Cell phone service on board - good idea or bad?

[benjamins]

[quote name='kokonut']
Let me have one sanctuary.

Please?[/QUOTE]

That's key. Sanctuary. Retreat. Get away from everyday annoyances.

That's actually part of vacation. To vacate.

Must-have connectivity are marketing buzzwords for the bottom line: expand the everyday life into new areas to make money. The "positives" will always be mentioned as part of some "21st Century" advancement (as if the 21st century is really defined at this point).

The contiuum in human existance is a need to renew. Unfortunately, IMO, that aspect is filtering out of cruising more and more.

[usha]

[i][font=Comic Sans MS][size=3][color=darkgreen]Part of what I LOVE about cruising is the fact that we are "untouchable," except to somebody who needs to reach us for an emergency. Even then, it'd better be REALLY SERIOUS.:mad: Cell phones are something that I tolerate on land, and I mean BARELY. I would not welcome that intrusion on my cruise vacation.[/color][/size][/font][/i]

[mango14217]

I agree leave the cell phones at home on vacation I don't want to be reached or hear other peoples cell phone conversations.

I hear enough cell phone rudeness at the Deli were I work and I'm sure the cruisers would be no differant. [url="http://www.smileycentral.com/?partner=ZSzeb001_ZNxdm82544US"][img]http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/7/7_19_3.gif[/img][/url]

[Danno]

Well folks...good fight...however, we can make all the noise we want here, form all the intelligent arguments, take a poll that proves the point...[size=5]BUT...[/size][size=2]if RCI thinks this change will make money, it will happen. Just another move by RCI, and Carnival to make your next cruise vacation [b]LESS [/b]than special.[/size]

[Techgirl]

Hi Ecowen,

I had no idea that you couldn't use your cell phone on a cruise!? I certainly used mine last year on the Millennium post Thankgsiving cruise. We got reception in St. Thomas and nearly every place we went.

I certainly agree with those people who hate being subjected to rude cell phone users. I only used mine in the cabin (the balcony actually) and that was just for me and my sister to check in on our husbands back home while we were having a great time at sea! LOL

This year we are taking our step mom with us and it is a great comfort to her that I have my cell because she is worried about leaving my dad behind. In fact, I just changed carriers today and made sure I had international access.

Cell phones are like many other good things that become bad when misused or abused by people. But does that mean we shouldn't be able to use them at all? Hmmmm.

[dkjretired]

Some of the islands such as St. Thomas will have service depending on your carrier however not all islands are available and roaming charges may be made. Most of this discussion however has been about service on the ship while at sea which is currently not available unless you are close enough to land to hit a cell site. Some of the cruise lines are in the process of setting up service on the ships for at sea periods.

Don

[corkpopr]

i dont leave mine at home either. i call the afternoon i am boarding the ship and the morning i get off whether it is a 7 day, 10 day, 14 day cruise. i dont have voice mail or call waiting. i turn it on to make calls and then turn it off. you are on vacation, and probably well deserved. if you miss something, everyone will tell you about it when you return
when i am gone i am not available to anyone for any reason, ever.

[Danno]

Intersting how this pole was dismissed completely by someone on another thread...this is the same thinking which will completely ignore any and all rules that pretain to cell phone use...really no different than all the rules that are ignored by this type of person...

[BADBUOY]

[quote name='Danno']Intersting how this pole was dismissed completely by someone on another thread...this is the same thinking which will completely ignore any and all rules that pretain to cell phone use...really no different than all the rules that are ignored by this type of person...[/QUOTE]
If this is me that your referring to please have the marbles to say so. Perhaps you could explain to me how you correlate a person who points out that a [b]poll[/b] of this nature doesn't necessarily speak for the general cruising public to a person you describe as follows "[i]this is the same thinking which will completely ignore any and all rules that pretain to cell phone use...really no different than all the rules that are ignored by this type of person"[/i]

Your comments are completely unfair and uncalled for.

