Change in itinerary........

[KIWP]

I am amazed with the comments I see, and would expect them from novice cruisers. However many of you are seasoned cruisers and overall travelers. You should know that the organizer has the right (also documented in the Contract of Carriage) to make changes if/when necessary.

 

My husband and I were on Nautica in December '08 during the Pirate attack. Overall the situation was not as described in the press, but we would prefer not to have a similar experience since we will be on Nautica for the full 65 days on the upcoming Africa itineraries.

 

Having been to Kenya and Tanzania I understand the disappointment of those who had their hearts set to visit these destinations, BUT be realistic and put the scenario into real perspective. Safety to crew and guests MUST COME FIRST!!!!

 

Oceania is doing the best possible under what I suspect are most difficult and unforeseen circumstances. The logistics of rearranging the itinerary are extremely challenging, as is the PR process in dealing with the clientele. Especially when reading the demonstration of sentiment shown on CC. I perceive the comments on CC as reminiscent of the mob scene in the old black and white Frankenstein movie.

 

 

CC should be used as a forum of sharing information not of venting frustrations and "egging on." All travel is an adventure. If you don't care to participate then don’t. Stop all the “roiling and fermentation” of the situation and contact Oceania directly to explore your options if the cruise is no longer to your taste. Venting on CC will not resolve anything. Don't come on board with the attitude that "you are owed something" and spoil the fun for the rest of us.

[frqttrvlr09]

At the risk of belaboring this exchange, some clarification is in order: those of us affected by the significantly changed itineraries to both Enchanted Africa and Safaris, Sands and Splendor are not unaware of Oceania's legal "right" to change its itineraries, including eliminating or adding ports and changing departure and arrival times, nor the rationale and legitimate reasons for doing so, at least for the Safaris, etc. one. Many of us were simply responding to posts about how it was handled, and so that others were aware of that fact. Some of us have in fact contacted Oceania management directly with our concerns and frustrations about how these were handled, communicated (and/or the lack thereof) and have either not received any response or received completely unsatisfactory ones, like the ones on this thread.

 

I have gained much valuable information from Cruise Critic, which I have used in planning my trips. I also have been fairly active in providing what I have been frequently told is useful information myself. At the same time, I believe it is entirely appropriate to share the negative types of experiences, particularly in direct response to queries on a thread on Cruise Critic so that existing or potential passengers can be not only aware of what can and does happen to booked itineraries (and other issues), but also, judge for themselves if they want to sail with a Line, or continue to sail with them, based on how a situation is handled. Quite a bit of "ranting" does go on on this and other sites, but much of it is informational, useful, and so long as it has a legitimate basis, justified and should be here. Thus my use of the term "Oceania Apologists". There is a hard core group of long time Oceania passengers that deem Oceania as doing no wrong, and defend its every move in one way or another. There are other views and circumstances that should be presented, and that is what some of us are doing.

 

So, I strongly disagree with the essentially "shut up or go elsewhere" suggestion.

[TKS]

Don't come on board with the attitude that "you are owed something" and spoil the fun for the rest of us.

 

 

And I might add, don't spoil your own fun. Don't let this difficulty up front sour you on your entire cruise and make you find other problems during the cruise that you would normally overlook if you hadn't already been disappointed once.

 

Remember the line from the old Irish Praryer "God grant us the ability to change what we can and to accept what we cannot." Even if you miss a couple ports you still are going to have an amazing cruise. I'm sure the crew on board, knowing the disappointment many passengers feel, will be going out of their way to make this a special experience for you, despite the changes. As Lyn said "make lemonade."

 

Good Luck! Kay

[KIWP]

I am not telling anyone to shut up, and I value constructively presented information which may be of assitance to anyone interested in cruising.

 

My objection is relative to the tone of some writers that they are owed something for the changes, and to what I interpret as "mob" behavior. It serves no purpose and does not resolve anything.

