When ‘Free at Sea’ is not Free at At Sea

[jimb98]

20 minutes ago, graphicguy said:

Take all of this, throw it in a blender, and come out with the cost of my cruise.

 

I always look at the total out of pocket.  

 

If, as the example is being made, Royal charges 2x the drink package compared to NCL, that VAT line item doesn't even remotely come close to what it costs to drink on a Royal ship.  And, adding to the out of pocket, Royal's fares tend to be higher than NCL's as a general rule of thumb.

 

VAT doesn't matter as I'm better off financially with NCL than I am with Royal, Costa, even MSC's "Easy Package" is about 3X the price of FAS, but includes the VAT.  It only includes drinks up to $10 ea.  You want to move up the ladder?  It's 4X the FAS package cost.  Still not comparable by any stretch.

 

As mentioned, Costa forces you to buy drinks a la carte  and adds VAT on top of that.

 

I like the way NCL does it.

This is probably the most rational response in this whole thread, even though I don’t personally agree with charging the vat.

[graphicguy]

1 minute ago, jimb98 said:

This is probably the most rational response in this whole thread, even though I don’t personally agree with charging the vat.

Thank you.  But, this would be a first for me.

 

I can make the most rational debate devolve into a street brawl without even batting an eye!

 

LOL!

[PATRLR]

1 hour ago, Captain-John said:

I personally am of the belief that an extra $50-$100 on the headline fare to 'absorb' issues such as this, or other 'nickel and diming' examples goes down far better. It's optics and it's messaging.

I agree with this.  So long as they really stuck to it and stopped the nickle and diming.  But I don't see that happening. 

[ontheweb]

2 hours ago, graphicguy said:

I do think NCL is having issues with policy as it applies in Europe vs U.S. based itineraries.

 

I’ve always felt that NCL’s IT has been, at best, klunky. And at worst, a roadblock.

 

Look no further than the gyrations the restaurant schedulers have to go through just to seat you at a pre-reserved table!  Or, what Customer Service has to go through just to fix an errant charge!

Here's another example of their klunky IT. On our cruise in August, we disembarked in Reykjavik. We had previously been charged $75 each with our BOGO for transfers. DW said, we are not going to wait for so long at the airport (we had a 5 PM flight), so she bought an excursion for us that eventually took us to the airport. We asked before buying it whether the original charge would come off automatically and were told yes. But it did not, and I had to go to customer service to get it removed.

 

And sorry to say, we were still at the airport forever as our flight was delayed. 😢

 

[RD64]

3 hours ago, graphicguy said:

True…some are getting themselves tied up like a pretzel because of the VAT being charged.  Pay it.  Make Spain happy.  

Exactly - pay it - or just don’t have any drinks - problem solved.

[graphicguy]

12 minutes ago, RD64 said:

Exactly - pay it - or just don’t have any drinks - problem solved.

I know people who cruise literally as cheaply as they possibly can.  Book out of season on older ships in inside cabins with no extras…. no drinks, no specialty dinners, no internet, etc.

 

They take more pride in getting “a great deal” than all the other “extras” will provide.

 

If you think about it, you get good meals in the MDRs and buffet.  You get good entertainment.  You are staying in a beautiful resort (albeit in small quarters) for really less than you can stay home and feed yourself!

 

Not my thing, but some do just that and are proud of their accomplishments!

[IAcruising]

6 minutes ago, graphicguy said:

Not my thing, but some do just that and are proud of their accomplishments!

 

Good for them. I'm far too old to care about such minor things.

 

[RD64]

@graphicguy I agree - I have run into so many of these people - not that there is anything wrong with that. Absolutely refuse to spend one additional dime - but my God - I will continue to sail with XYZ until I qualify for that free bag of laundry.

[RD64]

42 minutes ago, graphicguy said:

I know people who cruise literally as cheaply as they possibly can.  Book out of season on older ships in inside cabins with no extras…. no drinks, no specialty dinners, no internet, etc.

 

They take more pride in getting “a great deal” than all the other “extras” will provide.

 

If you think about it, you get good meals in the MDRs and buffet.  You get good entertainment.  You are staying in a beautiful resort (albeit in small quarters) for really less than you can stay home and feed yourself!

 

Not my thing, but some do just that and are proud of their accomplishments!

A beautiful resort yes - but (not you - someone I met last cruise) husband claimed to be a periodontist / university professor of a certain age. He and his wife were proud to be sailing in the smallest inside available on a guarantee, and not spending anything else. Thanks, but personally I would rather stay home. Said couple will also be going on a 17 day cruise to Hawaii next week, again in an inside guarantee. Said couple will only sail from Vancouver because they refuse to pay for airfare, baggage fees, taxis, or anything extra. Pride it may be, but I am more proud to stay at home. 

