How big a deal is it to grab a free drink for a friend who doesn't have the drinks package?

[Georgia_Peaches]

2 minutes ago, SeaShark said:

 

Now follow it up. Interstate speed limit is 70 mph, so 82 is "OK" and 83 is "BAD". Why does one person get a ticket and the other doesn't over just a paltry 1 mph? You're just as dangerous at 82 mph as your are at 83 mph.

I don't disagree...some people are dangerous behind the wheel...period.  I tend to have a lead foot on the interstate...and my car is red and sporty...so I'm a ticket magnet, which is why I asked my brother.  At the same time, I know speeding could get me a ticket and I accept the risk when I speed...and actually plan on at least 1 ticket per road trip.  I've been pretty lucky in that respect...except for in Italy, when I got two!  😳

[DCGuy64]

18 minutes ago, GeezerCouple said:

I'm sure that inside, you know very well what is right and what is wrong, but you like the attention here or you like to argue or you are a troll or... or.... but regardless, if you sail NCL, you agree to their rules as part of the contract.  Full Stop.

Oh I do like to argue, you're not wrong. But generally trolls just argue for the sake of arguing. In this case, I sincerely don't agree with you. I don't accept the notion of "take it or leave it." Since we don't know one another, I'm just going to assume that you have enough of a knowledge of American history to know that blindly accepting the status quo isn't a good argument to begin with. And I agree that if I sail with NCL, I do agree to the rules as part of the contract. But that doesn't mean I can't complain about the rules in that contract and argue for them to be amended. I simply feel confident that any reasonable person knows there are limits to ANY rules. How about this one: "to ensure all guests help us to prevent the spread of COVID-19, a staff member will personally escort you and watch you use the bathroom and wash your hands." OK with that one? IT'S IN THE CONTRACT, YOU AGREED TO IT, FULL STOP." See how silly that sounds? I'm sure you know how well THAT would go over. Also, Cruise Critic routinely has posts from both newbies and old timers about things cruise lines can technically get away with but are seen as unfair. I doubt you would tell all of them to suck it up.

Edited December 1, 2022 by DCGuy64
edited repetitive words

[GeezerCouple]

7 minutes ago, DCGuy64 said:

Actually.... you're onto something. What if they *DID* have a light drinker package, so you paid $50 pppd instead of $99 and were limited to, say, 5 drinks per day, then another package that was $75 and included 10 drinks, and so on? Nothing wrong with variety, right?

 

That's exactly right!

 

And NCL happens to define the "packages" as "full package" or the "one drink package" or the "two drink package" or the "three drink package", etc..

The "full" package is paid in advance; the lower categories are paid per drink.

 

And the passengers agree when making the reservation that IF they want the "full" package, both first and second passengers in the cabin must get it.  Otherwise, they are each free to get whichever lesser packages they desire.

 

They also agree to a whole bunch of other rules.  No one is "forcing them to agree to any of the rules".  They can simply not do business with NCL.  Easy.

Others may choose to do business with NCL under this arrangement. Free choice of the marketplace.

GC

[Georgia_Peaches]

11 minutes ago, DCGuy64 said:

What if they *DID* have a light drinker package

Lol...I think they do.  It's called Pay as you Go...😊...which is what the OP's friend should do instead of putting OP in a position where they feel compelled to take the pulse of the crowd about it being right or wrong.

[SeaShark]

13 minutes ago, DCGuy64 said:

 But I still wish it were possible to have the option of only 1 adult getting the UBP. 

 

But that option is entirely possible...just place the two adults in different cabins (like, for example, adjoining studios) problem solved.

 

26 minutes ago, scooter6139 said:

 

I get where you are coming from, but that is a non-starter for me.  Just because I don't LIKE some T&C's doesn't mean I get to ignore or violate it at will, UNLESS I am willing to accept the consequences of such actions.  And if you wish to challenge, you do so in a proper venue, like the courts.  

 

Challenging sounds good, but in the long run you won't win. If NCL was told that they had to allow one person in the cabin to buy the package while the other could pass on it, they'd just double the price of the package...problem solved, right? Remember, the current pricing is based on the assumption that the double occupancy guest both get the package. When the model changes, so will the pricing...and you likely won't be happy with that change either.

[DCGuy64]

1 minute ago, GeezerCouple said:

The "full" package is paid in advance; the lower categories are paid per drink.

Those aren't packages, it's all you can drink or a la carte.

 

2 minutes ago, GeezerCouple said:

They also agree to a whole bunch of other rules.  No one is "forcing them to agree to any of the rules".  They can simply not do business with NCL.  Easy.

You are correct. It's "take it or leave it." The difference between us is that you are OK with it, I am not.

[DCGuy64]

2 minutes ago, SeaShark said:

Challenging sounds good, but in the long run you won't win

I"m glad Rosa Parks didn't see things that way. "Back of the bus lady, rules are rules." (And I know you didn't mean it that way, but you do see that's a natural assumption based on the statement you just made).

