Celebrity Cruises' "Best Price Guarantee" is a lie.

[RomanH]

2 minutes ago, wrk2cruise said:

The Exciting Deal pricing is much different than the standard pricing.  If you look at the standard pricing it's way inflated then some convoluted math involved to do the 75% off the second passenger or whatever the promo is.

 

Exiting deals are $xxxx for each passenger then taxes/fees added.

 

I read the exciting deals T&C on the website where they are all listed.   They don't explicitly state "new bookings only" just "must be booked between x and y" dates which I guess is the same thing.  Your sailing was booked outside that range.

https://creative.rccl.com/Sales/Celebrity/Exciting_Deals/CEL_Exciting_Deals.pdf

 

You have to look at it like if you found a lower price listed on some TA site, they are not going to match that as it's not apples to apples what you booked.

 

The purpose of Exciting Deals is to fill the last remaining rooms on the ship.  As I stated earlier they have historically only been offered after final payment has passed which would avoid this situation as you can't reprice any reservation after final payment unless the price changes within 48 hrs of your initial booking.

Interesting! Thank you for that. The cruise is over three months away so I think unpopularity & the holiday weekend prompted this Exciting Deal.

 

From their email turning down my price adjustment: "Please be advised that the lower rate you have mentioned is with the Exciting Deals offer which is only applicable for new bookings and cannot be applied to your already created booking." Which, bluntly, means their guarantee is a lie.

[the penguins]

1 hour ago, RomanH said:

Thanks for that. I did essentially the same thing. Unfortunately, the lower price that I found was dubbed an "Exciting Deal," which means the "Best Price Guarantee" goes out the window.

As you still seem to be insisting that X's Best Price Guarantee is a lie and if, as I believe, you live in the UK I have a suggestion for you. 

Officially notify X of your complaint (giving full details including how much you want your fare reduced) and ask them to honour the Guarantee within 72 hours after which time you will take action against them through the Small Claims Court under the Unfair Trading Regulations.

 

 

 

[zitsky]

I enjoyed my one marketing class in college but boy did it seem like the sleaziest profession.  Buyer beware.

[mayleeman]

2 minutes ago, zitsky said:

I enjoyed my one marketing class in college but boy did it seem like the sleaziest profession.  Buyer beware.

 

Thank you for that.

Mayleeman, Esq. (Ret'd)

[Dolebludger]

If the ad for “Exciting Deals” stated that the Deal” was for first time cruisers only, X is probably right. Because it was correctly advertised, and was not for the “General Public” and thus not covered by the language of the “Best Price Guarantee”. If the “deal” ad did no so state, it is false advertising and a violation of law. Now getting it enforced is s a big problem. The Justice Dept and state AGs  don’t often go after crimes like this. In any civil suit, all cruise lines rely on their T&Cs which usually limit jurisdiction to a certain state and sometimes require binding arbitration. The T&C provisions shouldn’t be binding on a guest if nothing was signed, but who knows?

 

For example, we are booked on another cruise line that has a lowest price guarantee. We saw a lower advertised price clearly advertised as being only for first time cruisers on that line. As we are not first timers on that line, and we’re not upset at all. We forwarded the ad to an adult daughter who would be a first timer there. The difference in this case is the clear wording of the ad. Had it not stated the limitations, I would have been furious..

[the penguins]

26 minutes ago, Dolebludger said:

If the ad for “Exciting Deals” stated that the Deal” was for first time cruisers only, X is probably right. Because it was correctly advertised, and was not for the “General Public” and thus not covered by the language of the “Best Price Guarantee”. If the “deal” ad did no so state, it is false advertising and a violation of law. Now getting it enforced is s a big problem. The Justice Dept and state AGs  don’t often go after crimes like this. In any civil suit, all cruise lines rely on their T&Cs which usually limit jurisdiction to a certain state and sometimes require binding arbitration. The T&C provisions shouldn’t be binding on a guest if nothing was signed, but who knows?

 

For example, we are booked on another cruise line that has a lowest price guarantee. We saw a lower advertised price clearly advertised as being only for first time cruisers on that line. As we are not first timers on that line, and we’re not upset at all. We forwarded the ad to an adult daughter who would be a first timer there. The difference in this case is the clear wording of the ad. Had it not stated the limitations, I would have been furious..

If the orig

 

26 minutes ago, Dolebludger said:

If the ad for “Exciting Deals” stated that the Deal” was for first time cruisers only, X is probably right. Because it was correctly advertised, and was not for the “General Public” and thus not covered by the language of the “Best Price Guarantee”. If the “deal” ad did no so state, it is false advertising and a violation of law. Now getting it enforced is s a big problem. The Justice Dept and state AGs  don’t often go after crimes like this. In any civil suit, all cruise lines rely on their T&Cs which usually limit jurisdiction to a certain state and sometimes require binding arbitration. The T&C provisions shouldn’t be binding on a guest if nothing was signed, but who knows?

 

For example, we are booked on another cruise line that has a lowest price guarantee. We saw a lower advertised price clearly advertised as being only for first time cruisers on that line. As we are not first timers on that line, and we’re not upset at all. We forwarded the ad to an adult daughter who would be a first timer there. The difference in this case is the clear wording of the ad. Had it not stated the limitations, I would have been furious..

