pingpong1

Please note the correct spelling of her name...It is often incorrectly cited... "JTEEGEN@RSSC.COM" JENNEFER TEEGEN

And mine could play with yours! 😸

"RW goobers"? Definition please?

Hi Suzi - I don't mean to keep "flogging this horse" but....Here I go again. Won't it certainly be greatly more than just a simple case of "inconvenience" if any passenger happens to test "Positive" (rather than the expected "negative") and is denied overseas boarding? Especially after having flown to Japan, spending a few days there pre-cruise, and then quite unexpectedly, "popping positive" at the last-minute on a Covid test right before boarding the ship? And especially after everyone initially thought there would be no testing requirment, and after they all had "thought" they were being extra super-duper careful and "doing all the right things"...by washing hands, avoiding crowds, faithfully wearing a mask everywhere, etc., etc. upon leaving home...And then even after all of that... STILL testing "positive" right before boarding the ship? And then having to quickly arrange/pay for their own quarantining overseas and arranging for their own transportation back home, after a week or so spent in a Japanese quarantine setting? That is certainly far more than just a simple "testing inconvenience". The "defenders" of this late-imposed condition seem to all simply assume that they'll take this test....get a "negative" result, and happily board the ship on embarkation day. But how many people might (surprisingly to them) get a "positive" test result instead? Whether or not anyone happens to have an extremely comprehensive travel insurance, the policies may or may not cover a situation like this? Will the insurance company consider it to have been a "foreseen" (and therefore, uninsurable) event? "Portolan's" and my main point is that this new, late, and significant additional condition for sailing "sprung up" long after final payments were made. Was I affected? "No". But all of us could very well be affected on a future booked cruise! Regardless of whether it was the Japanese government (which cannot yet be documented) or the cruise company's mandate (Regent), it was added at the last moment and none of the booked passengers had a fair or reasonable opportunity to know about it, assess the risk in advance, or make their own reasonable best judgements (about the additional risk of being denied boarding) before having to make their final payments. They had no time to even look for an insurance policy that would take into account this significant new, last minute, and previously unknown added "risk". I just can't understand why this is so difficult for some to understand our point of view, or to at least acknowledge the possible validity of it? Yes, the whole cruising experience comes with some unforeseen circumstances (mechanical breakdown, missing ports due to bad weather, etc.) which are basically uninsurable, and which all of us reasonably take into account. But this is different than that. This is a "significantly changed condition" (a new last minute testing requirement in a foreign country just prior to boarding) and that was imposed long after final payment was made. In past recent years, we all Knew about dock-side testing and "negative" result requirements PRIOR to final payments. In this case, would-be passengers have had no opportunity to asses this "new boarding condition" before having had to make final payments. And if Regent were to even "acknowledge this" as a "significant change", it could possibly make them somewhat liable to offer some form of compensation to those "last minute" passengers who were denied boarding because of a last minute "positive" test result. The Regent lawyers would avoid this at all cost - literally! I'll try to make this my last post on the subject (most likely to everyone's overwhelming joy). Regards to All.

Yes, you are quite right! And that was one of the primary reasons why we cancelled an upcoming May Navigator sailing prior to final payment and "the jury is still out" for us with respect to an upcoming booked Splendor cruise this November, with a final payment date in July. I guess we just don't have the same "fire in the belly" for cruising that many others do. Best Regards.

No Susan, we are not directly affected by THIS particular cruise, but we very well could be (along with other future cruisers) for our/their next/upcoming cruises....For us, it's Barcelona to Miami in November. And then what? I (and others) could very well want to cancel future cruises due to new and burdensome/unknown (in our judgements) additional requirements that may be imposed AFTER we've made final payments for those cruises...and AFTER we gave "final agreement" to the cruise contract/s by sending in our final payments. Normally, contracts between two willing and informed parties are based upon both parties knowing and fully understanding and agreeing to ALL conditions that are/were in force at the time the contract is/was consummated/finalized. In these cases, the contracts would be agreed to by me (or others) making our final payments to Regent and by Regent acknowledging receipt of those final payments. I would guess that business contracts in GB are the same as they are in the U.S. But maybe not? In this case however, and as it applies to this particular itinerary in Japan, "conditions" of the cruise were (fairly significantly) changed after final payment was made/received. For many of us (and the actual affected cruisers for this particular itinerary), we/they might not have necessarily agreed to having to undergo a final (and subsequently/hopefully "negative") covid test result within 36 hours of boarding (when making their final payments) before being allowed to board this cruise, and particularly after spending many Dollars/Pounds and time required for them to fly to Japan from either GB or the U.S., or anywhere else. Insurance coverage/policies vary widely, and some of us even "self-insure", based upon conditions that were reasonably "known" by everyone at the time of booking and certainly by the time that final payment was due.. My point here is that the "insurable events" changed after final payments were made by the passengers to Regent. Not either the passengers' or Regent's fault...but who has the "deeper pockets" here? Best Regards.