[GeezerCouple]

2 minutes ago, DCGuy64 said:

Oh I do like to argue, you're not wrong. But generally trolls just argue for the sake of arguing. In this case, I just don't agree with you. I don't accept the notion of "take it or leave it." Since we don't know one another, I'm just going to assume that you have enough of a knowledge of American history to know that just accepting the status quo isn't a good argument to begin with. And I agree that if I sail with NCL, I do agree to the rules as part of the contract. But that doesn't mean I can't complain about the rules in that contract and argue for them to be amended. I just feel confident that any reasonable person knows there are limits to ANY rules. How about this one: "to ensure all guests help us to prevent the spread of COVID-19, a staff member will personally escort you and watch you use the bathroom and wash your hands." OK with that one? IT'S IN THE CONTRACT, YOU AGREED TO IT, FULL STOP." See how silly that sounds? I'm sure you know how well THAT would go over. Also, Cruise Critic routinely has posts from both newbies and old timers about things cruise lines can technically get away with but are seen as unfair. I doubt you just tell all of them to suck it up.

 

We do agree on one thing, and that is about the deeper principles of take it or leave it.... when there is some actual and serious principle at stake.  (To avoid our wandering into the quicksand of politics or religion, etc., I won't go into detail, but I'm sure, as a student of history, you fully understand, and your point is well taken -- very seriously!)

 

I've done my small parts of civil disobedience in past years/decades, and I've paid whatever penalty needed to be paid.  Sometimes the rules were changed as a result of the actions, sometimes not.

But the principles in those cases were not situations were those involved could just "make a different choice", etc.  Far from it, and *that* was the point.

I will stop here.  Either this is understood, or it is not.

 

Enjoy all of your travels.

GC

 

[DCGuy64]

4 minutes ago, Georgia_Peaches said:

Lol...I think they do.  It's called Pay as you Go...😊...which is what the OP's friend should do instead of putting OP in a position where they feel compelled to take the pulse of the crowd about it being right or wrong.

I wouldn't do that, either, it would just feel wrong. But I'm also not so naive as to believe that rules never get bent, on cruise ships or anywhere else.

[PTC DAWG]

The equine is dead.  

[DCGuy64]

2 minutes ago, GeezerCouple said:

Sometimes the rules were changed as a result of the actions, sometimes not.

But the principles in those cases were not situations were those involved could just "make a different choice", etc.  Far from it, and *that* was the point.

I will stop here.  Either this is understood, or it is not.

 

Enjoy all of your travels.

 

Bravo! Well said, and we do agree after all. It is definitely understood, and I hope you enjoy your travels as well, GC. 😃

[GeezerCouple]

1 minute ago, PTC DAWG said:

The equine is dead.  

 

And I wish it could RIP.

 

[kirtihk]

1 hour ago, All-ready2cruise said:

Wow! This is not good. 

Please, can we get back to what this is? Principles are important, however, when there are so many different levels concerning so many different beliefs and values how do we make it a level playing field.  

I do stick to the rules.  I cruise solo now and usually I'm very lucky to make friends very quickly on the cruises I take.  On a cruise in 2018 I met up with some great people and we spent a lot of time together. 

One person didn't have the drink package.  He saw that I was drinking wine and asked if I would get him a glass.  So, I did.  When I ordered, I told the bar tender the 2nd glass was for a friend and would he please charge me for it.  He brought the glasses and walked away.  He refused to charge me for it, who's at fault there?  Not me. 

So if the wait staff refuses to charge a guest, even when asked, what happens then?

 

then there will another indefinite number of replies of all colors and specters for that particular item.

 

Relax, everyone, and enjoy (to the very end)

 

https://youtu.be/sM2ZhByFcDk

 

Voyage, Voyage!!!

Edited December 1, 2022 by kirtihk

[SeaShark]

1 hour ago, DCGuy64 said:

And I know you didn't mean it that way

 

So why then present in a way in which you know I didn't mean?

[CILCIANRQTS]

1 hour ago, PTC DAWG said:

The equine is dead.  

And at this point, the energy in replying is wasted.

[RocketMan275]

2 hours ago, DCGuy64 said:

 Now, given that the price of the UBP is $99 pppd (not including the gratuities here since you pay that even when part of the FAS), 

So, the cost of the Free Beverage Package is $109 (price increase in Jan) plus 20% gratuity, ie, $130 per day.   Drinks are $15 or less, if someone decides to not buy the Free Drinks and pays al a cart, they can purchase about 8 drinks per day.   If two people in a cabin, one drinks, one doesn't, NCL isn't forcing anyone to buy two drink packages.

[DCGuy64]

7 minutes ago, RocketMan275 said:

So, the cost of the Free Beverage Package is $109 (price increase in Jan) plus 20% gratuity, ie, $130 per day.   Drinks are $15 or less, if someone decides to not buy the Free Drinks and pays al a cart, they can purchase about 8 drinks per day.   If two people in a cabin, one drinks, one doesn't, NCL isn't forcing anyone to buy two drink packages.