 

When dealing with a customer service situation is always most productive to take it to the one who is in a position of resolution. Positive discussion and other perspectives are helpful, bit some people (on other threads also) have taken attitudes to which I object. We have just booked our 31st Oceania cruise (also have many with other lines) and I am stating this fact only because overall we are quite pleased with the line. We have found that when dealing directly, and tactfully with the Management, much more has been accomplished than by "publicizing" any dissatisfaction.

 

I am not a doormat and will always stand for my beliefs. Fortunately we live in a society where we can express ourselves and have positive dialogue.

[Jancruz]

I'm going to blame my rapidly aging eyes, Jan-

I was thinking 2011 ((Blush))

 

I have sympathy for the OP

I can see where missing a series of ports can be hard to swallow

But who wouldn't rather be safe than sorry?

 

 

I am glad I am not alone in losing some of my faculties..

See you soon.

Jancruz1

[Paulchili]

Mura,

AFAIK, Americans cannot travel to Lybia (except on business and diplomatic passports). I don't think it's anything recent - it's been that way for quite a while.

We too wanted to visit Libya with a UK ship. (whose citizens are allowed in Lybia) but did not take that cruise for that reason.

Pirates,

This is not a new issue and Oceania has experienced it first hand. Why in the world did they then schedule a cruise to that area (only to be cancelled for what amounts to "old news")?

[Mura]

Actually, at the time you could. Visas had to be obtained at a Libyan consulate outside of the U.S., of course, but it was possible. Remember, this was in 2005. Oceania had two cruises scheduled to go there -- we were on the first one.

 

It wasn't the visa problem, however. It was Kaddafi being angry about something or other (I forget what it was now) and his sudden refusal to permit Americans to tour. Under the circumstances, Oceania obviously changed the itinerary since the bulk of the passengers were traveling with U.S. passports.

 

Besides, if Oceania has two itineraries going there we all assumed we could! I wouldn't have bought an airline ticket going there but lots of us thought we'd be able to visit there. The two cruises sold out very quickly. (Certainly when I researched the visa issue no one said it's impossible, just that we'd have to use a consulate in Canada or Europe.)

[Paulchili]

Actually, at the time you could. Visas had to be obtained at a Libyan consulate outside of the U.S., of course, but it was possible. Remember, this was in 2005. Oceania had two cruises scheduled to go there -- we were on the first one.

 

It wasn't the visa problem, however.)

 

I am surprised to hear that you could get a visa (even if issued in Canada).

After all, it still would be issued into a US passport and the US citizenship was problem AFAIK: or was it like into Cuba via Canada?

Maybe some day....

[Mura]

I'm sorry I don't recall all the details. Perhaps at the time the cruise was created and we all booked the cruise relations were fairly friendly between the countries even if we didn't have a diplomatic relationship with Libya. And then the s*** hit the fan. I DO recall that there were a number of ships sailing in the month or so before ours that were caught in the crossfire -- they'd thought their American passengers would be able to leave the ship and at the last minute they could not.

 

There were a lot of experienced travelers booked on our cruise who were caught up in this mess ... and as I've said earlier, many who were not (or at least were not following the various message boards regarding the cruise).

 

Still, we had a wonderful cruise -- aside from the fact that I blew out my knee in Barcelona the day before we boarded the ship. We had a wonderful visit in Tunisia (and according to our guide they don't like the Libyans any more than we do because even they would get harassed when crossing the border). They added Malta and Alicante (Spain) which were new to us, and also Tangier which we'd visited before. So we were satisfied even though the real reason we'd booked was unattainable. I could have done without a return to Casablanca but that had always been on the itinerary ...

[Benita]

We were on a later "Libya that wasn't" cruise. Oceania notified us a couple of months before the cruise that Libya was out and they substituted Sicily, Rome, Sorrento, and Amalfi for the ports in Libya. They gave us the option of canceling with a full refund or taking the cruise with the new itinerary. We went and although none of these ports were new to us, still had a great time. As long as we don't hit a hurricane (or an iceberg), or get norovirus, a cruise is great no matter where it goes.

