SantaFeFan

49 minutes ago, beachbum53 said:

 

To begin with, the Breeze is barely seven years old, and was never launched as a non-smoking ship. Second, I have been tobacco free for over four years. Regardless, I am not defending either side of the smoking/non-smoking debate. I stand by my statement that it's an issue that will never be settled to everyone's satisfaction. I also firmly believe that none of the cruise lines will ever make their entire fleet smoke free because they don't want the loss of revenue that would occur as a result. I do believe it is important for smokers to respect the rights of non-smokers. At the same time, I wish non-smokers would stop beating this very dead horse and quit bringing up this issue over and over again. 

Oops, my mistake. I should have written Carnival Paradise, not breeze. Not being a Carnival customer, I don't know the ship names very well. Thanks for the correction. 👍

I still stand by my belief that for most cruisers the current policies are acceptable even though the subject of completely non smoking ships comes up one or twice a year (which I don't consider is "bringing up this issue over and over again"). For many of us, the situation is indeed settled to our satisfaction. Not everyone, as you have stated, but then again, I doubt there is anything in the world that is "settled to everyone's satisfaction". 🙂 

I also believe, as you do, that the cruise lines will not establish completely smoke free ships, but for a different reason. There is no need to as there aren't very many people demanding it. As Hlitner has mentioned in the post above, most cruisers are accepting of limited outdoor smoking areas. So there is no need for the cruise lines to go even further. And I agree with this even though I have never smoked, and hate the smell of it.

3 hours ago, beachbum53 said:

Smoking versus not smoking on cruise ships will never be settled to everyone's satisfaction. Health issues aside, I don't foresee any cruise line banning smoking on their entire fleet. That would mean eliminating a source of revenue, just as banning alcohol on all cruises would eliminate those who drink alcohol so as to make non-drinkers more comfortable, or eliminating casinos so that those with a gambling problem can enjoy cruising without being tempted. When Carnival's Paradise first started sailing, it was a smoke-free ship. But it didn't take long for Carnival to realize there weren't enough non-smokers to keep the ship filled to capacity week after week. Much to the chagrin of non-smokers, after Carnival realized they were losing money by excluding  smokers from the Paradise, the decision was made to allow smoking on the ship.

First, the smoking vs not smoking issue seems to be settled to many people's satisfaction based on the number of posts on this thread alone that say the current policies are fine with them. 

Second, Carnival Breeze was an experiment that was decades ahead of it's time. She was launched as a non-smoking ship over twenty years ago. People weren't as used to no smoking policies back then as they are now. Since then, many communities, states and even countries have banned smoking in restaurants, bars, hotels, and public spaces. Today, there is a much higher awareness regarding the dangers of smoking, for both the smokers and people around them. While Carnival's experiment did not fare well twenty years ago (and keep in mind that other issues affected the failure), today there would be a much better chance of success with the ever growing awareness of the negatives of smoking, a trend seen even in traditionally heavy smoking countries.  

Based on your defense of smoking and your trotting out a decades old experiment to support your argument that banning smoking would not work today, I suspect that you are a smoker and are invested in advocating for cruise lines to not become more restrictive. 

1 hour ago, DDG 41 said:

Yes they can't and never were able to, as the peasant class doesn't exist in our day and age. They were in the medieval time period. Back when they were a class they wouldn't of been able to watch they would've been working...

You know exactly what I meant. 

Forward views for the majority of the passengers have been denied to appease the suite passengers. In other words, 2,700 passengers have now lost an important feature of the ship so less than 300 passengers can have it exclusively to themselves. ALL non suite passengers have had something taken away so a few privileged passengers can enjoy it. This is a trend I am seeing on many cruise lines. The rich get more while the rest get less. 

On 3/29/2019 at 3:40 PM, deliver42 said:

Skynight, why? They don't take away from the rest of the passengers. Maybe 5% of the ship is reserved.Depending on the ship, they may get a small pool, a separate lounge and restaurant. Big deal. If I don't have it, I don't miss it.

They DO take away from the rest of the passengers. For instance, Celebrity's latest ship, Edge, has 18% of the ship dedicated to suite passengers, with a slew of suite only venues and spaces, including lounges, entertainment, restaurants, bars, pools, and sun decks. And this is on a ship that is not much bigger than their last ship, Reflection (129,500 GT vs 126,000 GT). That affects how much space the non-suite passengers can enjoy, creating a more crowded experience for them. And on Edge, non-suite passengers no longer have access to forward viewing areas unless you pay extra to use the spa or are using the fitness center. No longer can the peasant class enjoy forward views when approaching a port. While the older ships have forward facing lounges and sun decks that everyone could use, on Edge you have to spend thousands more to get that amenity. 

