Cancelled Carnival cruises

Yesterday we attended a Cruise Expo conducted every year about this time
by a travel agent in a neighboring county. They had mentioned in their
e-mail alerting us of the date that they were having a group cruise on
the Carnival Triumph to the Quebec area leaving August 20 from NY City.

We wanted to know more about this cruise. (In fact a few weeks ago I
posted asking about the ports, all around Quebec.) We discovered that
Carnival had cancelled this cruise as of last Friday. (The agency had
already sold 15 cabins out of their allotment for the group.)

Actually, we're interested in doing a 7-9 day Eastern Mediterranean
cruise this summer. My wife had found cruise in both the RCL and
Carnival catalogues. I thought I had read that Carnival had moved its
ships out of the Mediterranean, and sure enough when I checked on line,
the ship in question was in the Caribbean in the summer. I spoke with my
TA and he confirmed that; he said he had several bookings that
disappeared with that move. He added that Carnival did not care about
the problems they caused for travel agents.

Last year, we did a short Carnival cruise from NY City to New Brunswick
and Halifax just to get away. We had a little get together for those of
us who had been chatting on the ship's cruise critic roll call. One of
the other couples was booked on a Carnival ship for a Baltic cruise this
year. They were looking forward to reading my Star Princess review,
different ships, but mostly the same ports. Carnival also pulled that
ship out of Europe.

I spoke with the Carnival representative at the Cruise Expo. She said
Carnival was doing better on the stock market because of business
decisions like pulling ships out of Europe. (I did not think at the time
to ask her about Princess, HAL, and Costa, all Carnival owned cruise
lines still going to Europe,) She did not know the thinking behind the
Quebec cancellation. (BTW, the 9 day cruise instead became a 4 and a 5
day cruise to New Brunswick (4) and New Brunswick and Halifax (5) day
cruises.) She did tell me that they would reinstate it for 2010. (Though
of course they could cancel that too even though she did not state
that.)

Now, I don't think cancelling already booked cruises is a good long run
tactic for engendering customer loyalty. It not only would **** off
travel agents who could recommend other lines saying that Carnival is
unreliable, but would also seem to me to get those who had already
booked extremely ****ed off. In fact, I looked at the cruisecritic roll
call for the sailing. The typical response was I can't believe they
cancelled the cruise; I think I'll go back to Royal Caribbean.

One more piece of information that I learned in my conversation with the
Carnival representative was that they were slowing rolling out the
dining equivalent of what Princess does, one dining room would remain
traditional seating, the other would allow you to go when you wanted. So
far, this was only available on 2 ships, (She did tell me which ones,
but I'm sorry, I do not remember which 2 they were.) She said the roll
out was being done slowly because a survey of their passengers said that
they preferred traditional dining. She added that the survey results
surprised her.

Changing plans mid stream may be a function of smartly recognizing that you
miscalculated. When the corporation saw that European sailings for HAL,
Princess, Celebrity, RCI, etc., were becoming very popular, and that ships
were able to generate higher per diems than originally anticipated, they
must have thought that they could get some Carnival ships into that mix.

But they may have run into a few things that caused things to play out
differently. For one thing oil prices this past year, which increased both
cruise fees and airline fees. For another the recession, depression, or
whatever you want to call this massive decline in the economy. And it's
worldwide, not just localized. England is on the verge of becoming an
Iceland type disaster. Then there's the post 911 issues, like incredibly
high security taxes in ports like Heathrow (a $700 ticket from NYC to
Heathrow is comprised of $500 in taxes, and only $200 in airline fees). But
most air to Europe is $1000 or much more in the peak summer season.