BD

[Danno]

If I was talking about you...I was out of line...I apologize. The unfortunate part of emotional topics is what seemed like a proper response at the time, in retrospect might not have been. I must, however also say the [b]"whiner"[/b] label is no more well recieved on my end. I expect I am allowed to have an opinion and to argue my side of it...I think the concept "free speech" came up earlier.

I may not have a point of view that all agree with but I [b]love[/b] cruising and I am concerned that the product that we [b]ALL[/b] receive is being so deminished by the RCI's and Carnival's of the industry...but if ships are full and the fact that I (and others like me) spend our money elsewhere means [b]they were right[/b] and I was wrong.

I sincerely hope that I return from my Feb cruise with a renewed optimism about X...and I will state it clearly if such is the case...I also hope that those who choose this line find the vacation they have always dreamt of...I just expect the X cruises that I have dreamt of may be a thing of the past.

[raudacruise]

Danno, you always get cranky 3 months before your cruise. Maybe you should ask your doctor about PCS (pre-cruise syndrom) medication ;). Maybe some Ice Wine for the holidays.

BTW, my folks picked up a couple bottles of it on a trip to explore Canada. 40 CD for a 135 ML bottle, yikes. Found that sipping it was a little sweet at first and then a little acidic (almost vinegry) after it past the palate. As recommended by the vinter (began with an F is all I can remember), we tried on vanilla ice cream - yummm. Also drizzled it on pumpkin cheesecake, even yummier.

Well, just put back 5 pounds on my waste remembering it.

[Danno]

:D :D


You may just be right....if you get to try icewine again look for Inniskillin...I don't recall ever having a vinegry edge...you certainly paid enough to have had a good selection.

(Through this I am learning that if you love this cruise line, but are not a cheerleader, it can be pretty tough going in here...I will work on not sayng anything that might offend Jack...it seems he has a lot of friends here ;) . Even I'm not too old to learn :eek: !!)

[raudacruise]

Checked, it was Peller Estates (Niagra on the Lake). Maybe it we didn't drink it right. It was warm and we all had a thimble full of a sip. They also picked up other types of wine that we are going to try on Christmas.

[Danno]

Well chilled will definitely make a difference....probably why it worked so well on the ice cream...live and learn :D . Treat yourself again sometime...Peller is a good vineyard, don't be detered!!

[greatam]

Cell Phones =ABSOLUTELY NOT

And since I voiced my opinion, has everyone noticed that the most antagonistic posters- who would turn Celebrity into NCL-clothes, manners, cell phones, walkie-talkies, you get the picture- have joined CC in 2004?

One other thing. I have some free time after the first of the year, so thought I would book a last minute, quickie trip to Mexico. First time I have every gone on a last minute cruise. I checked Celebrity prices and could NOT believe it. I can sail on Seabourn for $60.00 more per day per person. A few drinks and some caviar, not counting all the other goodies, and I have spent less on Seabourn than Celebrity. Doesn't seem possible, but it is. I really like Celebrity, but have read so many bad things recently, I certainly am not spending THAT kind of money for a ho-hum experience. Celebrity really better get its act if it intends to keep its loyal customers.

[zackiedawg]

[quote name='greatam']has everyone noticed that the most antagonistic posters- who would turn Celebrity into NCL-clothes, manners, cell phones, walkie-talkies, you get the picture- have joined CC in 2004?[/quote]
So does this mean that those who joined Cruise Critics in 2004 are somehow not as high class as those who joined Cruise Critics before 2004? Despite, age, education, class, and experience? Just wondering...I am not one of the antagonistic folks you are referring to, but I do fall into the lowly '2004 members' category.

[quote]Celebrity really better get its act if it intends to keep its loyal customers.[/QUOTE]
Unfortunately, I'm sure Celebrity has discovered that like in any industry, it cannot survive only on its loyal customers. And given the choice to keep their current customer base while losing new customers to other lines willing to cater to the ever-changing needs and expectations of society, or possibly losing some of their current customer base while bringing in larger numbers of new customers who demand such evolution and modernization...Celebrity, all other cruise lines, and indeed most other businesses have chosen the latter.

