Spouses same tier?

[Ourusualbeach]

1 minute ago, topnole said:

Let say a kid has 3 Points and is diamond + from parents.  We know they keep that status.  But when they marry does their spouse also become D+? Or does the status match get based off of the original 3 points and not the status that was inherited without the points?   This is another one that always gets me.  
 

Also, if one hits pinnacle, I know the kids don’t get it.  But what if I make pinnacle with minor kids.   Can I bring them to CK for dinner if they are traveling with me?  

My guess is that it is off their status and not actual points.  The main purpose of this matching is to not separate families and have them at different levels.

 

Same for Pinnacle.  I don't think anyone is going to question a PO brining their kids to CK just like a suite guest is not questioned bringing minor kids sailing in a non suite cabin, only applies to minor kids though

[Ourusualbeach]

3 minutes ago, topnole said:

Ok.  Thanks.  They did not do that for my son even though I did link him pre cruise.  It didn’t matter because he was so young.  But I just assumed it was because he needed to cruise once first.  

So many inconsistencies but there have also been a lot of reports about instant status matching

[topnole]

1 minute ago, Ourusualbeach said:

My guess is that it is off their status and not actual points.  The main purpose of this matching is to not separate families and have them at different levels.

 

Same for Pinnacle.  I don't think anyone is going to question a PO brining their kids to CK just like a suite guest is not questioned bringing minor kids sailing in a non suite cabin, only applies to minor kids though

Gotcha.  Thanks.  

[topnole]

Just now, Ourusualbeach said:

So many inconsistencies but there have also been a lot of reports about instant status matching

Yeah.  For us it didn’t matter.  A little kid doesn’t really need D+ benefits and they certainly have no idea what it even means.  They just want to play and swim (and eat). 

[DaKahuna]

57 minutes ago, topnole said:

Ok.  Thanks.  They did not do that for my son even though I did link him pre cruise.  It didn’t matter because he was so young.  But I just assumed it was because he needed to cruise once first.  

You do have to get them a C&A member number for them to get the status pre-cruise.  

 

You do not have to have already cruised to apply for a C&A account. 

 

[topnole]

3 minutes ago, DaKahuna said:

You do have to get them a C&A member number for them to get the status pre-cruise.  

 

You do not have to have already cruised to apply for a C&A account. 

 

Well.  It gets tricky with kids because they get linked to the parent and I’m not even sure my two oldest had #s for a while.  It seems they do now.  But originally I think they were just tied to my number and didn’t have their own.   But I will definitely be making sure my youngest is set up properly before our next cruise.  I might want to use his diamond drink for a smoothie or a coffee.  

[Biker19]

2 hours ago, topnole said:

  A little kid doesn’t really need D+ benefits and they certainly have no idea what it even means.  

The VOOM discount and the mock tails/drinks might be appreciated by some. 

[topnole]

12 hours ago, Biker19 said:

The VOOM discount and the mock tails/drinks might be appreciated by some. 

Oh I agree.  We didn’t need them on that cruise.  Glad it didn’t matter.  But this reinforces just how inconsistent Royal is on stuff like this.  Honestly, it makes sense to me you don’t get the perks until after you’ve cruised once.  Loyalty perks don’t really make sense when you haven’t even cruised Royal once, let alone been loyal yet.  
 

It also seems like spouse matching should be based on your spouses level based on their own points.  So if a kid is D+ with 3 points and retains that as an adult, why would Royal want to bestow D+ to their spouse when they get married.  It just dilutes the perks more in the long run.  I did meet a couple on a cruise who took their teens on one cruise only so they got their status for life if they decided they liked cruising as adults themselves.  So this scenario surely happens a lot in total number.  Just weird how Royal doesn’t have kids revert to their tier based on their points once they are adults.  
 

Their rules, but I find it odd.   I say that having 3 kids who will be at least D+ for life simply because they cruised with us (unless things change).  So the system may well benefit my kids, although odds are they make D+ on their own anyhow.  

[Starry Eyes]

1 hour ago, topnole said:

Oh I agree.  We didn’t need them on that cruise.  Glad it didn’t matter.  But this reinforces just how inconsistent Royal is on stuff like this.  Honestly, it makes sense to me you don’t get the perks until after you’ve cruised once.  Loyalty perks don’t really make sense when you haven’t even cruised Royal once, let alone been loyal yet.  
 