And so now (referring back to my original posts #3 and #16), these new/additional/administrative & testing requirements (hassles and concerns) have "popped up" AFTER everyone's final payment was made. Quite possibly, more than a few of those passengers would not have booked the cruise in the first place if they had known beforehand that they would be having to deal with this rather significant and new hurdle to deal with. Some might possibly have selected a different itinerary altogether, or perhaps just held off on cruising for a while longer. Now, they're pretty much "locked in" (financially), whether they like it or not! 🙄

You're not required to have them do anything for you if you don't want them to. They will respond accordingly and individually to your own requests and desires. Different cruisers will have different preferences and their respective butlers will gladly accommodate all those individual wishes. The less time they have to spend with one set of suite guests, will give them more time to fulfill other guest requirements. They all work very hard and don't have too many free moments in their day.

Sounds like a "Blast"!

Hate to pop the balloon but...We had the first two Pfizer vaccines plus 2 boosters before boarding our Panama Canal cruise and still tested positive on Mariner Panama Canal cruise in Jan '22..

Hi Marc - Yes, I "sort of did" as I used my own circumstance to come up with those cost comparisons (the "past" average nightly costs for me - compared to what the future published listed fares would be). For all of our own past Regent cruising we've always declined Regent's air, taken the credit, and booked/paid for our own air separately - either with cash or with FF miles; both for domestic and overseas flights. We always fly F/C in the U.S. and B/C overseas. It seems like the Regent fares are really "heading north". 🤪 Have you found the same thing to be true or am I just becoming unnecessarily alarmed?

In the not-too-distant-past, a quick "back of the envelope" price estimate (in the U.S. market) for an "average" Regent cruise to Northern Europe or the Mediterranean, was to estimate paying about $1K per person/per night, and even a bit less. That estimate is now too low. I just did a quick check a moment ago of Regent's latest "Upgrade Your Horizon" offer for this summer in northern Europe on Splendor and Voyager. This is the promotional where Regent is offering a "free" 2-level suite upgrade, reduced deposits, and $1,000 in OBC's. This offer also presumably applies to specific itineraries that are not yet sold out (even this close to the sailing dates). There are 5 northern Europe itineraries listed for this promotion. For the "cheapest/starting fares" (2 Voyager cruises) are $1,200 and $1,260 PP/PN. For the 3 Splendor cruises, the "starting fares" are $1,300, $1,500, and $1,638 PP/PN. Perhaps if we look carefully, we might still find some selected $1K (or slightly less) PP/PN itineraries for Alaska, NE/Can, and the Caribbean. But those are undoubtedly going to go up in price as well, in the future. Along with prices creeping up, it's not too much of a stretch to anticipate a subtle (but noticeable to longer-time customers) declines in once-offered amenities, as well (llike unlimited king crab-legs and top-shelf "included" liquor brands no longer offered/stocked, etc.). It's bound to happen, I think. It's a simple matter of business economics. Something has to "give" somewhere as Regent's operating costs continue to increase. Regards.

If their booking/occupancy numbers are so great at the moment, I'm wondering why they are offering "free" 2-level suite upgrade incentives and lots of OBCs for the remainder of many '23 itineraries?

Hi Mark - The "story" is that there has been a moratorium on crab fishing over the past few years. That is actually true. But I can still buy Alaskan king crab legs at our local Costco. Just not in the quantity that Regent would need! And the main problem is that they're now triple the cost of a few years ago. As much as $100+ per pound! So, I guess the Regent accountants in Miami just can't "handle" that kind of overhead cost at the moment! Fingers crossed for the future! Best Regards.

