Huge downturn in CC reviewer scores (this one's for the nerds)

[Cruise till you drop]

3 hours ago, ldtr said:

an apples to oranges comparison. You need to compare the recent Celebrity scores, to the scores for the other cruise lines for the same period. Comparing recent for one to historical for others is not good practice.

 

I expect that you will find all lines have dropped in the same period.

I agree.  I’m addition, a group of 60 is statistically irrelevant compared to a group of 19,000.  That data isn’t reliable 

[1Virgo]

1 hour ago, gold1953 said:

exactly!!

 

IMO there havent been the glowing reviews because many of us have experienced first hand, the cutbacks    We are paying more for less.   Food is a huge issue and that is just one of the areas where poorer and lower grades are being

[Georgia_Peaches]

9 minutes ago, Cruise till you drop said:

I agree.  I’m addition, a group of 60 is statistically irrelevant compared to a group of 19,000.  That data isn’t reliable 

I agree as well.  However, the OP was only looking at a sample size from August until now as it happens to coincide with when Celebrity made their changes.  I don't think it was intended to be a scientific data analysis...more like a quick data grab...we used to call this action research in my educator days.  

[sonnycruises]

Celebrity has problems with the truth. They are constantly misrepresenting their supposed sales. My wife and I have 25 cruises with Celebrity and after seeing multiple recent deceptions on pricing we switched to Viking.

[RichYak]

25 minutes ago, Jeremiah1212 said:

The NPS score would be different than the post-cruise survey. I haven't taken one in a while so I'm not sure if there is one attached but the NPS results would come from a single question rating 0-10 rather than a series of questions. A lower score is detractor, middle score is passive and high score is a promoter then it's simply the promoter percentage minus the detractor percentage. It would look like this one. 

Is this an email survey that goes out? If so, to whom?

[Cap_D]

33 minutes ago, wineoclock said:

Can you post a link to Gary Bembridge review if possible please as I can’t find anything. 

Bembridge is https://youtube.com/@tipsfortravellers?si=RC57ehAXynfXw_sD, and has one of the larger, or largest, subscriber numbers.  And, he's not a travel agent.  His recent raving and avoid videos gets in to annectdotes in various lines and reviews he's read.  He did not do stats. 

 

While Celebrity is in the rave about video, he highlights criticisms of the older ships vs Edge, and non-Retreat vs Retreat experiences. So, not all roses.  I don't believe he sailed Celebrity recently.  But, no doubt he'd call out bad food if that's what he had.  

 

And, while about NCL, Ben and David just panned Haven given the price and issues observed.  Some were less to do with quality more to do with what isn't included even after paying for Haven, and reduced access to inclusions like a 1 hour window for breakfast at the Haven restaurant and no coffee in the lounge.  

 

(The vacationers with YouTube videos tend to be a bit more positive and less critical of their experiences.)  

 

For annectdotes, the Traveling Gamblers tend to be on a ship several times a month, and post relatively free form thoughts, shipboard annectdotes, and personal reviews of food.  They had first hand video of the OVC cutbacks and it's restoration, for example.  They aren't necessarily critical, as much as they are first hand witnesses leaving viewers to reach their own conclusions.  

[DaKahuna]

1 hour ago, Cap_D said:

 While Celebrity is in the rave about video, he highlights criticisms of the older ships vs Edge, and non-Retreat vs Retreat experiences. So, not all roses.  I don't believe he sailed Celebrity recently.  But, no doubt he'd call out bad food if that's what he had.  

 

 I found it interesting that was Celebrity was also in his video preceding the one you linked about the "Cruise Lines to Steer Clear Of".  

 

 It does appear his last sailing on Celebrity was about a year ago or so.. 

 

[hcat]

2 hours ago, Cruise till you drop said:

I agree.  I’m addition, a group of 60 is statistically irrelevant compared to a group of 19,000.  That data isn’t reliable 

 A "snapshot" ..

just another chance to critque X and vent !

[mac_tlc]

My guess is that if Celebrity's score went up a lot of folks would think the data is top-notch and accurate. 

 

 

mac_tlc

[markeb]

5 minutes ago, mac_tlc said:

My guess is that if Celebrity's score went up a lot of folks would think the data is top-notch and accurate. 

 

 

mac_tlc

Not if they know anything about sampling and statistics…

[hankandteri]

2 hours ago, Georgia_Peaches said:

I agree as well.  However, the OP was only looking at a sample size from August until now as it happens to coincide with when Celebrity made their changes.  I don't think it was intended to be a scientific data analysis...more like a quick data grab...we used to call this action research in my educator days.  

Exactly! Peaches knows her stuff. What I shared is more than anecdotal and less than scientific. It was mostly a quick reality check I did for my own benefit born out of curiosity. The result surprised me so much that I decided to share them here.

 

Sixty is a pretty healthy sample for something like this, though. I could have gone back a little further to capture all of August in addition to September, but the totals I was getting were pretty consistent from screen to screen.

