Holland America Reduces Bring-On Wine Allowance

[LuckyLoon]

I'm not happy about the new wine policy. I previously did bring on a half case of wine for 30 day cruises, though last cruise I only brought one bottle. It was just easier to buy wine by the glass, especially since my DH doesn't much care for wine. Big Port lover though.

 

I agree that not being allowed to bring on wine from wine country stops is just not right. It's part of the immersion in the local culture. I wonder how tightly they will follow this on stops.

[LindaM]

I'm not happy about the new wine policy. I previously did bring on a half case of wine for 30 day cruises, though last cruise I only brought one bottle. It was just easier to buy wine by the glass, especially since my DH doesn't much care for wine. Big Port lover though.

 

I agree that not being allowed to bring on wine from wine country stops is just not right. It's part of the immersion in the local culture. I wonder how tightly they will follow this on stops.

 

A few posts back, someone wrote a HAL employee said they are not looking into changing the 1 bottle pp rule. That is another reason we cannot trust any person we get on the phone to know what is going on. The hotel manager on our last cruise stated explicitly that HAL is still working on the rule. And, that it most likely would change. I think I would trust someone who holds that position more than someone in a clerical postion in Seattle.

[taxmantoo]

A few posts back, someone wrote a HAL employee said they are not looking into changing the 1 bottle pp rule. That is another reason we cannot trust any person we get on the phone to know what is going on. The hotel manager on our last cruise stated explicitly that HAL is still working on the rule. And, that it most likely would change. I think I would trust someone who holds that position more than someone in a clerical postion in Seattle.

 

I am not saying it happens on a regular basis but it certainly would not be the first time a Hotel Manager/Cruise Director/steward/ etc ... says whatever the guest wants to hear to just get rid of the question. :rolleyes:

[mamaofami]

Personally, I can deal with the new wine policy, but not with the loss of escargot. That would make me very very unhappy. I'd then need the wine to cheer me up.:eek:

[JoeMGiants]

Hello;

A split of Champagne is 187.5 ML; 4 splits equals one 750 ML bottle of Champagne.

Are we allowed to bring on board 4 splits each?

Thanks,

Joe

[RuthC]

Hello;

A split of Champagne is 187.5 ML; 4 splits equals one 750 ML bottle of Champagne.

Are we allowed to bring on board 4 splits each?

Thanks,

Joe

Not the way I read the policy, we're not. :( Too bad, too, as I like my little "single serving" bottles. ;)

The policy clearly states "one bottle". Four mini bottles is still four bottles.

[Host Walt]

So if that's the case, I suppose I could bring aboard a jeroboam bottle (3.0 Litres or 4 regular 750 ml bottles), or even a Nebuchadnezzar (15 litres or equivalent of 20 regular 750 ml bottles). They each meet the definition of "one bottle." (For the various sizes of wine bottles, check this out: Bottle size definitions.)

To me the limitation of "one bottle" without specifying what constitutes a "bottle" is sillier than the policy itself.

 

The only problem I see is that Total Wine doesn'r stock Nebuchadnezzar sizes. I don't even think they carry anything larger than a jeroboam, and only that for high end champagnes.

 

Oh, and one more problem. You'll need a forklift to move a Nebuchadnezzar size of anything (it weighs about 38 kilograms), and pouring a 5 oz serving from one of those bottles can be rather tricky. And how wouls one decant a Nebuchadnezzar of a nice Bordeaux or a Silver Oak Cabernet?

 

Let's hope that saner heads prevail in Seattle and that they'll ditch the policy. It's easier than trying to pack a Methuselah or a Balthazar in our luggage. ;)

[RuthC]

So if that's the case, I suppose I could bring aboard a jeroboam bottle

Mine was a partial quote of two words of the policy. There are more words than that, and they include a 750 ml limit to that one bottle.

 

No one likes a wise guy, Walt. ;)

[LindaM]

I am not saying it happens on a regular basis but it certainly would not be the first time a Hotel Manager/Cruise Director/steward/ etc ... says whatever the guest wants to hear to just get rid of the question. :rolleyes:

 

I don't think that was the case. It was a sincere and honest discussion with 4 stars. He is not the only one in the HAL hierarchy who has said they are still in the process of reworking the policy. It doesn't make sense that HAL would be the only line in the Carnival Group to not have a corkage for additional bottles.

[Host Walt]

Mine was a partial quote of two words of the policy. There are more words than that, and they include a 750 ml limit to that one bottle.

 

No one likes a wise guy, Walt. ;)

Not even my DW!

 

Rats. I was already working on at least a magnum size. Oh well. I can still hope there are some "wise guys," meaning smart policy people, in Seattle.