To my thought process, Carnival becomes attractive in the $399 per week
price point, when others are priced at least $200 more. They can make up a
lot of the difference in price by bringing a lot of kids as 3rd and 4ths in
cabins. But then it seems illogical to tack on $1000pp in airfare to
Europe. And Carnival is going to want a lot more than $399 for a European
sailing. In Europe many people won't be bringing kids. So as they start
bringing in the pricing in line with Princess, HAL, Celebrity and RCI... why
not just GO on Princess, HAL, Celebrity or RCI? If I'm going to pay $2800
per person (with air) in the Baltics, would I rather be on a Destiny Class
ship variation, or something new like Solstice? Do I want a ship with
booths in the dining room, or candles in the dining room on the Queen Mary
2?

So I can see Carnival being smart. If their ships can't compete and aren't
selling well in Europe (for probably a variety of reasons) pull them back to
the Caribbean where the business model works. And if people have already
booked, then you just move them to a HAL or Princess ship. No big loss.

--Tom



"Jeff Gersten" wrote in message
...
Yesterday we attended a Cruise Expo conducted every year about this time
by a travel agent in a neighboring county. They had mentioned in their
e-mail alerting us of the date that they were having a group cruise on
the Carnival Triumph to the Quebec area leaving August 20 from NY City.

We wanted to know more about this cruise. (In fact a few weeks ago I
posted asking about the ports, all around Quebec.) We discovered that
Carnival had cancelled this cruise as of last Friday. (The agency had
already sold 15 cabins out of their allotment for the group.)

Actually, we're interested in doing a 7-9 day Eastern Mediterranean
cruise this summer. My wife had found cruise in both the RCL and
Carnival catalogues. I thought I had read that Carnival had moved its
ships out of the Mediterranean, and sure enough when I checked on line,
the ship in question was in the Caribbean in the summer. I spoke with my
TA and he confirmed that; he said he had several bookings that
disappeared with that move. He added that Carnival did not care about
the problems they caused for travel agents.

Last year, we did a short Carnival cruise from NY City to New Brunswick
and Halifax just to get away. We had a little get together for those of
us who had been chatting on the ship's cruise critic roll call. One of
the other couples was booked on a Carnival ship for a Baltic cruise this
year. They were looking forward to reading my Star Princess review,
different ships, but mostly the same ports. Carnival also pulled that
ship out of Europe.

I spoke with the Carnival representative at the Cruise Expo. She said
Carnival was doing better on the stock market because of business
decisions like pulling ships out of Europe. (I did not think at the time
to ask her about Princess, HAL, and Costa, all Carnival owned cruise
lines still going to Europe,) She did not know the thinking behind the
Quebec cancellation. (BTW, the 9 day cruise instead became a 4 and a 5
day cruise to New Brunswick (4) and New Brunswick and Halifax (5) day
cruises.) She did tell me that they would reinstate it for 2010. (Though
of course they could cancel that too even though she did not state
that.)

Now, I don't think cancelling already booked cruises is a good long run
tactic for engendering customer loyalty. It not only would **** off
travel agents who could recommend other lines saying that Carnival is
unreliable, but would also seem to me to get those who had already
booked extremely ****ed off. In fact, I looked at the cruisecritic roll
call for the sailing. The typical response was I can't believe they
cancelled the cruise; I think I'll go back to Royal Caribbean.

One more piece of information that I learned in my conversation with the
Carnival representative was that they were slowing rolling out the
dining equivalent of what Princess does, one dining room would remain
traditional seating, the other would allow you to go when you wanted. So
far, this was only available on 2 ships, (She did tell me which ones,
but I'm sorry, I do not remember which 2 they were.) She said the roll
out was being done slowly because a survey of their passengers said that
they preferred traditional dining. She added that the survey results
surprised her.

"Jeff Gersten" wrote

Actually, we're interested in doing a 7-9 day Eastern Mediterranean
cruise this summer. My wife had found cruise in both the RCL and
Carnival catalogues. I thought I had read that Carnival had moved its
ships out of the Mediterranean, and sure enough when I checked on line,
the ship in question was in the Caribbean in the summer.