[Mura]

We were on a later "Libya that wasn't" cruise. Oceania notified us a couple of months before the cruise that Libya was out and they substituted Sicily, Rome, Sorrento, and Amalfi for the ports in Libya. They gave us the option of canceling with a full refund or taking the cruise with the new itinerary. We went and although none of these ports were new to us, still had a great time. As long as we don't hit a hurricane (or an iceberg), or get norovirus, a cruise is great no matter where it goes.

 

 

Benita, I'm curious ...

 

Was your cruise back in late 2005 or more recently? I seem to recall that Oceania was planning on a Libya cruise a year or so ago and as far as I know that one didn't happen either.

 

Your substitutions were very different from ours! I rather think I'd have preferred yours since we haven't cruised "down there" although we certainly were not unhappy with the substitutions we did have.

 

We were on a Barcelona-Lisbon itinerary so it's understandable that they were looking for Med ports and not Sicily, etc.

 

Mura

[frqttrvlr09]

KWIP and interested others: I suggest you go over to the Roll Call for Nautica and the thread for the cruise "Cape Town to Singapore" to read an excellent letter written to DIRECTLY to FDR and other senior management of Prestige Holdings and Oceania Cruises by A1468 which was posted today in a PDF file. It is not only extremely well written, it will give you the same if more more detailed description of the problems we passengers have encountered concerning the itinerary changes for this cruise, and those problems are on going. I too have sent DIRECT communications to Oceania (so I do not need lectures or advice from anyone about that. As a former executive/general counsel for a large corporation, I have some experience in these types of matters). Its web site for this cruise has not been accessible for several days, so the revised itinerary is still not posted, nor are the "new" shore excursions though I know they exist. Oceania continues to not be straightforward and advise of all of the changes to the itinerary nor the reasons therefor and it continues to affect us passengers and our planned shore excursions, for example.

 

That said, I do not plan to let this situation affect my enjoyment of the actual cruise itself; I will be on the ship for the cruise preceeding this one (which had ITS itinerary changed as well in the same type of poorly handled last minute way, as I also mentioned previously) and the cruise following it. 2 1/2 months on board the same ship is too long to be upset. It will affect my consideration of Oceania or any line owned by Prestige Holdings for future cruises and my recommendation of it to others.

 

Enough said.

[2kiwis]

I will be on the ship for the cruise preceeding this one (which had ITS itinerary changed as well in the same type of poorly handled last minute way, as I also mentioned previously) and the cruise following it. 2 1/2 months on board the same ship is too long to be upset. It will affect my consideration of Oceania or any line owned by Prestige Holdings for future cruises and my recommendation of it to others.

 

We were on Nautica in 2008 when it met the "pirates" and at no time felt in any danger. They were in 4 little speed boats racing around the ship and yes they had guns, and a couple were fired in the air, but there was no way they could have boarded. The ship had sonic guns at the ready (which were not used) and had high pressure water pouring down its sides. We had been told what to do by the Captain and it was all very calm. We stood and cheered as Nautica took off very quickly and "the pirates" behind, going around in circles.

 

We booked this trip and were not particularly worried about pirates, and if this is the reason why the ports have been changed then it is disappointing because Oceania knows first hand what it is all about.

 

What is more annoying is, regardless why the changes have been made, the decision to change the itinerary was left until AFTER the deadline for final payment. This means we cannot show our displeasure by canceling the cruise - they win-we lose. = Their world - Their way!

 

If that was not bad enough, we find that Oceania has just cut 4 hours off Madagascar - what are they thinking ! If they felt the need to cancel the other ports, why not give us more time in places like Madagascar to make up for it. We are not interested in more beaches, we wanted to see cultural diversity.

 

Oceania is not doing it's loyal customers any favours.

[LHT28]

I am not clear on how many ports they cancelled?