You cannot find a line that has not changed, morphed, evolved, or compromised to accomodate changing expectations and conditions in society. Who would have imagined 10 years ago that Crystal would be offering $999 sales on off-season cruises? Or that HAL would have filtered out many of their upper-class services to allow lower pricing to compete with the more mass-market lines? Now Mr. Millionaire on the Crystal Symphony gets to find out his tablemates manage the local Denny's and took the $999 special.

The question: How long should Celebrity avoid changing their policies? Let's pretend they don't offer cell-phone service. Watch into the future as airlines add cell phone service (being proposed as we read); as Carnival becomes the first line to offer it; as HAL, Princess, Costa, NCL, Radisson, Seabourn, Crystal, Silversea all add it; as it becomes an industry norm. And still Celebrity stands fast, refusing to change, lest they perturb their loyal customer base - or at least the ones who DON'T want cell phone service availability (you realize that there will be some loyal customers who actually DO want cell phone service). And that customer base does nothing but shrink...the ones who want the new technology start to think twice, the older loyal customers get older and die, few if any new customers come into the fold. How many businesses do you know which have not changed with the times?

If a Line stayed fast to their original ideals and standards and did not allow change - where would they be today? When gas-powered engine variants became available, should they have stuck to coal and steam? Should they have allowed televisions in cabins? Internet service onboard? Optional casual dining for dinner? Relaxed dress code most nights and all days?

In each case, there were debates about whether it should be allowed. And there will always be some who would love it if all of those things would be eliminated and brought back to the original way of doing things. But the MAJORITY of passengers favored those changes, and indeed changes in technology and society's expectations of them precipitated those changes to occur. And years after each change occurred, the debate cooled, the dissenters either acqiuesced or stormed off, and the change became an accepted evolution, or even expectation, of life aboard a cruise ship.

Guess what? Cell phones are a ubiquitous and unavoidable fact of life today, and they will continue to work their way farther into general societal acceptance in every facet, every location, every possible scenario of western civilization. Celebrity, and all other cruise lines, see that the time has come to accept the cell phone, like the car, plane, radio, television, and computer before it, as a part of our society, with all the benefits and problems it brings with it. Every technology has a downside, and society itself is irreparably changed by each evolution in technology. Our reliance and expectation of that technology creates a vaccuum in our social interaction, education, and communication which is filled by that technology. And any sociologist, anthropologist, or phychiatrist can tell you the ill effects brought upon our society by each of those technological advances I mentioned above (the Iron Horse, the Smoking Scourge of the Road, the Vast Wasteland, HAL, etc).

Celebrity is simply taking the step that every other business and industry has either already made or will have to make in the coming years. It is amusing to see the narrow-focused criticism towards Celebrity for making this move despite the fact that they are in the last 5% or less of all companies, businesses, or industries to NOT have evolved to the capability of cell phone use!

[Ma Bell]

Zackiedawg,

I enjoy your thoughtful posts, however sometimes your conclusions seem a little self serving. The fact that you find someone else's opinion amusing diminishes yours. Your point certainly has validity, but it's also possible that serving loyal customers may be the best thing a company can do.

Passengers are able to use their cell phones most of the time while in port now. There are telephones available in each cabin in case of emergency. Most cruises are in port every other day or so. There are satellite telephones for sale or lease for those who absolutely can't manage without the umbilical cord for a day.

Personally, I wouldn't mind if cell phone reception were more readily available, but I can certainly understand why many would rather not have to deal with the abuses that come with their use while trying to enjoy their vacation. I would even venture to say there are many places ashore where cell phones will never be allowed.