So, absolutely they are taking away from the rest of the passengers. You can defend more suite areas all you want, but at least post facts instead of spin. 

29 minutes ago, K32682 said:

 

One of the advancements of modern day cruising is the expansion of anytime dining and alternate dining options.  No more table roulette and the risk of being stuck with Chatty Cathy and her husband.   

For us it would be Chatty Cathy, her husband Macho Mark, and their kids, Squirmy Spencer and Crying Chrisie. AKA: table mates from hell.

6 minutes ago, navybankerteacher said:

Smoking has been steadily declining since the mid 1960’s when health warnings were required on packs and TV advertising stopped.  In 2000 about 23% of US adults still smoked;  in 2005 it had dropped to just above 20%;  by 2016 the rate had fallen to just over 15%.

 

At what point do you feel mass market lines will decide they have more to gain from accommodating non-smokers than they will lose by turning away smokers?

 

As long as non-smokers do not care, the lines will probably not want to turn away as much as 10% if potential market;  but if smokers drop to about 5%, it is very likely that a greater number of non-smokers will see it as a make-or-break matter — and will avoid ships which permit any smoking.

 

At what percentage do you think that tipping  point is likely to occur?

My wife and I have never smoked and we both hate the stench it creates. Still, as long as our stateroom neighbors don't break the current rules and smoke on their balconies, I have no problem with the policies most cruise lines already have in place. Smoking areas are easy to avoid, and doing so doesn't take away anything from our cruise experiences.  My favorite is Celebrity with no smoking anywhere inside, including the casino. But, since my wife and I don't gamble, it is quite easy to avoid smoky casinos on lines that still allow smoking there. 

So, my answer is: There is no need for that tipping point you are looking for. 

3 hours ago, need2cruisesoon said:

On our next cruise I am seriously thinking of getting a couple table tents printed with our names and where we are from.

 

Seems like when you share a table other people always ask "whats your names"? or "where are you from"?

 

So have you done this before? and might be a good segway for dinner conversation.

 

Thanks,

Why stop there? Bring some self stick name tags and wear them at the table.

Or, have your names embroidered on your shirts. 

Seriously, if someone brought table tents with their names on them, my first impression would be that they were a bit egotistical. Just introduce yourselves on the first day and go from there. We have never had any problems at our tables without relying on the use of name badges. 

2 hours ago, Keith.Hanson said:

..... i have a feeling that the ship will not be full due to different start/end ports.......

Many cruisers prefer different start/end ports. My wife and I surely do. These give us the opportunity to spend several days in two unique ports before and after the cruise. It gives us one more interesting city to explore than what a round trip would provide. I would expect that these cruises are quite popular and almost always are fully booked. 

57 minutes ago, Toofarfromthesea said:

 

But, but, but, they are cute.  And memorable.

Yeah, memorable like a suitcase that is too large to fit under the bed. It requires an extra effort to deal with it. 🙄

Personally, I wouldn't give the crew anything that requires them to make special effort to use or dispose of. Giving something unusual like $2 bills is only meant to satisfy the giver, not the receiver who the oddball bill is supposed to benefit. 

Double post. CC is acting a bit wonky today. 

2 hours ago, CruiserBruce said:

At ease everyone...Mexico is getting a warning for the next year. No near term border closing.

It isn't going to happen - just like some of us predicted.

Watching what this administration's antics is like watching an old man with no teeth eating corn on the cob. 

50 minutes ago, Aplmac said:

.

This is a cruise forum, not a political discussion forum.

Does that mean we also can't talk about weather that affects our cruises because "this is a cruise forum" and not a weather discussion forum? 

32 minutes ago, loyalGTfan said:

Hello cruisers!

 

Looking for some advice to narrow down our honeymoon options. The two cruise ships are the Solstice and the Bliss from Celebrity and NCL respectively. 

 

They both have have the same port schedule and nearly identical prices for the following options:

 

Solstice, Aquaclass cabin with prepaid gratuities and classic drink package.

 

Bliss, a balcony cabin with classic drink package and the three specialty meals included. 

 

Anybody cruise either ship in Alaska? Thoughts on aqua versus regular balcony? We do like going to thermal spas. We’d probably try to purchase a day pass once or twice if available on the Bliss. 

 

Any comments would be appreciated! We have both cruised once before years ago. Right now we like the entertainment options better on the Bliss, but like the spa package on the Solstice in aquaclass. We are early thirties, like to enjoy fine dining, piano style cocktail bars, and look forward to seeing some great shows!

