Cruise to Mostly Nowhere--Part 2

[Hanoj]

7 minutes ago, ak1004 said:

 

I'm not a TA or Oceania employee. If you look at my signature, you can see that we sailed on 11 different lines, so I'm also not a loyalist or a cheerleader.

 

We had ports cancelled with SS, Azamara and Crystal, as well as with other lines. Some lines are more transparent, some are less. Some give you compensation, some don't. Some reasons look reasonable, some don't. On our last SS cruise we had 3 days on Doha cancelled, then one day in Bahrein. Some guests described it as "bait and switch". The reason given was completely far fetched. Maybe it was valid, maybe they had a different reason but didn't want to share it. It doesn't really matter.

 

Port cancellations are always disappointing, but I will repeat one more time: it's not the cruise lines interest to cancel ports. My assumption is that they have more facts than we do and wouldn't cancel if they absolutely didn't have to. Your assumption is that they lie, cover up and have some hidden agenda and do it on purpose. 

 

We will continue sailing with O, SS and Azamara (Crystal is just doesn't make sense at this point financially) because we love all those lines and love the on board experience. 

Concluding "it's not the cruise lines interest to cancel ports" is speculative too. We really don't know what their interests entail. Companies, even large public ones, seemingly make decision blunders at times. Bud Light anyone?

[ak1004]

Just now, Hanoj said:

Concluding "it's not the cruise lines interest to cancel ports" is speculative too. We really don't know what their interests entail. Companies, even large public ones, seemingly make decision blunders at times. Bud Light anyone?

 

No it's not speculative at all. Most people travel for destinations, and we met a lot of guests on our last few cruises who said "never again" after cancelled ports. Cruise lines are well aware that cancelling ports will cause a lot of lost business.

[Snaefell3]

52 minutes ago, hankandteri said:

Did they say there was a port strike when there was none? Yes, they did.

 

Did they give a full explanation of why they really cancelled? No, they did not. Did they dissemble in their follow-up explanation? Why, yes they did.

 

I'm not speculating about the lie or the cover-up. They happened. You were there. I've been forthright in pointing out that I absolutely was speculating as to the real motives behind the decision since the cruise line wasn't interested in sharing them. Playing amateur detective/forensic accountant can be fun.

 

I'm kind of curious, AK, are you a TA or Oceania employee? You were on the same cruise I was, and your relentless defense of behavior that was not in your best interest puzzles me.

Neither TA, Oceania, nor NCLH here, but it truly sounds like you are pounding the Riviera's Master for a B.A.D. (best available data) decision, and doing it unfairly.

 

Yes, with .30'30 hindsight (that's 20/20 hindsight with an axe to grind) we now know there was no strike on the day you were due in port, only just before that day and just after.  Back when the Master had to make the decision, it wasn't nearly so clear-cut with the then-current rumors, was it?

 

I sympathize with your lost ports (it's unlikely I'll ever get a chance at Dunedin or Christchurch again, so I know how it feels), *BUT*....

 

"It is difficult to make predictions, especially about the future."

-- Yogi Berra

[Hanoj]

27 minutes ago, ak1004 said:

 

No it's not speculative at all. Most people travel for destinations, and we met a lot of guests on our last few cruises who said "never again" after cancelled ports. Cruise lines are well aware that cancelling ports will cause a lot of lost business.

Is this a fact? Or, your interpretation?

 

It's possible Oceania is making calculated short term decisions to reduce costs to positively impact their parent company's bottom line, even if it may affect long term prospects. NCLH stock price is well below its pre shutdowns price and has generally trended downward the last two years. Its unsecured debt rating is in the junk bond range. If NCL is not able to meet is obligations its future is tenuous. In such circumstances it is not uncommon for publicly traded companies to emphasize the short term over the long run. And, yes I'm speculating.

 

"Never again" spoken in the heat of frustration is not definitive. Its possible O is confident many passengers will take your view of accepting missed ports, even if they become more prevalent. 

Edited June 12, 2023 by Hanoj

[hankandteri]

56 minutes ago, Snaefell3 said:

Neither TA, Oceania, nor NCLH here, but it truly sounds like you are pounding the Riviera's Master for a B.A.D. (best available data) decision, and doing it unfairly.

I’m not pounding the skipper because of a decision I doubt he made, but the entire organization for the handling of it. If anyone at O ever responds to my prior direct communications or this indirect one with any type of indication that they’ve heard my concerns, I promise I will give them public credit for that. They don’t even have to agree with me. 

[ak1004]

1 hour ago, Hanoj said:

Is this a fact? Or, your interpretation?

 

It's possible Oceania is making calculated short term decisions to reduce costs to positively impact their parent company's bottom line, even if it may affect long term prospects. NCLH stock price is well below its pre shutdowns price and has generally trended downward the last two years. Its unsecured debt rating is in the junk bond range. If NCL is not able to meet is obligations its future is tenuous. In such circumstances it is not uncommon for publicly traded companies to emphasize the short term over the long run. And, yes I'm speculating.