[graphicguy]

7 minutes ago, RD64 said:

A beautiful resort yes - but (not you - someone I met last cruise) husband claimed to be a periodontist / university professor of a certain age. He and his wife were proud to be sailing in the smallest inside available on a guarantee, and not spending anything else. Thanks, but personally I would rather stay home. Said couple will also be going on a 17 day cruise to Hawaii next week, again in an inside guarantee. Said couple will only sail from Vancouver because they refuse to pay for airfare, baggage fees, taxis, or anything extra. Pride it may be, but I am more proud to stay at home. 

I’m with you.  I consider booking an inside with no drinks, Specialty Dinners, etc a waste of money.

 

Book a Haven cabin for $4-$5K?  Money well spent!

[IAcruising]

1 hour ago, graphicguy said:

Book a Haven cabin for $4-$5K?  Money well spent!

 

Well, I'm not going that far. If you like an inside cabin, awesome. But if you're doing it just for the money, you're doing cruising wrong. Just book an A-frame on a river in Colorado.

 

[cruiser2015]

4 hours ago, graphicguy said:

I’m with you.  I consider booking an inside with no drinks, Specialty Dinners, etc a waste of money.

 

Book a Haven cabin for $4-$5K?  Money well spent!

4-5 K?

Not for 17 days, LOL

Maybe not even for 7 days.

[ShawnK]

8 hours ago, graphicguy said:

I know people who cruise literally as cheaply as they possibly can.  Book out of season on older ships in inside cabins with no extras…. no drinks, no specialty dinners, no internet, etc.

 

They take more pride in getting “a great deal” than all the other “extras” will provide.

 

If you think about it, you get good meals in the MDRs and buffet.  You get good entertainment.  You are staying in a beautiful resort (albeit in small quarters) for really less than you can stay home and feed yourself!

 

Not my thing, but some do just that and are proud of their accomplishments!

Sometimes staying at a good resort without internet, drinks and dinner is the best entertainment you can think of. But not all people will accept it and want it.

[ShawnK]

3 hours ago, cruiser2015 said:

4-5 K?

Not for 17 days, LOL

Maybe not even for 7 days.

If going to bed without dinner is okay for 7 days 😁

[insidecabin]

11 hours ago, graphicguy said:

Take all of this, throw it in a blender, and come out with the cost of my cruise.

 

I always look at the total out of pocket.  

 

If, as the example is being made, Royal charges 2x the drink package compared to NCL, that VAT line item doesn't even remotely come close to what it costs to drink on a Royal ship.  And, adding to the out of pocket, Royal's fares tend to be higher than NCL's as a general rule of thumb.

 

VAT doesn't matter as I'm better off financially with NCL than I am with Royal, Costa, even MSC's "Easy Package" is about 3X the price of FAS, but includes the VAT.  It only includes drinks up to $10 ea.  You want to move up the ladder?  It's 4X the FAS package cost.  Still not comparable by any stretch.

 

As mentioned, Costa forces you to buy drinks a la carte  and adds VAT on top of that.

 

I like the way NCL does it.

 

Most lines people don't pay the headline package cost there are always discounted packages and offers.

 

On NCL the headline is $109+20% one of the highest in the industry and is partially responsible for the high individual drink costs that are being used to calculate taxes on included(free) beverages.

 

Our last MSC the top package was £25pppd, it is far superior to the NCL package includes unlimited water and special coffee/tea in most venues.

Also includes drinks that NCL has put into the premium plus beverage package($138+20%) which still resticts to a NCL pink champagne.

 

Our NCL drink component of FAS is around £17pppd on 10/11n trips(counting 1 meal)

When discounted 50%(been every few weeks in the UK) its closer to £7-£8pppd.

 

 

Bottom line is the total.

 

 

[BunnyHutt]

15 hours ago, DCGuy64 said:

This thread kinda makes me laugh, in a way. As much as people on Cruise Critic casually talk about the many cruises they have booked, or how they simply have to pay for Premium+, or how they always sail in The Haven, here we are talking about comparatively trifling amounts of money, and you'd think it's the end of the world. Oh, I know there are those who say "it's not about the money." Yes, it is. It's always about the money. And it's not a lot of money, either. But hey, if some people wanna die on the VAT hill, go right ahead. I'm socking away some extra $ for our cruise in November, just in case.

Right?? And it’s a consumption tax, value of which cannot be determined until the goods are actually… consumed. And the bickering over the receipt? It’s so the consumer knows how the VAT is being calculated. Not exactly that difficult of a concept to grasp. 
 

As a general taxpayer, I would much rather be levied on my actual consumption versus some arbitrary value. We see enough of the latter in day to day life and it generally does not work in our favor. 

[ontheweb]

11 hours ago, graphicguy said:

I know people who cruise literally as cheaply as they possibly can.  Book out of season on older ships in inside cabins with no extras…. no drinks, no specialty dinners, no internet, etc.

