Dynamic Dining is "Future of Cruising," Says Royal Caribbean CEO

[lido deck larry]

[quote name='tripster']I have to agree with your son. There was so much to love and enjoy on the "old fashion" cruises! They were definitely special.

I think that the changes being made may be good for the larger ships where there is everything and anything onboard (a floating destination in itself), but I think that Royal Caribbean should leave the smaller/older ships (Radiance, Vision, and Sovereign Class) with the original/traditional cruise experience (including Traditional Dining).

Why can't Royal Caribbean offer the best of both worlds?!
(Newer, Bigger Ships ~ New/Updated Offerings; Smaller, Older Ships ~ Original/Classic Offerings)[/QUOTE]
Unlike your son, the are millions from his generation who have never cruised, didn't grow up taking cruise vacations, and could care less about the traditions. The next generation of cruisers want a vacation of the present, not of the past. I'm sure his kids will somehow survive without experiencing a midnight buffet...

I'm not trying to be mean here, but it's the reality, and RCI is only planning accordingly. Edited April 25, 2015 by lido deck larry

[Donsyb]

[quote name='bogofman']consider this when placing an order

English chef, restaurateur and media personality, Jamie Oliver, has a net worth of $400 million according to the Sunday Times Rich List.[/QUOTE]

Most of that is from his books and tv shows. The restaurants make about £5million per year, and I imagine he's not the only investor

[Biker19]

[quote name='critterchick'] We've never had a problem being seated in MTD without a reservation or getting a reservation on the day we go (although we usually dine late, which is wide open on most sailings, Europe being a notable exception).

What I've read of DD is that one must make reservations in advance of the sailing (and hope that they don't get deleted) or plan to spend time onboard figuring out options. Neither sounds like a good plan to me.[/QUOTE]

You are ignoring the very viable third option (has been mentioned on plenty of DD related threads) - do as you do for MTD and just show up. Sure, if you show up at 7PM, at the height of dinner rush hour, you won't get in right a way, but go late like you did for MTD and you'll get in.

[Stitchman]

[quote name='Donsyb']Most of that is from his books and tv shows. The restaurants make about £5million per year, and I imagine he's not the only investor[/QUOTE]

I wouldn't mind, but he's not even Italian lol.
I think that's the funniest thing.

like that Italian restaurant in Lees near Oldham, run by an Asian family, I thought I was in the twilight zone lol.

[Folk Singer]

[quote name='tripster']I have to agree with your son. There was so much to love and enjoy on the "old fashion" cruises! They were definitely special.

I think that the changes being made may be good for the larger ships where there is everything and anything onboard (a floating destination in itself), but I think that Royal Caribbean should leave the smaller/older ships (Radiance, Vision, and Sovereign Class) with the original/traditional cruise experience (including Traditional Dining).

Why can't Royal Caribbean offer the best of both worlds?!
(Newer, Bigger Ships ~ New/Updated Offerings; Smaller, Older Ships ~ Original/Classic Offerings)[/QUOTE]

Probably it is the all important bottom line as opposed to the Loyal to Royal anymore.:(:(

[kelmac]

It's all good!

 

Real first world problems here.:) My wife and I have 53 cruises together since 1993, and for the most part have enjoyed everything cruising these past 22 years.

We love the formality of Cunard and enjoyed our traditional dining on Celebrity. Then, we tried Blu, and it was a great change of pace. We've mixed MDR times with alternative restaurants, and it seemed outstanding. Oceania has wonderful cuisine with open seating and country club casual; Azamara the same. Last month we tried NCL again using the UDP (Ultimate Dining Package), and it was one of the best experiences in dining we've had lately.

 

In June, we will swing from traditional dining on Celebrity's Reflection to Dynamic Dining on RCL's Anthem. It all seems great to us!!

 

Embracing change is what happy people do!:)

 

Let go and enjoy!

Kel

[RLM77]

Well said!

 

Couldn't agree more.

[rockdoctor]

I have never sailed on RCL and I don't plan on doing so. I don't like their vision of the future.

[Cruising_Tiger]

I hate waiting lines so it sounds like DD isn't for me. I think I'll be doing a lot of Room Service on ships with DD.

