SS Debut of "Priviledged Passage"

[uk1]

uk1,

 

you misread my post. i said it was NOT the end of the world if SS goes country club casual, just the end of SS as we know it.

 

 

What do you think SS will change from and to?

 

Jeff

[uk1]

I read the article correctly. My view is that this experiment will ultimately lead SS down-market regardless of the hype surrounding the so-called "enhancements." Are they attempting to move up market? The announcement says they are, but I don't believe everything I read. Will I still cruise? Sure, but the experience may very well become dumbed-down and more Americanized than it is now.

 

Well, you believe that they are not genuinely saying what they want to do, and suggesting that they want to do the opposite. This is a touch bizarre. Spending effort to go in a direction they don't want to go in needs you to explain a bit more about what you think their somewhat cunning plan is!

 

And I've read your post and previous posts correctly. Your main interest - as is several others - is in the preservation of wearing your tuxedo on formal nights. Pretty much nothing else seems to have riled you about the announcement - and indeed all of the others who made opposing posts. This is in your mind and the others that agree synonymous with a deterioration in both SS class and market. It is for you - but the rest of society is moving onwards and upwards and actually sees the opposite as true.

 

Still, to reassure you, I promise you for what it is worth that I predict that SS will probably not be successful at this and that nothing much will change, and you'll receive the same product that merely whithers down market with diems and budgets reducing. If they haven't bothered to role out a TA programme to underpin this so that they can add value at the top and tail end - then it is basically condemned to fail unless they pull their fingers out of the place where the sun currently doesn't shine. I guess that in least on where it might lead - we agree?!

 

Great debate - thoroughly enjoying it by the way.

 

Jeff

[Canuckvoyager]

I read the article correctly. My view is that this experiment will ultimately lead SS down-market regardless of the hype surrounding the so-called "enhancements." Are they attempting to move up market? The announcement says they are, but I don't believe everything I read. Will I still cruise? Sure, but the experience may very well become dumbed-down and more Americanized than it is now.

 

Well put. I, too, think that SS is setting their sights down-market to catch some of that group that now chooses Regent, Oceania. After all, there will soon be increased capacity to fill. Maybe this upper-middle market group is where the greatest profits are, and maybe this is why SS is expanding it's fleet even though they can't fill current ships. Of course SS can't say directly that they're looking down-market. But, they need to say something to attract the attention of that group. I'll continue cruise, as well, -- until the wet T-shirt contests start.

[Canuckvoyager]

Well, you believe that they are not genuinely saying what they want to do, and suggesting that they want to do the opposite. This is a touch bizarre. Spending effort to go in a direction they don't want to go in needs you to explain a bit more about what you think their somewhat cunning plan is!

 

Jeff:

 

It's a common business strategy to re-frame into "good news" that which is likely to be "bad news" for a good chunk of your current customer base. Hence, if you're taking away more than you're adding in, you formulate this as an "enhancement".

[xplrcrzn]

I'm not sure where some folks--especially cruising folks--got the idea that wearing tuxes and evening gowns equals "upscale" or "upmarket" while dressing casually but elegantly inevitably leads to "wet T-shirt contests."

[Canuckvoyager]

I'm not sure where some folks--especially cruising folks--got the idea that wearing tuxes and evening gowns equals "upscale" or "upmarket" while dressing casually but elegantly inevitably leads to "wet T-shirt contests."

 

I couldn't help but chuckle reading your post. It seems that some people are trivializing this discussion as being only about clothing. I think we're discussing whether or not there's a general down-market change of direction at SS, press announcements notwithstanding.

[meow!]

Seabourn presently has three ships with a total of 600 berths. Silversea has four ships with a total of 1350 berths. As the higher a cruise line charges, the less the number of potential customers. If anything, Seabourn has a better chance of moving "up market" than Silversea. However, instead of going that way, they are adding two ships to more than double the number of berths. It would appear that their owner, Carnival, has decided that there is not enough "charter like" cruisers to go that way. The best bet for people in that mindset will be to convince Seadream, with a total of two ships and only two hundred berths to consider it.

 

Silversea's problem likely came from the downturn of the U.S. economy, and the precipitous drop of the US$. If somehow, the economic situation improves enough for Silversea to charge as many euros per diem as they do US$ now sometime down the road, and restore the amenities it used to offer at the turn of the millennium, that would be as much as could be hoped for. At this stage, they are playing with words, and only time will tell what actually will happen. Guessing what Silversea will be like is like forecasting the weather. Just wait till it happens, and then do accordingly, each to his/her own!