Yep... I wrote about that here quite a while ago. With Europe bookings soft
because of the high fuel prices (at the time) and it looked like getting
reasonable airfare was going to be a problems, more than one cruise line was
looking at cutting back in Europe.

"Why sell 7 night cruises for $599 in Europe when we can sell $599 in the
Caribbean at a much lower cost?"


TA and he confirmed that; he said he had several bookings that
disappeared with that move. He added that Carnival did not care about
the problems they caused for travel agents.

Carnival cares about the bottom line... just like any other business. Most
travel agents had bookings that were lost, but... the vast majority of them
re-booked on other ships. It took a little work but things happen and I
doubt that many TA's lost a significant amount of money over this.


One more piece of information that I learned in my conversation with the
Carnival representative was that they were slowing rolling out the
dining equivalent of what Princess does, one dining room would remain
traditional seating, the other would allow you to go when you wanted. So
far, this was only available on 2 ships, (She did tell me which ones,
but I'm sorry, I do not remember which 2 they were.) She said the roll
out was being done slowly because a survey of their passengers said that
they preferred traditional dining. She added that the survey results
surprised her.

This is an ongoing problem.... and it is with perception. People "say" they
want traditional dining but when they get on the ship, that changes. For
example, on Princess, the "traditional" dining room fills up for every
cruise. Bt the middle of the week, many of these people decide that
"Sheesh... we are running late so let's eat in the other dining room
tonight". Then they meet someone they like and agree to meet for dinner in
one of the open dining rooms. By the end of the cruise, it is not unusual
to see the "traditional" dining rooms 1/3 to 1/2 empty.

Open seating for dinner is going to be a way of life on most mainstream
cruise ships. NCL and Princess already have it. Carnival, HAL and Royal
Caribbean are already "testing" it.

Take it a step further and I wouldn't be surprised if sometime in the future
we didn't see a ship where all the main meals were served Buffet-style...
one huge buffet/casual dining facility open 24 hours a day.... augmented by
a number of additional fee restaurants.


--
George Leppla http://www.CruiseMaster.com

Cruise Specials Weblog http://cruisemaster.typepad.com/my_weblog/

In article , George Leppla
wrote:


This is an ongoing problem.... and it is with perception. People
"say" they want traditional dining but when they get on the ship,
that changes. For example, on Princess, the "traditional" dining room
fills up for every cruise. Bt the middle of the week, many of these
people decide that "Sheesh... we are running late so let's eat in the
other dining room tonight". Then they meet someone they like and
agree to meet for dinner in one of the open dining rooms. By the end
of the cruise, it is not unusual to see the "traditional" dining
rooms 1/3 to 1/2 empty.

I have not seen the traditional dining room that empty on Princess. And
Princess in particular forces people to do the open seating by limiting
traditional to one third of the dining rooms.

Open seating for dinner is going to be a way of life on most mainstream
cruise ships. NCL and Princess already have it. Carnival, HAL and Royal
Caribbean are already "testing" it.

Open seating is being pushed by the cruise lines because it helps their
bottom line. They can turn over tables and have less waiters serving
more passengers. It is more cost cutting by the cruise lines. It is not
an enhancement.


Take it a step further and I wouldn't be surprised if sometime in the future
we didn't see a ship where all the main meals were served Buffet-style...
one huge buffet/casual dining facility open 24 hours a day.... augmented by
a number of additional fee restaurants.

That would be the next step in cost cutting. If you want a sit down
dinner that used to be included you will have to pay for it.

--
Charles

"George Leppla" wrote in message
...


Take it a step further and I wouldn't be surprised if sometime in the
future we didn't see a ship where all the main meals were served
Buffet-style... one huge buffet/casual dining facility open 24 hours a
day.... augmented by a number of additional fee restaurants.



Do you think there is more or less waste of food in buffets vs. sit down
dining rooms on ships? Both food not consumed once taken, and food that was
prepared but that never needed to be used.

