Eloise4Ever

I am tickled to hear you are from the "Moonstruck" neighbourhood of New York Flatbush 🤩. That's one of my very favourite movies, due in no small part to the setting. Very evocative. I'm delighted to hear that you feel it was an accurate portrayal.

Really enjoying your review Hank. I've been reading your CC contributions for years and appreciate your comments. If, at some stage before you disembark Vista, you could find out who the CD will be for the first two weeks in June, I would be very grateful.

Thanks to all who have reported on the offerings at the Bakery in Baristas on Vista. Sounds like a huge improvement on the baked goods available in the same venue on Riviera and I can't wait to try it in June 😃

A half size portion of the lasagne is a perfect starter ☺️

I don't think anybody is saying O's approach in your case was unethical. I know I'm not.

Agree 100%. The issue under discussion was around the "use it or lose it" nature of SM shore excursion credits. Your post was quoted as an example of someone receiving a refund of unused SM credits so thank you for confirming that was not the case.

These are all fair points. The issue was raised by folks who couldn't use their SM shore excursion credit because O cancelled or shortened time in ports. All other excursions were sold out. I think in these cases the cruise line could see that the guest had "spent" the OBC before boarding and refund them accordingly if a port was cancelled. With the luxury lines the excursion costs don't stand out so much as everything is included in the fare. With O they are saying "pay the fare and we will give you x amount of money to spend on excursions". Which may be why folks are feeling hard done by.

Thanks for that but honestly I don't think it's terribly clear. The poster does say they ended up with "excess SM credits" which may be understood as SM credits they couldn't spend. I personally haven't experience losing SM credits but for me, unethical business practices are a red flag. Please note, I didn't dream this scenario up. It has been mentioned a few times on this thread that the SM excursion credit is "use it or lose it".

Multiple reports saying they do provide OBC to guests unable to spend their shore excursion OBC due to port cancellations?

So predictable. I wondered how long it would take for the O cheerleaders to trot out the old reliable "troll" trope.

Let's forget about the conspiracy theories. They are a distraction from the simple fact that O does not provide OBC to compensate their guests if they are unable to use the shore excursion credit that was included as part of their purchased cruise fare. I guess everybody defending this practice by O is okay with that.

Again, I am very surprised that folks are comfortable with this kind of dubious business practice. O may not break out their port fees but don't you think they should? Any company that treats their customers in such an underhand way is not a good fit for me. I find it amazing that so many are untroubled by these practices. To say this is much ado about nothing gives O carte blanche to treat their guests poorly.

I did. You clearly saw mine but seem to have missed the point. My post is about what happens to the Simply More cohort and the simple fact that O do not make them whole when the company fails to provide the services the guest purchased as part of their cruise fare. Simple as that.

IMO O are "profiteering" in these circumstances because they are denying their guests the chance to spend the Simply More shore excursion credit, the price of which was included in the cruise fare. If they were following reputable business practices they would refund guests for a service which they purchased but which the company can no longer provide. As O are not giving refunds, it seems clear that they're making an unethical profit out of the Simply More cohort. And don't even get me started on the fact that O don't refund port fees in the case of missed ports. That sharp practice deserves a whole thread of its own.

Thank you for your clarity and brevity. I'm really surprised that there isn't more protest about this issue though. Especially since O's tendency to skip ports or shorten port times seems to coincide with the introduction of Simply More. It's not a great look for a cruise line to be blatantly profiteering from their customers by reducing shore excursion expenses while at the same time disappointing customers by missing or shortening ports. Double whammy!