Stockholder Benefit

[RebekahTN]

    I alone own 100 shares of NCL Stock. They linked the full $100.00 OBC to my husbands account. I was expecting it to be $50.00 on each of ours. So, when I upgraded the Wi-Fi, I drug him over to customer service to put the charges on his account instead of mine. Same for when we bought the charms for my daughter's charm bracelet. A little more inconvenient for him, but I spent my $100.00 with his and daughters help. He also had $100.00 OBC from the casino that we weren't expecting. 

   It worked out.

   So in the scenario above where someone said, if it was split between the 2 friends although only 1 was a shareholder and the non shareholder has no interest in buying something, and so no interest in giving shareholder $50.00 for something they aren't using but would just be lost if they didn't. You COULD drag the friend to things you wanted to buy and have it put on their account.

I am pretty sure they would move it at guest services as well. Because my husband still had $8.00 left of the $200.00 OBC and I had almost $20.00 in charges on mine and guest services filled out a form and transferred those charges to him. We used the last $8.00 OBC and he got to pay the rest of my bill. LOL Better than loosing the $8.00 OR trying to find something for $8.00 that didn't go WAY over that we didn't need or even want.

[ChiefMateJRK]

40 minutes ago, RebekahTN said:

So, when I upgraded the Wi-Fi, I drug him over to customer service to put the charges on his account instead of mine.

Why did you and your husband have separate onboard accounts?

[SeaShark]

5 hours ago, cruiser2015 said:

While I respect your view, when you talk about someone who owns an insignificant portion of a major company as an "owner", while technically true, for all practicable purposes, is a poor description. Functionally, they hold no power or influence over the company's policies..

 

So? I hold no power or influence in our government, but that doesn't negate the fact that I'm a citizen.

[RebekahTN]

1 hour ago, ChiefMateJRK said:

Why did you and your husband have separate onboard accounts?

Because that is the way they do it? It is all under the same reservation, but they had my husband, me and my daughter all listed separately on the reservation. His Casino OBC showed under him, MY shareholder OBC showed under him, any purchases or swipes of his card to get drinks free showed under him as well as daily charges. My 13 year old didn't have anything showing under her. For some reason mine and my daughters' daily charges showed under me as well as any purchases I made. 

I call them different accounts because my stuff purchases/daily gratuities went on mine, and his went on his. Any charges I made did NOT come off the OBC showing under him (even though $100.00 - or at least $50.00 if going by stateroom for shareholder OBC was technically mine). So at the end when he had $8.00 of OBC left and I had almost $20.00 of charges, guest services moved my charges under his name and wiped out the unused OBC.

[ChiefMateJRK]

47 minutes ago, RebekahTN said:

Because that is the way they do it? It is all under the same reservation, but they had my husband, me and my daughter all listed separately on the reservation. His Casino OBC showed under him, MY shareholder OBC showed under him, any purchases or swipes of his card to get drinks free showed under him as well as daily charges. My 13 year old didn't have anything showing under her. For some reason mine and my daughters' daily charges showed under me as well as any purchases I made. 

I call them different accounts because my stuff purchases/daily gratuities went on mine, and his went on his. Any charges I made did NOT come off the OBC showing under him (even though $100.00 - or at least $50.00 if going by stateroom for shareholder OBC was technically mine). So at the end when he had $8.00 of OBC left and I had almost $20.00 of charges, guest services moved my charges under his name and wiped out the unused OBC.

Maybe the casino thing?

[cruiser2015]

2 hours ago, SeaShark said:

 

So? I hold no power or influence in our government, but that doesn't negate the fact that I'm a citizen.

True.

The point I was dwelling on was it looked like the comment you made implied that their was some sort of power inherent in being a stockholder.

[herbanrenewal]

Unless we can get a solo sale my best friend and I have shared a cabin on many cruises. My shareholder credit has been given to her many times, even when I'm the primary guest of record. We also have to figure out for ourselves how to split the free at sea credit.  Once when I booked an excursion before the cruise that was later cancelled she received the credit back to her credit card (Not my card that paid for the excursion). Because of the convoluted and sometimes irrational bookkeeping system all I can say is keep track of who owes who what, and only share a cabin with someone you trust.

[ChiefMateJRK]

1 hour ago, herbanrenewal said:

Because of the convoluted and sometimes irrational bookkeeping system all I can say is keep track of who owes who what, and only share a cabin with someone you trust.

Or just let NCL split the free money.  It's no big deal to hold 100 shares of NCLH.

[SeaShark]

4 hours ago, cruiser2015 said:

True.

The point I was dwelling on was it looked like the comment you made implied that their was some sort of power inherent in being a stockholder.

 

No, the comment I made stated that a stockholder was an owner, and as such, a stockholder shouldn't talk about the company as "them", but should talk about it as "us". Repeating again...if you are an owner in the company, you are "they".

[macewank]

11 minutes ago, SeaShark said:

 

No, the comment I made stated that a stockholder was an owner, and as such, a stockholder shouldn't talk about the company as "them", but should talk about it as "us". Repeating again...if you are an owner in the company, you are "they".

Why in the world is this conversation still happening...

