One less day on with change on Jewel - Not Fair!

[AdoraBelle]

This situation is completely ridiculous and I'm surprised people are taking on the devil's advocate role.

[KeithJenner]

This situation is completely ridiculous and I'm surprised people are taking on the devil's advocate role.

 

 

 

If the ship requires some work which means it needs to be in Seattle for an extra day, what would you suggest NCL do differently?

 

Other than offer more compensation obviously, as we all seem to be quite unanimous on that one.

[NLH Arizona]

This situation is completely ridiculous and I'm surprised people are taking on the devil's advocate role.

The ship needs to be fixed, so another alternative, I guess, would have been for NCL to cancelled the cruise completely. Wonder which folks would prefer?

[gusbourg]

But, why would they have to change flights or put people up in hotels? They aren't kicking people off early, so whatever they are doing can be done with people onboard.

This is in respect to the other plausible decision which is if they shifted the repairs by 24 hours, so that they delayed the next cruise. In that scenario, there are people who have coordinated travel plans to Seattle in order to get on this cruise. They would then have to inform those people that they're not leaving on time, and deal with the repercussions of that, which might include putting people in hotels, or re-booking flights so that the people can travel a day later. Even if they would have told everyone "hey, just get on the boat and then sit here for 24 hours cause we need to do repairs", it's immaterial to the point, which is that we paid for one thing, and they're giving us something else, and not compensating fairly for the difference. I can't think of any other industry that can do that to 2,376 (capacity of the jewel) all at exactly the same time and not suffer any repercussions. They're cutting out a day of cruising no matter how you slice it and returning early.

 

There are two extremely good reasons for doing the repairs at the end of the cruise rather than at the beginning. They are a bit boring I'm afraid, but I suspect that they make more sense than issues with the bottom line.

 

You can believe all you want that it's purely a technical reason as to why they're returning early on one cruise instead leaving late on another as opposed to a financial reason. I'll take my sense that all things equal, anyone would pick the cheaper option. Regardless of their motivations, it doesn't change this 6th (4th?) grade math question:

 

"If a company sells you 7 boxes of product for $1000 but only delivers you 6, how much does that company owe you as a refund?" Cross multiply and divide. It's that simple.

 

Perhaps the parts or skills required aren't available with just two days notice.

 

Perhaps they're not, but we're not talking about a hypothetical where they fix the problem sometime between now and August 6. Certainly if they had the ability to fix it, and they could for the amount of money they want to spend on fixing it, they would.

 

Again, their motivations are immaterial. I know that it's not a critical problem, because clearly they're sending us out on the boat with the problem as is. Or at least I hope that's not the case. Being that as it is, they have a problem, they need to fix it, they're going to fix it, and doing so robs me of what I paid for. It's that simple.

 

Also, if you delay the start of the cruise by a day then the first few ports will be reached a day late. Then you would be missing tours in more than just one port. As Skagway is the last of the Alaska ports to be visited then it makes absolute sense to leave on time and have the first half of the cruise as scheduled rather than mess everything up.

 

Look, I really sympathise with the situation you are in. I think NCL should do more. But I haven't seen anything to suggest that there is any issue with the way NCL have dealt with it other than their compensation offer.

 

Sure, and then they'd pay money to re-book stuff and get it figured out. And you know what? No matter how you spin it, someone is going to get affected. That said, the certain someone or people who are affected are those on the August 6 cruise on the Jewel. And in being affected, it's reasonable that they should expect compensation of an equal value to that which they have lost as a result of NCLs problems. It's not our problem, it's NCLs. By having something affect us, and not compensating us fairly for it, NCL is making their problem our problem.

 

Do you get how that works?

[gusbourg]

The ship needs to be fixed, so another alternative, I guess, would have been for NCL to cancelled the cruise completely. Wonder which folks would prefer?

 

That's a false dilemma. There are in fact a multitude of options that they could have chose.

 

1) Since we're already cruising with a crippled vessel, they could keep us cruising, and fix it when we return on schedule thereby pushing the problem to the people with the next sailing.

2) They could just cancel this sailing all together.

3) They could pro-rate what we have lost and not hold us hostage.

 

For some people #2 would be terrible (for others, it's more of a meh).

 

But nobody is asking for #2. Nobody is asking for #1 even.

 

All we're asking for is to be refunded the part of the cruise that we will not receive. If you return early, even if you'r allowed to stay aboard the vessel, you're not cruising. It's that simple. Prorate the cruise so I'm compensated for the day I lose (relative to the number of cruise days) or prorate the cruise so that I'm compensated for the amount of experience I'm losing (e.g. 1/3 of the Alaska in port days). It's super simple, and NCL doesn't need any excuses, or false dilemmas, or false equivalencies or any other fallacious defenses to do the right thing.