 

They take more pride in getting “a great deal” than all the other “extras” will provide.

 

If you think about it, you get good meals in the MDRs and buffet.  You get good entertainment.  You are staying in a beautiful resort (albeit in small quarters) for really less than you can stay home and feed yourself!

 

Not my thing, but some do just that and are proud of their accomplishments!

We never booked out of season (DW was a teacher). But the rest work for us. Neither of is a foodie, I am not really a drinker and DW cannot drink as it is contraindicated with a prescription drug she takes. And we like inside cabins as they are dark for sleeping.

[RocketMan275]

12 hours ago, graphicguy said:

Not my thing, but some do just that and are proud of their accomplishments!

Life is too short to drink cheap wine.

[RocketMan275]

11 hours ago, RD64 said:

A beautiful resort yes - but (not you - someone I met last cruise) husband claimed to be a periodontist / university professor of a certain age. He and his wife were proud to be sailing in the smallest inside available on a guarantee, and not spending anything else. Thanks, but personally I would rather stay home. Said couple will also be going on a 17 day cruise to Hawaii next week, again in an inside guarantee. Said couple will only sail from Vancouver because they refuse to pay for airfare, baggage fees, taxis, or anything extra. Pride it may be, but I am more proud to stay at home. 

They could save more money by living in their closet for 17 daus and eating oscar meyer for dinner.

[DCGuy64]

15 hours ago, Captain-John said:

 

If we ever end up on the same sailing I'm sure we'd end up having a spirited debate or two. We might see the other side. This medium doesn't always make it easy.

No doubt, on all counts, @Captain-John!

[DCGuy64]

15 hours ago, graphicguy said:

If, as the example is being made, Royal charges 2x the drink package compared to NCL, that VAT line item doesn't even remotely come close to what it costs to drink on a Royal ship.  And, adding to the out of pocket, Royal's fares tend to be higher than NCL's as a general rule of thumb.

My point exactly. Some people who cruise would prefer to have an "all-inclusive price" that literally covers everything: drinks, specialty dining, spa access, excursions, taxes, daily service charges, the whole shebang. Others prefer to customize their cruises and only pay for the things they intend to use. The good news is, there are cruise lines that do allow you to pay one price and have no add-ons, and they are enormously expensive. NCL is a mass-market line, which means they're going to separate the charges, because the average cruiser doesn't want to pay more than $10,000 pp for a 7-day cruise. Royal always seems to cost more than NCL and MSC (the lines we cruise with most frequently), and that's before adding in the high cost of their drink package. Oh, sure, they've absorbed the cost of the VAT. Goody, and you've been gouged for the privilege of it, too. No, thanks. Not for me.

[Capitan Obvious]

Just for fun, look at it from the other side...

 

15 hours ago, Captain-John said:

'All the *bad* sentiment' - I've edited it. Sorry but you are just picking a fight. 'What am I going to do about it'? Come on. Unless you personally are the person at NCL responsible for this decision, you're coming on way too strong. I didn't insult your mother.

 

The person at NCL responsible for this decision? As though such a person would be seeking advice from Cruise Critic "experts". Have you considered that the "decision" isn't made by a person at NCL, but is made by the legislative body behind the VAT? You don't like the VAT, fine, but take it up with the government responsible. Blaming NCL is only shooting the messenger.

 

15 hours ago, Captain-John said:

You and I have disagreed on these boards before but I am starting to wonder why you so strongly and consistently defend NCL at every turn.

 

Every turn? Really? If that is the case, couldn't we (looking at the other side) ask why it is that YOU so strongly and consistently attack NCL at every turn? Not to mention the "Why do you sail NCL and/or spend your time on NCL forums if you have so many disagreements about them" question.

[DCGuy64]

5 minutes ago, Capitan Obvious said:

Just for fun, look at it from the other side...

 

 

The person at NCL responsible for this decision? As though such a person would be seeking advice from Cruise Critic "experts". Have you considered that the "decision" isn't made by a person at NCL, but is made by the legislative body behind the VAT? You don't like the VAT, fine, but take it up with the government responsible. Blaming NCL is only shooting the messenger.

 

 

Every turn? Really? If that is the case, couldn't we (looking at the other side) ask why it is that YOU so strongly and consistently attack NCL at every turn? Not to mention the "Why do you sail NCL and/or spend your time on NCL forums if you have so many disagreements about them" question.

You said it better than I could, @Capitan Obvious!

[cruiser2015]

4 hours ago, ShawnK said:

If going to bed without dinner is okay for 7 days 😁

Oh?

Didn't realize there was a special discounted Haven fare for dieters. 🤐 

[BunnyHutt]

Now here’s an important question… are my Bingo cards going to be subject to VAT when I’m on my Mediterranean cruise next year? 😆