[SeaShark]

50 minutes ago, macewank said:

Why in the world is this conversation still happening...

 

Your guess is as good as mine. My original comment was (properly) directed to the OP and for some reason this person decided to stick their nose into it with no clue as to what was being said. For some unknown reason, they can't/won't accept the idea that a stockholder "is" the company. 

[cruiser2015]

2 hours ago, SeaShark said:

 

Your guess is as good as mine. My original comment was (properly) directed to the OP and for some reason this person decided to stick their nose into it with no clue as to what was being said. For some unknown reason, they can't/won't accept the idea that a stockholder "is" the company. 

Well, my friend, these are public forums. Many noses may appear.

I still disagree with your representation in that implies too great a connection.

Difference of opinion. I'm just fine with leaving it with that.

[lele100]

On 1/3/2024 at 2:33 PM, SeaShark said:

 

Then don't ask, but you are still an owner of the company (whether you vote or not) and thus you are "they". Don't like it? Bring it up at the next stockholder meeting. But, IMHO, you can't complain about the benefit when it is clearly a "per stateroom" and not a "per shareholer" benefit. Perhaps you could or should have checked into that before you purchased shares of the company. I'd think you'd want to know exactly what it is that you're buying.

 

Funny thing is that if both you and your friend owned the stock, the benefit would still be the same...you wouldn't both get it. Also funny is that if you owned 50 shares and your friend owned 50 shares, you wouldn't be able to combine them to get the benefit.

I know it’s per stateroom and not per shareholder what I’m saying is they should give the credit to the person in the state room who is the shareholder. If we were both shareholders and NCL saw that when we submitted the paperwork then yes, go ahead and split it per person but if it is only one person being the shareholder, that person should get the credit, that’s my opinion

[ontheweb]

39 minutes ago, lele100 said:

I know it’s per stateroom and not per shareholder what I’m saying is they should give the credit to the person in the state room who is the shareholder. If we were both shareholders and NCL saw that when we submitted the paperwork then yes, go ahead and split it per person but if it is only one person being the shareholder, that person should get the credit, that’s my opinion

Probably makes sense, and that is the way other cruise lines seem to do it, but they have their own rules and are following them.

 

It's sort of like when you were a kid and questioned your parents, and they said because I said so. 🤣

[SeaShark]

2 hours ago, lele100 said:

I know it’s per stateroom and not per shareholder what I’m saying is they should give the credit to the person in the state room who is the shareholder. If we were both shareholders and NCL saw that when we submitted the paperwork then yes, go ahead and split it per person but if it is only one person being the shareholder, that person should get the credit, that’s my opinion

 

You are aware that the first part of your first sentence contradicts the last part, right? It is a stateroom benefit, not a shareholder benefit. Once a person accepts that, then the alleged "problem" goes away.

 

The both shareholders statement doesn't matter as only one shareholder in the cabin can submit the paperwork. If two or more occupants of the cabin are shareholders, there is still only one benefit awareded, and again, it it awarded to the cabin (via guest 1 and guest 2) not to the named shareholder. (for example, if there are three people in a cabin, and the third guest on the reservation is the only shareholder, then guest 1 gets $50, guest 2 gets $50, and the shareholder guest 3 gets nothing).

 

We can all have our "opinions", but what we are talking about here are the facts of the benefit, what it is and how it is awarded. As noted eariler in the thread, this is only an issue when the occupants of the cabin insist on having separate oboard accounts. It is a self generated issue.

[Sailing12Away]

Call me crazy as I haven't spent too much time looking into it as my companion traveler and I share the same house and bank account so it doesn't matter to us. But isn't the final invoice a single invoice per cabin? Meaning that if he gets $100 in extra cabin charges for booze upgrades and bottles of wine, and I have none, our final net cabin bill will still be $0 even though he only had $50 of credits (because I had the other $50 in credit)? 

 

The only time this scenario of having the stockholder credits split between the 2 guests gets wonky is when there is an uneven amount of spending and one guest feels 'owed' the extra $50 the other person had. It all depends on what exactly the rightful owner of the credits wanted to use the credits on I suppose, but beyond it being a dopey system - it honestly just works out to having to review that final folio bill together and sort out who owes who what. Or - keep it simple and say 'Hey, you're paying for the Uber ride home since you got the extra $50 credit on your account that should have been mine."

 

I can't imagine a scenario where 2 people are friendly enough to share a cabin together for a trip at sea, but not friendly enough to sort out a measly $50. It's honestly an extra round of drinks at the pub, or next lunch is on me type of thing.

[RebekahTN]

6 hours ago, Sailing12Away said:

I can't imagine a scenario where 2 people are friendly enough to share a cabin together for a trip at sea, but not friendly enough to sort out a measly $50. It's honestly an extra round of drinks at the pub, or next lunch is on me type of thing.

