SeaShark

There you go...full value it is. I expect you to feel the same way if and when someone wants to sell two certificates. Since they are worth $500, you should pay $500 for them...regardless of what the seller of the CNs would have paid.

The interesting question for the Cruise Critics out there who always seem to only want to pay $125 for a $250 CN (since that is what they actually paid for it) is this: Would the OP file the amended claim for the $500 lost in the two CNs, or should they only file an amended claims for the $250 that they actually paid?

The key word is "usually", which differs significantly from "always". When you buy a cruise without the promotion, a drink package ($109/pppd) and a beverage gratuity ($21.80/pppd) can be added. When the promotion is on, you get the drink package at no additional charge...the promotion is not for the beverage gratuity. If we're going to be p-a, then I don't know why there are some people who feel the need to attack NCL's honor, as if your spouse is being criticized. Being NCL's customer is a choice, not a requirement. If you don't like what they offer, you are free to patronize other businesses. Has to be a better use of your time than wallowing in your dissatisfaction. "Attack"? Sorry, but disagreement is not an attack, but is a fact of discussion forums. Are you attacking people who don't feel it is misleading?

Nobody has said that it was free, correct? Especially since you have to buy a cruise to get it. The misleading "really a gratuity, or whether it's the real cost" doesn't seem so irrelevant considering how many times you've mentioned it. Think of it more like a surcharge to those who accept that part of the Free @ Sea promotion. The "real cost", fwiw, is actually baked into the cruise fare that everyone pays...whether you take the drink package or not. So even if you pass on the package, you'll still subsidize it as part of the fare. There is no free lunch. Do you really think a cruise line could make a profit or stay in business if they really gave drinks, specialty dining, wifi, and excursions away for "free"?

Because YOU can't/won't understand the difference between double occupancy and capacity. True. What started this was you using the term "official capacity" instead of the correct "double occupancy". Something that I already pointed out, btw. Notice that your reference uses the term "double occupancy" and not "official capacity" as you did in error. An no, I'm not saying anything about the Encore's lifeboat capacity (if I did, it would be plainly stated). Again...arguing something that was never stated.

Not new at all. It is well known that you can't always add additional guests to a cabin as lifeboat capacity might be exceeded. This is often a problem with prime (kids out of school) season cruises. Just lifeboats, inflatables are designed for crew. I think @chengkp75 can probably explain it better.

Never made such a claim, but that doesn't stop you as you prefer to make up stuff to argue against instead of using what was said. What I said was that 2 in a cabin is not "official capacity", it is actually just "double occupancy". Extra berths can cause an excess of "double occupancy", but never exceed "official capacity" as "official capacity" is determined by lifeboat seats, not 2 in a cabin as you claimed. Not only that, but lifeboats cover sections, and once lifeboat capacity for a section is reached no additional bookings in that section (be they empty excess berths or empty cabins) are permitted.

IMHO it isn't a matter of "maximizing value". What restaurant has the ambience that best appeals to ME? What restaurant offers the food item that best appeals to ME? What restaurant provides the best service to ME? Those are the important questions, not "maximum value". You have to ask yourself how those questions are answered by YOUR wants, desires, and expectations...not mine.

No...sorry, but words matter. Double occupancy is 2 per cabin (for most cabins, not all, btw). Official capacity is based on lifeboat seats...not cabins, beds, or anything else. It might surprise you to learn that ships can be at capacity with empty cabins. All kinds of "facts", "numbers", and "sources"...yet you claim to have been mislead. Hard to believe. Unless one or the other is a fabrication.

Come now, he isn't going to back up his misleading numbers...he has a narrative to push.

"I thought that meant" isn't a defense. Have you even considered that the shortcoming here is an error in your assumption of the meaning? You could have simply reached out to your TA or PCC and asked if your interpretation was correct. Did you bother to do that? The fact that you misunderstood, does not mean that you were mislead.

Yeah, and? I'm not seeing an issue. NCL sells a drink package. It is priced at $109 per day for the package and $21.80 per day for the gratuity/service charge. The free drink package comps you the $109...it is not added to your final price. However, you still have to pay the gratuity/service charge which was clearly not offered as free.

