Wehwalt

There is a rather lengthy discussion on the NCL board that seems to be generating as much heat as light.

I got my platinum on the Noordam in July, which I finished with 702 nights. On our next cruise guest services got in touch to ask if I had gotten mine on my previous cruise, and I assured them that I had.

1 hour ago, Ray4Fun said:

No matter what is stated. Bad PR is not good for a company. If the story of Julie Lenkoff is true, then they have another incident to be discussed. Leaving a passenger in this situation? Lucky her? I cannot wait to hear the tough love discussion. NCL , do better. 

The HAL GWV last year left a passenger in hospital in Angola, who later died. At least this passenger was well enough to fly home. It is regrettably the nature of cruising that there are medical issues and sometimes the ship does not feel they can treat aboard.

2 hours ago, CGYCruisingFamily said:

Looking at your signature, I am guessing you are referring to what you usually receive on Princess for your doors, ordering, etc? If so, as others have said, HAL uses the traditional room card key, not the medallion.

 

If you see people referring to medallions, that is a loyalty item you get with a certain number of actual cruise days (this does not include bonus spending) - Bronze for 100 actual sailing days on HAL, 300 for silver, 500 for gold and I believe 700+ for platinum.

I think all Princess ships are Medallion class and have been for some time.

Platinum is 700. I got mine on the Noordam last summer. DW got her medallion too. I'm not sure I could put my hands on all four that I've been given.

I bought daffodil bulbs in Holland and England, they had certificates, I declared them, the customs officer didn't want to see them, they were still blooming as of the time I sold the house two years ago.

I believe there is a special price for the package on Grand Voyage segments of 50 or more days. That may be what is being described in post #21.

2 hours ago, lstone19 said:

 

I can only say good luck to the passengers then. There is nowhere close to the same amount of air capacity to Norfolk as to Baltimore. Norfolk handles less than 25% of the passengers BWI handles in a year and National and Dulles are also alternatives for getting to Baltimore. Norfolk handles only about 2 million departing passengers per year (a little over 5,000 per day).

Baltimore is an attractive cruise port despite being relatively far from open ocean because it is very drivable. If you are going to fly then for an hour or at most two more you can be in FLL and take a cheaper ship that leaves from a port much closer to the action.  Norfolk is less attractive not because of flight connections but because it is further from DC and other cities within a hour or so drive of the Baltimore cruise port. 

I would suspect that the cruise lines do not want to be in the business of busing people from Baltimore to Norfolk. I anticipate generous cancellation policies, but it won't be their job to bus passengers except for returning from the voyages that have already started. 

1 hour ago, Engineroom Snipe said:

Plausible rebuttal. Keep the thought process going.

 

Heck, Royal should pay us for our analysis.

 

I always hate far offsite parking. So much can happen to your car in eight to nine days.

 

Arriving at your car that has been vandalized or worst, stolen, is a real downer after a vacation.

Far off-site parking, such as at MetLife, is certainly not going to attract people to keep the cruise even though it's not in Baltimore anymore. The bags are going to be another issue. And I probably left my car in a Meadowlands parking lot overnight sometime in my New Jersey career, I would not have liked to do it if people could tell no one's coming back for the car for ten or twelve days ...

16 minutes ago, aborgman said:

 

The Francis Scott Key Bridge had a clearance of 185 feet.

The Skyway Bridge has a clearance of 180.5 feet.

 

Clearance wise - they're functionally identical.

Somewhere upthread it was mentioned that the Chesapeake Bay Bridge (U.S.-50), under which cruise vessels leaving Baltimore must pass before reaching the open sea, has clearance of 186 feet. There was some discussion that this might be replaced in the future, though. Today won't speed that up, I'd guess. First things first.

3 minutes ago, toad455 said:

 

 

Bayonne has three ships from May through September. 2 Royal and 1 Celebrity.

Agreed. The question is, is it worth putting an additional RCCI ship in there if it's going to be months or longer, say if it's going to be all summer, or is there somewhere else it could more profitably go? 