[TiogaCruiser]

So if that's the case, I suppose I could bring aboard a jeroboam bottle (3.0 Litres or 4 regular 750 ml bottles), or even a Nebuchadnezzar (15 litres or equivalent of 20 regular 750 ml bottles). They each meet the definition of "one bottle." (For the various sizes of wine bottles, check this out: Bottle size definitions.)

 

The only problem I see is that Total Wine doesn'r stock Nebuchadnezzar sizes. I don't even think they carry anything larger than a jeroboam, and only that for high end champagnes.

 

My goodness, I thought you were joking until I followed your link.

And how big is the cork in those? I suppose one the cork from champagne in those sizes could be considered heavy artillery?

[kazu]

Not even my DW!

 

Rats. I was already working on at least a magnum size. Oh well. I can still hope there are some "wise guys," meaning smart policy people, in Seattle.

 

Wouldn't that be nice to see? Thanks for posting Walt - nice to see that those of us that have been accused of 'whining' are not alone;)

[Host Walt]

My goodness, I thought you were joking until I followed your link.

And how big is the cork in those? I suppose one the cork from champagne in those sizes could be considered heavy artillery?

 

I've actually seen a Balthazar sized bottle in the Veuve Cliquot tasting room in Reims, France. Because it was champagne the musalet (the wire that holds the cork in under the pressure of the contents) was a very heavy gauge wire that requires a special tool to cut.

 

The gal who runs the tasting room said that, to her knowledge, this is the first Balthazar ever created by Veuve Cliquot which means no one had ever popped a cork on one. As you can imagine the corks was also huge.

 

[My guess is that the bottle was, in fact, empty and that it was intended to be a novelty for folks to snap photos because it makes no sense to fill such a bottle with the real thing when it's most unlikely ever to be opened.]

[serendipity1499]

So if that's the case, I suppose I could bring aboard a jeroboam bottle (3.0 Litres or 4 regular 750 ml bottles), or even a Nebuchadnezzar (15 litres or equivalent of 20 regular 750 ml bottles). They each meet the definition of "one bottle." (For the various sizes of wine bottles, check this out: Bottle size definitions.)

To me the limitation of "one bottle" without specifying what constitutes a "bottle" is sillier than the policy itself.

 

The only problem I see is that Total Wine doesn'r stock Nebuchadnezzar sizes. I don't even think they carry anything larger than a jeroboam, and only that for high end champagnes.

 

Oh, and one more problem. You'll need a forklift to move a Nebuchadnezzar size of anything (it weighs about 38 kilograms), and pouring a 5 oz serving from one of those bottles can be rather tricky. And how wouls one decant a Nebuchadnezzar of a nice Bordeaux or a Silver Oak Cabernet?

 

Let's hope that saner heads prevail in Seattle and that they'll ditch the policy. It's easier than trying to pack a Methuselah or a Balthazar in our luggage. ;)

 

Love it!...Thanks for the laugh Walt..:D:D:D:D:D

Betty

[Christine Frances]

[innlady1]

Not even my DW!

 

Rats. I was already working on at least a magnum size. Oh well. I can still hope there are some "wise guys," meaning smart policy people, in Seattle.

 

Let's hope so, Host Walt. This policy is ridiculous. From extremely liberal to non-existent...basically. :rolleyes:

[MR NW GUY]

Let's hope so, Host Walt. This policy is ridiculous. From extremely liberal to non-existent...basically. :rolleyes:

I truly understand that some people here find it extremely important to haul along their own wine and then whine when they can't.

 

When I took my position on this topic (which has not changed). It simply is:

 

CCL and HAL are "for profit" companies and really have the right to restrict outside food and beverages.

 

It will be interesting to see if you have any influence through your letter writing and petitions.

[OVgirl]

I truly understand that some people here find it extremely important to haul along their own wine and then whine when they can't.

 

When I took my position on this topic (which has not changed). It simply is:

 

CCL and HAL are "for profit" companies and really have the right to restrict outside food and beverages.

 

It will be interesting to see if you have any influence through your letter writing and petitions.

 

I think everyone here agrees that HAL has the right to make decisions that will benefit the bottom dollar. But, those posting also agree that everyone has the right to express their like or dislike of the new policy.

 

And yes, it will be interesting.

[wwinfl91]

Hopefully we will. We are boarding a 17 day Panama Canal cruise in a couple of days with a case of CA wine that is much better than the ones HAL offers. We will also probably buy a wine package on the ship but we enjoy a glass or two before dinner on our balcony and feel that HAL shouldn't screw things up for us.

 

Have a great next cruise with some wine.

[MR NW GUY]

I think everyone here agrees that HAL has the right to make decisions that will benefit the bottom dollar. But, those posting also agree that everyone has the right to express their like or dislike of the new policy.