How an I attempting to squash the discussion? By simply participating in it? Simply disagreeing with your particular opinion isn't squashing...it is part of the discussion. But you said it was well established, those were your original words...and we were discussing that in reference to the idea that nothing was free. 100% of the gratuity to the bartending staff? I never said anything about gratuity distribution being well established. If you want to veer the topic to the side, you can't insist that I follow you. If it is published, but not clear and known to every person who books an NCL cruise, whose fault is that? If you can't be bothered to learn, then you don't have standing to blame others. I didn't day "people already know that NCL is misleading". That is (once again) you attempting to put words in my mouth to argue against them. Why don't you argue what I actually said instead. You can quote my words, you don't have to play the "so your're saying" game. Once again, I don't have a problem with people discussing anything...never said I did. I get to discuss too...that is the way it works. Do you have a problem with that? Oh, and FWIW, you understand that "misleading" and "feel it's misleading" aren't the same, right? Facts trump feelz.

You mean, you mean, you mean...no, I don't mean your misleading interpretation, I only mean what I specifically wrote. Your continued confusion over the no cost vs no worry aspect of the marketing shows your continued attempts to promote your bad faith narrative. I'm simply not buying it, but you'll still try to sell it nonetheless. I did no such thing. I said pointing out well established facts as though they weren't well established is misleading. I never said an honest discussion of facts is "misleading". Shame is that there is no "fine print" here. It's all right there, something you've already admitted that is known and well established. Again..."under some cirucumstances" a phrasing that is misleading as it infers that this circumstance is one of the "some" referred to. Accusation without evidence. Textbook misleading.

They actually don't. That is what is great about it. You can call your PCC or TA and they can explain it all to you verbally. No reading required.

Gotta laugh when you look at the above and notice that the "All Included" description even says "Tips charged separately". Not to mention the marketing aspect of "All Included" vs "All Inclusive".

How is NCL trying to create a narrative? You make accusations, but provide nothing to support them (this tactic IS, in fact, creating a narrative). You also accuse NCL of not including it in the base price...again, with nothing to support that. Why? Nothing wrong with discussing on a discussion forum. However, NOBODY said there was something wrong with discussing it. So again, here is an accusation without supporting evidence...you're trying to argue something that was never said. IOW, who even said that there was something wrong with discussing it? All of the information about the product and its costs are out there and available for guests to review prior to purchase. It isn't misleading on NCL's part if some people don't bother to read and understand the information.

Depends. It is "free" as in "no cost", or "free" as in "free to enjoy drinks without the worry of a huge bar bill at the end of the cruise"? NCL's moniker is "freestyle" cruising? Does that mean you don't pay for cruises? Since everyone knows that nothing is "really free", it doesn't need to be pointed out, and yes, those who want to point it out to create a narrative are being misleading.

If there is anything misleading it is posts like this that are nothing but word games on the word "free". You want to play the "it's not free at all" card, but you gloss over the fact that you have to purchase an entire cruise to get what you classify as "free". Do you really think anything can be "free" if you have to purchase a cruise to get it?

So the only definate here is that "they are entitled to an explanation", and an explanation was given. So what is the problem?

How exactly do we tell which explanation is "honest"? I'm simply seeing a lot of unsupported speculation here. The linked story cites speed issues in 2005 and 2015 without any indication that those issues are relevant today. The linked article also states: The body responsibly for governing Antarctic tourism IAATO brought into effect slower speed restrictions this summer 2023-24, for the protection of migratory whales, but members like NCL had been aware of the change since 2021. What I don't get is that if the IAATO introduced "slower spped restrictions this summer", how could NCL have been aware of the "this summer" change three years ago? Honestly, did the IAATO do this as reported, or did they do it back in 2021?

It has been accepted as fact on CC that the folks staying in balconies near the slides are going to have to put up with the people on the slides screaming all day. How are you coping with the screaming?

https://www.ncl.com/cruisefirst-program

Have you ever seen so much confusion over something so simple? I hate to bring the two topics together, but it is threads like this that stand as concrete evidence that "experienced cruisers" should not attempt to design cruise ships. 🙄 If you can't understand the order of disembarkation, then you certainly can't advise as to the proper size for an onboard venue. Sorry, not sorry.

It is what you wrote, but not what you were referring to. And I never said it was my job, I never said it was anyone's job. I only asked a question, I didn't make a statement. Is it your job to fabricate or edit just to argue, cause you aren't good at it at all.