Based on your last paragraph, I strongly advise Celebrity over NCL. Celebrity is several steps up from NCL, with a classier, more sophisticated feel to it. Dining on Celebrity is superior to NCL, which has a reputation for having some of the worst food in the industry. Even the food in Celebrity's main dining rooms, included in the base fare, is usually better than NCL's extra cost specialty restaurants. Where NCL may shine, however, are their shows. 

If you want to feel pampered and well taken care of, go with Celebrity. If you want to kick back, relax and dress down like a week at the beach, then go with NCL. 

38 minutes ago, Heidi13 said:

As with everything, it was challenging to begin with, but after 5 months, I am used to it.

Same here. At first, it needed some tweaking. But it has evolved and gotten better. And, like you, I am now used to it. 

52 minutes ago, lenquixote66 said:

CC has me listed as joining in 2011,I joined in 2008.

They have my wrong date of birth

They remove posts without an explanation and have not replied to my e-mails re all of the above.

I couldn't care less if they have my join date wrong. How does that make any difference? Being allowed to post isn't determined by seniority.

As as for my birth date - I would prefer to forget it since I am only getting older, not younger. In fact, I no longer celebrate my birth date. Instead, I celebrate anniversaries of my 25th. 😉

1 minute ago, LHT28 said:

Yes  you just  need to return it to the purser at the end of the day

Best to make the request  the night before  the port  you want your passport for

for me it is not worth the  hassle  but for some  they feel the need to have their passport with them

JMO

If planning to rent a car and explore on your own, many countries require a passport shown to process the rental. In those infrequent cases, just explain the reason and the passport should be made available. This also applies if the ship overnights at a port and the plan is to stay at a local hotel or resort for the night. We have done this for both situations. 

9 minutes ago, Pyrate13 said:

Something else I haven't seen mentioned in any response (I may have missed it) but you say you would tip in cash those that took care of you so they are not hurt. Do you not realize some of the tips paid thru the cruise lines also go to folks behind the scenes that you will almost never encounter but still provide you with great service? How do you propose to keep their tips intact if you remove all of the paid thru the line system?

Good point. To add to this, most cruise lines will require any cash tips to be surrendered to accounting at all times. By removing the tips in order to give tips only to those one chooses, the tip won't go to that person at all. It will go into the tip pool to be distributed appropriately. 

If auto tips are kept in place, all affected crew members will be taken care of, and any cash tips given to reward a crew member's extra service level will then be deposited into that crew member's account during the accounting process. 

By tipping only in cash you put the burden on that crew member. They can be fired for not turning in cash tips they receive. And since all accounting is done at the end of the cruise, even if a passenger removes the tips on the last day, any cash tips will be affected accordingly. 

One thing not yet mentioned is if the service you are receiving is not up to your expectations, bring it up immediately with the supervisory staff to have it resolved. 

Some people on these boards will claim they reduce or remove entirely the tips because of poor service received. That claim makes absolutely no sense. Why would anyone put up with poor service for the entire cruise only to "punish" the crew at the end by altering the tip amount? Seems that enduring poor service for all those days would punish the guest more than the crew. Plus, removing tips punishes ALL crew in the tip pool. I have never had so bad a service level from even one crew member to adjust down the tips, much less the entire crew who provided service to me.

Leave the tips unaltered and if you receive better than expected service from one or more individuals, give them each a bit more. For those exceptional people we typically give an additional $20 per stateroom guest for a 7 day cruise. 

And one more thing - on most cruise lines the person delivering any room service order you place is often not in the tipping pool. We typically give $2 per stateroom guest for that service. 

Another vote for leaving it in the safe unless required to carry it by local laws. I have been travelling for over 40 years, have visited almost 50 countries on every continent but Antarctica, and have never carried it unless the law required it. Even the companies I worked for that I had to travel international for recommended not carrying it if not needed. The US State department even advised on their web site that keeping it in the safe was the most secure approach. I have never unexpectedly been asked to show my passport. I have needed it to check into a hotel at an overnight port stop, or to rent a car, however. But I knew in advance that I needed to have it, so it wasn't unexpected. I do carry a copy of the passport, and my California driver's license, which is a government issued document with my name and photo on it. 

There are posters on these boards who will try to scare you into carrying it, claiming that you might be asked for your "papers" by local officials (extremely rare), or that the ship will leave you without it if you return late (it won't). Virtually all cruise lines promise to check your safe for your passports if you will be left behind. If they find it in the safe, they will give it to the port representative so he can give it to you when you arrive after the ship has left. The daily newsletter that you will find in your stateroom the night before will have the phone number of the representative. It is a good idea to always take that phone number with you, just in case. 

I prefer to know where my passport is at all times. If it's in the safe, I can arrange to have it retrieved if I am in an accident or other emergency. If I carry it and it gets stolen, lost, or pick pocketed, I no longer will have control of it. 

