All Inclusive

[bohaiboy]

We are on the Encore in April for a IST-IST 14 day sailing, our first with SB.  Looking at future sailings also.  Is it just me but when I hear All Inclusive Sailing, as SB promotes on their website, wouldn't or shouldn't at least one shore excursion be included?  I know SS and Regent include at least one excursion in each port.  SS also now includes transportation from your home to the departing airport and return home at up to 50 miles included in fare,

 

Thoughts. 

[cruiseej]

"All inclusive" means whatever a company defines it to be. No cruise line offers free spa treatments, for instance, but there is an "arms war" among the luxury cruise companies. First came all-inclusive alcohol, which all the competitors matched. Regent was the first to add included excursions in each port several years ago. They've been adding more included amenities: free wi-fi; not just included air, but included business class air; included home to and from airport transfers; free laundry… While Silversea, Seabourn and Crystal didn't originally match Regent, it seems the gap was becoming too large. Silversea included economy air on most cruises a while back, and most recently, added some included excursions in each port and adding included private transportation between home and airport. 

 

Seabourn has seemed to lay back from this arms race. Only recently, they added free Wi-Fi -- a pretty small  move. There's logic to not adding all these inclusions and raising prices commensurately. Some percentage of cruisers don't want ship excursions; they prefer to do their own thing in ports. Some people want to book their own air using frequent flier miles. Some have achieved high loyalty levels ad don't want to see loyalty benefits handed out for free to all. The question I see is whether Seabourn can avoid losing customers, especially to Silversea, or whether they will join the race to add more included features. Seabourn customers are generally very happy and loyal -- but they may lose ground to comp[eitors who offer more. Do they see a lane for offering less and charging less?

 

Now, add to all this the after-effects of the pandemic. Cruise lines lost millions and, at the corporate parent level, billions of dollars. There will be upward pressure on pricing to earn back some of the lost revenue. And if inflation continues to due supply chain shortages, there will be additional upward pressure on pricing. If Seabourn nudges prices higher, but doesn't match competitors' offerings, they could lose some of their traffic.

 

It will be interesting to see how this plays out over the next year or two. But for now, Seabourn offers fewer of these inclusions than their competitors.

 

 

[marazul]

On the other hand, compare prices in similar itineraries. Included is not free and it is reflected in the prices. In some you can choose not to have the "free" air and you will pay less. On others, the "free" excursions are not the most desirable and you have to pay for the better ones.

[frantic36]

4 hours ago, cruiseej said:

Some percentage of cruisers don't want ship excursions; they prefer to do their own thing in ports.

 

I am definitely one of those people who don't want to be paying for some included excursions that I am unlikely to use. I rarely do ship excursions unless it is somewhere like Sri Lanka, Malaysia etc where the distance and heavy traffic make it wise to be on a ship excursion.

 

One of the reasons I have avoided using Regent and with Silversea it is more their new SALT experience and bigger ships with different dining that appeals, not included excursions.

Edited November 1, 2021 by frantic36

[cruiseej]

12 hours ago, marazul said:

On the other hand, compare prices in similar itineraries. Included is not free and it is reflected in the prices. In some you can choose not to have the "free" air and you will pay less. On others, the "free" excursions are not the most desirable and you have to pay for the better ones.

 

Some things, like air, can be backed out of the fare. Others, like included excursions or drinks, cannot. For the things you can pull out, the credit is often smaller than the value. For instance, when Silversea recently added included home-to-airport private transfers, they raised prices about $250 per cruise to cover the cost of the new service; if you decide not to use the transfer service you get back $100 -- so the cruise line gets some profit whether you use the service or not. 

 

And while included is definitely not free, it seems many people in this market like the idea of paying one fee upfront and not having to pay for additional services as they go along. For those of us who drink alcoholic beverages, this is certainly true; even if I pay more in the cost of my cruise than the a la carte price fro drinks would be, there is a freedom and joy from not having to make a micro decision about water to get another drink or having to sign a bill each time. Excursions and air are a bit different, but the pay-once-and-forget it approach appeals to some travelers more than piecing together their air and purchasing/arranging excursions. Regent clearly thinks this formula works; over the past two decades, they started with drinks, then added excursions, and have continued to steadily add more and more to their all-inclusive offerings. It will be interesting to see how Silversea makes out raising prices and adding more inclusive services. And it will be interesting to see if Seabourn follows along -- after all, they market "the Seabourn All-Inclusive Difference" -- or finds there is a segment of the luxury cruise market which prefers a la carte pricing to building all these things into a higher price. 

