Itinerary subject to change at cruise lines discretion!

[navybankerteacher]

2 hours ago, njhorseman said:

 

Navybankerteacher,  it seem you are always lying in wait to take advantage of a chance to say something negative about NCL,  from food to whatever else might irk you at the moment, but if you took five seconds to read NCL's Guest Ticket Contract you would find that while a change in ports of call specifically is permissible at the cruise lines discretion, as it is for every cruise line I'm familiar with ...

 

2 hours ago, njhorseman said:

 

By the way, every cruise line is diligent about taking full advantage of every contractual clause in their favor. In fact pretty much every corporation engaged in every type of business is. Some may be a bit more willing at times to bend in the interest of customer goodwill, but there's a reason why the contract you enter into with any business has all its i's dotted and t's crossed. 

  

 

You are right - I do not think well of NCL - for their service level, food quality, deceptive advertising, endless add-on pricing  —   even their convoluted requirements for adjusting service charges; I am sorry if my mentioning it bothers you. But, I think it is fair to say, having read many posts here, that regardless of contract protections - they are certainly the least likely of lines to offer compensation - entitled or not.

 

 

[Shmoo here]

4 hours ago, rogerbid said:

My reason in posting this question now was to get a gauge on how often this happens. 

In my experience, not that often.  We've done 24 cruises and the itinerary has been changed on only one, swapping one port for another.  

 

Of course, there are areas of the world where the weather is quite changeable and would cause such itinerary changes more often.  Not to mention any political situations that could arise, also.

Edited June 5, 2019 by Shmoo here

[momofmeg]

6 minutes ago, Shmoo here said:

In my experience, not that often.  We've done 24 cruises and the itinerary has been changed on only one, swapping one port for another.  

 

Of course, there are areas of the world where the weather is quite changeable and would cause such itinerary changes more often.  Not to mention any political situations that could arise, also.

 

 I have had ports switched (Itinerary reversed, same ports but 1st port and 3rd port scheduled were switched with each other) and once a port was changed to a different, closer port. both of those were in  prime  September hurricane season so we knew that could happen.  Only that one cruise did we miss a port all together and it was ship issues not weather (like they pretended) because every cruise after ours until dry dock lost that  same port.

[FlyerTalker]

If you are adverse to missing a port, don't take a cruise that makes a stop in the Falkland Islands.

 

I've been on four with that port stop and are only batting .500 -- twice the weather made tendering impossible.  Have also missed ports in Asia due to weather (Jeju Island and others).  Always accept that as part of the game.

 

If you ABSOLUTELY have to visit somewhere, don't take a cruise to get there.  Simple.

[TonyB17]

29 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

The cruise line does not get the full amount of a shore excursion, more like 6-8% (maybe 10%) as a commission.  The rest goes to the excursion provider.

Point taken.  Aren't most of the shops either paying rent to the cruise line or on some kind of percentage of sales?  Still seems difficult to make more than the lost excursion revenue unless a lot of people are buying watches or some high ticket item.  I know some people have a low opinion of the cruise lines (or specific lines) but cancelling ports to try to increase sales to ticked off passengers doesn't sound like a winning business plan.

 

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, TonyB17 said:

Point taken.  Aren't most of the shops either paying rent to the cruise line or on some kind of percentage of sales?  Still seems difficult to make more than the lost excursion revenue unless a lot of people are buying watches or some high ticket item.  I know some people have a low opinion of the cruise lines (or specific lines) but cancelling ports to try to increase sales to ticked off passengers doesn't sound like a winning business plan.

 

Yes, the shops are a concession, but the line participates in the profit as well.  Onboard revenue is a major source of the profit for the cruise line, shore ex is not that large a part of onboard revenue.  No, they don't cancel ports to increase onboard revenue, but they do better on sea days than port days.

[TonyB17]

7 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Yes, the shops are a concession, but the line participates in the profit as well.  Onboard revenue is a major source of the profit for the cruise line, shore ex is not that large a part of onboard revenue.  No, they don't cancel ports to increase onboard revenue, but they do better on sea days than port days.

The casino is number one by a wide margin, isn't it?

[John Bull]

6 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

The cruise line does not get the full amount of a shore excursion, more like 6-8% (maybe 10%) as a commission.  The rest goes to the excursion provider.

 

 

I'm very wary of disagreeing  with a knowledgeable poster like the chief engineer, but from the price differences that I've seen between local tour operators (and even the likes of Viator) and the cruise lines I'd rate their commission as 25% and more, even without allowing for their buying power.

 

And I do at least know how much they pay for coaches for their transfers in Southampton.

Kerrrrrching.