I'm sure the day will come when we all have little computers implanted in our brains so we never miss the opportunity for a call...doesn't it sound wonderful?;)

[newtocc]

[b][color=blue][font=Arial]I see people on the highway everyday using cell phones, they can’t drive a steady speed, they’re distracted, they’re a menace to society, and they should be shot![/font][/color][/b]

[b][color=blue][/color][/b]

[b][color=blue][font=Arial]How’s that for being Politically Correct![/font][/color][/b]

This thread should be closed because you're never gonna come to a conclusion!

[Ma Bell]

Newt,

That's an example of where they should be outlawed and as a matter of fact they are in some states.

[greatam]

[quote name='zackiedawg']So does this mean that those who joined Cruise Critics in 2004 are somehow not as high class as those who joined Cruise Critics before 2004? Despite, age, education, class, and experience? Just wondering...I am not one of the antagonistic folks you are referring to, but I do fall into the lowly '2004 members' category.

[/QUOTE]

WOW!!! How did you interpret my post to include age, education, class, etc? I never mentioned any such thing. I did make a comment about the most antagonistic posters joining in 2004. Seems like every other post, from some of the 2004 members, is in the vein of "I will do it my way-Shove off". Or "I will do my best to change Celebrity to what I want it to be and not what is marketed". If you don't read the same things in some of the posts, I guess we went to different schools.

[Luvtotrav]

Going to sea use to mean peace and quiet, now we have annoying rings and tones to listen to. Then with that comes those who feel the rest of us wish to listen to their conversation. I wish that Celebrity would reconsider this decision. In the long run, I beleive they will regret this decision.

From Minnesota

[Danno]

Greatam....get over it!! (I'm not sure what that means...but it get used here a lot instead of civilized debate)


This group you refer to is [b]not[/b] interested in anyone's wants, needs, cravings, except their [b]own[/b]. They are a fact of life and businesses pander to them...they will get their cell phones, simply because (the new) [b]X[/b] is amoung the businesses that will pander to [b]anyone[/b] to make a buck...what they never figure out, despite (too)[b]MANY MBA's**[/b], is the group they courting is very fickle and will quickly move on to the next shiny object that catches their eye.

Maybe then [b]X[/b] will understand why loyal clients are important...when they don't have any left.

**amoung the biggest employers of MBA's are the airlines...how's that going so far??

[Rustynail]

[b]As long as my pager and cell get left at home while we a cruise I really don't care if my fellow passengers wish to ruin their cruise by being connected to the outside world. [/b]

[b]A cruise to us is one of the few times during the year were not joined at the hip to our electronic devices and we love the freedom! [/b]

[b]I really don't care who's phone rings as long as it's not mine...............[/b]

[b][i][color=red]'Joy to the world'.............[/color][/i][/b]
[b][i][color=#ff0000][/color][/i][/b]
[b][i][color=black]Dan[/color][/i][/b]

[zackiedawg]

[quote]I enjoy your thoughtful posts, however sometimes your conclusions seem a little self serving. The fact that you find someone else's opinion amusing diminishes yours. Your point certainly has validity, but it's also possible that serving loyal customers may be the best thing a company can do.[/quote]
Ma Bell, please note that I am not stating that other people having an opinion about cell phone use onboard that differs from my own is amusing...I love opinionated people, even those who disagree with me. As a lifelong debater, I revel in opposition to my views! What I was mentioning as amusing was not their opinion, but the fact that because Celebrity was the first to make the move, they are the sole subject of the debate...despite the obvious reality that all cruise lines will follow suit. If more posters would keep the debate for or against cell phone use onboard SHIPS, and not specifically attack Celebrity as a lone gunman taking a lonely road all by themselves...I wouldn't be amused as much as I'd be stimulated! Sorry if you read any offense or belittling into the word 'amused'.