 

"Never again" spoken in the heat of frustration is not definitive. Its possible O is confident many passengers will take your view of accepting missed ports, even if they become more prevalent. 

 

Can you please explain how they reduce costs by cancelling ports? They surely lose huge revenues from the port excursions (at least $50k per port according to my conservative estimates), where do they gain?

 

As for "never again" - on our Regatta cruise last September, we met a group of ladies who booked two cruises on the first day, but cancelled them a few days later after Mexico was cancelled due to Hurricane. Not sure if they expected the captain to take the ship into the hurricane.. but the fact remains.

[ak1004]

48 minutes ago, hankandteri said:

I’m not pounding the skipper because of a decision I doubt he made, but the entire organization for the handling of it. If anyone at O ever responds to my prior direct communications or this indirect one with any type of indication that they’ve heard my concerns, I promise I will give them public credit for that. They don’t even have to agree with me. 

 

I think we can all agree that transparency and communication are NOT the areas O is strong in..

Edited June 12, 2023 by ak1004

[kirtihk]

On 6/8/2023 at 11:40 AM, ak1004 said:

@hankandteri thank you for sharing your impressions.

 

When I read those conspiracy theories about cancelled ports, my first question is: why would they cancel ports and lie about the reasoning? They surely get a lot of angry guests, what is their benefit of doing this? Not to mention lost revenues from all the excursions (my estimate would be at least $100k). They have everything to lose and nothing to gain, so why would they do it??

 

Call me naïve, but in my opinion, no line would cancel ports unless they really have too. Their explanation was that they were concerned to be stuck in Lisbon and lose the rest of the ports. I'm sure they had more information than us and didn't make the announcement lightly.   

 

Going to Morocco or Gibraltar instead? Easier said than done. Many popular ports are booked 2 years in advance. And even if Morocco was available, I'm not sure it was possible in terms of distance.

 

As a side note, comparing Carnival and Oceania is like comparing Mercedes and Fiat. Both will bring you from A to B, but this is where the similarity ends. Also, you mentioned the price on Carnival for inside cabin and compared it to Oceania PH.. not exactly apples to apples to say the least. But yes, obviously O will always be more expensive even for the similar category. 

With such a mentality, there shall be no cruises whatsoever anywhere except cruises to nowhere (there is always a concern of a possibility of being stuck in any port of call for dozens of reasons whether it's strike or whatever else the world or nature might throw in one's direction).

[ak1004]

1 hour ago, kirtihk said:

With such a mentality, there shall be no cruises whatsoever anywhere except cruises to nowhere (there is always a concern of a possibility of being stuck in any port of call for dozens of reasons whether it's strike or whatever else the world or nature might throw in one's direction).

 

This is not apples to apples comparison at all.

 

In this case, the strikes were a reality, not a possibility - the only question was the dates.

 

Anyway, I believe we covered the subject..

[kirtihk]

11 minutes ago, ak1004 said:

 

This is not apples to apples comparison at all.

 

In this case, the strikes were a reality, not a possibility - the only question was the dates.

 

Anyway, I believe we covered the subject..

Everything is a possibility.  Once we were on a cruise stopped in Lisbon, and while walking down on our own, we all of a sudden literally occurred in the middle of a strike.  It looked scary for some people (screaming and demanding crew surrounded us).

 

I have a better memory of Lisbon: during a different cruise, I broke 5 ribs while walking on a sleek famous stones during pouring rain in the construction zone covered with pasty dust near the port.  I still danced for 6 remaining cruise days.  What’s more scary, a strike or my condition when could not sleep (at all), cough, laugh, breath for next 3 weeks.

 

I still love  Lisbon (been there 6 times).

Edited June 13, 2023 by kirtihk

[Jayne E]

On 6/12/2023 at 2:40 PM, hankandteri said:

Did they say there was a port strike when there was none? Yes, they did.

 

Did they give a full explanation of why they really cancelled? No, they did not. Did they dissemble in their follow-up explanation? Why, yes they did.

 

I'm not speculating about the lie or the cover-up. They happened. You were there. I've been forthright in pointing out that I absolutely was speculating as to the real motives behind the decision since the cruise line wasn't interested in sharing them. Playing amateur detective/forensic accountant can be fun.

 

I'm kind of curious, AK, are you a TA or Oceania employee? You were on the same cruise I was, and your relentless defense of behavior that was not in your best interest puzzles me.

I was also on this cruise. We were initially told there were port strikes and that wasn’t true. I feel captain came on several days later with more detailed explanation only due to passengers quite angry when they learned there was no strike. 
Absolutely nothing added to sea day activities.  O made no attempt to liven up the day. 
This was our 20th O cruise, so we’re quite aware that this is not a cruise line known for day/night entertainment.  Food and service remained outstanding and we enjoyed ourselves despite missing 4 ports. 

[CardowMD]

When ports are missed, do port charges get refunded?