Since food has to be prepared ahead of time, I wonder if it is easier to
predict usage in one vs. the other. Though I guess in a buffet, if they run
out they can always close the station. Harder to do that in a dining room.

--Tom

"Charles" wrote in message
d...
In article , George Leppla
wrote:


This is an ongoing problem.... and it is with perception. People
"say" they want traditional dining but when they get on the ship,
that changes. For example, on Princess, the "traditional" dining room
fills up for every cruise. Bt the middle of the week, many of these
people decide that "Sheesh... we are running late so let's eat in the
other dining room tonight". Then they meet someone they like and
agree to meet for dinner in one of the open dining rooms. By the end
of the cruise, it is not unusual to see the "traditional" dining
rooms 1/3 to 1/2 empty.
I have not seen the traditional dining room that empty on Princess. And
Princess in particular forces people to do the open seating by limiting
traditional to one third of the dining rooms.
Open seating for dinner is going to be a way of life on most mainstream
cruise ships. NCL and Princess already have it. Carnival, HAL and Royal
Caribbean are already "testing" it.

Open seating has worked well for Oceania since Day One. That's one major
reason we chose to book Oceania cruises. We didn't want to be locked in to
a time and a set group of people. On Oceania we met new people at each meal
and the time was at our convenience. Even in the no-extra-cost specialty
dining rooms we could choose our time and table by reservation.
Paul Johnson

"Paul Johnson" wrote in message
...

Open seating has worked well for Oceania since Day One. That's one major
reason we chose to book Oceania cruises. We didn't want to be locked in
to a time and a set group of people. On Oceania we met new people at each
meal and the time was at our convenience. Even in the no-extra-cost
specialty dining rooms we could choose our time and table by reservation.
Paul Johnson


That's a whole different model. For smaller ships (and even on a few large
ships like the QM2 in Grill Class), they can have a dining room with enough
tables for everyone on board. Then you just show up whenever you want to.
Your table is always waiting for you. But on large ships, dining rooms
basically only have enough tables for half the number of passengers. One
option is to split them into 2 seatings. The other is to have open seating,
but then there is potential for a wait if you come at peak periods. In
fact, if you put a bar just outside the dining room, where people can have a
drink while they wait, it's a revenue enhancement to FORCE people to have to
wait.

But you really can't compare small high-end ships to large mass market
ships.

--Tom

"Tom K" wrote in message
...

"George Leppla" wrote in message
...


Take it a step further and I wouldn't be surprised if sometime in the
future we didn't see a ship where all the main meals were served
Buffet-style... one huge buffet/casual dining facility open 24 hours a
day.... augmented by a number of additional fee restaurants.



Do you think there is more or less waste of food in buffets vs. sit down
dining rooms on ships? Both food not consumed once taken, and food that
was prepared but that never needed to be used.

Since food has to be prepared ahead of time, I wonder if it is easier to
predict usage in one vs. the other. Though I guess in a buffet, if they
run out they can always close the station. Harder to do that in a dining
room.


I'm not privy to actual figures, but like Charles, I would bet that open
seating programs are cheaper to operate than standard sit-down dining rooms.

I would imagine there is less actual food waste in a buffet (food prepared)
and the staffing is not as intensive... or require as much supervision or
training.

Years ago I wrote something on r.t.c. about the possibility of "food courts"
with companies like McDonald's vying for contracts. Of course, now we have
pizzerias, Johnny Rockets, coffee shops, ice cream parlors etc.

I am not one of those who moan for the "good old days" of cruising or ocean
travel... but I sometimes have to wonder if future ships will be little
more than floating shopping malls.... or perhaps, floating theme parks.


--
George Leppla http://www.CruiseMaster.com

Cruise Specials Weblog http://cruisemaster.typepad.com/my_weblog/

In article , Paul Johnson
wrote:

Open seating has worked well for Oceania since Day One. That's one major
reason we chose to book Oceania cruises. We didn't want to be locked in to
a time and a set group of people. On Oceania we met new people at each meal
and the time was at our convenience. Even in the no-extra-cost specialty
dining rooms we could choose our time and table by reservation.