[quote]WOW!!! How did you interpret my post to include age, education, class, etc? I never mentioned any such thing. I did make a comment about the most antagonistic posters joining in 2004. Seems like every other post, from some of the 2004 members, is in the vein of "I will do it my way-Shove off". Or "I will do my best to change Celebrity to what I want it to be and not what is marketed". If you don't read the same things in some of the posts, I guess we went to different schools.[/quote]
Greatam, My reply was laced with sarcasm for humors-sake...a device which you also used in your first post when you belittled those "who would turn Celebrity into NCL-clothes, manners, cell phones, walkie-talkies, you get the picture". Only because you mentioned the prevalence of antagonism from posters who joined in 2004, and myself having joined in 2004...I thought I would have some fun with that. Personally, I have occasionally read some antagonism from posters who joined in 2004 - but I can't say that I've noticed any more antagonism than from posters who joined earlier. In fact, there appears to be a significant amount of antagonism from pre-2004 members who consider themselves loyal Celebrity customers...and who are usually the ones posting the very threads that start the debates and arguments in which antagonism can be found! So who is the real antagonist - those who respond to a polarizing thread, or those who post that thread?

I just thought I'd point out that the 2004+ members seem to be as equally balanced as those who joined earlier...dosed with a modicum of intelligence and stupidity, rationale and narrow-focus, and even antagonism.

[quote]They are a fact of life and businesses pander to them...they will get their cell phones, simply because (the new) [b]X[/b] is amoung the businesses that will pander to [b]anyone[/b] to make a buck[/quote]
Well, you got that right. That is the point I am making...not whether or not this group is good or bad, selfish or inclusive, friendly or antagonistic...but simply that business will always pander to them, and businesses will always abandon traditions, loyalties, and anything else to remain profitable. Unfortunately, unless you believe Marx's original theories could be put into practice without the inevitable corruption that has always sprouted from attempts to apply it...you aren't going to find a westernized society that isn't built around money and profit.

[quote]what they never figure out, despite (too)[b]MANY MBA's**[/b], is the group they courting is very fickle and will quickly move on to the next shiny object that catches their eye.[/quote]
I guess that is a good reason to keep it shiny! It is the fickleness of much of society that forces companies to constantly change despite resistance from the few to court the changing tastes and expectations of the many.

It certainly isn't just MBAs who are this fickle. Why is a particular pop star hot one year and gone the next? Why does a particular reality show become a hit one year and get canceled the next? Why does K-Mart rule the middle-class all-purpose market business for years, only to be bumped down the chain by Target, which itself is bumped off the throne by Walmart? Why was Krispy Kreme the hottest new stock in the world, and now a has-been? Western civilization is fickle by the nature of the society we created, and it is a self-fulfilling prophecy that we will continue to be. Television has reduced our attention span, satellites and computers have rewired our expectations of time and duration, phones have reduced our personal interaction, and our free-market has eliminated a needs-based economy.

The companies that survive in a western society are those that can constantly change and adapt to what society demands, not those who cater to a loyal group of unchanging followers. Look at the changing marketing campaign of MacDonalds over the years, as they courted the most influential group of the day over many decades, changing slogans, songs, design, and advertisements constantly to stay 'hip', altering menu choices and food serving sizes as necessary to keep up with the competition as well as the expectations of the society. Look at the careers of a David Bowie (From 60's rocker to early 70's glammer to late 70's disco to early 80's punk to late 80's alternative to 90's industrial to this decade's techno) or Madonna (bubblegum pop to pop to retro to ballads to latin to dance to techno)...see how many complete transformations they made during their long careers to constantly court society's most influential market, despite alienating their loyal followers who liked one particular iteration...while other artists from their day faded out or fell back to playing tiny clubs with their ever-dwindling group of loyal followers.

RUSTY...you said it! As long as it isn't mine. That's a very healthy way of looking at it. ;)

[Danno]

Poor phrasing on my part...the MBA's aren't fickle...the clientel X is now courting is.

MBA's need to come out from behind charts, market studies, and demograhics studies and see the real world...the world where disappointed customers take their money, leave and support the competition...