It also seems like spouse matching should be based on your spouses level based on their own points.  So if a kid is D+ with 3 points and retains that as an adult, why would Royal want to bestow D+ to their spouse when they get married.  It just dilutes the perks more in the long run.  I did meet a couple on a cruise who took their teens on one cruise only so they got their status for life if they decided they liked cruising as adults themselves.  So this scenario surely happens a lot in total number.  Just weird how Royal doesn’t have kids revert to their tier based on their points once they are adults.  
 

Their rules, but I find it odd.   I say that having 3 kids who will be at least D+ for life simply because they cruised with us (unless things change).  So the system may well benefit my kids, although odds are they make D+ on their own anyhow.  

I tend to agree with you, especially as marriage is not really required.  A couple that lives together can be linked and receive a status match.  So with or without multiple marriages and divorces, a person with a series of live-in partners  could pass the D+ status they inherited from their parents to several partners and offspring.  After breakups, those partners could ask for status matches for new partners.  I understand family togetherness, but those D+ parents are not cruising with their son’s ex-girlfriend’s new boyfriend’s kid.

[Bruin Steve]

Well...MY kids got to Diamond because they cruised with us...and we may have paid for their cruises...but the fact remains that they were on those cruises and that the cruises were paid for--and, therefore, that status was just as "earned" as any adult who qualifies as Diamond.  In fact, because we always cruised during "high" season and on rather nice cruises...and we booked our daughters, at times, in categories as high as suites, I would say they are more deserving of that Diamond status as those adults who got there cruising on off-season three night  cruises in cheap inside cabins.  As adults, they shouldn't have to "revert" to anything.

 

As they progress on the path of life, get married, have kids, etc., it would seem ridiculous to say "Well, you can drink in the Diamond Club but your husband has to wait outside".

 

If you want to look at how the cruise lines have diluted the loyalty programs, how about looking at the "reciprocity" issue.  We are independently Diamond Plus on Royal Caribbean and Elite Plus on Celebrity because we have cruised a lot on BOTH lines.  But, the reciprocity thing pretty much instantly overcrowded the loyalty lounges on both lines...

 

And, does the whole loyalty thing even mean that much anymore?  Sure, on RCCL, the drink vouchers have a value...but, over on Celebrity, it's all fairly meaningless as they pretty much require everyone to purchase drink packages and WiFi as part of the deal.  The Captains Club has pretty much been limited now to a free bag of laundry.  It may not be much longer before neither of the loyalty clubs are worth more than a few token benefits.

 

Edited November 2, 2022 by Bruin Steve

[DaKahuna]

8 hours ago, Bruin Steve said:

 

If you want to look at how the cruise lines have diluted the loyalty programs, how about looking at the "reciprocity" issue.  We are independently Diamond Plus on Royal Caribbean and Elite Plus on Celebrity because we have cruised a lot on BOTH lines.  But, the reciprocity thing pretty much instantly overcrowded the loyalty lounges on both lines...

 

 

 Interesting.  After a dozen cruises on Celebrity I have never found a loyalty lounge.  Can you tell me where it is so I can visit on when we cruise on Millennium next April? 

 

 

8 hours ago, Bruin Steve said:

And, does the whole loyalty thing even mean that much anymore?  Sure, on RCCL, the drink vouchers have a value...but, over on Celebrity, it's all fairly meaningless as they pretty much require everyone to purchase drink packages and WiFi as part of the deal.  The Captains Club has pretty much been limited now to a free bag of laundry.  It may not be much longer before neither of the loyalty clubs are worth more than a few token benefits.

 

 

Due to customer feedback Celebrity has reintroduced "cruise fare" bookings.  There is no drink package or WiFi included with those.  

 

Personally, I think the included drinks, WiFi, gratuties, and OBC are a big positive and one of the reasons we really like sailing on Celebrity. 

 

[topnole]

17 hours ago, Bruin Steve said:

Well...MY kids got to Diamond because they cruised with us...and we may have paid for their cruises...but the fact remains that they were on those cruises and that the cruises were paid for--and, therefore, that status was just as "earned" as any adult who qualifies as Diamond.  In fact, because we always cruised during "high" season and on rather nice cruises...and we booked our daughters, at times, in categories as high as suites, I would say they are more deserving of that Diamond status as those adults who got there cruising on off-season three night  cruises in cheap inside cabins.  As adults, they shouldn't have to "revert" to anything.