The no-extra-cost specialty dining rooms help make it work on Oceania.
It was a problem when they limited it on Azamara to only one night of
no cost specialty dining. On Princess, NCL, RCI, HAL the specialty
dining rooms cost extra. You can rationalize benefits of open seating
like meeting new people, time at your convenience just like I can
rationalize benefits of traditional. The waiters knowing my preferences
and bonding with a group of people and not having to plan when to go to
dinner, not having to wait for a table. There are pros and cons to both
open seating and assigned dining. I am not opposed to open seating and
having it on cruise ships but it is not being put into effect because
that is what people want. It is being put on ships so the cruise lines
can cut costs. If they can the cruise lines will make all dining ala
carte. They would push ala carte as an enhancement and market it to us
as such. And for some ala carte would be of benefit. I am one who might
have a smaller bill if the food was ala carte.

--
Charles

(Tom*K) wrote"

Changing plans mid stream may be a function of smartly recognizing
that you miscalculated. When the corporation saw that European sailings
for HAL, Princess, Celebrity, RCI, etc., were becoming very popular, and
that ships were able to generate higher per diems than originally
anticipated, they must have thought that they could get some Carnival
ships into that mix.

But they may have run into a few things that caused things to play out
differently. For one thing oil prices this past year, which increased
both cruise fees and airline fees. For another the recession,
depression, or whatever you want to call this massive decline in the
economy. And it's worldwide, not just localized. England is on the verge
of becoming an Iceland type disaster. Then there's the post 911 issues,
like incredibly high security taxes in ports like Heathrow (a $700
ticket from NYC to Heathrow is comprised of $500 in taxes, and only $200
in airline fees). But most air to Europe is $1000 or much more in the
peak summer season.

To my thought process, Carnival becomes attractive in the $399 per week
price point, when others are priced at least $200 more.
They can make up a lot of the difference in price by bringing a lot of
kids as 3rd and 4ths in cabins. But then it seems illogical to tack on
$1000pp in airfare to Europe. And Carnival is going to want a lot more
than $399 for a European sailing. In Europe many people won't be
bringing kids. So as they start bringing in the pricing in line with
Princess, HAL, Celebrity and RCI... why not just GO on Princess, HAL,
Celebrity or RCI? If I'm going to pay $2800 per person (with air) in the
Baltics, would I rather be on a Destiny Class ship variation, or
something new like Solstice? Do I want a ship with booths in the dining
room, or candles in the dining room on the Queen Mary 2?

So I can see Carnival being smart. If their ships can't compete and
aren't selling well in Europe (for probably a variety of reasons) pull
them back to the Caribbean where the business model works. And if people
have already booked, then you just move them to a HAL or Princess ship.
No big loss.

I'm not sure switching to another Carnival owned line is as seamless as
you make it out to be. Will the already booked customers be given the
same rate? I don't think a fare increase would go over well. Also the
length of the cruise, the specific date, and the itinerary all may be
important to the potential customer. I know when we picked our Star
Princess Baltic cruise the length (10 days, a lesser amount than many
other cruises) and the fact that Oslo was one of the ports was very
important to us. There was actually one 7 day cruise possible (IIRC on
Costa.), but that was only one day in St. Petersburg. The only other 10
day was NCL, and that did not have Oslo as a port. In fact, on Princess
Oslo and the port for Berlin alternated as ports of call. Even the fact
that despite being gone 12 days only one was a Wednesday worked out for
us as my wife plays in a local band for 10 Wednesdays in the summer.
(For an interesting read, google "Callicoon Center Band".

As for Quebec, I'm not sure but I think they cancelled all 3 cruise,not
just te one we were looking at. But, if they have told their reps that
the itinerary is still a go for 2010, they must think it has potential.