That's not the issue. If one person buys the UBP (Unlimited Beverage Package), then the other adult in the same cabin MUST buy it. That's the "forcing" part. And I was using $99 pppd because that's still the price (January is next month), and when we booked back in April 2022, the price was $99.

[SeaShark]

4 minutes ago, DCGuy64 said:

That's not the issue. If one person buys the UBP (Unlimited Beverage Package), then the other adult in the same cabin MUST buy it. That's the "forcing" part. And I was using $99 pppd because that's still the price (January is next month), and when we booked back in April 2022, the price was $99.

 

But you are being disingenuous in your argument and you know it. You have a CHOICE as to whether or not to buy the drink package. When you have a CHOICE, by definition, you are not forced. You also fail to recognize that the price is $99pppd applied to ALL adults in the same stateroom...the pricing only can be applied to one person, if that one person is the only adult in the room. You are trying to change the offer into something it is not in order to argue...and that dog don't hunt.

[DCGuy64]

1 minute ago, SeaShark said:

 

But you are being disingenuous in your argument and you know it. You have a CHOICE as to whether or not to buy the drink package. When you have a CHOICE, by definition, you are not forced. You also fail to recognize that the price is $99pppd applied to ALL adults in the same stateroom...the pricing only can be applied to one person, if that one person is the only adult in the room. You are trying to change the offer into something it is not in order to argue...and that dog don't hunt.

I'm not sure why you're getting so angry about this. I don't like the way they structure this such that it's either both or neither. As I said much earlier today, there is no way that someone who doesn't/can't drink (even for health reasons) can avoid paying for the UBP if his/her spouse (or other adult cabinmate) has it. To me, saying "take it or leave it" isn't much of a choice. Anyway, I think you ought to ask yourself why it's so important to you to win some pointless argument against a total stranger. I don't really care, it's fine if you don't agree with me. Not going to lose any sleep over it. For me, I'm looking forward to our trip!

[CILCIANRQTS]

Great taste! Less filling! 🥱

[dolfan1980]

Would you drive 20 over on the highway, take food away from a buffet when it's not allowed or slip a few extra apples in your purse when apple picking?  I sort of consider this to be similar.  

[pookel]

Oof, sorry this turned into such a contentious topic. I'm still trying to gauge how I feel about it. Like, sure, stealing is stealing, right? But there are levels of wrongness, like if I take an extra beer from my friend's fridge without asking, that's pretty different from if I stole his car, and THAT would be pretty different from if I embezzled $1 million from his business. Filling an extra drink for a friend seems on the minor end of things to me, but I'll keep in mind how many people here seem to think it's a serious offense.

[DCGuy64]

5 minutes ago, dolfan1980 said:

Would you drive 20 over on the highway, take food away from a buffet when it's not allowed or slip a few extra apples in your purse when apple picking?  I sort of consider this to be similar.  

 

Edited December 1, 2022 by DCGuy64

[SeaShark]

20 minutes ago, DCGuy64 said:

I'm not sure why you're getting so angry about this. I don't like the way they structure this such that it's either both or neither. As I said much earlier today, there is no way that someone who doesn't/can't drink (even for health reasons) can avoid paying for the UBP if his/her spouse (or other adult cabinmate) has it. To me, saying "take it or leave it" isn't much of a choice. Anyway, I think you ought to ask yourself why it's so important to you to win some pointless argument against a total stranger. I don't really care, it's fine if you don't agree with me. Not going to lose any sleep over it. For me, I'm looking forward to our trip!

 

It isn't anger, I just don't tolerate what Ron White can't fix. What you (again) fail to recognize, or likely intentionally ignore, is that the pricing is based on the purchase model. If they made it an option where only the heavy drinkers could choose it, then the price would have to be increased to reflect that. It can be $99pd for both people or $198pd for only one person. There is no free lunch.

 

BTW...it isn't about "winning" an argument. There is no argument, only a discussion. Likewise, there is no winning, either. Personally, it doesn't bother me if you're wrong about something...that only reflects poorly on you, not on me. However, I also don't have an issue with standing firm on my beliefs.

[Georgia_Peaches]

5 minutes ago, pookel said:

Oof, sorry this turned into such a contentious topic. I'm still trying to gauge how I feel about it. Like, sure, stealing is stealing, right? But there are levels of wrongness, like if I take an extra beer from my friend's fridge without asking, that's pretty different from if I stole his car, and THAT would be pretty different from if I embezzled $1 million from his business. Filling an extra drink for a friend seems on the minor end of things to me, but I'll keep in mind how many people here seem to think it's a serious offense.

I'm so glad you came back!  I bet you never dreamed your question would lead to such a downward spiral.  I think you have the right attitude here.  Lesson learned is any question that leans itself even slightly toward one's moral turpitude is a no go...got a question about the weather, what to wear, or how the food is...you've got yourself a forum 😊. 

 

In fairness though, lots of great points, both for and against, were made as a result of this thread!

Edited December 1, 2022 by Georgia_Peaches