Celebrity's new smoking policy

[marle7]

Not necessarily... Just because they may have to tweak the new policy, that doesn't necessarily mean it would be to the detriment of non-smokers. My recommendation would be to set up an "annex smoking casino" in Michael's club (one of the most separate, isolated rooms on any X ship) and make the main casino entirely smoke free. That way, smokers would get to gamble, non-smokers would get to gamble, and neither would bother the other.

 

Honestly, I don't see the point in the announced new policy, as there will still be smoking permitted in a section of the casino. Non-smokers who avoid the casino because of smoke are likely going to STILL HAVE TO DO SO! Where's the benefit?

 

As long as they put a few slots in there, it would work for me.

[Oceans&Rivers]

After Celebrity announced their new smoking policy, I sent a letter to the Captains Club telling them why we would no longer be sailing on Celebrity. I also informed our TA about it and asked her to look at Princess for any of our future cruises.

 

If all the cruise lines eliminate smoking on verandahs, then we will spend our vacationing dollars at a less restrictive place.

 

We are among those who are giving Celebrity the business that you will move elsewhere. We stopped cruising for years because of the smokiness all over the ships, including on balconies. It simply became intolerable for us. We could enjoy land vacations because hotels are for the most part non-smoking now, but cruise ships were an anachronism.

 

I contacted Celebrity also, but my purpose was to request that they ban smoking to the extent they felt it was financially feasible and that once their ban came close enough to meeting our needs that we would cruise on their line.

 

We want to cruise to Alaska, but will have to wait until 2009 since the smoking ban does not go into effect until October of this year. We wish the ban could have been instituted earlier.

 

I applaud Celebrity for being the first premium line with medium-sized to large-sized ships to institute a ban on smoking in cabins, on balconies and throughout most of their ships. We are looking into possibly purchasing RCI stock, too, because of their policy, but that has to be a financial decision, not just a "thank you." I do wish that their sister line would have the same ban on balcony smoking as Celebrity, as we are quite curious about cruising on Royal Caribbean also, but Celebrity probably meets our needs better in most ways, anyway.

 

Celebrity will be getting a lot of our business in the future.

[puli]

I haven't sailed on Celebrity either, but I believe she was responding to the OP's question of whether she would sail on this (or other) lines due to their policies. Given that she is responding to the OP, I don't think it really matters whether she's sailed on Celebrity or not. It could be, like me, she might have considered them, but now will not. I don't see the problem.

 

As the OP, my question was directed specifically to the Celebrity cruisers who smoke and I wanted to know if the new "smoking policy effective October 2008" would effect their remaining Celebrity cruisers of would they move to another line and if so which?

 

As stated in a later posting I am anxious to see if HAL will be inundated with former Celebrity passengers who smoke.

[snc421]

Put me on the NO CELEBRITY list! I understand no smoking in certain public areas, I even understand no smoking in our rooms. But to say not on my balcony is ridiculous!

 

**NOTE: On my cruise on CCL just recently, I did not smoke at all in my room, even though I could. I did ask my steward for an ashtray... to use on my balcony.

[bbro]

As the OP, my question was directed specifically to the Celebrity cruisers who smoke and I wanted to know if the new "smoking policy effective October 2008" would effect their remaining Celebrity cruisers of would they move to another line and if so which?

 

As stated in a later posting I am anxious to see if HAL will be inundated with former Celebrity passengers who smoke.

 

 

Too late, the non-smokers are on the soapbox and I don't think they're coming down. Shall we discuss the weather instead? ;)

[kitty9]

Does anyone feel the banning of smoking on balconies has more to do with insurance/liability issues rather than passenger ***fort? I had read in some trade publications that since the fire that started with smoking materials on a balcony happened, insurance ***panies have upped the premiums for cruise lines. But seeing the fire occurred on a Princess ship, I'm surprised they haven't banned smoking on balconies.

 

As to the revenue issue in the casinos, Summit has been implementing the new smoking rules on that ship since late last year. I spoke with the casino manager and he said their revenues had not dropped with the restrictive smoking rules and they had, in fact, seen more people in the casino because of the new rules. I know that on our Summit cruise, I had problems every night trying to get a seat at either the blackjack or three card poker tables because they were so crowded.