I've taken a few cruises where I didn't even leave the ship while in port. I just stayed onboard and enjoyed "having the ship to myself" for the day. Regards.

What a great idea! I might just borrow that idea, myself. Thanks!

Looks fantastic. Wish I was there!

"dd", Thanks for the confirmation. Although it could be argued that many of us "have no dog in this fight" (since we're not booked on this particular cruise), it now appears that this could actually happen to any of us on a future/upcoming booked cruise, if this is a "new Regent practice" (remember that in the past, Regent gave already-booked/paid passengers the option of "backing out" on short notice, with no financial penalty, if emerging/last minute Covid protocols/conditions made their own risk-analysis feel "uneasy" about cruising). For this cruise however, it now seems that a "new and last-minute" Regent-imposed Covid self-testing requirement is being levied on passengers, and is required to be arranged/performed (by themselves - the passengers) within just 3 days of embarkation...and in this case, for a cruise with a foreign embarkation port that has taken most people many hours to get to. The required testing (with a "negative test result") has to take place once the passengers are actually in the foreign country - Japan, which for most all travelers has taken them at least 24 hours to get too, counting an overnight hotel stay! And I think most-importantly (and the I guess the "Crux of my Beef")...Is having this completely "new and significant added requirement" imposed/levied on each customer AFTER their final payment was collected by Regent. I generally agree with others who might say as a general statement..."everyone knew what the conditions were before they booked the cruise, and each customer presumably made their own individual risk assessments accordingly". But all those risk assessments were made based upon "the conditions" that were known before their final payments were made. "But this is not that"! I would argue (perhaps wrongly in some peoples' view) that in the case of this cruise (and perhaps other future cruises that could affect all of us) significant new and additional changes/conditions/testing & boarding protocols were suddenly put into place with barely a month left before the cruise actually commences. These booked passengers are now having to "scramble" (with no real financial choice or alternative option available to them) to meet these new last minute health-related boarding requirements. Requirements and risks assessments they may very well NOT have accepted or agreed to when they first booked, and particularly not when their final payments were due. Now, they are all having to accept and meet these terms, whether they like it or not" (or accept a huge personal financial "hit" if they now cancel on their own). What "fun and pleasure" (sarc) that's going to be for them all, to be planning, packing, and travelling to Japan with the cloud/possibility of a "positive test result" on embarkation day hanging over their heads! I do not envy them in the least, at this point. Regards to all.

Yup...."Easie-Peasie", as long as you test "negative"... And what happens if you don't?

"Papa" - I can actually "see" (and agree) with both sides of this discussion. I know what the contract says and comes with the implicit/actual caveat of "conditions beyond Regent's control". I think what "Lonedaddy" (and others) might be saying here is that (they - the affected passengers feel) that the missed ports and substantially changed cruise itinerary was not brought about by conditions or circumstances "beyond Regent's control". They see to think and say that Regent (either purposely or inadvertently) did not meet the (foreseeable/published/promulgated) hull cleaning requirements/regime that was imposed by New Zealand's government. And if I understand things correctly, this impacted more than just one Regent itinerary. So "their belief" is that if the major cause of the disruption was primarily caused by Regent's own "non-compliance" with specific, published, and previously known New Zealand environmental requirements (and not just a random storm or an unexpected mechanical failure), then Regent might owe the affected passengers a bit more than what they're currently offering. I'm in no position myself to judge whether Regent's offer was "enough/adequate/over-the-top/or subject to some future legal adjudication". But Regent's future business is completely dependent on public relations and having a large enough following of "returning" and future customers. I guess Regent will have to judge what the cost/benefits will be to the proper way of "handling" this. It seems that at least for now, they've made that decision. Best Regards.