 

JB 

[njhorseman]

1 hour ago, navybankerteacher said:

 

  

 

You are right - I do not think well of NCL - for their service level, food quality, deceptive advertising, endless add-on pricing  —   even their convoluted requirements for adjusting service charges; I am sorry if my mentioning it bothers you. But, I think it is fair to say, having read many posts here, that regardless of contract protections - they are certainly the least likely of lines to offer compensation - entitled or not.

 

 

Here's an example of why your posts bother me. You cleverly failed to quote the most important part of my post, which was:

" there is nothing in the contract that permits NCL to change the port of embarkation . Since the contract speaks to ports of call but not ports of embarkation if NCL were to change the embarkation port as happened to you with MSC,  NCL would also be obligated to refund the fare. So MSC wasn't being nice to you versus NCL being mean. A change in embarkation port would be a breach of contract by the cruise line."

 

What you did is attempt to sidestep an important fact that decimates your chosen example of how a "good" cruise line, in this case MSC, acts versus the implication of how that nasty old NCL would act in a similar situation.  

 

If you don't like NCL, that's your prerogative. Just don't try to support your position by making up things that cross the line separating opinion from fact.

Edited June 5, 2019 by njhorseman

[navybankerteacher]

41 minutes ago, njhorseman said:

Here's an example of why your posts bother me. You cleverly failed to quote the most important part of my post, which was:

" there is nothing in the contract that permits NCL to change the port of embarkation . Since the contract speaks to ports of call but not ports of embarkation if NCL were to change the embarkation port as happened to you with MSC,  NCL would also be obligated to refund the fare. So MSC wasn't being nice to you versus NCL being mean. A change in embarkation port would be a breach of contract by the cruise line."

 

What you did is attempt to sidestep an important fact that decimates your chosen example of how a "good" cruise line, in this case MSC, acts versus the implication of how that nasty old NCL would act in a similar situation.  

 

If you don't like NCL, that's your prerogative. Just don't try to support your position by making up things that cross the line separating opinion from fact.

Give it a rest.

[Texas Tillie]

Boys, Boys, Boys! Are you still 10 years old? Both of you, give it a rest. We all GET where you are coming from and you have made your preferences clear.😱🤡🤓🙄

[navybankerteacher]

50 minutes ago, Texas Tillie said:

Boys, Boys, Boys! Are you still 10 years old? Both of you, give it a rest. We all GET where you are coming from and you have made your preferences clear.😱🤡🤓🙄

Yes, Ma’am.

[ldubs]

I can understand the need for what is a heavy handed one-sided contract because decisions about safety should always trump.  But if the cruise line takes advantage by doing things like cancelling bookings because someone else would pay more, then I think it is unfair.   

 

We have been on three cruises  with material changes.  First, Livorno was cancelled because of gale force winds, second Portofino was cancelled because it was too rough to tender, and the third, we diverted to another Caribbean island stop to avoid a hurricane.  As far as I'm concerned all three were good decisions.   

Edited June 5, 2019 by ldubs

[Flatbush Flyer]

11 hours ago, Aplmac said:

You must admit

it's a great way to keep them on board

spending their money at the NCL shops.............

It is quite the misconception that a ship captain's decision to skip a port due to unforeseen circumstances (weather, mechanical issues, etc) and substitute a sea day is somehow good for the ship's financials. Quite the contrary.

At the very least, ship payments for engaged port services had already been committed. Unanticipated food consumption rises, Planned maintenance and other scheduled crew activities may need to be postponed, etc

 

 

[OzKiwiJJ]

There was a great kerfuffle a few years ago when Carnival completely changed the itinerary of one of it's Australian cruises at the last minute. The original itinerary was Sydney to New Caledonia return but, unfortunately, New Caledonia was right in the path of an approaching Cat 5 cyclone. So the captain took them to Tasmania instead. Quite a change - from a tropical cruise to a cooler climate cruise. Quite a few passengers were outraged that they hadn't been allowed to cancel their cruise at the last minute. I can't recall if any compensation was offered but some passengers banded together to instigate a class action against Carnival which I believe was settled out of court.

[clackey]

We have done 18 cruises so far with the majority 7-10 nights.  Of all of those ports we have only missed 2.    The stop in Belize was because it was too windy to anchor or tender.  We were re-routed to Calica.  Calica was the port that we had missed the year before because of a broken stabilizer.  Not bad for over 60  port stops.  

[TNcruising02]

20 hours ago, navybankerteacher said:

 

  

 

You are right - I do not think well of NCL - for their service level, food quality, deceptive advertising, endless add-on pricing  —   even their convoluted requirements for adjusting service charges; I am sorry if my mentioning it bothers you. But, I think it is fair to say, having read many posts here, that regardless of contract protections - they are certainly the least likely of lines to offer compensation - entitled or not.