 

I thought it was 2 or 3 but someone can correct me

[JimandStan]

I am not clear on how many ports they cancelled?

 

I thought it was 2 or 3 but someone can correct me

 

The trouble is in East Africa (election unrest), so Dar El Salaam, Zanzibar and Mombasa were cancelled. They were replaced with Pointe DeGalets on the island of Réunion, Port Louis on the island of Mauritius and La Digue, which is one of the larger Seychelles.

 

The "new" ports bring the ship East of Madagasgar, and she now begins her treck across the Indian Ocean from a slightly more Southern position.

[Benita]

Benita, I'm curious ...

 

Was your cruise back in late 2005 or more recently? I seem to recall that Oceania was planning on a Libya cruise a year or so ago and as far as I know that one didn't happen either.

 

Your substitutions were very different from ours! I rather think I'd have preferred yours since we haven't cruised "down there" although we certainly were not unhappy with the substitutions we did have.

 

We were on a Barcelona-Lisbon itinerary so it's understandable that they were looking for Med ports and not Sicily, etc.

 

Mura

 

Mura - our cruise was in May, 2006. It was the first Libya cruise scheduled after the one with all the last minute changes. Oceania decided a few months in advance that Libya was not going to be feasible, which is when they offered us the new itinerary. It was still Barcelona to Lisbon and the ports kept were Malta, Tunis, Casablanca, Gibralter, and Lisbon. They gave the four ports in Italy instead of the three in Libya and pretty much eliminated a day or two at sea. Of course we were disappointed in missing Libya, but opted to take the new itinerary and were very glad we did. Arte Johnson (of Laugh-In fame) was a fellow passenger and gave a couple of lectures.

[Mura]

I had forgotten that Libya was scheduled again so soon after our abortive trip. It seems to me Libya was scheduled again a year or two ago but I don't think that happened either. At least I never heard yea or nay.

 

I'd have loved to have heard Arte Johnson's lectures!

 

Mura

[LHT28]

The trouble is in East Africa (election unrest), so Dar El Salaam, Zanzibar and Mombasa were cancelled.

Thanks Jim

That is what I thought I saw before

 

Lyn

[Benita]

I had forgotten that Libya was scheduled again so soon after our abortive trip. It seems to me Libya was scheduled again a year or two ago but I don't think that happened either. At least I never heard yea or nay.

 

I'd have loved to have heard Arte Johnson's lectures!

 

Mura

 

When Arte Johnson used to say "Wanna Walnetto?" I thought it was his way of asking for sex. When I met him on the Insignia, I told him that and he laughed and said it was an inexpensive candy.

[Druke I]

Yes, there were Walnettos, and Choclettos. About ten indivually wrapped soft chewy candies in each package. Not sure, but think they were produced by Mars Candy Co.

 

I much prefered the Choclettos.

[Druke I]

Well, I googled Walnettos, and apparently they are still made. And it is Chocolettos - not Choclettos.

 

I was wrong about Mars Candy - it was Peter Paul Candies, makers of Mounds and Almond Joy, and later bought by Cadbury's.

 

Talk about thread drift - I'm sorry.

[A Knitter]

Well, I googled Walnettos, and apparently they are still made. And it is Chocolettos - not Choclettos.

 

I was wrong about Mars Candy - it was Peter Paul Candies, makers of Mounds and Almond Joy, and later bought by Cadbury's.

 

Talk about thread drift - I'm sorry.