[Isklaar]

59 minutes ago, cruiseej said:

 

And it will be interesting to see if Seabourn follows along -- after all, they market "the Seabourn All-Inclusive Difference" -- or finds there is a segment of the luxury cruise market which prefers a la carte pricing to building all these things into a higher price. 

 

Exactly this. My own feeling is that SB will eventually include excursions, something that  absolutely doesn't appeal to me. I would definitely prefer the line to stay at its current 'all inclusive' level. 

 

Does Regent now offer included caviar on request?

[margbem]

17 hours ago, bohaiboy said:

We are on the Encore in April for a IST-IST 14 day sailing, our first with SB.  Looking at future sailings also.  Is it just me but when I hear All Inclusive Sailing, as SB promotes on their website, wouldn't or shouldn't at least one shore excursion be included?  I know SS and Regent include at least one excursion in each port.  SS also now includes transportation from your home to the departing airport and return home at up to 50 miles included in fare,

 

Thoughts. 

As this is your first time on Seabourn, have a look at the top thread about referral vouchers. You can get some extra on board credit!

[Covepointcruiser]

I see many complaints about the included air on the Regent and Oceania sites.   The flights included are never the best and wouldn’t be what you would choose for convenience.   We were booked on connecting flights instead of the non stop direct flight.   Got home six hours later.   I would rather book my own flights.

[tv24]

We try to avoid the lines that include excursions as a part of their all-inclusive package as we are DIY guys and don't want to pay for something we don't use.  i must admit trying to competitively price among cruise lines can cause grave headaches as the race to be all-inclusive can make a careful shopping experience to be the comparison of apples-to-oranges.

[MBP&O2/O]

When SS brought in the airport transfer they gave you the option to opt out and have £100 credit ….  It was just coincidence that the cruise prices rose £200 at the same time 🤔

I was looking at an SS ‘excursions included’ cruise the other day …. in one port there was one ‘free’ excursion …. a snorkelling trip?  Really? If you don’t swim then tough 😤

 

I went to a Regent presentation not so long ago and I asked about flights pointing out that where we live there are minimal international flights so arriving in some places in time to board could be difficult. I asked what they would do.

Answer: We will sort it.

The same ‘non committal’ answer was given to the question of what happens if the excursion you want is full.

Very disingenuous. 

[travelwell]

In 2023 have a 32 day NZ/Australia Seabourn cruise booked and in 2022 a 34 day Regent cruise Singapore/San Fran booked. We have traveled both lines and find the demographics similar. Up front the Seabourn cruise is significantly less expensive (in the 15 thousand dollar range). We have spent around 4K on Seabourn excursions and we got what we wanted. Regent includes a 3 day pre-cruise stay at the Fairmont Singapore with some meals and tours included. Although business air included, for the one way international flight and domestic to San Fran we like to be in control of our air. We got 5k per person for air deducted. We booked our own business flight to San Fran and then Air Singapore for about the same amount. We did spend about $800 to upgrade a few Japan excursions to Regent choice. We get free laundry on Regent.  Bottom line is that we have found Regent ends up a bit less expensive as in this case we still need air for the Seabourn trip. I will say I really like the way Regent does it and the extra days a nice plug. 

 

[BoilerBill]

My wife and I took one Regent cruise from Ft Lauderdale to Buenos Aires a few years ago, about 32 days if I recall.  We found that having the excursions included in the fare was very undesirable to us.  Because they are "included", it seemed that everyone on board felt compelled to take one in every port.  That resulted in many and full buses to so-so excursions led by mediocre (at best) guides, and in many cases the decent excursions were already full so we could not join them.  And many excursions had no Regent rep along with the group.   

This has never happened to us on Seabourn, where people are more discerning about choosing to go on an excursion, they rarely have more than 20-25 people on them, the guides are quite good (since there are needs for fewer of them, I surmise Seabourn gets higher quality), and just about every excursion has at least one Seabourn rep with the group who is in communication with the ship directly if there are any issues.

To us, we would rather pay visibly for specific higher quality excursions that are of real interest to us - the Seabourn difference --- rather than mill about in a huge crowd of people taking lower quality excursions who are there primarily because they feel that they have already paid for them. 

[whogo]

CSR staff at Seabourn Square told me that they limit coach tours to 70% occupancy, seemed true in my experience.