 

 

 

I agree with this.  I was on a Norwegian cruise that was re-routed from an eastern itinerary to a western due to a hurricane.  I was offered no compensation.  On the other hand, I cruised on Carnival last year to Bermuda, but was re-routed to the Bahamas because of a hurricane.  They gave me 25% off my next cruise.  I believe Royal has done similar things, but I don't think Norwegian gives anybody anything.  I could be wrong, but that has been my experience.

Edited June 6, 2019 by TNcruising02

[SRF]

20 hours ago, momofmeg said:

 My last Celebrity cruise we missed San Juan , Puerto Rico because something was wrong with the ship and it had to go extra slow, like 5 knots an hour less.  However. they  could have offered us something. A free dinner in  a cheaper specialty or if that was too much a couple of free drinks. All we got  was a refund of port fees since we missed the port. No port of course no port fee.

 

But that is not the worst. They knew the ship had the issue while still in Europe and a dry dock was scheduled a month after our cruise. We were the first cruise in the Caribbean after their transatlantic re-position.  If only they had been honest and scheduled only 2 ports instead of 3 from the get go.  Or better yet, picked 3 ports nearer to  Ft. Lauderdale as we were an over crowded ship since that was Thanksgiving week and it would have been nice to get away form the crowd one more day.

 

anyway I was pretty peeved with them. I have not been on them since and that was 5 years ago.

Let's see, the cruise itinerary was set at least 2 YEARS before the cruise.    How were they supposed to know of a mechanical issue would occur 2 years later?

 

At what point would it have been OK for them to tell you that it was only going to be 2 ports and you would be happy with it?  Did the mechanical issue get worse on the TA?

 

You were on the ship, you got to cruise, and THAT is what you paid for.

[momofmeg]

9 minutes ago, SRF said:

Let's see, the cruise itinerary was set at least 2 YEARS before the cruise.    How were they supposed to know of a mechanical issue would occur 2 years later?

 

At what point would it have been OK for them to tell you that it was only going to be 2 ports and you would be happy with it?  Did the mechanical issue get worse on the TA?

 

You were on the ship, you got to cruise, and THAT is what you paid for.

How about before final payment when they were still in Europe and  knew they had issues if they had simply sent us a warning email that we may would lose a port since the 3 year old ship had propulsion problems and  that they had to  cancel cruises for a drydock shortly after ours? From my understanding the cruise that was supposed to before ours was only canceled a month before it would have sailed. That was when we heard about  the issue as it was all over Celebrity's message board here it but that was AFTER final payment for us.

[SRF]

5 hours ago, momofmeg said:

How about before final payment when they were still in Europe and  knew they had issues if they had simply sent us a warning email that we may would lose a port since the 3 year old ship had propulsion problems and  that they had to  cancel cruises for a drydock shortly after ours? From my understanding the cruise that was supposed to before ours was only canceled a month before it would have sailed. That was when we heard about  the issue as it was all over Celebrity's message board here it but that was AFTER final payment for us.

 

So they told you 2 months ahead of time.

 

What then?

 

How does that make a difference?

 

 

[ldubs]

6 hours ago, momofmeg said:

How about before final payment when they were still in Europe and  knew they had issues if they had simply sent us a warning email that we may would lose a port since the 3 year old ship had propulsion problems and  that they had to  cancel cruises for a drydock shortly after ours? From my understanding the cruise that was supposed to before ours was only canceled a month before it would have sailed. That was when we heard about  the issue as it was all over Celebrity's message board here it but that was AFTER final payment for us.

 

I don't know the answer and sure don't disagree with you.  I don't know for certain, but suspect there is a real reluctance to provide notice about things like engine issues before the cancel date.  If I received notice before the cancel date I think I would seriously consider changing to another itinerary on a ship without any issues.  I would like that option but I suspect release of this kind of info is closely managed.  

[kira5]

This is part of the reason I only book a cruise when I feel it is a 'deal' so I will not feel cheated if something doesn't work out or things are below what I would expect.    I can't imagine spending $10,000 + on a cruise and having so few guarantees about the quality or the ports.    I only book an inside as I have read too often of people having painting going on/ people smoking next door so their balcony is unusable or their suite furniture is in poor repair.   I don't spend much time in my stateroom.

 

But I have mostly sailed on Holland America and have been satisfied with what I've received for the price I paid.

[FredT]

Last year we did a 12 day CMV cruise around the UK in March...   Missed 6 of 9 ports scheduled.    Our compensation?   $160.00 (between the two of us) 

 

Thats the cruise life!

[gooch47]

Technically, couldn't they leave the embarcation port, go out to sea a few miles, sit there for however many days and return?  

[navybankerteacher]

4 minutes ago, gooch47 said:

Technically, couldn't they leave the embarcation port, go out to sea a few miles, sit there for however many days and return?  

I think they could - but if they did it often, they would see their sales impacted;  especially to the extent itinerary mattered to their passengers.