[ak1004]

5 hours ago, Jayne E said:

I was also on this cruise. We were initially told there were port strikes and that wasn’t true. I feel captain came on several days later with more detailed explanation only due to passengers quite angry when they learned there was no strike. 
Absolutely nothing added to sea day activities.  O made no attempt to liven up the day. 
This was our 20th O cruise, so we’re quite aware that this is not a cruise line known for day/night entertainment.  Food and service remained outstanding and we enjoyed ourselves despite missing 4 ports. 

 

Agree with your assessment mostly (small correction: 3 ports missed, not 4), and it was nice to meet you on the private tour.

Edited June 14, 2023 by ak1004

[LHT28]

2 hours ago, CardowMD said:

When ports are missed, do port charges get refunded?

NO

[Hanoj]

33 minutes ago, LHT28 said:

NO

Evidently, customer convenience is not a high priority as it seems O would rather have guests submit insurance claims for recompense of missed ports.

[Snaefell3]

3 hours ago, CardowMD said:

When ports are missed, do port charges get refunded?

 

1 hour ago, LHT28 said:

NO

Unlike many (most?) cruise lines, taxes and port fees are not a line item over and above Oceania's cruise fare, so....

[jaywoods678]

On 6/12/2023 at 3:56 PM, Hanoj said:

Is this a fact? Or, your interpretation?

 

It's possible Oceania is making calculated short term decisions to reduce costs to positively impact their parent company's bottom line, even if it may affect long term prospects. NCLH stock price is well below its pre shutdowns price and has generally trended downward the last two years. Its unsecured debt rating is in the junk bond range. If NCL is not able to meet is obligations its future is tenuous. In such circumstances it is not uncommon for publicly traded companies to emphasize the short term over the long run. And, yes I'm speculating.

 

"Never again" spoken in the heat of frustration is not definitive. Its possible O is confident many passengers will take your view of accepting missed ports, even if they become more prevalent. 

I completely agree with this. I can't remember all the exact details or reasons, but I have heard on numerous occasions that it CAN be in the cruise lines best interest to cancel - depending on the circumstances and other factors. I've been on too many where the ports were cancelled for not so good reasons and have heard crew members mention that corporate will sometimes make the decision based on fuel costs, tendering (of course, tender ports tend to get canceled more than others), and number of excursions, etc.

[bob brown]

4 hours ago, Snaefell3 said:

 

Unlike many (most?) cruise lines, taxes and port fees are not a line item over and above Oceania's cruise fare, so....

Yes and no.

 No, not added to advertised fares, as other cruise lines do.

Yes, they are charged to you, whenever you take your loyalty complimentary “Milestone” cruise.

Travel agents know what they are, as they only receive commission on the base fare, not on the port charges and taxes.

[Jayne E]

12 hours ago, ak1004 said:

 

Agree with your assessment mostly (small correction: 3 ports missed, not 4), and it was nice to meet you on the private tour.

Sorry, but we missed 4 ports. We were on the prior 10 day cruise and missed Amalfi port, for total of 4 

[ak1004]

16 minutes ago, Jayne E said:

Sorry, but we missed 4 ports. We were on the prior 10 day cruise and missed Amalfi port, for total of 4 

 

Well, this topic is about May 22 - June 1 cruise, which missed 3 ports not 4..

[susiesan]

On 6/14/2023 at 7:05 AM, CardowMD said:

When ports are missed, do port charges get refunded?

On your cruise, let's say average port taxes/fees are $25 a head per port. For 1200 passengers times $25 times 4 ports that comes to $120,000 that Oceania gets to keep. That's how they make money by skipping ports.

[basor]

22 minutes ago, susiesan said:

On your cruise, let's say average port taxes/fees are $25 a head per port. For 1200 passengers times $25 times 4 ports that comes to $120,000 that Oceania gets to keep. That's how they make money by skipping ports.

Port fees are not refunded in many ports if a ship fails to dock, the port keeps the money paid ....skipping ports is not a deliberate way to make money.  also the average port fees are closer to $5.00 per head when we have had them refunded on other cruise lines due to a missed port (Alaska, Carib, Europe, etc.)

Edited June 16, 2023 by basor

[ak1004]

10 minutes ago, basor said:

Port fees are not refunded in many ports if a ship fails to dock, the port keeps the money paid ....skipping ports is not a deliberate way to make money.  also the average port fees are closer to $5.00 per head when we have had them refunded on other cruise lines due to a missed port (Alaska, Carib, Europe, etc.)

Not to mention the revenue they lose from shore excursions. Probably at least $50k per port.

[PhD-iva]

Time to give it a rest?

[shepherd really]

On 6/16/2023 at 2:44 PM, ak1004 said:

Not to mention the revenue they lose from shore excursions. Probably at least $50k per port.

Oh please, an extra seaday means higher on board spend, 1200 passengers buying a couple of drinks here, a spa treatment there, small shop purchase, a pull at a slot machine and they are well ahead of the game overall.   They know that.