Major problem I see is that if they are both in Bayonne for any length of time, they're going to compete with each other. If RCCI felt it was worth having another ship there, they already would. 

But I would think immense resources are going to be devoted to getting a channel open to reopen the Port of Baltimore. Once it is, the problem goes away. 

There's space for at least five to dock at Manhattan at the same time, but I don't know if they have the facilities for four of them to turn around (customs, baggage, check-in, etc).

18 minutes ago, PC 462 said:

Like the Great Baltimore Fire of 1904, which resulted in the rebuilding of downtown with safer modern buildings, water, and sewer, this tragedy could result in the rebuilding of a safer bridge;  maybe even a higher bridge that would allow for larger modern cruise ships to access Baltimore.

You're still going to be limited by the clearance under the Chesapeake Bay Bridge (US 50) which I find to be 186 feet. That's going to rule out the newest ships.

3 minutes ago, Charles4515 said:

Most road work on 695, 95, and 495 is done at night in Maryland. 

Also 895. I used to drive quite often from DC area to NYC area in the wee hours and it was routine to have one tube of the tunnels closed.

Look, we can discuss all we want about people calling. Many people are not as adept with communication as we are and hearing there is a problem they are going to call the cruise line. That's just the way it is. I don't think any less of them for doing it. Possibly Royal can head off some of it by being proactive with communications.

7 minutes ago, Earthworm Jim said:

 

I don't know the percentages, but my guess is northeast ports such as Baltimore probably have a lot higher percentage of drivers than warm weather ports. If you're going to fly to your cruise, you'll probably fly to Florida, New Orleans, etc.and spend your whole cruise in the warmth. The main advantage of Baltimore in chilly seasons is if you can avoid flights by driving there.

One of the big attractions of Baltimore is that they have a nice big surface parking lot right by the cruise terminal. It's easy. I cruised out of there three times before I moved too far south, and each time I'm out and on I 95 in no time.

14 minutes ago, BND said:

People are calling Royal.  I knew this would happen.  Just be patient.  We all want to know how it affects our cruises, but give them a chance, geez.  

As you way, we knew it would happen. Also I have no doubt that onboard the Vision, people are seeking information where they can. It's human nature. People will ask until they have the information they desire. I don't fault them.

16 minutes ago, Charles4515 said:

Buses seem most likely if they debark at Bayonne because it would be direct but Amtrak could easily handle the people and baggage. They could also add extra trains. There is also Newark Airport. 

Yeah, I considered the airport but really you'll get to Baltimore quicker with a direct bus than with a bus to a plane (or a train) to a bus.

There are large numbers of buses in the NY/NJ area. I think the limiting factor would be the number of properly-licensed drivers.

11 minutes ago, Engineroom Snipe said:

 

Probably one of the most practical solutions presented. Shuttle buses from Bayonne to railway and Baltimore railway shuttle buses to the port where the cars are or to airports.

 

I think you have a winner.

I think more likely they'd just run the shuttle buses from Bayonne to Baltimore. Amtrak's already busy this time of year so you'd probably be asking hundreds of people to stand and control their baggage. Then cancel sailings until the dry dock and afterwards run the ship out of Florida for a few months until the channel's clear and Baltimore's OK with cruise ships coming back. 

Be even better if you can alter the Vision's schedule. Cancel the last two ports, re-enter the country at Fort Lauderdale, get all the people who are using the cruise line's air off there and anyone else who wants to. Assume everyone will get at least a partial refund. Sure, this is an expensive solution but there are no cheap solutions and someone's insurance is paying.

52 minutes ago, skandsea99 said:

I tried to edit my original post but failed.  I expect HAL may have to soften that policy if they want to attract younger patrons. Even to retirees who have seen the evolving dress codes in offices and at other functions, including at weddings and funerals by some attendees (yours truly NOT included)  the past number of years.