 

As they progress on the path of life, get married, have kids, etc., it would seem ridiculous to say "Well, you can drink in the Diamond Club but your husband has to wait outside".

 

If you want to look at how the cruise lines have diluted the loyalty programs, how about looking at the "reciprocity" issue.  We are independently Diamond Plus on Royal Caribbean and Elite Plus on Celebrity because we have cruised a lot on BOTH lines.  But, the reciprocity thing pretty much instantly overcrowded the loyalty lounges on both lines...

 

And, does the whole loyalty thing even mean that much anymore?  Sure, on RCCL, the drink vouchers have a value...but, over on Celebrity, it's all fairly meaningless as they pretty much require everyone to purchase drink packages and WiFi as part of the deal.  The Captains Club has pretty much been limited now to a free bag of laundry.  It may not be much longer before neither of the loyalty clubs are worth more than a few token benefits.

 

You are making my entire argument.  They got to diamond on their own points.    So a kid (your kids for example) who has 80 points or more would obviously stay diamond as they “earned” it.  But a kid who only cruised once with a parent who is D retaining that when they become an adult seems silly.  That is obviously an extreme, but there are many who only cruise 2-3 times and then get high status for life.  It’s just odd.  Once a person hits 18 or 19 (pick a cut off) it would seem perfectly reasonable that their status matches their own cruise points (not mom and dads status).   Again, not my system so it is what it is.  Just find it odd and very unnecessary (and it has to cost Royal $).  My kids will all be D+ for life given the current system.  I’m certainly benefiting, even if I do find it ridiculous.  Thanks Royal for that very unnecessary perk. 

[Biker19]

16 minutes ago, topnole said:

Just find it odd and very unnecessary (and it has to cost Royal $).

Whatever minimal cost for RCI could be made up by the loyalty sales it may generate.

[topnole]

33 minutes ago, Biker19 said:

Whatever minimal cost for RCI could be made up by the loyalty sales it may generate.

Yes, I recognize the pros and cons.   There is a huge hole in that logic however.  Using that mindset Royal should just give everyone Diamond after their first cruise.  Then they make up any of the extra cost with loyalty sales.  So at what point are they making profit making decisions versus absorbing cost to build goodwill (which may or may not increase profit).  I can tell you there are many D or D+ who only cruise on the cheap (at the extreme) and Royal probably loses money every time they cruise or breaks even at best.  I’ve met some who only do the cheapest cabins and never spend a dime onboard.  They take the freebies and what is included. That’s it.  

[clochette]

On 11/1/2022 at 10:14 PM, Ourusualbeach said:

The cruise once only applies if you are not linked to someone....i.e new couples first time cruising.  Where one person has cruised and a newby links to them in is instant status

thanks for the explanation, do they also get a number once they are linked or do they get a number after the first cruise?

[Biker19]

24 minutes ago, topnole said:

 I’ve met some who only do the cheapest cabins and never spend a dime onboard.  They take the freebies and what is included. That’s it.  

For RCI, one has to assume that's still better than the cabin going empty.

[Ourusualbeach]

12 minutes ago, clochette said:

thanks for the explanation, do they also get a number once they are linked or do they get a number after the first cruise?

Once they are linked

[topnole]

2 hours ago, Biker19 said:

For RCI, one has to assume that's still better than the cabin going empty.

I wouldn’t assume that.   You can book some cruises for nearly taxes.  Yes, many cost more, but some are so cheap there is no way they make money unless the passengers spend money onboard.  In the “old days” when base fares were about the same or more as todays prices, they made money just by the cruise fare and there was little in terms of up charges.   Now their entire business model (for non suite cabins) is predicated on passengers spending extra onboard.  I’d guess 90+% profit comes from onboard extra spending.  

Edited November 3, 2022 by topnole

[Biker19]

1 hour ago, topnole said:

Yes, many cost more, but some are so cheap there is no way they make money unless the passengers spend money onboard.

Perhaps they don't have much/any profit from such passengers but running the ship is a somewhat fixed cost thing - they don't save much/any by not having those folks on board. The passengers pay the taxes and most of the time the grats, so RCI can show some revenue instead of none from an empty cabin.

