Outrageous Paying For Soda

[bUU]

This is a really critical point, Barb, and something I think many of us need to work hard at. It is so easy to pre-determine that you're going to be dissatisfied by anything you buy by fostering unreasonable expectations. The time to apply expectations and a skeptical eye is before you purchase, in reviewing the promises being made to you. If what you're purchasing, in terms of the actual promises being made -- the written guarantees of what will be provided (as opposed to what you've heard is provided, or what you think should be provided, or what was provided in the past, etc.) isn't worth the price being charged, then don't buy! You're not buying your dreams; you're buying a promise by the cruise line to fulfill a written service specification. Those promises (alone) had better be worth the price -- everything over-and-above that is icing on the cake.

So in the case of soda, it isn't included. So the price of the cruise needs to be "worth it" in light of that, and in light of the promise to charge $6 per day for the soda card, if that is in any way important to you. Otherwise, do yourself a favor and cruise with a company that will promise to live up to your expectations instead of one that told you that it wouldn't.

[Mark_K]

[quote name='bicker']This is a really critical point, Barb, and something I think many of us need to work hard at. It is so easy to pre-determine that you're going to be dissatisfied by anything you buy by fostering unreasonable expectations. The time to apply expectations and a skeptical eye is before you purchase, in reviewing the promises being made to you. If what you're purchasing, in terms of the actual promises being made -- the written guarantees of what will be provided (as opposed to what you've heard is provided, or what you think should be provided, or what was provided in the past, etc.) isn't worth the price being charged, then don't buy! You're not buying your dreams; you're buying a promise by the cruise line to fulfill a written service specification. Those promises (alone) had better be worth the price -- everything over-and-above that is icing on the cake.

So in the case of soda, it isn't included. So the price of the cruise needs to be "worth it" in light of that, and in light of the promise to charge $6 per day for the soda card, if that is in any way important to you. Otherwise, do yourself a favor and cruise with a company that will promise to live up to your expectations instead of one that told you that it wouldn't.[/QUOTE]And so we've come full circle back to what I told the OP in the very first reply:

[b]"Why are you so outraged? You act as if this was suddenly foisted on you after you booked your cruise."[/b]

[Lyncruiser]

Just to set the record straight -- I cruised the Eastern Caribbean on on RCI three years ago. I'm cruising the Eastern Caribbean again next month. Both times on Voyager-class ships. Both times the same week and same type of cabin. Balcony was $800 first and second two years ago, now its over $1100 first and second. Thus, I'm paying at least $300 more per person for this cruise than the one two years ago. With inflation running at about 3% per year (someone correct me if that's wrong), I'd expect to pay about $100 more per person.

Three years ago, sodas were included at dinner, now they're not. Gee, I was hoping to pay less now that sodas aren't included! Darn it! What's wrong with this picture?

Could it be that pricing is determined by something other than whether sodas are included? Could it be that the Voyager-class ships are very popular and RCI has realized that and raised prices (certainly their right to do so). Could it be consolidation in the cruise industry -- for which we can blame a lax Justice Department.

My point is, those of you who think your next cruise will be cheaper just because RCI no longer serves soda in the dining room are sorely mistaken. Cruise pricing has very little to do with sodas, and much more to do with cruise industry conditions, travel industry conditions generally, competition and, when it comes down to it, what the market will bear.

If the price of travel were 100% correlated with the cost of providing that travel to you, the airlines would not be losing billions annually. Competition is a much greater determinant of the price you pay than are Diet Cokes.

[bUU]

The "inflation rate" is computed based on a bundle of goods, utilities and services that a typical household purchases. It does not track the inflation rate for luxury items. Luxury items typically trail the inflation rate during a depressed economy (luxury items either rise in price more slowly than general items, or even fall in price -- something that almost never happens with necessities), and luxury items lead the inflation rate during a recovering and boom economy (luxury items climb in price faster than general item).

You are right about one thing: Pricing is definitely not based solely on whether sodas are included or not -- that only has a very small impact. Pricing is based on overall perceived value by customers.

[xpcdoojk]

[quote name='Lyncruiser']Just to set the record straight -- I cruised the Eastern Caribbean on on RCI three years ago. I'm cruising the Eastern Caribbean again next month. Both times on Voyager-class ships. Both times the same week and same type of cabin. Balcony was $800 first and second two years ago, now its over $1100 first and second. Thus, I'm paying at least $300 more per person for this cruise than the one two years ago. With inflation running at about 3% per year (someone correct me if that's wrong), I'd expect to pay about $100 more per person.