If RomanH is so convinced he is right it's a very simple system in the UK and is based on submitted documents alone. You pay a fee and if you win you get the fee back and whatever the court awards you. X simply saying it's in the Booking Conditions is not in it self a defence as the Court can still (and does) rule that the Conditions are unfair and therefore not enforceable.

My view (and I think the view of most contributors to this thread) is that X is correct however the  decision on whether to challenge or not is purely RomanH's choice.

[Dolebludger]

All I am saying is if the “Exciting Deals” ad clearly stated it was a price for first-time X cruisers only, X is correct here. If not X is not. But recovery in the US is not as easy as in the UK.

[RomanH]

12 hours ago, Dolebludger said:

All I am saying is if the “Exciting Deals” ad clearly stated it was a price for first-time X cruisers only, X is correct here. If not X is not. But recovery in the US is not as easy as in the UK.

No, I think the guarantee should mention exceptions. I'd never heard of Exciting Deals before I gave them a nonrefundable deposit because I believed the guarantee.

[RomanH]

12 hours ago, the penguins said:

If the orig

 

If RomanH is so convinced he is right it's a very simple system in the UK and is based on submitted documents alone. You pay a fee and if you win you get the fee back and whatever the court awards you. X simply saying it's in the Booking Conditions is not in it self a defence as the Court can still (and does) rule that the Conditions are unfair and therefore not enforceable.

My view (and I think the view of most contributors to this thread) is that X is correct however the  decision on whether to challenge or not is purely RomanH's choice.

 

If I wanted to work long hours for little reward I'd have children. 😉

[RomanH]

13 hours ago, Dolebludger said:

If the ad for “Exciting Deals” stated that the Deal” was for first time cruisers only, X is probably right. Because it was correctly advertised, and was not for the “General Public” and thus not covered by the language of the “Best Price Guarantee”. If the “deal” ad did no so state, it is false advertising and a violation of law. Now getting it enforced is s a big problem. The Justice Dept and state AGs  don’t often go after crimes like this. In any civil suit, all cruise lines rely on their T&Cs which usually limit jurisdiction to a certain state and sometimes require binding arbitration. The T&C provisions shouldn’t be binding on a guest if nothing was signed, but who knows?

 

For example, we are booked on another cruise line that has a lowest price guarantee. We saw a lower advertised price clearly advertised as being only for first time cruisers on that line. As we are not first timers on that line, and we’re not upset at all. We forwarded the ad to an adult daughter who would be a first timer there. The difference in this case is the clear wording of the ad. Had it not stated the limitations, I would have been furious..

Sincere thanks for this: you definitely understand. However, in your example for first-time cruisers, I disagree because the guarantee should have mentioned exceptions. Plus this situation is significantly different: the deal is for "new bookings only," which clearly means "no price matching for old bookings" or "the guarantee doesn't apply to this."

[hcat]

15 minutes ago, RomanH said:

 

If I wanted to work long hours for little reward I'd have children. 😉

I think that emoji means sarcasm??

We are blessed with a great dtr and son in law, and best all grandchildren we adore.!   The work invested and love shared is returned  ten fold!

 

As to this thread topic

, I agree X has exclusions to just about everything..We usually don't pay attention to marketing sales or deals. Often ends in disappointment of learning that it does not apply,  or the sale ends up with same or higher price...

 

Right now folks are getting good deals on excursions, dining and other reductions..but we just stuck with what we have...not worth the effort.

[webecruzin2]

Our last cruise this past April on the Equinox was an "Exciting Deal" I just thought it meant it was a great deal. 😆  I found out those exciting deals are pretty restrictive and the only excitement I got out of it was the frustration whenever I called about a price drop.   
They get ya coming and going.  We've just got to learn to expect it, book accordingly and roll with it when they trot out the fine print.

[mayleeman]

Deleted

Edited September 3, 2023 by mayleeman

[Bugsy1966]

On 9/3/2023 at 5:39 PM, RomanH said:

No, I think the guarantee should mention exceptions. I'd never heard of Exciting Deals before I gave them a nonrefundable deposit because I believed the guarantee.

 

I think this earlier point of yours summed things up perfectly.......

 

'And what kind of guarantee is that when they can just call something an "Exciting Deal" & the guarantee goes out the window?'

 

For me, that is the nub of the matter. If they wish to advertise a best price 'guarantee' that is not bulletproof then they need to add an asterisk or two i.e. guarantee**. Then, lower down, list the exceptions where the guarantee does not apply e.g. Exciting Deals.

 

I rather think you'd win in a UK small claims court (especially as they'd be unlikely to defend, deeming it too much cost/effort for the sums involved) but it's aggro you could probably do without.

[happy cruzer]

Yep, it is a lie in the black and white world like almost all advertising and marketing such as "best food", "lowest price", "limited time offer",  "price guarantee", etc.

 

Most people have learned to beware of that advertising/marketing speak.  There is no easy way to punish the "false"  promises so they continue.  For many life is to short to get too excited about these "falsehoods".  Book at a price you like and if you get better great, else enjoy the deal you got.

[hcat]

Good advice.  OP will have a miserable cruise if unable to let it go! Cancel or enjoy it and move on!

.