Bankruptcy settlement update?

[Keith1010]

I don't consider the EI program to be double dipping. Like most things, people can interpret it how they want.  

 

What I did say is what happens when you have unused sub credits when Moecker has started to make payments.  I was told by a Crystal Senior Executive shortly after the program rolled out and there were questions how the process works.  I went back to read what I was told. It was noted that once Moecker  starts to make payout to guests who were owed money then Crystal will check to see if you received money back from Moecker and if you did that will come off of any unused sub-credits.  

 

It has no impact on sub-credits you already used and as a reminder it does NOT impact money you will get back from Moecker.

 

Knowing how things can change I have gone back to ask about this to be sure what I was told is still the case.

 

Keith

[Whipsnade]

Vince is 100% correct 

[Keith1010]

On 8/12/2023 at 6:45 PM, Whipsnade said:

EI has nothing to do with Moecker. EI is a very welcome sales promotion for folks who are out some Big Bucks. EI will nit be reduced once we receive $$ from bankruptcy. 

You are incorrect on this.  

 

My original comments are correct.

If you have outstanding voucher(s) and Moecker makes a payout associated with the bankruptcy your vouchers will be removed by the amount. I have confirmed this with A&K.

 

 

 

[Keith1010]

6 hours ago, Roland4 said:

Agreed, but what Keith is saying is that any monetary settlement from Moecker in future would be deducted from any unused EI credits. That is NOT what I was told, and I asked that question specifically of our Crystal DSM. Again, the recovery from Moecker, if any, will be insignificant in the grand scheme of things.

Larry you were told incorrectly by the DSM. 

 

My information which I posted a couple of months ago came from A&K and I reached out to them a second time last evening and they have confirmed that my example is still correct.  I am dealing with senior executives at A&K.

 

I agree. The amount of money in the payout will be small and for people like myself who were owned quite a large some of money it is a nit.

Thankfully I have used one full voucher and three fifths of another one and plan to use the rest after 2025 itineraries are released.

 

Keith

 

 

[Keith1010]

All I just want to confirm once again that what I posted below is correct.

 

Example:

 

Let's say you were owed $25,000.00 and you got an EI credit of $25,000.oo with five sub credits each of $5,000.00.

 

Let's say before Moecker refunded you any money, you booked three cruises and used three vouchers of $5,000 each.

 

Now let's say you got a refund of $2,000.00 from Moecker as part of the settlement before you used your last two vouchers.

 

Your remaining two vouchers which had totaled a combined $10,000.00 would now be worth a total of $8,000.00

 

In short,

 

Whatever you got from EI's has no bearing on any money you will get back from Moecker because they do not check with Crystal about the EI program.  This is a Crystal initiative.  The only checking that was done is before Crystal issues the voucher they check with Moecker that what someone has requested is what they are owed.

 

However, should any money be returned to you from Moecker it does impact the value any unused vouchers.

 

This is how it was explained to me shortly after the EI program rolled out by a senior executive of A&K and the was reconfirmed by a note I just received from a Senior Executive at A&K.

 

Even though the potential payout is low, I do hope I am able to use my remaining sub-credits before the payout is made.

 

Keith 

[Whipsnade]

Roland is correct. Keith is incorrect. 

[Shorex]

Well, time will tell. However, couple of months ago, our TA explained the process to us exactly as Keith explained above and she had documentation. The debate will be moot soon. Hopefully, very soon.

[Keith1010]

1 hour ago, Shorex said:

Well, time will tell. However, couple of months ago, our TA explained the process to us exactly as Keith explained above and she had documentation. The debate will be moot soon. Hopefully, very soon.

Thank you.

 

I do want to note the following.

 

This is one that actually is very firm.   This is the policy as explained to me by the executive who set the policy a few months ago so I could explain it to others here and on another platform.  Back then there were all sorts of questions so I was very careful to get all the facts and have them reviewed before I posted them.

 

All iI did yesterday was reconfirm it when I got push back this time around although I didn't a couple of month ago. SO it goes.

 

So to me there is no debate and to me I don't care whether or not the previous poster believes me or not. I truly don't.

 

And to me I am hoping I can use my last sub-credits which have not been assigned before the payment is made even though the payment pales in comparison to what I was owed  To me like bread crumbs.

 

I do know that they plan to get a communication out on this in the coming weeks.

 

Glad to know your TA was up to speed on this. Mine was too but again my information came directly for the people who set the policy.