[marazul]

1 hour ago, whogo said:

CSR staff at Seabourn Square told me that they limit coach tours to 70% occupancy, seemed true in my experience.

That could be an outside limit. It's normally about 50% on the coaches.

[mraven]

We've been on Seabourn excursions where every seat was taken and the Seabourn rep had to sit on a cooler in the aisle. We've also been on some with 50% occupancy.

[cruiseej]

There are too many variables to make any blanket statement about capacity on excursions. Excursion suppliers can have changes of buses, or a broken bus; what's available in one country isn't the same as what's available in another country; in countries with small, winding roads, there may be buses which can hold 25 people, while in other locations there can be full-size luxury coaches which hold more than double that; competition for assets with other cruise ships in a port can impact what's available on a given day; a tour give can call in sick on the morning of an excursion, etc., etc.

 

I think all we can say is that they generally aim not to fill the coaches, and generally that's the case; discussing different percentage numbers as hard limits just isn't possible.

[SLSD]

I think a great idea for structuring all inclusive would be a certain $$ amount that could be used toward excursions  (any excursions you choose) if you wished to use them that way--or toward other items--such as fine wine-- door to door transportation---the dreaded retreat--- spa services --etc.  Let guests choose their own way to enjoy an all inclusive cruise.  Or, of course, none of the above--but please no set excursions that  are included.   

Edited November 3, 2021 by SLSD

[RetiredandTravel]

We do like the Regent concept of not owing anything at the end of the cruise but its marginal.  Regent "free" excursions were generally high quality but crowded if the ship was full.   In most ports we'll take an excursion so how they price it isn't consequential.  We have been comparing SS & Seabourn and SS switching to "all inclusive' with excursions is irrelevant to our decision, we just add  the excursion cost back to Seabourn when comparing.

 

 

[marazul]

19 hours ago, SLSD said:

I think a great idea for structuring all inclusive would be a certain $$ amount that could be used toward excursions  (any excursions you choose) if you wished to use them that way--or toward other items--such as fine wine-- door to door transportation---the dreaded retreat--- spa services --etc.  Let guests choose their own way to enjoy an all inclusive cruise.  Or, of course, none of the above--but please no set excursions that  are included.   

It's called On-board Credit, and they are doing that already.  Plus whatever else you get from TA, shareholder's credit, etc.  We have received enough OBC in our last few cruises that all our excursions, etc have been covered. 

[SLSD]

1 hour ago, marazul said:

It's called On-board Credit, and they are doing that already.  Plus whatever else you get from TA, shareholder's credit, etc.  We have received enough OBC in our last few cruises that all our excursions, etc have been covered. 

Exactly.  Perhaps that is a bette route and trying to include excursions.  

[SLSD]

1 hour ago, SLSD said:

Exactly.  Perhaps that is a bette route and trying to include excursions.  

a better route than trying to include excursions for everyone--more OBC to make the cruise work the way YOU want it to work, instead of charging everyone for included excursions.  That is what I was trying to say.   

 

[markham]

For our purposes the “all inclusive” idea on tours/sightseeing etc is a waste of time and money. 
I prefer freedom of choice when I travel, and would generally prefer independent tours with a couple of other seasoned like-minded friends than something of a school bus trip. At our expense as independent travelers.

 

In contrast “all inclusive” works fine at the bar. Then there’s tipping which I guess I violate when I rip personally the stewardess/es and favorite waiters. That’s about it.

 

Happy and healthy sailing!

[Mahogany]

Was "rip" a typo (I hope) or do you physically "rip" their clothes off? Or "rip" as in bad mouth?

🤣

[bohaiboy]

For Silver Sea the included tours have about 5 choices, so you are not being forced to go on one you may not like.  There is also the choice to take additional tours either from the ship or private onshore tours.  In today's world, often independent touring is not allowed and the only choice you have, if you want to leave the ship, is to take a ship sponsored tour,  The tours we took in Iceland recently limited buses to 16 people only on a 40 seat big bus.  Every other row was left empty for social distancing.
 

On another note, we just booked a Crystal Caribbean cruise that states all inclusive, no tours included, but it also doesn't include port fees and taxes.  I like to see the full price listed.

[markham]

My bad! Darn spellchecker. Maybe this shows I type rip often and tip seldom? No wonder… I haven’t been cruising enough due to Covid but that’s gonna change since we have 6 booked in 2022. 
 

 

Happy and healthy sailing!