Three years ago, sodas were included at dinner, now they're not. Gee, I was hoping to pay less now that sodas aren't included! Darn it! What's wrong with this picture?

Could it be that pricing is determined by something other than whether sodas are included? Could it be that the Voyager-class ships are very popular and RCI has realized that and raised prices (certainly their right to do so). Could it be consolidation in the cruise industry -- for which we can blame a lax Justice Department.

My point is, those of you who think your next cruise will be cheaper just because RCI no longer serves soda in the dining room are sorely mistaken. Cruise pricing has very little to do with sodas, and much more to do with cruise industry conditions, travel industry conditions generally, competition and, when it comes down to it, what the market will bear.

If the price of travel were 100% correlated with the cost of providing that travel to you, the airlines would not be losing billions annually. Competition is a much greater determinant of the price you pay than are Diet Cokes.[/QUOTE]
Umm, wrong, but with your point of view hardly surprising. Supply and demand determine pricing for cruises. 2 years ago would be during the recession, and the fallout for the travel industry after 911. IE there were a lot of travelers unwilling to go on airplane rides and the pricing for cruises was at an all time low. If you have noticed, despite what the TV talking heads say, the economy has come back. RCI and Carnival stock prices are increasing. IE the demand for cruises is increased, therefore the cost of cabins has increased. It has nothing to do with inflation.

You are correct that competition does affect the price of diet cokes at walmart or the grocery store, but that is not the correct analogy to make. The price of cokes is determined by the fact that there is no competition when you are on a cruise ship. Anymore than it is when you go to a movie theatre or a ballpark(this point has been made countless times in this debate, but you still ignore it). They have a captive audience. It doesn't cost anymore for a coke at a ballpark than it does on a cruiseship or McDonald's, yet they do not charge the same do they. I was at a ball game recently I had to pay 6.75 for a can of beer. I can buy a really nice 6 pack for that at my grocery store. In otherwords, the cruiseline or the ballpark is maximizing revenue. They are justified and correct in doing so. If they stop selling sodas at the current price level because of lack of demand, then to maximize revenue they would need to reduce price. I am pretty sure that the cruiseline has done an analysis of the price at which they maximize revenue, hence the pricing structure you see. This is what we do in a non-socialist economy.

You are correct that the price of cokes doesn't cause the price of the cruise, however the price of cokes may affect the profitability or lack thereof of the cruiseline. If you don't like RCIs policy why don't you cruise HAL or Carnival. Oh yeah, I forget, they don't offer those wonderful Voyager class ships do they? Maybe RCI is worth more to cruise than the competition hence, they can get away with charging more for cokes, rather than raising the price on those who don't drink cokes. Why should others subsidize your coke consumption? I mean everything should be included, I like to collect photographs, they only cost the cruiseline a dollar and they charge me twenty, that is wrong. I think the massage therapist only gets paid $10 per hour therefore shouldn't the cruise only charge $20 for a massage instead of $100?

Bottom line, drink a coke or don't drink a coke it is personal choice. If you have to drink a coke you really have a bigger problem than the price.

jc

[Erie Dave]

I have read back throught this thread and I don't seem to see any discussion on why you buy the card to begin with? You buy it because it is a better deal than buying the soda individually right? I guess it is up to you to decide if it is cheaper to buy the card, or pay as you go.

I think some memories are short about these cards. Not long ago, there was a lot of discussion about how poor the service was when using a soda card, and how you didn't get the same quality of beverage when they still had the drink card.

I think the funny thing about this thread is that the card fans used to complain about what they got for their money, now the complaints are about how much they cost. RCI got rid of the alcohol cards because of complaints like these, the soda card may just go away and none of us will have to worry about it.........

[mjsshipboy]

To the poster who was outraged at the $300 cost increase of her cruise....

2 years ago was 2002, the summer following the September 11th attacks. The whole travel industry was in pain then, you could book a transatlantic flight that summer for around $250 return, something that would set you back closer to $750 - $1000 now..... Luxury product prices fluctuate a lot dependant on the economic situation we are in at the time.....