[uk1]

I couldn't help but chuckle reading your post. It seems that some people are trivializing this discussion as being only about clothing. I think we're discussing whether or not there's a general down-market change of direction at SS, press announcements notwithstanding.

 

 

Well, I chuckle with you except that I and others were discussing what SS had announced and I gave you quite extensive first-hand information that I had concerning why they were trying to move up-market and how this would help. But you reduced the announcement to:

 

Personally, I enjoy the dressing-up, the parties and receptions where you can meet and greet the Captain and officers and get to know more of your fellow passengers, and all those fabulous social traditions. A big part of what appeals to me about a cruise holiday is the opportunity to step into another world, very different from day-to-day life -- a world with a bit of glamour, fantasy, and adventure. Doing away with many of the traditional aspects of cruising could make the experience rather ordinary to many of us.

 

......... and it was me that tried to bring you back to the bigger picture.

 

You then went on a trip to steakhouseland:

 

Say you're the owner of a specialty restaurant, say a steakhouse. You then decide to eliminate beef for one night a week in order to please those that don't like beef, but want lamb ..........

 

and off you went again. I tried again to bring you back to what SS were trying to do. You then went on about clothing again:

 

Jeff:

 

“The trend toward more casual cruising seems to be permeating the industry. I wonder how much this has to do with customer preferences, and how much is about cruise lines wanting to cut costs and raise profits. Toward this end, they may be trying to convince customers that conventional is “rigid”, and casual is better. By golly, the most affluent and desirable passengers want casual, you/they tell us. More “casualness” often equates with less for the passenger (and more profit for the cruise line) – more DJ’s instead of live bands and productions; more hamburgers and less caviar; fewer receptions, cocktail parties, and organized activities which cuts down on the need for crew; and so on. And all this for higher fares, because you’re on a “privileged passage”. Oh, but there will be new “privileges”, one may argue – increased spa hours, some free excursions, and early embarkation/late disembarkation if needed. I suspect that the savings coming from the cuts to be made will outweigh the cost of the new extras.

 

Based on the majority of my SS cruises, I like SS as it is. A move toward less conventional cruising, even if it’s only in a portion of the product to start, is bound to change the whole nature of the beast before too long. By the way, donning a ball gown when all around are casual (i.e. exercising your right to exceed minimum dress requirements) is not going to make one feel like they’re on a different sort of cruise -- unless one typically lives in a separate reality. If casual, non-conventional is truly what everybody wants, then so be it. But, maybe there are more than a few of us out there who want traditional cruising to stay alive.[/font]

 

So when you say:

I couldn't help but chuckle reading your post. It seems that some people are trivializing this discussion as being only about clothing. ...............

You seem to be objecting to your own posts!

 

Said with a genuine helpfulness.

 

Jeff

[Host Dan]

This is a great debate everyone, and as the OP I'm thoroughly enjoying it. That said, lets keep on topic. (Biz and financial tips, and negative comments targeting other members are not on topic BTW)

 

Thanks!

 

Host Dan

[BP617]

Having just returned from our 3rd SS cruise, I find them to be as good as they always have been. Impeccable service and food. As to their newly announced experiment, well, let's all just wait and see where it goes:)

One interesting thing will be the dropping of fees for early embarkation and late disembarkation. On our cruise just completed, late disembarkation was not available due to a full ship charter that was following our cruise (completely understandable, since the group chartering wanted quite an early embarkation). Granted, this is probably a bit rare, but it will be interesting to see how SS handles this sort of situation if they expand this idea to all ships (on our cruise people who requested late disembarkation were simply told it was not available).

[Iamseasick]

Personally, I like it. I agree that many people want to get away from the suit/tie that they where daily. That does not mean that these same people want wet t-shirt contests (although maybe one small wet t-shirt contest in the smoking lounge would be ok for one night). Seriously, most people who choose SS do so because they want quality food, decent entertainment, superb service, larger staterooms than the norm, and PEACE AND QUIET.

 

I also like the early/late embark/debark but I do fear it will open the floodgates and make it difficult for the staff to get the ship ready.