 

And yes, it will be interesting.

Where is the "LIKE" button?

[LindaM]

I truly understand that some people here find it extremely important to haul along their own wine and then whine when they can't.

 

When I took my position on this topic (which has not changed). It simply is:

 

CCL and HAL are "for profit" companies and really have the right to restrict outside food and beverages.

 

It will be interesting to see if you have any influence through your letter writing and petitions.

 

I believe the letters and petition will influence HAL to modify the policy to be similar to that of Princess. HAL will make money; people can sample local wine. The letters certainly influenced HAL to delay the initial startdate! Curiously, you weren't around here when all of that was going on....

[MR NW GUY]

I was in Florida and on the Allure of the Seas in an Aqua Theater Suite for most of August and missed this topic as I was focused on the RCI boards. Now that I am booked on the Zuiderdam, I am watching, reading and participating on the HAL boards.

 

Busy Busy life here!

 

Thanks for asking and following...

 

CHEERS!

[Sow There]

I truly understand that some people here find it extremely important to haul along their own wine and then whine when they can't.

 

When I took my position on this topic (which has not changed). It simply is:

 

CCL and HAL are "for profit" companies and really have the right to restrict outside food and beverages.

 

It will be interesting to see if you have any influence through your letter writing and petitions.

 

Yes, any "for profit" company has the right to do whatever they choose and can restrict outside food and beverages.

 

But you also observe, "...some people here find it extremely important to haul along their own wine and then whine when they can't."

 

Most, if not all, "for profit" companies who choose not to respond to their customers interests soon become extinct...or at least a failing company.

 

One small example is a local white table cloth restaurant near me that has a modest, but acceptable wine list was charging a $15 corkage charge. Many customers, such as me and my DW, always "hauled along" our own wine because we preferred certain varietals not available on the restaurant's wine list. I chatted with the owner suggesting that he add to his wine list. He said he'd like to but he really couldn't afford the cost of expanding his inventory. His concern was the balance between limiting his wine sales and corkage charges and its impact on business. He decided to try reducing his corkage to $2 for a month and advertising the reduction both in his ads and on his menus.

 

His business boomed, so he made the $2 fee a permanent feature. He said the impact on sales from his own list was not affected much because people, especially parties of 4 or more, would order additional bottles.

 

The point is, if the general reaction to the HAL policy is negative, HAL will probably listen to their customers and adjust their policies accordingly. Conversely, if there is only a minor amount of unhappiness and the feedback to HAL is minimal, HAL will likely not make any adjustment.

[PunkiC]

I am just glad HAL made this decision before we had invested much time and money in their line, as had been our intent. Having a priest on board and the ability to bring our own wine made them pretty much the perfect cruise line for our retirement.

 

It is very good for us that Princess created a more reasonable modification to their wine policy as we have already invested a lot of time and money in Princess status and I would hate to have to dump them as a cruise line.

[MR NW GUY]

Yes, any "for profit" company has the right to do whatever they choose and can restrict outside food and beverages.

 

But you also observe, "...some people here find it extremely important to haul along their own wine and then whine when they can't."

 

Most, if not all, "for profit" companies who choose not to respond to their customers interests soon become extinct...or at least a failing company.

 

One small example is a local white table cloth restaurant near me that has a modest, but acceptable wine list was charging a $15 corkage charge. Many customers, such as me and my DW, always "hauled along" our own wine because we preferred certain varietals not available on the restaurant's wine list. I chatted with the owner suggesting that he add to his wine list. He said he'd like to but he really couldn't afford the cost of expanding his inventory. His concern was the balance between limiting his wine sales and corkage charges and its impact on business. He decided to try reducing his corkage to $2 for a month and advertising the reduction both in his ads and on his menus.

 

His business boomed, so he made the $2 fee a permanent feature. He said the impact on sales from his own list was not affected much because people, especially parties of 4 or more, would order additional bottles.

 

The point is, if the general reaction to the HAL policy is negative, HAL will probably listen to their customers and adjust their policies accordingly. Conversely, if there is only a minor amount of unhappiness and the feedback to HAL is minimal, HAL will likely not make any adjustment.

Great example! The owner made a decision that supported his limited capital which limited his wine selection. We know HAL has deep pockets and could increase wine choices if that is the root problem here. Your restaurant owner truly found a solution that was a win win for him and his customers.

 

Your example shows how he sustained and increased revenue, correct?

 

I would imagine the HAL might point out the loss of revenue for all the wine consumed in the cabins is a loss of revenue they will make up even if they loose 50% or more of the people who haul on the wine.

 

I appreciate your view point and conversation here...