Plus, $1100 is a bit of a bargain. I have an RCCL brochure from 1987 spotlighting the BRAND NEW Sovereign of the Seas (The largest cruise ship in the world,no less.....) Starting prices for December 1987 were $1250 per person for a deck 2 inside cabin.......

Suddenly $6 a day for soda seems a bargain, doesn't it. (PS - has anyone ever actually paid for a drink in a lobby bar at a Marriott or Westin hotel?? - Or do all of these posters book a $10 econolodge the night before they get on the cruise, or just sleep in the car in a free parking lot.....?)

[Franchise]

Outrageous

[Cruiz'nTall]

Yeah, um, I'm going to have to agree (gasp).

Plus, you start out saying you own a resteraunt and that by your own first hand knowledge, you know there is great profit in soda. Then you question why RCCL and other cruise ships charge for it? I think its because they like profit...just a guess.

Fast food places like McDonalds make the majority of their profits in soda - believe it or not. The soda is made by combining the syrup with carbonated water. A medium coke, for example costs them about 19 cents and they charge you a buck and change.

Their profit margin on food is much lower.

But the point is, FREE ICE CREAM! I'll take that over free coke any day.

Cheers,



[quote name='Mark_K']Calm down, take three deep breaths and relax. If you don't want to pay for soda, don't. Drink lemonade, ice tea, coffee, and water.

Why are you so outraged? You act as if this was suddenly foisted on you after you booked your cruise.[/QUOTE]

[Cruiz'nTall]

[quote name='xpcdoojk']Umm, wrong, but with your point of view hardly surprising. Supply and demand determine pricing for cruises. 2 years ago would be during the recession, and the fallout for the travel industry after 911. IE there were a lot of travelers unwilling to go on airplane rides and the pricing for cruises was at an all time low. If you have noticed, despite what the TV talking heads say, the economy has come back. RCI and Carnival stock prices are increasing. IE the demand for cruises is increased, therefore the cost of cabins has increased. It has nothing to do with inflation. [/QUOTE]I'm baaaaak....To borrow from your oh so apt phrase..UM Wrong...

Higher prices has everything to do with inflation, and one component of a rebounding economy is inflation. That is why the FED's have started to increase STM interst rates - because of fears that inflation will outpace the growth in the economy. Prices for consumer goods are on the rise because people are able to borrow and spend and refinance at such a reduced rate. That creates a disparity in market value.

Sorry...


[Quote]You are correct that competition does affect the price of diet cokes at walmart or the grocery store, but that is not the correct analogy to make. The price of cokes is determined by the fact that there is no competition when you are on a cruise ship. Anymore than it is when you go to a movie theatre or a ballpark(this point has been made countless times in this debate, but you still ignore it). They have a captive audience. It doesn't cost anymore for a coke at a ballpark than it does on a cruiseship or McDonald's, yet they do not charge the same do they. I was at a ball game recently I had to pay 6.75 for a can of beer. I can buy a really nice 6 pack for that at my grocery store. In otherwords, the cruiseline or the ballpark is maximizing revenue. They are justified and correct in doing so. If they stop selling sodas at the current price level because of lack of demand, then to maximize revenue they would need to reduce price. I am pretty sure that the cruiseline has done an analysis of the price at which they maximize revenue, hence the pricing structure you see. This is what we do in a non-socialist economy. [/Quote]I'll agree with this statement, to a point. But whether or not they are justified and correct in engaging in price fixing and what is essentially a self-imposed Monopoly is up for debate. What determines the price of a consumable product at a venue like a movie theatre, or ball park is based on an artificial monopoly. They refuse to allow you to bring in outside sources of market valued products and force you to buy products that reflect their inflated market value. Are they justified in doing this? It all depends on how you look at it.

Who is actually selling these products at these venues (outside of movie theatres who generally make a large chunk of their profits by selling their own consumables?).

Not the actual venues, but subcontracted vendors. Do you think the vendors are the ones engaging in price gauging? You might think so, but you would be wrong. The vendors are slapped with very hight "rent" or "opportunity" fees because of the fact that they have an exclusive, and deprived consumer (deprived in the sense that they cannot provide their own consumables).

The vendor has to charge a substantially higher charge for their product to overcome the unusually high rent that is charged by the venue. Thus, when you pay 6.75 for that beer, the vendor probably pulls in his $1.50 and the rest goes to paying the venue for the right to be there.

