We’ve all seen examples of companies jumping on the cause bandwagon, but this may be the first boat. According to a recent article from The Wall Street Journal construction is underway on Utopia, a luxury cruise ship that is using more than onboard amenities and exotic ports-of-call to sell its multi-million dollar residences. More than just a luxury cruise, it’s being touted as a “‘platform’ for learning, cultural exchange and philanthropy,” complete with an on-board Philanthropy Concierge.

So what is the connection to philanthropy? The cruise liner’s Web site indicates residents have opportunities to host galas on board – with mention that fundraising solicitation of other residents is not allowed – a Philanthropy Concierge who will book a lunch or dinner with other philanthropists at destinations along the route or day trips to visit an orphanage. All of these “philanthropic” options are situated alongside amenities such as “shopping” and “indulgences.”

But there’s something about Utopia that has us feeling a bit sea sick. Philanthropy requires a contribution to organizations seeking solutions to social problems, yet the Utopia program appears to fall short. There is no clear connection between the on-board services offered and any tangible outcomes, or even tangible opportunities for that matter, which makes it feel more like a way to balance extravagance with altruism than a true commitment to social good.

What do you think? Is Utopia smart to promote philanthropic behavior on its luxury ship, or are they simply using the buzzword to appear committed to the greater good?

Comments

Mike

December 11, 2009 7:21 PM I perceive some disconnects in the Utopia concept ... First, it seems easily replicable; there's nothing I see that stops a competitor from hosting similar gatherings. I don't see the added value that Utopia brings to the table. Second, the Utopia brand doesn't really seem to reflect philanthropic values at its core. Just seems like a way to attract wealthy customers. Walk the walk. Donate a percentage of proceeds from bookings, etc, back to the hosting customer's charity or use these funds as a match or challenge grant. Luxury brands generally have higher margins, so Utopia should be able to give back to the charities they are embracing with a comfortable margin ... and good PR, to boot. Third, I'd imagine wealthy people don't want to cruise to all parts of the world on a liner that continues to broadcasts their wealth; seems ripe for criminals to take advantage of the situation. Security needs to be exceptionally high, especially for onshore departures to visit the charity. Fourth, the cruise industry gets criticized, and rightly so, for being unfriendly to the environment. I see no evidence that Utopia is attempting to differentiate itself here. Wealthy consumers who embrace greener living could be swayed to choose Utopia over a competitor if, for example, the liner embraced a sustainable energy or zero-waste business model. Anyway, just my thoughts. -mw.

Casey Brennan

December 14, 2009 11:40 AM Hi Mike- Thanks for sharing your thoughts - some valid points. Interesting that you drew your opinion from environmental factors as well - just another reminder that consumers view a company's "goodness" holistically and not only based on their philanthropic claims. Casey Brennan Insights Coordinator Cone

Name *

Website

Comment *