There is no absolute right or wrong approach. Just do what is most comforting to you. It is a personal decision whether or not you carry it. 

Five posts and four are accusing NCL of scams and deceptive practices, and now is trying to get approval to take his dissatisfaction out on innocent crew members. 

Is it worth holding a discussion with someone who only posts accusations and assumes the cruise lines are cheating people?

1 hour ago, Pyrate13 said:

Not true, for instance, one of the Magic Kingdom smoking areas was on Main Street next to the hat shop, it was often full of smokers and well within the sight of children.

Maybe "was" years ago, but not recently. The only smoking areas at Magic Kingdom currently are a dock in the southwest area of the entrance to the park, tucked in a corner of the Big Thunder Mountain Railroad area, and next to the restrooms at the east border of Tomorrowland. They have not allowed smoking anywhere on main street for as long as I can remember. 

Trivia: smoking was allowed in Disneyland when it first opened in 1955. It was never allowed on rides or in attractions, however. It banned smoking other than in designated areas in the late 1990s. Their cruise line had restricted smoking from their first launch. 

43 minutes ago, leaveitallbehind said:

Just curious - what cruise line / ship?  Clearly the policies vary.

Celebrity Infinity and Constellation allowed it the times I visited the bridge.

2 hours ago, leaveitallbehind said:

Regarding the all access tours, while there may not be a direct cost identified per se for these tours, someone has to arrange and conduct the tours, which typically last about 3 hours. Not denying that it now generates revenue, but I don't see it as "nickle and diming" to charge for this option so much as charging for a somewhat unique opportunity for those who would want to see this - especially given the number of passengers on board as mentioned.  They typically only conduct one or two per sailing with about 50 participants per tour.

Completely agree. The tour I took cost $150. It was entirely optional. They were not "nickle and diming" me for something that should have been free. It was a unique and rare opportunity since only one tour was conducted during that 10 day cruise, and only 35 people out of 2,800 were allowed. I considered paying for it no different than paying for a shore excursion. If I didn't like the cost, all I had to do was not go. And, not going would not have been detrimental to my cruise in any way.

However, that tour did inconvenience ship operations. Ship activities had to be curtailed or minimized while we were in the area. Normal job tasks were affected by us being in the way. In all locations, at least one crew member was tasked with explaining the processes conducted there. Instead of doing their normal work load, they now had to pause and put on a "class" or demonstration. In other areas, work was stopped entirely while we were there, presumably both for safety and for loss of efficiency. 

There IS an impact on ship functions when these tours are conducted. Which means there is a cost to ship operations.

2 hours ago, Heidi13 said:

Although some pax still visit the Bridge at sea, in my experience, most Bridge visits these days are in port. Back in the 70's & 80's we did Bridge visits every 1/2 hr, but only at sea. Although sign-up was required, all pax were welcome and they certainly didn't charge a fee. All the other areas of the ship tours were also free.

 

It costs nothing to provide tours of a cruise ship, so just can't imagine paying money for an all access tour. Yet another nickle & dining.

I have visited the bridge on 7 cruises on 3 different cruise lines, all while under way. None were in port. Only one required a fee, and that was a 3 hour tour of various areas of the ship. The other visits were just to the bridge and were the result of me asking at customer service desk on the first day. Those had nothing to do with being a frequent customer or part of a special group. They happened simply because I asked politely. 

Apples and oranges. Or maybe, tangerines and oranges. 😉

If you visit a Disney park you are only there for part of a day, not for several days at a time. And you can leave the park to smoke anytime you want. You can't step off the ship after it leaves a port. 

Not even the same situation, and not even comparable. Your point is without merit. 🙄

The smoking policies most cruise lines have in place today is fine. 

39 minutes ago, iancal said:

I think that the busybodies have enough on their plates dealing with attire and deportment.

 

If they add scent to the list I suspect that they will have to increase their numbers.

 

Two at the door.  One to check on scent, the other to check on attire.

So, if I passed gas in the elevator, you wouldn't care since you apparently aren't a "busy body"? How about if I never showered or used deodorant, rarely changed my clothing, and only brushed my teeth once a week? Would you be fine with standing next to me in a crowded elevator? 

I find it equally repulsive those people who have a "holier than thou" attitude towards people who prefer not to be inundated with whatever scent created by the people around us and who call us names for the simple reason we prefer not to be forced to endure whatever you smell like at the moment.  

Personally, I don't use scented soap, deodorant, hair care products, or aftershave. I prefer not to offend people. To me it is a simple question of consideration for others. Clearly for some, being considerate is a lost art.