[Maraprince]

I think everyone here is forgetting about the math on Quantum class ships - RCI couldn't do much more than 20-30% classic even if they wanted to - the seating capacity of the venues won't support it (about 1800 seats for a ship that can carry up to about 4600). They need to have about 2.5-3 sittings per night to fit everyone in (depending on # of guests on board). So it's not guests choosing the low percentage or RCI limiting for some nefarious reason - that's all that will fit.

 

The story is a bit different on Oasis class, where if needed, they might be able to get away with doing all Classic.

 

The DD concept was not really thought out before it was rolled out to the public. Just because RCL declared that DD was the wave of the future doesn't mean their passengers will unconditionally love it. Software wasn't working properly and cause more grief. Not a lot of promotion of the new DD concept was provided to passengers prior to Q going into service.

 

Add to the problem of trying to book the shows and reserve dining times that kept disappearing. If you are on vacation, you do not need to be stressed out even before you get on board, nor do you want to take your chances getting the dining times/restaurants and standing on lines to do so.

 

Remember lots of passengers booked Q a year or more ago when DD wasn't even on the horizon.

 

Now that the MDR has been cut up into smaller venues there is no way everyone who wants to have 1st or 2nd traditional dining times can be accommodated. Thus, the dreaded wait list.

 

 

MARAPRINCE

[CanadaRob]

Maraprince I can see your point. The inaugural season was not highly publicized for this change. After QofS was on this side of the pond it was quite obvious what was going on.

Shame on royal for not getting in front of it and shame on those that heard about it and decided it wasn't for them, went on the ship and then took the time to complain...

[caribbean sailor]

Maybe the reason you are seeing a 30% of reservations choosing Classis, is because RC is not letting many Traditional dinners CHOOSE Classic...and is MAKING them book their cruises as MTD! Several people have stated that they were unable to book Traditional Dining and had to be placed on a Wait List for Early or Late Dining.

 

Hey, maybe that is the whole reason behind it! Maybe they need those low numbers to back up their impending decision to do away with Classic Traditional Dining. :rolleyes: If that were to be the case...how SAD is that?! :eek:

 

Royal can do as they please with this so called dd dining.We will never sail on a ship without traditional dining.There are certain things we like and will not sail without them.We will never sail on a quantum class ship. :)

[LetsGetWet!]

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?

[setsail]

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

 

CLIA is a great source, here is some info to do with formal nights

 

Results of Research (continued)

Q5b2. Which type(s) of onboard atmospheres appeal to you?

Appeal of Various Types of Cruise Atmospheres Travelers prefer: Casual Elegance (64%) and Casual (63%) pull travelers at virtually the same level; however, past cruisers more often opt for the little extra formality of Casual Elegance than non-cruisers (67% vs. 52%) Laid-back (50%) appeals to half of potential cruisers and takes the lead among non-cruisers (75%) Generally trailing the other types of atmospheres, Country Club (24%) outpaces Formal (16%) in every segment except Destination cruisers; Luxury and Destination cruisers choose the more formal attire more often than other segments.

Appeal of Type of Atmosphere (Q5B) BASE: Probably/Definitely Will Cruise

CRUISERS

Casual Elegance: Resort wear, jackets/no ties Casual: Khakis, polo or golf shirts Laid-back: shorts, t-shirts, flip-flops Formal: Black-tie, fancy Country Club: Suit/tie for men/dresses for women

[richstowe]

CLIA is a great source, here is some info to do with formal nights

 

Results of Research (continued)

Q5b2. Which type(s) of onboard atmospheres appeal to you?

Appeal of Various Types of Cruise Atmospheres Travelers prefer: Casual Elegance (64%) and Casual (63%) pull travelers at virtually the same level; however, past cruisers more often opt for the little extra formality of Casual Elegance than non-cruisers (67% vs. 52%) Laid-back (50%) appeals to half of potential cruisers and takes the lead among non-cruisers (75%) Generally trailing the other types of atmospheres, Country Club (24%) outpaces Formal (16%) in every segment except Destination cruisers; Luxury and Destination cruisers choose the more formal attire more often than other segments.

Appeal of Type of Atmosphere (Q5B) BASE: Probably/Definitely Will Cruise

CRUISERS

Casual Elegance: Resort wear, jackets/no ties Casual: Khakis, polo or golf shirts Laid-back: shorts, t-shirts, flip-flops Formal: Black-tie, fancy Country Club: Suit/tie for men/dresses for women

 

According to your data 52% of non-cruisers still opt for Casual Elegance .