Now, is the venue justified in essentially screwing the end consumer? Absolutely not. But is it legal for them to do so? Absolutely. It's called Capitalism.

Justifiability, and legality are not the same things. Try not to confuse them.


[quote] You are correct that the price of cokes doesn't cause the price of the cruise, however the price of cokes may affect the profitability or lack thereof of the cruiseline. If you don't like RCIs policy why don't you cruise HAL or Carnival. Oh yeah, I forget, they don't offer those wonderful Voyager class ships do they? Maybe RCI is worth more to cruise than the competition hence, they can get away with charging more for cokes, rather than raising the price on those who don't drink cokes. Why should others subsidize your coke consumption? I mean everything should be included, I like to collect photographs, they only cost the cruiseline a dollar and they charge me twenty, that is wrong. I think the massage therapist only gets paid $10 per hour therefore shouldn't the cruise only charge $20 for a massage instead of $100? [/QUOTE]Right point, but wrong analogy - as you so mentioned earlier. What the original poster is arguing is that coke shouldn't be considered a luxury item that the cruise should charge for any more then coffee or lemonade. The difference is that there isn't much profit to be made in those particular drinks, and the cruise line has to offer something as a a free alternative.

What the cruise lines are honing in on, is that Coke and soft drink products are consumed by the billions of gallons in this country year wide (we average something like a hundred gallons per consumer a year). What ensues, is an inflexible demand for these products, and consequently, a mechanism to charge people higher then market value for something they know that a consumer is going to want.

By your logic, RCCI would be just as justified in charging for bread, or butter, or heaven forbid, Ice Cream (gasp). What would happen though if they did? Most likely, Revolt. And you would be the only one arguing it would still ok.



[QUOTE]Bottom line, drink a coke or don't drink a coke it is personal choice. If you have to drink a coke you really have a bigger problem than the price. [/QUOTE]Thats not judemental and hypocritical. As if there aren't a million people on these cruises that HAVE to drink coffeee. The only difference is that the cruiselines don't charge for coffeee so those people are OK according to your logic. The unlucky bastards who HAVE to drink coke, and are nailed with the upcharge are somehow not OK?

Hmm... Tell that to the millions who frequent Star Bucks every day.

Cheers,

CT

[Woodsmaster]

[quote name='Mark_K']In 2003 RCI (including Celebrity) had net income of $280 million and had 20 million passenger days. That works out to a net income of $14 per passenger per day.

It wouldn't surprise me at all if they make more than $14 per passenger day on drinks, casino, photos, merchandise, shore excursions, etc. (actually it would surprise me if they didn't). And if so, their base prices are below cost.[/QUOTE]


Net income is not what you are looking at....

I may have it all bassackwards, but I believe Gross income = Net income + expenses + overhead. They deduct the cost of the vessel's expenses (fuel, docking fees, demurrage, pilots, food, etc.), staff and crew, office overhead, booking services, etc. from their gross income to get to the Net income of $280,000,000.00. What is their actual cost? It's not all there. Your tips offset crew expenses they don't otherwise pay.

You go to gross income and then take away their expenses. The net income would be their profit. If your net income calculation is correct, then they make 7x $14.00 per passenger profit per 7 day cruise.... About $100.00 per person. That would be about $250,000 profit on one 7 day cruise for a 2500 passenger ship. $13,000,000.00 per year for that one ship. They aren't out there to lose money. They may take a cut in their last minute bookings to fill space versus sail with an empty cabin, but they aren't sailing with their base prices being below their cost for their normal bookings. Without seeing their balance sheet, trial balance, and P&L statement, It's speculation and conjecture.

The lines that are sailing at a below cost basis are being gobbled up or going out of business. They are not building multiple hundred million dollar ships to dump into their fleets and keep losing more.

At least not if they want to keep stock holders.......

[Mark_K]

Yes, you have it all bassackwards. You're confusing income with revenues.

Also, since you mention it, the fact that they only make $14pp/day and we subsidize their crew's income by tipping makes it even more certain that they price their cruises below total costs.

"Without seeing their balance sheet, trial balance, and P&L statement, It's speculation and conjecture."

I have seen their balance sheet, etc. If you want to also, here's a link to eight years worth of their annual reports:

[url="http://www.corporate-ir.net/ireye/ir_site.zhtml?ticker=rcl&script=700"]http://www.corporate-ir.net/ireye/ir_site.zhtml?ticker=rcl&script=700[/url]

[Magicat]

So the big question I have is...what kind of soda do they have anyway?