Scott, exactly! And that was the main point in my own earlier post (#3). Is this not a "newly added hurdle" that was imposed by Regent (not by the embarking country - Japan) since/after you first booked the cruise AND AFTER you were required to make your final payment? Perhaps...perhaps there are more than just a few folks who would NOT have booked this cruise at all (or other cruises), had they known (in advance) about this recently added requirement "before" they put down a first deposit, and certainly before having to make their final payments? Now, they will be keeping their "fingers crossed", as they leave home and fly across the water to Japan; even after having presumably received a "Negative" covid test result (on their own) before leaving home? No one has any "certainty" of not "testing positive" within 3 days of this embarkation. And in this particular case, that would be after flying transcontinental across the Pacific to reach Japan for boarding, and perhaps spending a few days in Japan (i.e., airplanes, hotels, restaurants, sight-seeing on their own) before embarkation. I can attest from my own most recent personal cruise experience that EVEN AFTER wearing masks in all required venues on a previous Regent cruise (Mariner Panama Canal in Dec '21), after DW and I both tested "negative" at home (Phoenix) before leaving for the embarkations port (Miami), after having tested "negative" on cruise day at the cruise terminal before being allowed to board, AND after having boarded with all the original series of vaccinations plus 2 extra boosters before boarding (DW and I have since had 2 more boosters since that cruise)...We STILL wound up testing "positive" on that cruise (after a mandatory testing imposed on everyone on the ship AFTER it was already in the midst- final days of the cruise) and we wound up being quarantined (fortunately for only the last 24-hours of the cruise before disembarking in San Francisco). And neither of us had any symptoms before or after that "positive" test onboard! After disembarking, we rented a car and drove from San Francisco back home to Phoenix. I hope this fate (a "positive" Covid test) doesn't befall anyone on your upcoming Explorer cruise (after they arrive in Japan, and either before or after boarding the cruise). No one should falsely think that "taking all the requisite precautions", having the vaccinations with boosters, and wearing masks whenever prudent, is going to "guarantee" that they are absolutely not going to wind up with a "positive" Covid test, after first leaving their homes and heading to Tokyo... either immediately before boarding the ship, or while on the cruise. Our own past experience has already caused us to (regrettably) cancel an upcoming (previously booked) Navigator cruise in May '23 (prior to final payment), and we're carefully "watching" world health conditions before final payment is due for our booked Splendor TA cruise departing Barcelona to Miami in Nov '23. We are NOT afraid or concerned about "getting Covid", itself. We're afraid of how "official-dom" will handle it (and us) outside of our own country, where we loose control of making decisions for ourselves and loose the civil "protections" afforded by our own country. Of course, we can't really make a full and accurate "risk assessment" of the situation (our Splendor TA) before the "final payment date" in July, now that Regent has shown us (by your own and others experience) that Regent can/will "change the rules" AFTER they have received everyone's final payment. 😟 Best Regards to all.

Or...If you're involuntarily quarantined in your stateroom for a week or two, you'll have a much more spacious balcony to while away the hours on!! 😜

Hi Scott (and others) - I have a "general question" about the timing of all this. Are we, as upcoming Regent passengers (ourselves included), still in a position (after over two years since initial "covid stuff" first emerged) of not actually knowing what the "final Covid rules" are for any particular cruise/itinerary BEFORE the final payment period has passed for that cruise? Does this mean that we (all of us) have to hand over a final non-refundable payment for a future booked cruise and then afterwards, find out that some "new" and previously unexpected/unknowable covid-related "hoop" has to be jumped through (like having to produce a pre-boarding "negative" covid test within 3 days of embarkation), that didn't exist when the cruise was first booked and subsequently, after the final non-refundable payment has been made? I hope I'm not re-plowing a previously well over-plowed field (or re-killing an already quite dead horse) by asking this question of "the group". De we need a lawyer to explain Regent's T&C "fine print" us? I realize that one can buy insurance in advance to cover costs if one becomes (actually) "ill" prior to boarding or while on a cruise. But no one has any ability to predict with any accuracy whether you might test "positive" on some random antigen test that's administered 4-5 months in the future (even AFTER you have already taken every/all initial vaccines and all subsequent "boosters). And even testing "positive" on such a test within 3 days of boarding certainly doesn't mean that one is actually "sick" in the traditional sense of health insurance. Regards to all.

Hey "Irish"!...And don't forget the ever popular...."Vibration issues on Navigator", "Quality of complimentary wines served", and "Poor internet connectivity"!! 🤪 Best Regards

Our first Splendor cruise will be in November, so we're looking forward to yours and Mudhen's reports and pictures! Best Regards.