[kitty9]

Hey, board hosts. What's going on with these boards? In my previous post, why are the letters C O M being "starred". These are not dirty words, so why is this going on? I mean, since when are the words c omfort and c ompany considered offensive?

[Susan-M]

Hey, board hosts. What's going on with these boards? In my previous post, why are the letters C O M being "starred". These are not dirty words, so why is this going on? I mean, since when are the words c omfort and c ompany considered offensive?

 

Hi Darcie,

I had the same thing happen in one of my posts, so I thought I would send an email to CC. When I clicked on the link, ***munity@cruisecritic.*** came up.:confused: Hopefully it's a temporary glitch. Or maybe an attempt to prevent website links?

[Drew B]

Does anyone feel the banning of smoking on balconies has more to do with insurance/liability issues rather than passenger ***fort? I had read in some trade publications that since the fire that started with smoking materials on a balcony happened, insurance ***panies have upped the premiums for cruise lines. But seeing the fire occurred on a Princess ship, I'm surprised they haven't banned smoking on balconies.

 

 

IF that's the case (and it may very well be), it makes very little sense to me. Wouldn't they also have to ban smoking on outdoor public decks as well if they want to make a real difference? The critical fire risk isn't smoking on the balcony - it's throwing burning cigarettes overboard (they then blow back and land on balconies). That can happen just as easily if a butt is thrown from a public deck...

[usha]

Wouldn't they also have to ban smoking on outdoor public decks as well if they want to make a real difference?

All in due time, Drew; all in due time.:D

[Leejnd4]

Too late, the non-smokers are on the soapbox and I don't think they're coming down. Shall we discuss the weather instead? ;)

Very pleasant post, and a great contribution to this discussion. :rolleyes: Taking an "us vs them" attitude is always a winner.

 

IF that's the case (and it may very well be), it makes very little sense to me. Wouldn't they also have to ban smoking on outdoor public decks as well if they want to make a real difference? The critical fire risk isn't smoking on the balcony - it's throwing burning cigarettes overboard (they then blow back and land on balconies). That can happen just as easily if a butt is thrown from a public deck...

 

I tend to agree that liability is not the primary factor in these new policies. If that were the case, I would think Princess would have implemented such a policy sooner, given that they're the ones who suffered a fire due to smoking on a balcony.

 

As to the revenue issue in the casinos, Summit has been implementing the new smoking rules on that ship since late last year. I spoke with the casino manager and he said their revenues had not dropped with the restrictive smoking rules and they had, in fact, seen more people in the casino because of the new rules. I know that on our Summit cruise, I had problems every night trying to get a seat at either the blackjack or three card poker tables because they were so crowded.

 

Good to know, and encouraging for the ultimate success of the new policy!

 

Yeah, that c o m thing is rather strange, huh? :confused:

[bbro]

Very pleasant post, and a great contribution to this discussion. :rolleyes: Taking an "us vs them" attitude is always a winner.

 

 

When the OP asked SMOKERS what they thought why did all the non smokers jump in and start gloating? Was that contributing the discussion? Was that an "us" attitude? I just called it how I saw it.

Sorry it hit a nerve... :D

[dkjretired]

Very pleasant post, and a great contribution to this discussion. :rolleyes: Taking an "us vs them" attitude is always a winner.

 

 

When the OP asked SMOKERS what they thought why did all the non smokers jump in and start gloating? Was that contributing the discussion? Was that an "us" attitude? I just called it how I saw it.

Sorry it hit a nerve... :D

 

I think it was a positive thing to have them hop in and find out how many are going to Celebrity because of the policy as well as how many are leaving. What did not contribute to the discussion was all the preaching...and as usual this thread will probably be closed soon. If people could just stay on topic.

[Susan-M]

As the OP, my question was directed specifically to the Celebrity cruisers who smoke and I wanted to know if the new "smoking policy effective October 2008" would effect their remaining Celebrity cruisers of would they move to another line and if so which?

 

As stated in a later posting I am anxious to see if HAL will be inundated with former Celebrity passengers who smoke.

 

Hi Puli,

I find this topic very interesting as well and I wonder if smokers will move to other lines (and also whether other lines will follow Celebrity's lead.)