[bUU]

[QUOTE=Cruiz'nTall]Plus, you start out saying you own a resteraunt and that by your own first hand knowledge, you know there is great profit in soda. Then you question why RCCL and other cruise ships charge for it? I think its because they like profit...just a guess.[/QUOTE]LOL! Thanks for the smile, this morning!

[bUU]

Great info, Mark K. Thanks for the research.

[xpcdoojk]

CT, inflation is based on a basket of goods and not a particular single good. A case in point, would be looking at the current inflation rate, which is skewed upwards in the months of May and June because of a single item. IE gasoline went up at a rate much faster than the overall inflation rate, and yes gasoline was a factor in the increasing inflation rate, and because all goods rely on gasoline and its sibling diesel fuel therefore the increase of this item has an impact on all other goods because of it relationship to the cost of getting goods to market. Another item that has had a huge impact on this years inflation rates are the massive increases in the cost of steel and copper, due to huge demands for the products in China. Steel has more than doubled in 6 months. When items like these increase so drastically it is almost impossible for the overall inflation rate to not increase, however this means nothing to other products in the basket of goods used to determine the inflation rate. In fact they could increase, decrease or remain the same. No definitive judgement of the other items can be determined based solely on the inflation rate.

Further, the price of cruising is clearly a classic case of the equilibrium of supply and demand curves. On 911 the demand for cruises curve clearly shifted to the left. There is no doubt that many travelers chose not travel post 911. Therefore the demand curve shifted to the left, and the supply curve in the short run was fixed. (Of course, there was a shift of the supply curve shortly letter when Renaissance and American Hawaii cruiselines went broke. Yes children, the huge evil corporations can indeed go broke and they are not operating with huge coffers of gold and silver stashed away) Ergo, the price of cruises went down. I booked a cruise for a 7 day cruise on the adventure of the seas and with port taxes the price of a balcony cabin was $660. We were on a Hawaiian cruise 1 month after 911, and after our 12 day cruise they offered to let us stay for another 12 day cruise for $40 per person per day, as they had many cancelations. I don't think it is debateable that following 911 cruising was a huge bargain. It is likely that during this time the stock prices reflected the markets understanding that the cruiselines were not likely to be posting any short term profits, and I think it is argueable that so many of the policies that people whine about are a result of the crisis management policies that this massive shock to the travel industry caused. Clearly the 911 shift of the demand curve has been replaced by a new shift reflecting people's renewed interest in traveling.

CT, The cruiselines charge a premium price for the premium coffees that would be comparable to Starbucks, exactly like they charge a premium price for cokes. On some of the RCI ships they have Coffee shops in which a caramel machiatto (my personal poison) is priced higher than my local Starbucks. If you order a latte or capucino after dinner expect to pay on most mid range cruiselines.

Regarding you ballpark arguement, regardless of who is making the money the vendors which are usually as you point out separate operators from the ball park owners, the fact that the vendors will pay outrageous rents in order to be in the ball park, proves that they appreciate the monopoly pricing position by being the beer vendor at the ballgame. Since the ball park owner has a highly desireable location for selling products doesn't invalidate the arguement. In fact on cruiseships the salon is usually operated by Steiner and they are an independent contractor that pays the cruiseline based on a contract between the two companies at whatever rate they both agree on. In otherwords, they see the value of a captive market and pay a lot of money to be the operator. Same with Seattle's best coffee shops. This is a good thing, generally, because while the cruiseline may know a lot about operating a cruiseship they may not be as good operating a salon as a salon specialist. Of course the movie theatre and the pricing of a coke is exactly the same as the cruiseline pricing a coke. Maybe we should have the justice department crack down on those nasty movie houses instead of cruiseships that mostly operate outside of the US of A.:rolleyes: Maybe, we should realize as a consumer when we are in a place with a captive market, to decide if we really have to have a coke and maybe while we would like a coke, that a nice lemonade or iced tea might not be too bad or some bad sludge coffee might be an ok substitute for our caramel machiatto.:p I do love to go to the ballpark and watch some guy who probably doesn't make a lot of money drink 7 $6 beers and then marvel when he is surprised he doesn't have enough money to pay the rent at the end of the month. I do actually get to see this with work mates as our ballpark is a couple of hundred yards from our office. It is all choices and we are free to make them, and that is why capitalism is such a wonderful thing.

jc

[yarlenna]

Or simply don't buy the soda. There is lots of other stuff to drink. Water springs to mind. The lemonaide can be really good.