 

You are forgiven if you bring some of both for our cruise 11/11:D

[frqttrvlr09]

Here is what Oceania belatedly sent to its passengers on October 4, 2010 about the changes it had made to the December 11 departure Cape Town to Singapore itinerary:

 

"...Due to the recent security concerns in regards to the Mozambique Channel and the southern edges of the Somali Horn, we are amending the course of the voyage in an abundance of caution." This would imply sea activity, not land-based election activity. "Our calls in Dar El Salaam, Zanzibar and Mombasa have been cancelled and replaced with Pointe De Galets, Port Louis and La Digue" , which are on the islands of Reunion, Mauritius, and in the Seychelles, respectively, where the ship was/is already going (to Mahe, for two days, and to Praslin, for 5 hours." The letter states there are no changes after La Digue. However, that is not true. What the letter failed to state, and only with a careful analysis of the revised itinerary, which contrary to what Oceania stated in its October 4 letter was not sent out on October 5 but rather, it was not received from Oceania until October 7, was that port arrival and departure times in OTHER ports had also been changed. The time in port in Nosy Be, Madagasgar has inexplicably been shortened from 10 to 6 hours (less of course the time it takes for the ship to clear customs, and the passengers to actually get off the ship), thus greatly impacting shore excursions, particularly of course those that have been arranged privately Some are non-refundable. The arrival time in Yangon, Myanmar is now two hours earlier, and departure 2 days later is also two hours earlier. Some of us have tours and/or plane flights to and from Bagan or Mandalay that are impacted.

 

Unlike Regent, which gave its passengers who were stranded in Machu Picchu fuil reimbursement of what we paid for that trip even though the stranding was due to a true force majeure event (although there were other problems with the trip that were not), to be used towards payment of a future cruise, Oceania is not endearing itself to even its most loyal passengers by not only this late date, arguably foreseeable cancellation; by delaying and stonewalling its passengers before formally announcing the revised itinerary; by being disingenuous in not timely or fully describing all of the changes to the itinerary; y belatedly releasing the detailed changed itinerary, while rumors, which turned out to be founded, of all of the above was leaking all over Cruise Critic and between passengers; it has also taken a hard line on these changes and sated it will "not entertain request for refunds, waivers of penalties or reimbursement for discretionary expenses such as private land arrangements" let alone provide some even minimal type of compensation for the severely reduced quality of the itinerary. Perhaps their attorneys are worried about it "setting precedent." That is an easy and unfounded excuse, and Regent's actions are a good example of a costly but very much appreciated "good passenger relations" move that will likely pay off for Regent, at least with many of these passengers, in the short and long run. Oceania's handling of this situation has been so poor in so many ways that unless it does something to repair this damage, I believe quite a few passengers will consider this cruise with Oceania their last.

[2kiwis]

Oceania's handling of this situation has been so poor in so many ways that unless it does something to repair this damage, I believe quite a few passengers will consider this cruise with Oceania their last.

 

 

Don't like your chances, and don't think Oceania Head Office really cares.

If they did they would have handled it completely differently.

 

All we can do now is enjoy the trip best we can and (we never thought we'd ever say this) take our custom elsewhere next time.

Looks our 10th trip with them will be our last.

Very very sad indeed, particularly as it is Head office, not the wonderful front line staff on board, who have let the company down so badly.

 

Cheers

[LHT28]

Unlike Regent, which gave its passengers who were stranded in Machu Picchu fuil reimbursement of what we paid for that trip even though the stranding was due to a true force majeure event (although there were other problems with the trip that were not), to be used towards payment of a future cruise,

I do not understand your comparison??

Totally different!

 

You are not stranded ....they did handle the notification of the changes badly but they cancelled 3 ports out of 18 & added some new ports.

You are still on the cruise just not some of the ports you wanted.

 

Maybe in hindsight they should have not offered those ports of call & maybe they will not offer them again

 

Things change, Country situations change

 

 

As a lawyer you of all people would have read the fine print & understood it ...maybe better than others

 

If the United States Department of State publishes a Public Announcement regarding a specific country or location included in the scheduled itinerary, We reserve the right to operate the Cruise or CruiseTour as scheduled or to change the itinerary, at Our discretion.

http://www.oceaniacruises.com/corporate/legal/ticketcontract.aspx

 

Sorry it is not the cruise you signed up for.

 

 

Lyn

Life is short enjoy it while you can