR TWO HOURS!

[Schplinky]

 

Our point is - If they need more money they should simply charge more for the cruise. Not take away peoples privileges.

 

 

I enjoy a coctktail or three as much as the next person but I have a few non-drinking friends who would disagree with this and so should you. You're willing to pay more (how much?) for your cruise for this privilege of drinking in your room but you won't pay to buy a bottle from room service or to visit a bar.

 

A cruise line is not going to charge more for everyone so a portion of their pax can drink in their rooms. The goal of any hospitality provider is to keep the base price as low as possible. I'm sure of any cruise company could operate like the airlines, they would. "cruise now for only $389 a week (with a $300 fuel surcharge).

 

RCL will likely lose an incredibly small percentage of folks over this. Many who want to drink in their room are bringing it on anyway.

 

Clearly, thisis a decision you're not fond of but you have to decide now between cruising on RCL and dealing with it, not cruising at all or going posh and cruising a line that includes drinks int he price.

[Andipanda1]

You People do realize that maybe this will eliminate some under aged drinking right?

 

I don't think people realize this. Or care, unfortunately. It won't get rid of all the underaged drinking, but it will cut down on the intrepid 16 year olds that knock back a few in their cabins. And maybe it will discourage those same 16 year olds from bribing older cruisers into buying booze for them.

[MrsPete]

What percentage of passengers were using this 9.50 in-room consumption deal anyway? I was under the impression that most people either bought straight from the bar or brought their own.

 

If a side-effect is that it's a little harder for teens to get their hands on alcohol, then I think it's a good thing. The drunken teens bother me much more than the elimination of the in-room consumption fee.

[moisture]

I guess I'll just have to become a smuggler.

[Schplinky]

Welcome to the boards, smuggler.

[Schplinky]

Welcome to the boards, moisture.

[moisture]

thank you. I'll be the guy wearing the trench coat in the middle of the summer

[critterchick]

Critterchick - You have made an honest and straightforward answer to my question,

I respect you very much for that. But you do miss the point of why people are so angry, and that is they (RCI), are taking a privilege away that has always existed. And their attitude is very arrogant.

 

Our point is - If they need more money they should simply charge more for the cruise. Not take away peoples privileges.

 

The taking away of the privileges is something we all have to endure in all aspects of live. The arrogance is another matter. I haven't yet had to deal with the RCI customer service reps, except at the C&A Society, and they've always been very nice. Rudeness and arrogance are simply intolerable, IHMO. I suspect that the CSRs are poorly trained and they are the ones who have to deal with the irate public. There's really no excuse for the former. Corporate should have sent around a memo with a PLAUSIBLE explanation attached to give to customers who call in.

I noticed that several people were advised to write a letter, which I agree would have more impact than a tally of irate calls with no substance. And just go to the top, to the chairman. About 10 years ago when we couldn't get any satisfaction from the CSRs at Hewlett Packard for our non-functioning PC, I faxed a letter to the chairman. I had a response and resolution in a couple of hours as the letter trickled down to marketing. Now, I don't think there will be a satisfactory resolution, but maybe at least a cordial response would do something to soothe some ruffled feathers.

I respect you, even like you.

Awwww. I like you, too.:D But as for charging me more so you can have drinks in your cabin, probably without inviting me over, fuggedaboutit!

[lindslea]

I disagree with whoever said the companies should raise the price of the cruise to compensate for this in-room alcohol thing.

 

Some want an after-dinner drink in their room and some don't. Some want to drink mass quantities in their room and some don't. And some people don't want to drink at all. It's a choice. I'm guessing it's the "mass quantitiy" drinkers the cruiselines want money from.

 

Maybe I'll wander up to the bar for a drink and maybe I won't. But, what counts is that I am going to have a GREAT time on my cruise! It's difficult for me to understand why some people are upset over this to the point of not even wanting to cruise again.

[WeBeCruisin']

We've never seen booze in the minifridge.

 

It had been four years since we cruised on Royal Caribbean and I thought they had beer and mini-bottles on our previous trips, but I could be wrong. Our last three cruises were on Celebrity, and I know they had beer and mini-bottles and wine in the mini-bar.

 

Allen

[joeinwpb]

[/size][/font][/b]

Critterchick - I've always said, "There's never a time when two reasonable people can't agree with each other." Now you know why I got really ticked off with RCI. On the other hand think of all the things you enjoy that I don't use. I'm paying for them when I make my reservation. Maybe you enjoy the pool. There's a huge expense. I never use it - NEVER. I pay for it though. Should I expect the people that use the pool to be charged for it?, so I don't have to?