 

Keith

[Whipsnade]

As did mine. Also direct from Moecker. 

[BWIVince]

18 minutes ago, Whipsnade said:

As did mine. Also direct from Moecker. 

 

MM&A doesn't have any role in EI though, except providing Crystal with updated data records...  I think I would take anything they say about the rules or administration of EI with a grain of salt, especially compared with what's coming from Crystal's management.  That said, it would be nice if all of Crystal's management was on the same page, but that's a fantasyland that no travel supplier I've ever worked with lives completely in, in fairness.

 

Vince

[Whipsnade]

MM&A want as little to do with new Crystal as possible. They gave Crystal the amounts we submitted. That is the end of the line for MM$A. If you don’t believe me, call them. 

[Shorex]

Actually, Moecker does not control or influence Crystal policies in any way. Crystal management set the terms and conditions for distribution of and eligibility for the EI program. Moecker could care less about what Crystal does re the EI program.

 

Per the Crystal website:

 

"Will the credits I receive impact my ability to be refunded through the Insolvency process, my insurance, my credit card company or others?

No, Crystal has found a solution which will run in parallel with these proceedings. The Exceptional Initiative is purely a commercial gesture from Crystal."

 

What I didn't find on the Crystal website was clarification of the impact on one's EI after Moecker distributes whatever funds are applicable to each claimant. My TA was informed about the consequences, as was Keith's and likely other TA's who read and understood the information provided to them. The only reliable source on this subject of dissemination of the EI benefit is Crystal management. Crystal management WROTE and CONTROLS the EI policies in their entirety. And Keith got his information directly from Crystal management. Good enough for me.

[Keith1010]

30 minutes ago, Whipsnade said:

As did mine. Also direct from Moecker. 

As Vince pointed out Moecker has absolutely nothing to do with the Crystal Exceptional Incentive program.  

Crystal sets the rules of the program and it is the Crystal/A&K executives who have confirmed that what I have posted is 100 correct.

 

You are wrong and you are confusing people with your inaccurate information.

 

There is nothing more to say on this except what I've said already.

 

For those who have unused vouchers or sub-credits what I have stated is correct.

 

I plan to use my remaining sub-credits as soon as the 2025 itineraries are released and available for booking.

 

Keith

 

 

[TER777]

4 hours ago, Shorex said:

What I didn't find on the Crystal website was clarification of the impact on one's EI after Moecker distributes whatever funds are applicable to each claimant. My TA was informed about the consequences, as was Keith's and likely other TA's who read and understood the information provided to them. The only reliable source on this subject of dissemination of the EI benefit is Crystal management. Crystal management WROTE and CONTROLS the EI policies in their entirety. And Keith got his information directly from Crystal management. Good enough for me.

See https://www.crystalcruises.com/legal/exceptional-initiative-terms-and-conditions

[avalon244]

14 hours ago, Whipsnade said:

Roland is correct. Keith is incorrect. 

Better start preparing that apology post you'll owe to Keith now.

[crickette]

On 8/30/2023 at 4:47 PM, BWIVince said:

 

It can't be considered double-dipping because Crystal is just offering a rebate/discount incentive for people to book a cruise with them, and had no connection in any way to the old bookings with GHK.  Even if MM&A wanted to count EI as compensation, I don't think they legally could.  

 

NOW, if Crystal wanted to mail everyone an unconditional cash reimbursement, that might be a different story.  Even then it would be kind of questionable because, again, they still don't have any connection to the original transaction, but at least that would be closer to an actual reimbursement.

 

...But getting up to 1/5 of your loss back from another company via a discount on up to 5 new bookings is not technically a reimbursement, even if people feel like that makes them closer to whole.

 

Vince

Vince - I never mean to argue with you.  I appreciate your valued contributions too much to do that.

 

But it seems to me, that if Crystal is offering a credit, (or the guest received a real dollar credit from Crystal) a reasonable person would revise their claim with Moecker to reflect this amount.  I know that we did this - the Moecker deadline date required us to submit claims, one of which our credit card company paid after the June 15th deadline.  We advised Moecker to revise/reduce our claim with them.  It is not so much the onus on Crystal and Moecker, but on the Crystal guest, to be forthcoming.

 

I'll enjoy reading your thoughts.

[Keith1010]

The new Crystal has nothing to do with old Crystal.

 

The  EI program is not giving you money back. Rather to use the program you must spend money and what you get is a credit from spending money equal to 1/5 of a sub credit.