 

You might not like the numbers (I certainly don't) and you might be able to explain them away or rationalize them, but they are what they are. That's the cool thing about data. It doesn't have an agenda. The agenda comes in when you begin to manipulate or make more of it than is there. I didn't do anything tricky or that anyone else here couldn't reproduce on their own in a matter of minutes. The numbers speak for themselves. I leave it to others to decide what, if anything, they mean. Clearly, some of you think they align with reality and others of you don't. It's all fine by me.

[goofysmom99]

I've actually been reading the X reviews every week since about March of this year.  Even though I dined in Luminae, I was underwhelmed by several things on my Feb/Mar cruises, so wanted to see what others were saying.  Ratings have trended steadily down, especially since August.  I may write my first official review after my upcoming cruise in a few weeks.  If it's better than expected, and my expectation are pretty low at this point, I'll happily give credit where credit is due.  If, God forbid, it's worse, I might have to rejoin FB (quit 10 yrs ago) and post there, too.  

[Myrtle Ave. Mayhem]

Nothing in the service & product delivery industries is what it used to be. This is across the board in transportation, health care, hospitality. Sadly a reality we have to accept. Has anyone been to Nordstrom, flown American Airlines, traveled on Amtrak, or tried to get an MRI approved by Aetna lately? This is even happening at gasp, Viking, of all cruise lines. My first Viking Ocean cruise was in 2019, my seventh & most recent was December 2022. Unquestionably a let down in terms of dining, crew, service, & attention to detail(lack thereof). First time I stepped off a Viking ship underwhelmed & disappointed. Historically this isn't anything new in the cruising world. If any members here remember when Sitmar was absorbed by P & O, becoming Princess ships. Princess had many an unhappy passenger for some time. When Kloster purchased Royal Viking Line, that didn't go over well either. 

Edited October 10, 2023 by Myrtle Ave. Mayhem

[Cruise till you drop]

58 minutes ago, hankandteri said:

Exactly! Peaches knows her stuff. What I shared is more than anecdotal and less than scientific. It was mostly a quick reality check I did for my own benefit born out of curiosity. The result surprised me so much that I decided to share them here.

 

Sixty is a pretty healthy sample for something like this, though. I could have gone back a little further to capture all of August in addition to September, but the totals I was getting were pretty consistent from screen to screen.

 

You might not like the numbers (I certainly don't) and you might be able to explain them away or rationalize them, but they are what they are. That's the cool thing about data. It doesn't have an agenda. The agenda comes in when you begin to manipulate or make more of it than is there. I didn't do anything tricky or that anyone else here couldn't reproduce on their own in a matter of minutes. The numbers speak for themselves. I leave it to others to decide what, if anything, they mean. Clearly, some of you think they align with reality and others of you don't. It's all fine by me.

Let’s do slightly different math

 

OP admittedly checked one months data

 

All Celebrity ships carry around 36,000 passengers in total.

Each ship will run about 3 or 4 cruises a month

Thats 126,000 passengers in a month

 

If you checked 60 people’s opinions, that represents 0.04% (4 one hundredths of a percent)

 

This is why I feel a base of 60 people is statistically inconclusive, whether it shows an improved or worsened condition

 

Statistics say the population of 5 to 30% would make it conclusive, which would require a survey a minimum of 6,300 peoples opinions

 

 

Edited October 10, 2023 by Cruise till you drop

[NMTraveller]

I found the same earlier in the year.  They just keep on dropping and dropping.  Reading some of them is truly shocking...

 

 

Edited October 10, 2023 by NMTraveller

[deliver42]

I think that all the lines have probably gone down due to previeved value. As soon as the changes were made, especially eliminating the tips from the All Included to the elimination of OBC in suites, the perception went down. It may be of real value or not, but the perception is not. As more people book knowing in advance what's included, not changed, t I believe the numbers will go back up.

[SusieAV8R]

7 hours ago, Georgia_Peaches said:

Agree.  In fact, I've met cruisers who say they are avid but have never heard of Cruise Critic.  To really cast a wider net for data purposes one would have to look at other reviewing platforms that offer a rating system similar to CC.  

 

But, I understand what the OP was looking at and it is indicative of something going on with how at least CC consumers are feeling.

I agree with you Georgia_Peaches:  most of my cruising friends had not heard of CC before I mentioned it.   Heck, I cruised on X for 14 years before I found CC a year ago!

[wrk2cruise]

36 minutes ago, Cruise till you drop said:

Let’s do slightly different math

 

OP admittedly checked one months data

 

All Celebrity ships carry around 36,000 passengers in total.

Each ship will run about 3 or 4 cruises a month

Thats 126,000 passengers in a month

 

If you checked 60 people’s opinions, that represents 0.04% (4 one hundredths of a percent)

 

This is why I feel a base of 60 people is statistically inconclusive, whether it shows an improved or worsened condition

 

Statistics say the population of 5 to 30% would make it conclusive, which would require a survey a minimum of 6,300 peoples opinions

 

 

 

And a recent national political poll I saw interviewed in the range of 2,500-3,000 people out of around 165 million voters in the US.