 

It will be interesting to see if this new policy results in more young families with children on board. I am not against that as long as they are well behaved.

[Signor John]

To the participants in this discussion who think luxury is all about dress codes, let me ask this: How many five-star hotels require a tuxedo or gown at dinner these days?

 

It wasn't that long ago that first-class passengers on ships wore black tie every night. Now they're doing it a few days a week. Pretty soon they'll do it if they want to, but they won't if they don't.

 

Cole Porter is dead; rich Brits don't dress for dinner every night; white tie is now associated with orchestra conductors. Times change, and a business that doesn't keep up with change is doomed to die off with a shrinking pool of customers.

[tgh]

I am probably one of the Australian "Targets" ,considered in this discussion and a cruise on Silversea is on the agenda.

 

Silversea is being considered in order to escape the cafeteria culture of the big boats.

 

A recent cruise on the Constellation decided us that we would go back "down" to princess as the premium for Celebrity was not reflected in tangible quality.

 

A requirement for fancy dress on a cruise is a booking negative for me , although it is clear that many enjoy the charade.

 

Quality food , good wine , and the simple things done well attract.

[UKCruiseJeff]

Not wanting to start a new Muse thread, in the light of the Muse roll-out many CCers may be interested in being reminded or informed about some of the thought processes buzzing around SS ten years ago when some of the idea of SS moving up-market (yes there is one ......) from the rather higher postion (imho) they had in those days with higher levels of luxury and quality to an even higher one with higher diems and more affluent customers even amongst those seeking a genuine ultra-luxury alternative to owning their own.

 

I sought of hoped that Muse might boldly move in the direction of "Priveleged Passage" that Albert Peters envisioned as being a possible way forward for the whole SS fleet and product. It was an interesting experiement that much to my sadness never caught on. Sad because it wasn't a bad idea, it was simply not rolled out in a way that would make it work. It was a bold and great idea let down by poor "staff work". You also have to see that work against the background of the smaller fleet of smaller more exclusive craft it then had and at a time when it's major competitor was rather short of balconies. Those were the days. :)

 

It was a fascinating time to see the SS thought process and product aspirations and how it seems the pursuit of revenue seemed to reverse some of those ideas. There were early warning signs about reconciling customer aspirations with lowering diems. What might have been!

 

I strongly feel now as I thought then that above the clouds below which most current lines choose to compete, there is a clear market with no competion for a genuinely ultra-luxury line.

[hypercafe]

If you are looking for a true ultra luxury line I would suggest Hapag-Lloyd, the Europa 2.

 

Sent from my XT1032 using Forums mobile app

[Travelcat2]

Jeff, not sure how you found such an old (and interesting thread). Did you read Cruise Critic's comparison of the Muse and Seabourn's Encore. It is in the "Luxury" cruise section of CC and is quite interesting! To be honest, I am saddened to see the situation with dining venues on Muse. The dress code is odd and having two restaurants with a price tag seems to take away from the "all-inclusiveness" of the line.

 

In any case, I'm not sure why a poster used your post as an opportunity to "advertise" another cruise line. Think that I'll stick to the thread where your lovely meals are highlighted.:halo:

 

Jackie

[UKCruiseJeff]

Jeff, not sure how you found such an old (and interesting thread). Did you read Cruise Critic's comparison of the Muse and Seabourn's Encore. It is in the "Luxury" cruise section of CC and is quite interesting! To be honest, I am saddened to see the situation with dining venues on Muse. The dress code is odd and having two restaurants with a price tag seems to take away from the "all-inclusiveness" of the line.

 

In any case, I'm not sure why a poster used your post as an opportunity to "advertise" another cruise line. Think that I'll stick to the thread where your lovely meals are highlighted.:halo:

 

Jackie

 

Thanks Jackie,

 

I'll find and read the comparison. Thanks for the pointer.

 

You might have "read between the lines" (eg#43) my interest in the project at the time (UK1) hence it wasn't a matter of finding as such. I had hoped that Muse was going to adopt some of the philosphies of Priveledged Passenger and perhaps if they had got the thing right it might have done.

 

The original proposal for PP was that one of the smaller ships ie Wind or Cloud would prototype the programme for a time. Anyway. History.

 

Thanks for the foody comments. I am looking forward to wifey's recovery after Friday and I'll put her on to more chewy things.

Edited May 24, 2017 by UKCruiseJeff