[JohnSax]

Interesting thread--have loved reading all of it. Having sailed on over 40 cruises, I feel like I have a pretty good perception of cruise passengers, and the reality is that there are now more than ever, passengers who can afford the basic cruise fare--but not much more. Hence, the constant debate here regarding extra charges. No, it's not great that the price of the soda card went up, but hasn't just about everything? We live in a capitalistic, free market economy where maximizing profits counts for everything. I have to agree with the posters that I would rather pay a reasonable cruise fare, then have the freedom to purchase what I choose to consume. As for soda pop, it's been my experience that just about everywhere you go, there is always an extra charge for this--sometimes exhorbitant, sometimes reasonable. Six dollars a day for unlimited soda seems fair to me--not a huge bargain, but not the 3.00 per glass sodas served in hotels or bars either. As for coffee, I am a partaker and I do pay the extra charge at the coffee bar onboard when I want a "good" cup of coffee. And at 1.00 for a small, that seems pretty fair to me. As for the extra charge restaurants on board--20.00 for a meal that would go for close to 100.00 seems reasonable to me, too--but that's for a whole other thread

[Mark_K]

The thing that amazes me is there are so many soda drinkers apparently unable to mentally (or with paper/pencil) add $6/day+15% to the price of the cruise and then decide whether it still sounds like a good value.

[xpcdoojk]

So true! Mark K.

jc:eek: :D

[Magicat]

[quote name='yarlenna']Or simply don't buy the soda. There is lots of other stuff to drink. Water springs to mind. The lemonaide can be really good.[/QUOTE]


Mmmmmm beeeerrrr

[Cruiz'nTall]

[quote name='xpcdoojk']CT, inflation is based on a basket of goods and not a particular single good. A case in point, would be looking at the current inflation rate, which is skewed upwards in the months of May and June because of a single item. IE gasoline went up at a rate much faster than the overall inflation rate, and yes gasoline was a factor in the increasing inflation rate, and because all goods rely on gasoline and its sibling diesel fuel therefore the increase of this item has an impact on all other goods because of it relationship to the cost of getting goods to market. Another item that has had a huge impact on this years inflation rates are the massive increases in the cost of steel and copper, due to huge demands for the products in China. Steel has more than doubled in 6 months. When items like these increase so drastically it is almost impossible for the overall inflation rate to not increase, however this means nothing to other products in the basket of goods used to determine the inflation rate. In fact they could increase, decrease or remain the same. No definitive judgement of the other items can be determined based solely on the inflation rate.

Further, the price of cruising is clearly a classic case of the equilibrium of supply and demand curves. On 911 the demand for cruises curve clearly shifted to the left. There is no doubt that many travelers chose not travel post 911. Therefore the demand curve shifted to the left, and the supply curve in the short run was fixed. (Of course, there was a shift of the supply curve shortly letter when Renaissance and American Hawaii cruiselines went broke. Yes children, the huge evil corporations can indeed go broke and they are not operating with huge coffers of gold and silver stashed away) Ergo, the price of cruises went down. I booked a cruise for a 7 day cruise on the adventure of the seas and with port taxes the price of a balcony cabin was $660. We were on a Hawaiian cruise 1 month after 911, and after our 12 day cruise they offered to let us stay for another 12 day cruise for $40 per person per day, as they had many cancelations. I don't think it is debateable that following 911 cruising was a huge bargain. It is likely that during this time the stock prices reflected the markets understanding that the cruiselines were not likely to be posting any short term profits, and I think it is argueable that so many of the policies that people whine about are a result of the crisis management policies that this massive shock to the travel industry caused. Clearly the 911 shift of the demand curve has been replaced by a new shift reflecting people's renewed interest in traveling.

CT, The cruiselines charge a premium price for the premium coffees that would be comparable to Starbucks, exactly like they charge a premium price for cokes. On some of the RCI ships they have Coffee shops in which a caramel machiatto (my personal poison) is priced higher than my local Starbucks. If you order a latte or capucino after dinner expect to pay on most mid range cruiselines.