 

No problem anyone dressing up or folks embracing tradition to which they feel comfortable and in good taste.  I just think the dictation went a bit too strong.  I think I do dress well and probably would like to up it a bit and wear a jacket and tie on a dressy-suggested cruise night as I have the clothes and get little chance now. However... I'm not about to pay extra and/or lug  an extra suitcase or garment bag and worry about creasing etc. for a few hours parading in finery.

 

Folks should feel comfortable as long as they dress with reasonable decorum.  Especially from other posts in this thread that on other cruises they don't enforce codes  in the MDR like those that wear ball caps ( and that "fashion" change certainly does  irk me-not just on cruises!).

 

 

 

I would tend to agree. The line is increasingly getting out of the business of telling people what they should wear in order to eat in their accustomed places, and I don't think the sky will fall on account of it.

If the ship has docked and  they don't announce clearance but let tours off, the ship is still cleared and I don't see anything wrong with disembarking then even if not on a tour. I've never heard anyone say you can't. But from what I've seen usually tour departures are at least 15-30 minutes after the ship is expected to be cleared.

Thanks for the info. Do you know who the cruise staff are who are giving the activities such as the trivia games? It's always good to know if we will have friends aboard. That is, if we aren't going to wave at them leaving as we embark 🙂

33 minutes ago, jimdee3636 said:

I'm a retired lawyer. Regarding the legality of the cruise line's standard contract with passengers, it's what's called a "contract of adhesion," which basically means a contract in which the terms are dictated entirely by one party (in this example, the cruise line), with no right to negotiate by the other party (the passenger). In other words, take it or leave it. 

 

Contracts of adhesion are not inherently unenforceable, but in a disputed case they're examined closely by the court, and a judge is not necessarily going to rubber-stamp it just because the passenger "agreed" to it. If a judge believes the contract---or the action taken by the cruise line---was "unconscionable" or "misleading, unfair, or deceptive," the contract can be voided, and monetary damages can be awarded to the passenger.

 

As a practical matter, contract cases don't usually wind up in court unless a lot of money is at stake. But there are "class actions," where similarly-injured plaintiffs can band together, so there may be some hope for passengers financially injured by being involuntarily bumped.

 

Jim

Sure. But there's a waiver of class action in the cruise contract, and the Supreme Court upheld waivers of class action. AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, 563 U.S. 333 (2011). Also, this isn't a claim for death, injury or illness so there is an arbitration clause that would send the claim to individual arbitration. The Supreme Court ruled regarding forum selection clauses (i.e., you have to sue HAL in Seattle) in cruise contracts that they had a valid purpose, and from what I can see the Washington State courts have not tried to differ. In Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc. v. Shute, 499 U.S. 585 (1991) Justice Blackmun for a 7-2 majority of the Supreme Court wrote that "In this context, it would be entirely unreasonable for us to assume that respondents -- or any other cruise passenger -- would negotiate with petitioner the terms of a forum-selection clause in an ordinary commercial cruise ticket. Common sense dictates that a ticket of this kind will be a form contract the terms of which are not subject to negotiation, and that an individual purchasing the ticket will not have bargaining parity with the cruise line." 

So you'd probably have to take such a claim to arbitration that means no class action. 

Thanks for the daily program. Looking forward to hearing your impression of the activities you attend. We're in the on-deck circle!

1 hour ago, RedIguana said:

 

The judgment of the Captain would not come into play until embarkation day, and is pretty well stated that it is for reasons of health, safety, or the unsuitability of the passenger or passengers.

"Or lodging" is included to address land portions of a trip, such as are found on the Alaskan cruisetours, not staterooms. 

I am surprised the contract does not state they can change your state room at their discretion, and I am pretty sure I have seen that in past contracts on other lines. Although I'm not sure what recourse one would have other than complaining.

Could be you are right. But I suspect a court will interpret "any reason" to mean, "any reason". The rest of it does not restrict the discretion of the cruise line. They would not be doing this unless they were comfortable that it is within their power. And if they find it is not, no doubt there will be a change to the terms and conditions.

I agree it would be difficult to maintain a court action. It might, for one thing, be difficult to prove damages. It would be interesting to see such an action attempted.