 

Perhaps if you post a poll with your question, and a list of cruise lines to choose from, it will give a better indication of what people who smoke plan on doing. Polls get a lot more responses as many people are happy to indicate their choices without having to post a message. Just my thoughts.:)

[bbro]

My point exactly. Stick to the question asked. Even the original poster came back on TWICE to re-iterate that the question was for smokers who would consider leaving X due to the policy, not non-smokers who would move over to X because of the policy. I tried to make that point more politely a few pages back. Then I just got frustrated. Score one for board rage. :o

[Leejnd4]

When the OP asked SMOKERS what they thought why did all the non smokers jump in and start gloating? Was that contributing the discussion? Was that an "us" attitude? I just called it how I saw it.

 

The difference is you are among the few people who chose to diss the people, rather than discuss the topic. Most posters in this thread have remained respectful and simply presented their opinions about the complex issues surrounding smoking on cruise ships, and how these new policies affect them and their cruise decisions.

 

Of course, some folks purposely set out to "strike nerves". I prefer to respectfully discuss issues.

 

 

I think it was a positive thing to have them hop in and find out how many are going to Celebrity because of the policy as well as how many are leaving.

 

I agree, and thanks for pointing that out. This is a complex topic, and there are bound to be many opinions. I am interested in all sides (preferably presented respectfully, of course). I for one am curious to see how many people are going in each direction...recognizing that this is all anecdotal, given the small percentage of the cruising population are on CC. Still, we are a microcosm of cruising society, so it's definitely interesting! As for non-smokers offering their opinions: posters on this board are not generally required to adhere rigidly to such a narrow focus of the topic...it's very common for a thread to inspire lively discussion of the overall issues surrounding the topic, as this one has. If we were required to so narrowly limit our replies to the specific question, most threads would be rather short. How boring would that be?

 

Y'know, it's actually possible for people with opposite opinions on an issue to have a respectful discussion, without sinking into nastiness. I always find that to be a much more enjoyable read. :)

[Leejnd4]

My point exactly. Stick to the question asked. Even the original poster came back on TWICE to re-iterate that the question was for smokers who would consider leaving X due to the policy, not non-smokers who would move over to X because of the policy. I tried to make that point more politely a few pages back. Then I just got frustrated. Score one for board rage. :o

 

You're the only one who seems angry. :confused: The rest of us are just talking.

[dkjretired]

My point exactly. Stick to the question asked. Even the original poster came back on TWICE to re-iterate that the question was for smokers who would consider leaving X due to the policy, not non-smokers who would move over to X because of the policy. I tried to make that point more politely a few pages back. Then I just got frustrated. Score one for board rage. :o

 

Actually I think its impossible to post a question on smoking and have it remain on topic. I also don't think you can direct a question to only a certain portion of those on the board and not expect others to answer. It's just the nature of these boards.

[bbro]

You're the only one who seems angry. :confused: The rest of us are just talking.

 

Really I'm frustrated, not angry. I'm not getting why the non smokers felt they had to respond how happy they were about the ban. It wasn't the question at hand. And all the comments have been the same as all the previous smoking threads. So I guess I just don't get it.

 

I think I'll just have to let it go, my knickers need unbunching now ;)

[bbro]

Actually I think its impossible to post a question on smoking and have it remain on topic. I also don't think you can direct a question to only a certain portion of those on the board and not expect others to answer. It's just the nature of these boards.

 

I think you're right on this one. I think I'll wake up on the other side of the bed tomorrow and see how that works for me.

[Captain Jake]

Very pleasant post, and a great contribution to this discussion. :rolleyes: Taking an "us vs them" attitude is always a winner.

 

 

When the OP asked SMOKERS what they thought why did all the non smokers jump in and start gloating? Was that contributing the discussion? Was that an "us" attitude? I just called it how I saw it.

Sorry it hit a nerve... :D

 

 

..Looking forward to a smoke free balcony.Ain't life sweet

[jerseyk]

For the nice folks who talk about the Star Princess fire being started by someone who was smoking on balconies you might want to read the MAIB report on this fire. This will be helpful for facts on this fire.

[Captain Jake]

very interesting

http://www.maib.gov.uk/cms_resources/Star%20Princess%5FSynopsis%2Epdf

[jerseyk]

The full report is 62 pages.

http://www.maib.gov.uk/cms_resources/Star%20Princess.pdf

[Captain Jake]

The condensed version is information enough