This is just one of many examples. The free entertainment, is another. I consider these all privileges that make cruising fun. Just spend a moment and think of things you do on the ship that you just take for granted. Also what would you think if you were hearing others saying, "Good I shouldn't have to pay for the things that Critterchick enjoys?" Make her pay. Cause I don't do it.

 

Please give that some thought. If you’re as honest with yourself, as I believe you are - You will also conclude, as I have done. (And not just on this issue, but a long time before) Taking away privileges, and pleasures from others to make it cheaper for you, is not the moral high ground. With this course. You can be sure that the things you enjoy will be next, as the Cruise Company removes them one, by one. I promise you I would never support such an action, and cheer it along, but it will happen. Watch and see who's cheering.

 

Oh Yes! You’re welcome to our balcony stateroom, for a libation, anytime, As a welcome guest. But your not paying for me or my wife if we enjoy a before diner cocktail. You sound like your treating us to a drink. We both know that’s not true. It's not costing you a cent.

[Fury1995]

Critterchick - I've always said, "There's never a time when two reasonable people can't agree with each other." Now you know why I got really ticked off with RCI. On the other hand think of all the things you enjoy that I don't use. I'm paying for them when I make my reservation. Maybe you enjoy the pool. There's a huge expense. I never use it - NEVER. I pay for it though. Should I expect the people that use the pool to be charged for it?, so I don't have to?

This is just one of many examples. The free entertainment, is another. I consider these all privileges that make cruising fun. Just spend a moment and think of things you do on the ship that you just take for granted. Also what would you think if you were hearing others saying, "Good I shouldn't have to pay for the things that Critterchick enjoys?" Make her pay. Cause I don't do it.

 

Please give that some thought. If you’re as honest with yourself, as I believe you are - You will also conclude, as I have done. (And not just on this issue, but a long time before) Taking away privileges, and pleasures from others to make it cheaper for you, is not the moral high ground. With this course. You can be sure that the things you enjoy will be next, as the Cruise Company removes them one, by one. I promise you I would never support such an action, and cheer it along, but it will happen. Watch and see who's cheering.

 

Oh Yes! You’re welcome to our balcony stateroom, for a libation, anytime, As a welcome guest. But your not paying for me or my wife if we enjoy a before diner cocktail. You sound like your treating us to a drink. We both know that’s not true. It's not costing you a cent.

 

Very well said.

[critterchick]

We all pay for stuff we don't use on a cruise (I don't use the pools, either - salt water without sand doesn't work for me), but you're not paying for your drinks when you make your reservation - it's already an additional charge. You've been able to purchase a bottle of xx for $yy. Now the price may be going up or your liquor of choice may be unavailable. I understand that you're not pleased about it, and if customer service has been as obnoxious and ill-informed as people have reported, that's just wrong. If drinks in the bars go from $5.00 to $6.00, that's just something we have to pay.

 

But prices go up. Massage prices have gone up (I know they're independently operated by Steiner, so it's a flawed analogy), but only those of us who already pay for them are going to pay the increase - it's not added onto the basic fare, nor should it be, IMHO.

 

I think the cruiselines are all analyzing their onboard offerings and deciding what to "unbundle" from the basic package. They will charge what they can without alienating a big group of cruisers. Johnny Rockets used to be free, didn't it (I haven't sailed a Voyager class ship yet). Same with cappuccino, orange juice at dinner, ice cream (or is Ben & Jerry's just a new item that always cost $$). Those who indulge have to pay for it. Now, when they charge $5 to get a down pillow instead of an upholstered brick or $10 to use the gym (they already charge for many classes, so let's not say they'll never do it), I may get fed up enough to try one of the super premium lines. But I think it'll still be a relative bargain. I'll just have a fatter Seapass bill at the end of the cruise.

 

I'm going to check in a couple of weeks when we're on Monarch (which has fairly strict Booze Police at embarkation) and see if (1) the room service menu has anything reasonable by the bottle and (2) whether you can buy a bottle at one of the bars to take back to your room and if so, what it costs. I'll let you know. If you can stil enjoy your cocktails in your room (and we do, too, by the way), then I still don't see this turn of events as any more significant than some of the other new charges.