 

If I remember correctly, if one was owed money and booked a Silversea Endeavour Cruise they got a certain amount off. 

 

This is way different than getting money back from a Credit Card company that you were owed and was reflected on your claim to Moecker. That is money back where you didn't have to spend money to get your (Your is the keyword) money back.

 

This is only an incentive for those who book cruises and were owed money.

 

Big difference IMHO.

 

Keith 

[Whipsnade]

Once again Keith is totally correct. EI has nothing to do with Moecker claim. EI is a sales promotion tool to lure us back. Worked for me. Will use my five credits over next 18 mos. Canceled three SS cruises to do it. EI has had desired effect for me. 
The idea that they would lure us back with EI and then piss us off by deducting small amounts makes no sense. 

[BWIVince]

8 hours ago, crickette said:

Vince - I never mean to argue with you.  I appreciate your valued contributions too much to do that.

 

But it seems to me, that if Crystal is offering a credit, (or the guest received a real dollar credit from Crystal) a reasonable person would revise their claim with Moecker to reflect this amount.  I know that we did this - the Moecker deadline date required us to submit claims, one of which our credit card company paid after the June 15th deadline.  We advised Moecker to revise/reduce our claim with them.  It is not so much the onus on Crystal and Moecker, but on the Crystal guest, to be forthcoming.

 

I'll enjoy reading your thoughts.

Keith nailed it, but I’ll just add a few other points, and an example since it may be clearer if we take this away from the specific parties here.

 

I get your point, but it’s apples and oranges for the points I listed upthread.  A sales incentive is in no way considered reimbursement for a host of reasons, but not the least of which that you are not able to actually receive money out of the transaction, and you’re required to actually buy something with an unrelated (to the loss) third party in order to get any kind of incentive.  I would never update a claim for a loss based on some kind of sales promotion I got from a third party to book new, additional business.  

 

Let’s put it this way…. Let’s say I bought a defective Android tablet and filed a claim with the manufacturer.  While that’s working itself out, I look around for alternatives to use in the meantime, and I’m lured by a local retailer that’s incentivizing much more expensive iPads, and their promotion is equal to the value of the original Android tablet, with the condition that you just need to be a current Android tablet owner (and show proof of purchase).  I may consider myself whole because I sort of “got my money back” from the original Android investment, but who would consider their warranty claim settled with the original manufacturer just because an unrelated company gave you a discount on a new product you had to buy?  That’s what’s happening here.

 

I get that it may be confusing because the reverse can definitely be adjusted.  Being a marketing promotion, and being A&K was in no way responsible for and is not a party in the loss, they can absolutely adjust the incentive to use current numbers and not just prior claims.  They’re the ones discounting their product to incentivize new sales, so they have every right to give less of a discount if the customer already received cash back to cover part of their claimed loss.  They can basically discount as much or as little as they wish, provided its consistent with the stated terms and FTC practices, and they have no reason to discount the product more than a customer actually lost.

 

Vince

Edited September 2, 2023 by BWIVince

[Whipsnade]

Vince is, of course, correct and puts it very well and clearly. 
I might add that if, now, Crystal/AK were to change the rules and decide to disincentivize their excellent sales promotion they are certainly within theur rights to do so. Of course this would defeat the purpose of the entire EI effort and annoy us all. I doubt Manfredi or AK are that dumb. Together they are the best marketers in the industry. 
Time will tell. 

[PaulMCO]

By the way there is more money in the Kitty as ABC has just settled with the Insurance companies providing $15.5m less attorneys 30% fees and expenses for liability claims of the former owners and executives.  While not admitting any guilt, those executives are part of the settlement (including some familiar names).  More details and the documents can be found in the Crystal claims site.

 

ABC is still going through the verification process (at number 41) and the court is slowly sustaining the motions (at 19).

[vistaman]

Are there already people who got a check from Moecker ? 

[Keith1010]

13 minutes ago, vistaman said:

Are there already people who got a check from Moecker ? 

Not guests who were owed money.

 

Keith

[Whipsnade]

I have been on Explora for the last month so will not see ny mail until next week. Ladt I heard Moecker expected to make distribution late Sept early Oct. 

[Whipsnade]

Re Crystal EI credits: we spread ours over five cruises in the next 18 mos. Why not??!! For us that is $120K we were going to spend on some cruise line. Now Crystal has locked us in for next two years. 
At first I agreed with Stickman about Sakura being better than Nobu. Changed my mind.