I agree on this.... but it could happen. We didn't get a single. I received one in the end to my email, with what I owed (daily fees for me and our daughter) and mine was charged to my card. I assume he got one and his daily fees where paid with his card. They didn't show up on my CC, so I am assuming they did his. I don't know if it being CAS made it weird or something else. If I was traveling with someone else, I would hope there was no question as to who paid which things. I would hope what was swiped with their room key went on their credit card and what I did went on mine. While I wouldn't be staying with anyone who I "Couldn't" work it out with.... but I probably wouldn't mention it, and hope they would if they knew their charges went on my account and not theirs. I might pull it up in the room and casually say, hummm, I wonder why this is on my account and not yours, but not push it, in hopes they would make it right. I MIGHT be a pushover who doesn't like confrontation.... EVEN if it wouldn't be a big deal. 

[kjquilts]

Funny thing .... I'm filling out the Shareholder Benefit Request Form for our upcoming

Spirit cruise ($250).  Under Name it shows "Owner of the 100 shares will receive the onboard credit".  However on every single NCL cruise where I've submitted the form and backup paperwork showing I own the NCLH shares the OBC is split between my dh and myself.  Not a problem for us as very long time married but if they're going to split the OBC anyway why put that wording on the request form?

[julig22]

11 minutes ago, kjquilts said:

Funny thing .... I'm filling out the Shareholder Benefit Request Form for our upcoming

Spirit cruise ($250).  Under Name it shows "Owner of the 100 shares will receive the onboard credit".  However on every single NCL cruise where I've submitted the form and backup paperwork showing I own the NCLH shares the OBC is split between my dh and myself.  Not a problem for us as very long time married but if they're going to split the OBC anyway why put that wording on the request form?

Good catch.  I seem to recall discussions about splitting the SH credit about the same time they stopped splitting the excursion credit.

As usual with wording from NCL, the per-stateroom terminology could simply be there just to indicate that it's only 1 benefit/stateroom, regardless of how many people on the reservation have shares. But no matter which way they choose, somebody won't be happy!

[Sailing12Away]

I'm almost certain on our last trip when we looked at the room charges on the tv in the room, all of them were under a single name, regardless of who actually swiped the card. But again - in our case, we only put a single credit card on file for the room, so that may be the reason they're on one. For folks who put separate cards for each traveler I guess that's when it gets tricky.

[ontheweb]

22 minutes ago, Sailing12Away said:

I'm almost certain on our last trip when we looked at the room charges on the tv in the room, all of them were under a single name, regardless of who actually swiped the card. But again - in our case, we only put a single credit card on file for the room, so that may be the reason they're on one. For folks who put separate cards for each traveler I guess that's when it gets tricky.

On our last trip with both on the same credit card, we each had an account we could see on the tv. The primary account, however, was the only one that showed both our charges.

[cruiser2015]

9 hours ago, RebekahTN said:

I agree on this.... but it could happen. We didn't get a single. I received one in the end to my email, with what I owed (daily fees for me and our daughter) and mine was charged to my card. I assume he got one and his daily fees where paid with his card. They didn't show up on my CC, so I am assuming they did his. I don't know if it being CAS made it weird or something else. If I was traveling with someone else, I would hope there was no question as to who paid which things. I would hope what was swiped with their room key went on their credit card and what I did went on mine. While I wouldn't be staying with anyone who I "Couldn't" work it out with.... but I probably wouldn't mention it, and hope they would if they knew their charges went on my account and not theirs. I might pull it up in the room and casually say, hummm, I wonder why this is on my account and not yours, but not push it, in hopes they would make it right. I MIGHT be a pushover who doesn't like confrontation.... EVEN if it wouldn't be a big deal. 

Charges are tagged to the card used for the purchase.

When checking in, if there are multiple passengers sharing the cabin, they ask for authorization for others to be charged to passenger #1's account, if that's what you want to do. Otherwise, there should be a separate tab pinned to another credit card.

[SeaShark]

17 hours ago, kjquilts said:

Funny thing .... I'm filling out the Shareholder Benefit Request Form for our upcoming

Spirit cruise ($250).  Under Name it shows "Owner of the 100 shares will receive the onboard credit".  However on every single NCL cruise where I've submitted the form and backup paperwork showing I own the NCLH shares the OBC is split between my dh and myself.  Not a problem for us as very long time married but if they're going to split the OBC anyway why put that wording on the request form?

 

Yes. It says "Owner of the 100 shares will receive the onboard credit", however you have to remember that "the onboard credit" that you will receive is a "per stateroom" credit and NOT a "per shareholder" credit. The owner of the shares receives the OBC in that it is assigned to the stateroom. Simple.

[jhunger]

I have applied for the stockholder’s OBC. Can I see somewhere that it has been issued before I board?  Does it show under “Payment” in My NCL?

[schmoopie17]

12 minutes ago, jhunger said:

I have applied for the stockholder’s OBC. Can I see somewhere that it has been issued before I board?  Does it show under “Payment” in My NCL?

It will appear at the top on your Vacation Summary as "$100 Onboard Credit." Then when you scroll down below the included amenities, such as FAS, etc, the credit will appear as "Non-Refundable Onboard Credit" in the amount of $100. In our case it is broken out as $50 each for me and Mrs. Schmoopie.

 

It's a good thing we're married so we won't have to fight over it...as in the examples above. We have better things to fight about...

 

 

Edited January 6 by schmoopie17