Missed

[Gemrac9693]

Why can't they tell us why a stop got cancelled, should have been in Panama on overnighter then suddenly couple of weeks before it changes to 5oclock the next morning 

[wolft927]

The Honest answer is they don't have to. Your Cruise Contract clearly states ports and port times can be altered for any reason. Now with that being said, it would be nice to know why. We had our time cut by an hour in GSC this month and our time in St Thomas added 30 minutes. No real reason was given. Only times we were given reasons for port or time changes has been due to weather. 

[Gemrac9693]

We all know they don't have to but I'm talking an overnight stay not 30minutes, in UK we just think it's polite to give reasons 

[SeaShark]

1 hour ago, Gemrac9693 said:

We all know they don't have to but I'm talking an overnight stay not 30minutes, in UK we just think it's polite to give reasons 

 

Interesting. In the US we just think that when you want to ask "why" that you ask the actual party (in this case, NCL) and not random people who a) are not a party to the decision making, and b) have no idea "why"...THAT is the polite thing to do.

[RocketMan275]

2 hours ago, Gemrac9693 said:

Why can't they tell us why a stop got cancelled, should have been in Panama on overnighter then suddenly couple of weeks before it changes to 5oclock the next morning 

Why can't you ask NCL why the stop was cancelled? 

No one on CC can give you a definitive answer. all we can do is speculate.

[ontheweb]

We were told by e-mail for our cruise this summer that the port of Zeebrugges for Brugge was going to be missed. And they gave a reason, a very low tide of only 1 foot.

[Travelling2Some]

We were on the Bliss last winter and were supposed to have an overnight in Panama City.  We never docked and the only explanation came from a part-time resident of Panama who is very knowledgeable and posts on CC.  The reason was (might still be?) that the dock and terminal there have been under construction for, literally, years.  Not possible that NCL did not know this well in advance.  By way of contrast, here's the way Captain Kate does things at Celebrity: 

Consideration is always good form, even when not required.  Especially when it comes to your customers.

[n4w]

Why can't they?  Because like everyone else, they are more concerned with their own business at hand.  Like, why can't topic titles be more descriptive, provide more information, and be less clickbaity?  They don't have to, but in online forums, it's just the polite thing to do.

Edited January 30 by n4w

[Panhandle Couple]

5 hours ago, Gemrac9693 said:

Why can't they tell us why a stop got cancelled, should have been in Panama on overnighter then suddenly couple of weeks before it changes to 5oclock the next morning 

When, last week?

Next week?

Last year?

 

What changed, arrival or departure?

 

Which ship?  Bliss? or?

Was this even an NCL cruise?

 

Canal transit east to west, or west to east?

 

 

Edited January 30 by Panhandle Couple

[Panhandle Couple]

2 hours ago, Travelling2Some said:

We were on the Bliss last winter and were supposed to have an overnight in Panama City.  We never docked and the only explanation came from a part-time resident of Panama who is very knowledgeable and posts on CC.  The reason was (might still be?) that the dock and terminal there have been under construction for, literally, years.  Not possible that NCL did not know this well in advance.  By way of contrast, here's the way Captain Kate does things at Celebrity: 

Consideration is always good form, even when not required.  Especially when it comes to your customers.

The port was in use in December.  Certainly not completed, but in use.

 

 

 

[complawyer]

on the web. we were on the star in 2022 and one of the ports were brugge, it's a shame you couldnt dock there, it's one of the prettiest cities (places) we've ever been. 

this past summer we were on the dawn and couldnt stop in berlin and edinburgh. 

in 2016, we couldnt  dock in taipei or hanoi.

 

all these missed ports came with a great deal of disappointment. really wanted to see hanoi and berlin. 

 

as they say, them's the breaks, and what can you do. even given a plausible explanation, it doesnt remove the disappointment of missing places one actually was looking forward to seeing and probably one of the primary reasons to book that particular cruise

 

by the way, berlin and edinburgh due to weather conditions, hanoi/taipei, mechanical issues

[ontheweb]

We missed Brugge and Isafjordur last summer. Brugge they said was for extremely low tides. Isafjordur was missed by every sailing on the Prima. The dock was not completed, and the Prima either would not or could not tender.

[odie1024]

If it was December I had heard on the news there was unrest. looks like there was unrest in October and November also. 

https://pa.usembassy.gov/alert-december-20-demonstrations/

[kitkat343]

14 hours ago, odie1024 said:

If it was December I had heard on the news there was unrest. looks like there was unrest in October and November also. 

https://pa.usembassy.gov/alert-december-20-demonstrations/

It is possible that there was a strike or protest scheduled in advance for the second day, which would necessitate the cancellation of the overnight portion of this stop.  If that is the case, it would be in NCL's best interest to announce that, since most passengers would be disappointed to learn that they lost time in port but they would understand that safety needs to be the priority.

 

 

But the overnight port in Panama has had issues in the past - On the 1/27  Bliss sailing to the Panama Canal, the port stops in Nicaragua and Costa Rica were cancelled for safety reasons after final payment (which makes sense in Nicaragua but not for Costa Rica) , and replaced with Acapulco and Jamaica.  The port stop in Panama was changed from a full day and overnight and replaced with 4 pm - 11 pm, knocking out shore excursions.  That's the 31st comment on this thread:

 

 

 

On this Panama Canal sailing they also lost ports:  

 

People have speculated in the past over why this happens, and some people have speculated that NCL is trying to make more money with onboard spending.  That might be correct, but NCL also makes money off shore excursions so I don't really know if overall it is more profitable for NCL when the ship is in port or at sea.  It is true that a ship sailing faster needs to burn more fuel, so NCL can use less fuel (which technically also helps the environment, which is what they are claiming for at least some of the cancelations) if they can sail more slowly to the following ports.  

 

Threads on this topic pop up on these boards every so often, and this was the most recent one: