spongerob

We were also on Zuiderdam a couple of weeks ago. I agree with DaveOKC that the crew was great. However I did hear a few complaints about weak A/C in some cabins and there were some problems with public restrooms. It seemed to me that many were out of service frequently.

 

Say hi to Roger at the Ocean Bar.

Next for us: Nieuw Amsterdam June 21 12 days Venice - Barcelona

Well count us as moving the other direction. We have 25+ Princess cruises and just came back from our third on HAL. We both agree that HAL is today the way Princess was before the big ship craze started. Princess still does a few things better but our preference now is for HAL.

You take the total square footage of the ship and divide by the passenger and crew capactiy to give you a measure of sq. ft per person...it's a decent rough estimate and can be useful when comparing several ships.

What you describe would be a far better measurement, but that's not what the space ratio is.

 

Space ratio takes the VOLUME of the ship, expressed in tons, and divides that number by the number of passengers. The tonnage number is a term that is used to describe how much cargo a ship can carry.

 

The tonnage measurement includes enclosed spaces only, so things like open decks, balconies, etc. are not included. A ship with a higher space ratio expressed in tons might actually have less space per passenger if the number was expressed in sq. ft. per person.

 

Space ratio is an almost useless statistic, but it gives people just one more thing to argue about on CC. :)

I tell the boss I'm going out to make a few sales calls. Answer a few e-mails from my I-phone every day, and no one has to be the wiser. He's sooooo clueless!

 

;)

 

What really happens is that I bust my butt most of the year, work weekends, and try to create some room so I can take a few days off. I know that I'm going to have a pile of work that is overdue when I get back thanks to being short-staffed (we're working smarter, not harder! :rolleyes:) but since that's no different than the situation pre-cruise I don't let it bother me too much.

The problems sometimes is not in the laws themselves, but how they are interpreted after being written. So take this quote from the Travel Agents Act (1985, ammended Jun 24 2009)

 

A person shall not, if he knows that another person is carrying

on business as a travel agent in contravention of section 7 (1)

or (2), do an act which assists and is intended by him to assist

the other person so to carry on business.

 

One interpretation of this is that RCI in America cannot knowingly accept a booking from Australia made through its US website since that might violate federal and territorial laws governing trade and competitive practices. This also might be challenged by existing travel agents in Australia as an unjust business practice (extreme discounting) which whether true or not, requires a court appearance and the costs involved.

It's been a couple of years and a hurricane since we have been there, but IMO there isn't a ton of "exciting" things to do unless you want to go roaring around in jeeps or dune buggies.

 

My idea of a perfect day is just to go into Majahual, find a spot on the beach and enjoy some cold drinks, then finish up with mojitos at El Faro with perhaps a nice grilled lobster. It doesn't get any better than that.

1) Protectionism is as much an American sport as it is a local one. Government regulation doesn't cause prices to be higher than over there because of it. There's no tariff on cruises that we charge that you don't. Protectionism doesn't require a tariff, just regulations that make it more difficult for you to make bookings with agencies outside your own country. And true enough, the US government can be just as bad as anyone else.

 

2) As for taxes, again showing your lack of research, no extra sales taxes are levied on cruises here. So much for those arguments. You don't see the taxes because they are hidden in the cost of setting up a business. I know a bit about this because my business operates in Australia. Taxes and fees assessed at the corporate level end up being passed on to the consumer as overhead.

 

3) You say "they (cruise lines) might not like the restrictions that force them to operate a local subsidiary in Australia." Pity there aren't any such restrictions! This statement displays such naivety that it is difficult to refute without violating board guidelines for civility. But I will try. No corporate entity is allowed to do business in Australia and send the revenue offshore. It is the same just about anywhere. If this were not the case, every corporation doing business in Australia would conduct business from Dubai or some other tax haven, and you'd reach them via a website.

 

Cruise lines want to operate from Australian ports because 1) you have a large enough local market to make it worthwhile and 2) in spite of our occasional differences in opinion, we like you well enough to travel to your country and enjoy what you have to offer. In order to operate from your ports and access your marketplace, the cruise lines have to set themselves up under Australian laws.

 

This is Strike 3, but there are still more errors...

 

4) "But, in order to maintain their standing, and more importantly, avoid problems with operating their ships from Australian ports, they have to comply. That means that they have to lean on their agents in the US to refuse Australian bookings." Aside from the logical failure that one does not lead to the other - operating a subsidiary does not mean that you need to refuse to do business elsewhere, again there is no such restriction causing them to need to operate such a subsidiary here. In addition to being naive, you apparently don't understand English. Or reality. Cruise lines have made an investment to operate in your part of the world. Return on that investment rests to a large extent on the the ability to conduct business without interference. Your government does not want you to send your money to the US, and although some have in the past found ways around the restrictions using internet agencies, the authorities have caught on. They want to cruise lines to play ball, or be subject to regulatory harassment.

The US government does the same thing, by the way, so I'm not saying it's unique.

 

5) "so crafts laws that makes it more difficult for you to book overseas. "

 

Ever wonder why it's so difficult for you guys, and why it obviously upsets you so greatly? It would be dead easy for Princess or RCI or anyone else to take your money and fill their ships. You just aren't seeing the bigger picture.

 

My advice is the same as last time. Google is great as an aid but please don't rely on 15 minutes of using it to make you an expert on local tax and business law. Further, the advice that you offer any international user that any issues are due to governmental regulation is just old, boring and incorrect - though do demonstrate your bias.

What, pray tell, is my bias? All I am asking you to do is take the blinders off, quit thinking the way you have been indoctrinated to think, and follow the money. I think you are being worked over, by both sides, but until you figure out who is yanking your chains you won't ever solve the problem.

 

It's not your analysis that is incorrect, it's your basic assumptions. Start from square one with a blank sheet of paper, spend 15 minutes in research, read the documents you find, and see if what I'm trying to tell you makes a little more sense.

 

Or, if it's thinking you are averse to, show me an example where regulation has lowered costs. I'm not saying all regs are bad or unnecessary, just that they have a cost.

I don't think you would have any concerns about refusal of embarkation if booking a cruise through a US TA, as long as the cruise does not depart from an Australian port. If it does depart from Australia, I think maybe the concerns are valid.

 

Guys, I feel sorry for you, but if you were to investigate for yourself, you might find that the high costs you pay and the restrictions the cruise lines have to comply with in regards to overseas bookings are written into the laws of your country.

 

It's understandable that the Australian government, or state governments, wish to protect local businesses from foreign competition. It is also understandable that your government wishes to collect taxes that are part of those sales. Both would be impossible if you were allowed to go overseas to make your travel arrangements.

 

Some of you blame the cruise lines. This isn't without justification - while they might not like the restrictions that force them to operate a local subsidiary in Australia, it also allows them to set higher pricing. But, in order to maintain their standing, and more importantly, avoid problems with operating their ships from Australian ports, they have to comply. That means that they have to lean on their agents in the US to refuse Australian bookings.

 

What you have here is a perfect storm of unintended consequences. Your government wants to protect your travel agencies from international competition, so crafts laws that makes it more difficult for you to book overseas. Your government wants the taxes and licensing fees, so forces the cruise lines to set up local subsidiaries if they exceed a threshold of activity from Australian ports (perhaps the reason Carnival isn't included - yet). The cruise lines face stiff penalties and other repercussions if they do not comply, so they are forced to tell overseas agencies not to accept bookings that are initiated from Australia. By playing along, the cruise lines get to charge higher prices, the government gets more tax revenue from the higher prices since X% of a large number is much better than X% of a smaller number, and YOU, the consumer, pays for it all.

 

I would be most interested to find out what an investigation would discover. I did my own research to make the preceding comments. It took about 15 minutes on Google to find relevant documentation on AUS web sites. The thing is, you have to follow the money. Governments are like the cosa nostra, even if they aren't involved directly in the business, they still like to get their cut. Your government has made an offer that the cruise lines can't refuse.

Either these employees don't have health insurance, or that cost isn't in this number.

I'm reasonably confident that basic, and advanced medical care is available to the crew on board ships. Sometimes I think we use the word "insurance", which to me covers unforeseen and unpredictable events, in place of "subsidized", which is more appropriate since it implies that someone else is picking up the tab - either voluntarily, or involuntarily through confiscation of wages.