[Cruise till you drop]

2 minutes ago, wrk2cruise said:

 

And a recent national political poll I saw interviewed in the range of 2,500-3,000 people out of around 165 million voters in the US.

Which is also statistically invalid.  Thanks for pointing that out

[markeb]

42 minutes ago, Cruise till you drop said:

Let’s do slightly different math

 

OP admittedly checked one months data

 

All Celebrity ships carry around 36,000 passengers in total.

Each ship will run about 3 or 4 cruises a month

Thats 126,000 passengers in a month

 

If you checked 60 people’s opinions, that represents 0.04% (4 one hundredths of a percent)

 

This is why I feel a base of 60 people is statistically inconclusive, whether it shows an improved or worsened condition

 

Statistics say the population of 5 to 30% would make it conclusive, which would require a survey a minimum of 6,300 peoples opinions

 

 

 

The size of the sample is pretty typical of many surveys. That's really not an issue. It's a nice set of descriptive statistics, but it's an inherently biased convenience sample, so you can't really extrapolate it. If you understand that limitation, the results suggest the raw scores have dropped. And doing statistics on a biased sample is a waste of time, so it is what it is. You can do the math to establish statistical significance, but you can't correct selection bias (convenience sampling in this case) with statistics.

 

A 5-30% sample with inherent selection bias would still be a bad sample. 

[RichYak]

41 minutes ago, markeb said:

 

The size of the sample is pretty typical of many surveys. That's really not an issue. It's a nice set of descriptive statistics, but it's an inherently biased convenience sample, so you can't really extrapolate it. If you understand that limitation, the results suggest the raw scores have dropped. And doing statistics on a biased sample is a waste of time, so it is what it is. You can do the math to establish statistical significance, but you can't correct selection bias (convenience sampling in this case) with statistics.

 

A 5-30% sample with inherent selection bias would still be a bad sample. 

I agree with this but I would also add that the entire 14,000 sample is biased the same way as the last 60 or so is. So comparing the last 60 to the prior 14000 does have merit IMO. 
 

The only thing I can glean from this is a VERY short term downward drop in ratings. That said, the drop is significant. 
 

There must be someone technical enough to be able to scrape the site for more data to work with. 

Edited October 11, 2023 by RichYak

[markeb]

11 minutes ago, RichYak said:

I agree with this but I would also add that the entire 14,000 sample is biased the same way as the last 60 or so is. So comparing the last 60 to the prior 14000 does have merit IMO.

 

Agree. Just don't overdue the statistics or numbers. The verbiage is probably much more relevant. And there's software to do that, of course. It would be interesting to see a word cloud, for instance...

 

But in some ways this is a blinding flash of the obvious, isn't it? Whether we're representative of the population at large (probably not) CC members have been pretty vocal in their opinion of recent changes. My big hesitation in jumping on the band wagon is until next month I have no first hand experience, and I think there are a lot of moving parts beyond Celebrity's control. I've never done a review; don't know that I will, but I'll report back after Equinox in November. I suspect I'll enjoy it regardless, so I may be horrible as an objective observer...

[Spif Barwunkel]

I am not a numbers guy. I realize the necessity and the value of numbers and statistics within certain domains and conditions. In the cruising world when dealing with the human element there are many variables from which a skewed result can occur. Not to say that the reviews and their number ratings are not sincere, but might they be more unscientifically emotional rather than unscientifically thought out, thus more often than not resulting in negative codification and subsequent commentary?  

 

On all of my Celebrity cruises to date I have never been privy, singularly or collectively, to the personal affronts and circumstances that some folks apparently have experienced. As to the occasional disappointment, most certainly we have had a few. Therefore, reviews and downturns in the numbers are of no concern to me, at present. Not to say that can’t change, but it will be on my terms not someone else's.     

Edited October 11, 2023 by Spif Barwunkel

[Islander500]

9 hours ago, hankandteri said:

Again, I admitted that I didn't compare current vs. historical averages for any other line in my initial report. I was only concerned about recent Celebrity reviews.

 

Just for fun, I just did the same exercise for Carnival and HAL (last 60 reviews vs. historical average) Carnival also dropped and by way more than I was expecting. They went from 3.8 to 3.0--almost as much as X dropped. HAL, on the other hand, went from 3.9 to 3.8, which isn't much of a change at all.

Like how you have fun.  Haven’t read further on the thread but would love to see if you will make similar comparisons to some of the other more premium lines, too.  I think the data is interesting.  I know I was one of the very recent Celebrity reviewers and my survey response to Celebrity tracks what I posted on CC.  It’s my third celebrity cruise this year & my ratings have gone down with each.  By my cruise in May (from January), the changes were noticeable, by September they were significant and disappointing.  
 

 

Edited October 11, 2023 by Islander500

[wineoclock]

Thank you @DaKahuna and @Cap_D

I really like Paul Bembridge but hadn’t seen his latest video regarding Celebrity. I now have. So thank you 

 

I’ll look out for the travelling gamblers. Am on steroids at the moment and been awake since 2.30am it’s now 3.45 so May see if I can while away my time 😁