[DeputyDawg46]

My wife and I are Pinnacles.  However, we are Pinnacles due to my number of cruises as I have done more than her.  She gets the benefits of Pinnacle regardless if we cruise together or individually.  Our individual RCI accounts show the same number of points (mine) and both our points increase if I cruise with or without her.  However, if she cruises alone the points (mine) showing in her account will not increase.  Point wise when she cruises on her own and since she is a D+, internally her points increase but since we are linked, only the higher of the two (me), are my points shown on her account.

 

DDawg

[Starry Eyes]

11 minutes ago, DeputyDawg46 said:

My wife and I are Pinnacles.  However, we are Pinnacles due to my number of cruises as I have done more than her.  She gets the benefits of Pinnacle regardless if we cruise together or individually.  Our individual RCI accounts show the same number of points (mine) and both our points increase if I cruise with or without her.  However, if she cruises alone the points (mine) showing in her account will not increase.  Point wise when she cruises on her own and since she is a D+, internally her points increase but since we are linked, only the higher of the two (me), are my points shown on her account.

 

DDawg

I think a substantial number of spouses have different numbers of points.  If the couple is striving together toward a new level, they should book strategically if possible with the partner with the higher point total continuing to accumulate as rapidly as possible.  For example, if the wife has the higher total from a past solo cruises when the couple plus a child plan to book adjoining cabins to maximize points the wife should be booked solo in one cabin and hubby and child in the other. If one spouse becomes the “point leader” let them continue in that role when easily workable and mutually agreeable

[topnole]

6 minutes ago, Starry Eyes said:

I think a substantial number of spouses have different numbers of points.  If the couple is striving together toward a new level, they should book strategically if possible with the partner with the higher point total continuing to accumulate as rapidly as possible.  For example, if the wife has the higher total from a past solo cruises when the couple plus a child plan to book adjoining cabins to maximize points the wife should be booked solo in one cabin and hubby and child in the other. If one spouse becomes the “point leader” let them continue in that role when easily workable and mutually agreeable

Nobody strategizes to get more points.  Their points and status are just an artifact of the love for cruising.  😂😂😂

[topnole]

1 hour ago, Biker19 said:

Perhaps they don't have much/any profit from such passengers but running the ship is a somewhat fixed cost thing - they don't save much/any by not having those folks on board. The passengers pay the taxes and most of the time the grats, so RCI can show some revenue instead of none from an empty cabin.

All lot of people say food quality has gone way down over the past 20 years.  Why?  Maybe because it is a very big variable cost.  That variable cost is based on passenger count.  Less product is ordered when there are less passengers.  
 

If VC is higher than the revenue for that person, they lose money (independent of FC).   When you can take a two week transatlantic for 400 out the door, RCI is losing money if you don’t spend more onboard.  There is no other financial/economic argument that makes it viable for them to fill that cabin.  They would lose less leaving the cabin empty and just absorbing the FC in this scenario.  They are simply filling the cabin with the hope they can get you to spend onboard.  Those that don’t are a losing proposition for Royal.  
 

There are many high tier folks who Royal has probably never made a profit off of in their lives.  This type of scenario is impossible with airline type loyalty systems.  It’s really quite easy to be upper tier with Royal with either cheap cruises or inheriting status.  It is very hard to be upper tier in other travel related programs.   

[Ourusualbeach]

30 minutes ago, topnole said:

There is no other financial/economic argument that makes it viable for them to fill that cabin.

While some of the port fees and taxes are variable many are actually a fixed cost so filling those berths does contribute financially, besides you have no way of knowing whether that person who spends $500 on a cabin will drop another $1000 on board or not spend a dime.

[topnole]

1 hour ago, Ourusualbeach said:

While some of the port fees and taxes are variable many are actually a fixed cost so filling those berths does contribute financially, besides you have no way of knowing whether that person who spends $500 on a cabin will drop another $1000 on board or not spend a dime.

Agree.  That is my point.  Unless they spend onboard.  That is the context of the sentence you clipped (see my prior sentences).  There are cabins far cheaper than 500 on a lot of 7 and even 14 night cruises.  So I’m quite certain they only make money if there is a solid amount of spending onboard.  
 

Surely many do spend onboard.  But I also know some don’t.  I’ve met people who book low price inside cabins and take pride in not spending an extra dime onboard.   There are certainly all kinds and it’s not hard if you don’t drink much and don’t feel the need for specialty restaurants.