 

The concept of a living wage is another one of those poorly defined and easily misinterpreted descriptions. To some it might mean basic living space, a loaf of bread, a jug of milk, and a jar of peanut butter. To others, a living wage implies being able to own a home, have a TV with cable, a computer with broadband internet coverage, and two cars. Until you can define what "living" is, you can't begin discuss the finer points.

actually the CDC is normally pretty good about investigating before deciding. There is a problem with some overseas suppliers(mainly in China) but I am not sure what they do.

Fair enough, I may have used a bad example, thanks for the info.

 

Cuba is a whole 'nother topic with a tragic history and unfortunate consequences.

Food illness on board ships has been a big problem and this is one way to make it safer(in their view not mine)

Sometimes the regs come before the investigation and analysis. I think a lot of people blamed food quality, and not hygiene, for norovirus outbreaks when they started to become headline news. The CDC thing sounds like a knee-jerk reaction, done to give the appearance of being proactive but in reality does little or nothing to address the root cause of the problem.

 

Something I'm sure you know, but didn't state.

Early disembarkations are routinely done, except for US-based cruises where there are laws preventing it. Typically you have to request early disembarkation ahead of time, but it's not a big deal. A friend of ours left a cruise early due to work and it was very easily handled. As long as there are no local laws preventing it, the cruise line shouldn't have a problem with you leaving a day or two early.

The ship will dock near the harbor entrance, at Dallas Road and Niagara Street. I think you can walk, but be sure to note the fact that the stop in Victoria is rather short.

It's little more than a small selection of sandwiches. Some ships allow you to order pizza to your cabin for a small additional charge. The pizza is just slightly larger than "personal size".

What does the vent sound like? Does it sound like a large fan? I like to sleep to a fan noise.

 

Can someone describe the noise.

 

Thanks

That's it exactly, a large blower producing white noise.

So...the ship stays put and the islands change?????? I thought that's what happened anyway! you get on the ship....and everything ELSE moves....

 

Actually this is EXACTLY what happens. The math is a little complex so I'll leave it as an exercise, but if you do it right you'll also be able to prove that the shortest distance between any two points is a straight line in the opposite direction.

You can argue that my numbers may be off but there's no way dinner and dancing will come even close to $500 p/p. Not if you expect anyone to show up.

I think your estimate is on the low side but it makes the point, the cost is likely to be prohibitive to many. I think the OP is looking at something more like about $800 pp - many will need to book hotels, flights, board pets, etc.

 

Now if there is enough interest, they could probably swing a group deal. I strongly suggest using a good cruise agent who can handle groups. There will be cancellations, re-bookings, people wanting to join at the last minute. Pay someone to deal with the headaches.

What it is is an exhaust vent for the A/C system. It blows constantly. It's like the noise from the wake, it's always there and you get used to it very quickly because it's white noise, but people should be aware. We were in that exact cabin on CB.

 

I don't think the vent or the beams are a huge issue, but if I had to choose one over the other I'd take the beam.

Some of the PS suites are next to an A/C exhaust that makes noise. We've booked D736 on CB for next fall and have stayed in C749. I'd rather have the beam, which really isn't in the way, than the noise of that exhaust vent.

There aren't a lot of perks with minisuites other than those you have listed. You have to book a full suite category to get the goodies on Princess if you don't have Elite (15 completed cruises) status.

Thanks for posting your review. :)

 

cpt-cruisenut, my little secret is to go down to the future cruise salesperson and grab a brochure that has the Grand Princess deck plans in the back. That will give your relatives a full plan view of the various decks, and is much better than the silly little profile map you'll find in your cabin.

We travel for the same reason someone stated previously, tomorrow isn't guaranteed. We've got one bunch in power who wants to march us off to war, and the another bunch trying to take power whose promises to tax us into prosperity will probably leave us without the means to travel. At least we'll be able to look at our photos and say, "Remember when..."

I think it's fun to go early and meet some of the people you will be sharing a ship with for a week or two. Be aware that you might not be able to drop off you luggage if you go too early, but as soon as they are able someone will come around and collect your bags. Usually (but not always) boarding starts between 11:30 and noon.

Did Soft Steve get stuck in the Golden Shower again?