So how does this translate into your assertion that they are "not attracted to traditional dining".

52% is not only a significant group , it is in fact a majority ! What am I missing .

[setsail]

According to your data 52% of non-cruisers still opt for Casual Elegance .

So how does this translate into your assertion that they are "not attracted to traditional dining".

52% is not only a significant group , it is in fact a majority ! What am I missing .

 

A lot, "here is some info about FORMAL nights

[Folk Singer]

Do enjoy the Traditional Dining and with the drink prices will probably be our last cruse for a long while until at least the CDN $ goes back up.

[Donsyb]

I wouldn't mind, but he's not even Italian lol.

I think that's the funniest thing.

 

 

And most Michelin starred chefs serving French and Asian food around the world aren't French or Asian - doesn't mean they can't cook good French and Asian food.

 

He may not be Italian but he's been trained by some excellent Italian chefs, and one of them Gennaro Contaldo is very closely involved with Jamie's Italian, both in terms of the menu and training the staff

[RocketMan275]

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

 

 

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.

[Hoopster95]

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?

 

If I remember my numbers that I once read here on CC, D+ and above make up only about 0.1% of C&A, D and up around 1%. Surveying only loyal RCL cruisers would not give them a true market share analysis of what the majority 99% of the rest of C&A really want I guess. With no factual data whatsoever I'm thinking DD grew steam from the popularity of specialty restaurants and MTD... this popularity came from us, the actual cruisers, with plenty of empty chairs in the MDR every night on all cruises I've been on the past 4 years with many cruisers opting for Specialty, Wind Jammer, etc... big time waste of staff and food imo. Therefore create DD... reserve so that they know staffing and how much food, etc. I figure plenty of pros vs. cons for the cruise lines.

 

Interesting to note that many long time experienced cruisers have multiple future bookings on Anthem after experiencing Quantum this past winter/spring (ie. read Bugsy's current LIVE review that just ended for only one example). Many loved Quantum. Many hated Quantum. Even more hated Quantum without even having any real experience... like a child who says they hate roller coasters, then at age 10 go on their first roller coaster ride kicking and screaming, then all they want to do after actually experiencing it is doing it over and over and over again cause they love it so much. Facing change and facing a phobia (in this case losing the much beloved traditional dining for example) head on is difficult, and I think the much advertised and non-experience hatred of DD on these forums exacerbated those opinions. I also think a key issue with DD was that many cruisers went on Quantum were already apprehensive and hating the whole experience, especially with the horrible booking process on the RCL website before even setting foot on the ship... the negative feelings were already pre-destined imho, and then on those few early sailings where DD was not executed by staff totally and exponentially compounded the hatred of DD.

 

Now that things seemed to be worked out, and as per the most recent Anthem updates on her inaugural, experienced cruisers posting seem to be loving the ship.

[brfan]

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.

 

I think Royal did misjudge. I recall reading a while back (don't know if it was Adam or Richard) who mentioned they were going after the demographic that doesn't view cruising as a vacation choice. While the research you posted shows what Royal needs to do to attract that demographic, it doesn't take into consideration that there may be nothing that any cruise line can do to get people who don't view cruising as a vacation option for one reason or another to suddenly start booking cruises. If rock climbing walls and wave runners couldn't get these people to book, I doubt dynamic dining or the "smart" ship concept will either. While it might have lured some to book, I'm guessing it was not enough and that's why they've gone with the classic option to try to keep their current traditional cruisers happy.

[LetsGetWet!]

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.

[Maraprince]

Maraprince I can see your point. The inaugural season was not highly publicized for this change. After QofS was on this side of the pond it was quite obvious what was going on.

Shame on royal for not getting in front of it and shame on those that heard about it and decided it wasn't for them, went on the ship and then took the time to complain...

 

In the US they are running TV commercials for the Anthem but no mention of making reservations for dinner or the shows. It does show the various on-deck activities along with the pink gorilla, a large golden hand pointing and a quick look at the inside of the ship. 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!:(

 

MARAPRINCE

Edited April 27, 2015 by Maraprince

[LetsGetWet!]

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:

[RocketMan275]

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.

 

Are you saying that everyone on this board that states an opinion should include a disclaimer that it is an opinion? People give their opinions on this board all the time without such a disclaimer.