[Merriem]

Are they giving you the option to cancel with a full refund? I would do that and book something else.

[LrgPizza]

If enough people complain, maybe NCL can cancel your entire cruise? That would give them more time to fix the issue. /sarcasm

 

When do people think this type of thing can be fixed?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums mobile app

[gusbourg]

Are they giving you the option to cancel with a full refund? I would do that and book something else.

 

No. No options to cancel. They're just doing a #NCLRipoff where they're selling us short and telling us to suck it up. I don't even consider the $100 on board credit to be an actual offer of compensation.

[www3traveler]

To add another dimension to this discussion:

 

If I understand the situation correctly The Jewel will be returning to Seattle on Friday August 12th for repairs to the azipod. Is the Jewel scheduled to dock at The Bell Street Terminal? If so, WHERE will the ship already scheduled to dock there be docked? How do you get Her passengers off and board those waiting to board? Yes, She could dock at the Smith Cove Terminal IF there is space.

 

If the repairs to the azipod do not go well, what do you do with The Pearl scheduled to dock in the same space Sunday?

 

Azipod's fail on a regular basis especially the early generation which I am assuming this one is.

[KeithJenner]

Do you get how that works?

 

 

What I do get is that it doesn't matter how many times I say that I think you should get more compensation, you aren't going to stop telling me why you need more compensation.

 

You can believe all you want that it's purely a technical reason as to why they're returning early on one cruise instead leaving late on another as opposed to a financial reason.

 

I'm not the one who is saying that I believe I know the reasons. I'm saying that we DON'T know the reasons.

 

I have no belief either way, as I don't know the details. You seem to want me to blindly accept your assumptions though. Sorry, I'm not going to do that.

 

Anyway, as you have now conclusively proved that you aren't actually reading what I'm saying it seems pointless continuing this.

[gusbourg]

If enough people complain, maybe NCL can cancel your entire cruise? That would give them more time to fix the issue. /sarcasm

 

When do people think this type of thing can be fixed?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums mobile app

 

Nobody is arguing that they shouldn't fix the issue, except the people who are defending NCL. The only argument we've made is that they should prorate the day they're taking from us. How hard is that to grasp?

[KeithJenner]

To add another dimension to this discussion:

 

If I understand the situation correctly The Jewel will be returning to Seattle on Friday August 12th for repairs to the azipod. Is the Jewel scheduled to dock at The Bell Street Terminal? If so, WHERE will the ship already scheduled to dock there be docked? How do you get Her passengers off and board those waiting to board? Yes, She could dock at the Smith Cove Terminal IF there is space.

 

If the repairs to the azipod do not go well, what do you do with The Pearl scheduled to dock in the same space Sunday?

 

Azipod's fail on a regular basis especially the early generation which I am assuming this one is.

 

 

 

Is there a ship due there on the Friday? I had a quick look and couldn't find a 2016 schedule, but based on 2015 there were usually ships there on Saturday, Sunday and Monday.

 

If that's the case for this year then that would be another reason for finishing the cruise early rather than starting the next one later.

 

Just to clarify for the easily confused, the above statement doesn't mean that I need as essay on why compensation should be paid. :)

[triptolemus]

Nobody is arguing that they shouldn't fix the issue, except the people who are defending NCL. The only argument we've made is that they should prorate the day they're taking from us. How hard is that to grasp?

 

I don't know what's so complicated about this. The correct compensation for each passenger, as I've already stated, equals $fare / 7.

 

Roped up alongside Seattle is not cruising.

[KeithJenner]

There is nothing complicated about it. That's why just about everyone agrees.

Edited August 4, 2016 by KeithJenner

[Merriem]

No. No options to cancel. They're just doing a #NCLRipoff where they're selling us short and telling us to suck it up. I don't even consider the $100 on board credit to be an actual offer of compensation.

 

Well thank stinks. We were on the POA mess, and in retrospect wish we had used the option to cancel. I hate to see this happen. I am going to Alaska on Celebrity with my sister next month. I would be really upset, and let someone know. A $100 is an insult.

[www3traveler]

Is there a ship due there on the Friday? I had a quick look and couldn't find a 2016 schedule, but based on 2015 there were usually ships there on Saturday, Sunday and Monday.

 

If that's the case for this year then that would be another reason for finishing the cruise early rather than starting the next one later.

 

Just to clarify for the easily confused, the above statement doesn't mean that I need as essay on why compensation should be paid. :)

Yes, Oceania docks there on Thursdays and Fridays.