Regarding you ballpark arguement, regardless of who is making the money the vendors which are usually as you point out separate operators from the ball park owners, the fact that the vendors will pay outrageous rents in order to be in the ball park, proves that they appreciate the monopoly pricing position by being the beer vendor at the ballgame. Since the ball park owner has a highly desireable location for selling products doesn't invalidate the arguement. In fact on cruiseships the salon is usually operated by Steiner and they are an independent contractor that pays the cruiseline based on a contract between the two companies at whatever rate they both agree on. In otherwords, they see the value of a captive market and pay a lot of money to be the operator. Same with Seattle's best coffee shops. This is a good thing, generally, because while the cruiseline may know a lot about operating a cruiseship they may not be as good operating a salon as a salon specialist. Of course the movie theatre and the pricing of a coke is exactly the same as the cruiseline pricing a coke. Maybe we should have the justice department crack down on those nasty movie houses instead of cruiseships that mostly operate outside of the US of A.:rolleyes: Maybe, we should realize as a consumer when we are in a place with a captive market, to decide if we really have to have a coke and maybe while we would like a coke, that a nice lemonade or iced tea might not be too bad or some bad sludge coffee might be an ok substitute for our caramel machiatto.:p I do love to go to the ballpark and watch some guy who probably doesn't make a lot of money drink 7 $6 beers and then marvel when he is surprised he doesn't have enough money to pay the rent at the end of the month. I do actually get to see this with work mates as our ballpark is a couple of hundred yards from our office. It is all choices and we are free to make them, and that is why capitalism is such a wonderful thing.

jc[/QUOTE]
Christ, too much blah-blah. That's all good and great, but cruise ships use a ton of fuel (just like jet-liners) and last time I checked, they were all paying for it. Yes, inflation can be affected by a single source like the price of fuel (which has a dramatic effect on the economy) - but if you listen to Allen Greenspan - the price of fuel is not something he is all that worried about. He's raised interest rates because inflation is outpacing growth. Inflation cannot be soley based on the price of gas - but on the price of consumer goods and how much we spend on them.

What is effecting the economy (and subsequently inflation) is consumer spending (or the lack thereof for the last few months of June and July) - our economy is almost completely driven by consumer spending. Think about that in relation to your arguement.

The other factor is rising budget deficits but I won't go into that here.

Cheers,

CT

[Cruiz'nTall]

I'm glad someone is appreciating my (cough, cough) humor!

:)

[quote name='bicker']LOL! Thanks for the smile, this morning![/QUOTE]

[Cruiz'nTall]

Yes, Good question.

Not sure what RCCI has, but on Princess we only had the major Coke Products:

Coke, Diet Coke, Sprite (and maybe Ginger Ale).

Someone who's traveled Princess correct me if I am wrong.

I wonder if the cruise lines have contractual agreements with different soda companies (i.e. Princess - Coke, RCCI Pepsi, etc.).

Cheers,

CT


[quote name='Magicat']So the big question I have is...what kind of soda do they have anyway?[/QUOTE]

[xpcdoojk]

[QUOTE=Cruiz'nTall]Christ, too much blah-blah. That's all good and great, but cruise ships use a ton of fuel (just like jet-liners) and last time I checked, they were all paying for it. Yes, inflation can be affected by a single source like the price of fuel (which has a dramatic effect on the economy) - but if you listen to Allen Greenspan - the price of fuel is not something he is all that worried about. He's raised interest rates because inflation is outpacing growth. Inflation cannot be soley based on the price of gas - but on the price of consumer goods and how much we spend on them.

What is effecting the economy (and subsequently inflation) is consumer spending (or the lack thereof for the last few months of June and July) - our economy is almost completely driven by consumer spending. Think about that in relation to your arguement.

The other factor is rising budget deficits but I won't go into that here.

Cheers,

CT[/QUOTE]
Ummm, there you have it folks. CT the man Alan Greenspan confides in.:rolleyes:

Got to go to the golf course, of course, I will probably get a psuedo economics lesson from the greenskeeper. :D ;) Fortunately, I can tell him that if he'd just quit buying cokes at the movies, we would not have this economic situation and that it is all his fault. Because the costs of production have no impact on inflation or the economy. Remember that the next time you are at the gas pump. If gas was $0.50 a gallon the economy wouldn't notice a thing.:D :p

jc