navybankerteacher

Since most lines charge a "single supplement" - often 100% - which means that a person sailing alone will pay for two people, it kind of works out that having a "second guest" in a stateroom costs no more than one person -- meaning that the second guest arguably sails "free".

But to the extent service charges are distributed fleet-wide (or at least ship-wide) they really do not flow to the individual crew members who provided such exceptional service. They are simply a source of funds for the line's crew compensation.

Is that really a “THOMAS KINCAID original” hanging in the card room for you to bid on? I have never seen any original work of any recognized artist at a shipboard auction.

Precisely. And the only real reason for retaining the system is that it provides cruise lines (primarily those US focused) to advertise tempting low fares. Once tipping ceased to be a matter of individual passengers acknowledging superior performance by individual staff members, the system lost most of its validity. The only arguably valid point at this time is that it makes a portion of what the passenger pays adjustable as a means of protesting against poor service.

You are avoiding the subject under discussion: whether NCL permits on board reduction/removal of service charges or if the way they adjust service charges is by requiring the passenger to submit a request for refund - to be processed after debarking. True - I do not particularly like NCL: the size and passenger capacity of their ships, the minimal quality of included dining, my perception of the shortage of public space as compared with other lines; but these views have little to do with the subject.

I suggest you read the ncl faq bit you cited. In detail, it says nothing about reducing or removing the service charge -- it does state that the service charge is "REFUNDABLE" -- which means after the fact, and is rather different from removing or reducing it.

But the mass market cruise lines depend on the “mass market” - which is largely made up of bargain hunters - many of whom can barely afford to cruise - and some fair number of them wil remove service charges if possible. It would be interesting to learn the number of passengers, by cruise line, who do reduce/remove service charges.

Of course, that is just one of the many justifications the cheap creeps will use. At least NCL (because they know their market demographic) make it very difficult to reduce/remove gratuities: it can only be done after returning home after the cruise. When it is too easy, such cuts are more likely.

Of course a very large number of your audience (the readers of these boards) only cruise because the cost of cruising is so low compared with other vacation options available to them. Room and as much food (fairly well served) as they can eat, a fair amount of entertainment, a chance to see other areas, people cleaning up after you, etc. etc. All this for a cost which could hardly be matched by staying at a home town motel for a week and eating at local Applebees, Olive Garden, Ponderosa, etc. … and only possible because the cruise lines have figured out how to efficiently and effectively exploit the staff they bring in from poor societies. How can you say “It is not our problem”? When we effectively hire the cruise lines to create the environment you deplore.

Easy trivialization - yes: that one passenger screwing thousands of workers means that each worker only suffers immaterial loss. However, it is important to remember that, while the whole might not always precisely match the sum of its parts - it does remain that sum. Your summary certain makes it easy for an individual cruiser to justify removing the service charge - assuming that he is the only one doing so. Is he?

Have you any real information supporting this claim?

You know, of course, that in what they call "football" they never hold the ball -- so that's the way it is with them.

Agreed - medieval magic beats Italian Renaissance.

Exactly — and the cruise line has a much better concept of “supply” than the wannabe cruiser, because they can keep track of bookings; and the cruise line can fine tune “demand” by offering incentives while the wannabe cruiser simply “demands” what he thinks will be a deal. The one edge the wannabe cruiser has is the power to decide that the offer currently in front of him is something he wants enough to press the buy button. Of course, on every cruise there will be at least one passenger who has gotten the “best deal” — but more than 99% of those who wants to find out will discover that someone else got a better deal. The intelligent cruiser will be happy with what he has - and not sweat trying to beat the expert at figuring the best price point.

Mid-November in New York could be sunny in the low 70’s , windy and rainy, or possibly the first snow (light dusting) of the season. Most likely pretty decent for touring, as not a particularly rainy time and neither too warm or very cold — but generally unpredictable.

I really doubt that "similar itineraries" (which mean same length, same ports, same time of year on the same line) would cost more or less for similar accommodations. I am inclined to think you are overlooking a factor or two. They are essentially priced to get what the market will bear. Cruise lines expend a lot of effort in developing pricing models -- they are sensitive to "tipping points": when itineraries either sell at faster rates than anticipated or fail to sell -- and they make pricing adjustments accordingly. Aside from the obvious quality-based differentiations (Oceania cruises will likely cost more per day than NCL's offerings) market reactions are responded to. But two NCL 7 day cruises to the same ports, from the same home port at the same time of year are almost certain to charge very similar fares. Of course, if you are comparing very similar, same-line itineraries' pricing a year before sailing with pricing two weeks before sailing, you must consider the availability factor along with everything else.

A no-brainer. CocoCay, Labadee and Puerto Plata are synthetic "Caribbean" ports - you might as well stay on the ship when the yahoos get off. Aruba, Curacao and Grand Turk (not so much) are OK - but involve a lot of sea days. San Juan and St. Maarten are the two best ports in the Caribbean - and Celebrity will give you a good shipboard experience -- followed by Royal Caribbean, with Carnival a distant third.

A "short cruise" is a terrible way to try out "cruising". They are entirely different activities. They attract different demographics. Taking a short cruise is a good way to see if you like short cruises. Taking a week or longer is a good way to see if you like cruising.

You get what you pay for -- not what you want to pay for it.

A 15 day round trip TA would strike me as a bit too much sea time. Because we live about an hour from Brooklyn Cruise Terminal, it is great to come home from a visit with family near London - day time flight over, crash at a Heathrow hotel for the night then car service up to Herts. -- already time-adjusted - taking QM2 home gets us here with no airports at end of trip and no lag once home.

Having sailed both lines, I would recommend Princess for quality of shipboard experience.

Who is the "they"? And, if f you dropped off passengers and luggage first, how would they identify you as a cruiser?

Well, it is a bit different from Cleveland - which I first saw after the Cuyahaga River fire.

What could you NOT have expanded upon if you HAD kissed the Stone? Are you not aware of the powers it conveys?