[AdoraBelle]

I think everyone understands that the ship has to be fixed.

 

I also think (apparently?) everyone agrees that $100 OBC is an insult.

 

One of the posters on the sailing has also has NCL refuse to swap a shorex credit for UBP despite the removal of a major port.

 

Can't we agree NCL is handling it poorly and just *maybe* deserves to be called out on it?

 

You may love the cruise line, but the corporation doesn't love you back.

Edited August 4, 2016 by AdoraBelle

[KeithJenner]

Yes, Oceania docks there on Thursdays and Fridays.

 

 

 

I'm only seeing Regatta on the Thursday.

 

Maybe I'm missing something though.

[LrgPizza]

 

One of the posters on the sailing has also has NCL refuse to swap a shorex credit for UBP despite the removal of a major port.

 

You mean as a promo? (I missed the post.) If so, that's just stupid. They should allow that under these circumstances. The value of that promo choice just dropped significantly.

[gknep]

Here is the 2016 schedule. Nothing is scheduled for the Friday they have scheduled for the repair. I just hope they get it fixed OK. I sail on the Jewel on August 20. http://www.portseattle.org/Cruise/Documents/2016_cruise_schedule.pdf

[AdoraBelle]

You mean as a promo? (I missed the post.) If so, that's just stupid. They should allow that under these circumstances. The value of that promo choice just dropped significantly.

 

 

Yep, see post #14.

[www3traveler]

When I was in Seattle on Thursday June 16th and Friday June 17th there was an Oceania ship docked both days. I was surprised to see them.

[NLH Arizona]

 

All we're asking for is to be refunded the part of the cruise that we will not receive. If you return early, even if you'r allowed to stay aboard the vessel, you're not cruising. It's that simple. Prorate the cruise so I'm compensated for the day I lose (relative to the number of cruise days) or prorate the cruise so that I'm compensated for the amount of experience I'm losing (e.g. 1/3 of the Alaska in port days). It's super simple, and NCL doesn't need any excuses, or false dilemmas, or false equivalencies or any other fallacious defenses to do the right thing.

Even if you are not cruising, you are still using the ship and it's personnel. There is food, drinks, entertainment, cabins to be cleaned, etc., so IMHO, they would have to reduce any prorated amount by those amounts and then I think it would be fair to everyone. You are losing 1 day, which would equate to 1/7 of your cruise, so I would suggest they give folks that amount, less costs for the night in Seattle, and the port charges for Skagway.

 

I do, however, agree with LrgPizza who said, if enough people complain maybe they will just cancel the cruise all together.

Edited August 4, 2016 by NLH Arizona

[casofilia]

Isn't Victoria there as the obligatory non US Port?

 

As we seem to be getting a lot of surmises let me put one in!! I made the comment about missing Victoria and going to Skagway.

 

We know that there has to be work done and unfortunately it was known well in advance. Let us assume that the fact had been found out AFTER the ship had been in Skagway, and the only port left was Victoria.

Would the ship still have been forced to visit Victoria? Or would NCLs merry band of lawyers sought a dispensation to bypass Victoria to get back to Seattle to have the repairs done?

If that were the case surely the same brilliant lawyers (NCL would not use any less brilliant) would have been able to have obtained a dispensation to visit Skagway and to by pass Victoria.

When will NCL employ people who see a "third meaning in a double entendre"? Think outside the circle NCL.

[gusbourg]

Even if you are not cruising, you are still using the ship and it's personnel. There is food, drinks, entertainment, cabins to be cleaned, etc., so IMHO, they would have to reduce any prorated amount by those amounts and then I think it would be fair to everyone. You are losing 1 day, which would equate to 1/7 of your cruise, so I would suggest they give folks that amount, less cost for the night in Seattle, and the port charges for Skagway.

 

I do, however, agree with LrgPizza, if enough people complain maybe they will just cancel the cruise all together.

 

1) I do not plan on staying on the ship. I am from Seattle - and as I've said many times before, I'm sure my own bed is comfier than the one the boat. If I'm home, I'm going home. Therefor, even under your proposal they should reimburse me 1/7th of whatever I paid, period, no exceptions.

 

2) For the people who are not from here, they should be allowed to stay on the ship and still receive the 1/7 back. The entire value of the cruise is diminished for everyone. Giving them food and drink for the day that they're not cruising is the last NCL could do. And all those people might still have to be paid anyways whether or not the ship is occupied (though maybe they treat their employees as poorly as they do their customers, in which case I could see them kicking their employees off and docking their pay as well).

 

We paid for a a 7 day cruise. If the ship is in port being repaired, it certainly is not cruising. Trying to defend NCL here, or minimize their expenses is silly.