Simply Less but Vista is Beautiful

[1985rz1]

18 minutes ago, Tranquility Base said:

In some booking locations eg U.K. and Australia, I believe gratuities are included in the initial base fare irrespective of whether the passenger is new to Oceania or silver.

That's my understanding.  The price includes the gratuities and the cost is folded into the base fare.

[Vallesan]

39 minutes ago, Croooser said:

A point of view:

 

1. Whether or not Oceania anticipated that unused shorex OBC would become a margin enhancement is speculation. Maybe they did not see this coming. Only O management knows for sure.

 

However, given the reports on these boards from more than one recent cruise, there are issues with availability of tours AND O shipboard personnel refusing to provide an alternative means of the customer recouping the value of the unavailable shorex.

 

IMO, There can be no way that O is not NOW aware of the situation and is actively choosing to NOT come up with an equitable solution. Otherwise, shipboard management would have the authority to provide refundable OBC or OBC not restricted to shorex if there is no shorex resolution.  

 

Perhaps, they are sailing mostly full and don't see the need to make any changes?

 

Perhaps, their financials are horrible and they feel they have no choice other than take advantage and not allow people the opportunity to use the shorex OBC in some cases? Remember, as has been previously pointed out, they not only capture all of the revenue from the booking, but also undoubtedly don't have to pay the 3rd party excursion providers? More revenue and lower operating cost. 

 

But, there is no way that they don't know about this and thus far they have chosen to do what has been reported.

 

At this point, it is becoming a test of integrity. And so far, O is failing the test. 

 

 

 

 

Looking at it from Oceania’s point of view maybe they just didn’t realise what a mess this new  system would turn out to be. They must have shed loads of people booked with SimplyMore so they could just be trying to work out the best way forward?

Change doesn’t happen overnight!

Edited March 28 by Vallesan

[daydreamer62]

30 minutes ago, Vallesan said:

Looking at it from Oceania’s point of view maybe they just didn’t realise what a mess this new  system would turn out to be. They must have shed loads of people booked with SimplyMore so they could just be trying to work out the best way forward?

Change doesn’t happen overnight!

And they may have gained as many as they shed.... Change is the thing that some will never like.. if you think of the many who were contemplating Viking who decided their prices are just too high but they liked their semi inclusive options there then Oceanias change may have drawn them in . (I'm one of them so I figure there are more ) But you are right some policy changes do result in unintended consequences 

[basenji56]

There was nothing wrong with OLife. You could use the OBC for excursions and other things. 

[shepherd really]

1 minute ago, basenji56 said:

There was nothing wrong with OLife. You could use the OBC for excursions and other things. 

You mean that non-refundable OBC that you could only spend on the ship but that you paid for with real money?  That was one "perk" that no one should miss.   Converting cash into Oceania funny money was never a deal.

[Tranquility Base]

29 minutes ago, shepherd really said:

That was one "perk" that no one should miss.   Converting cash into Oceania funny money was never a deal.

However, when booking from certain countries (ie: Australia) O Life was mandatory .

IE: No there was not a 'cruise only' option.

If one didn't want the alcohol or tours option, the SBC was the only default option left.

Edited March 28 by Tranquility Base

[edgee]

30 minutes ago, shepherd really said:

You mean that non-refundable OBC that you could only spend on the ship but that you paid for with real money?  That was one "perk" that no one should miss.   Converting cash into Oceania funny money was never a deal.

Yes, but at least the "funny money" from a cancelled shore excursion could be used to purchase goods or services or drinks on the ship. Unused SM shore excursion money from cancelled excursions goes back in the pocket of Oceania.

[shepherd really]

Just now, edgee said:

Yes, but at least the "funny money" from a cancelled shore excursion could be used to purchase goods or services or drinks on the ship. Unused SM shore excursion money from cancelled excursions goes back in the pocket of Oceania.

But so did the leftover funny money, in any case as Heinlein wrote;

 

 

"Certainly the game is rigged. Don't let that stop you; if you don't bet you can't win."

[Tranquility Base]

9 minutes ago, edgee said:

Yes, but at least the "funny money" from a cancelled shore excursion could be used to purchase goods or services or drinks on the ship. Unused SM shore excursion money from cancelled excursions goes back in the pocket of Oceania.

 

5 minutes ago, shepherd really said:

But so did the leftover funny money,......

Non refundable O Life SBC.....$400,

Oceania clothes in my wardrobe......many,

Not having to be taken shopping for shirts, polos, jerseys on my return home.......priceless.

[Vineyard View]

8 hours ago, durberville said:

I must say that now I’m a tad apprehensive about our first Oceania cruise. We have booked an excursion package which used all of our shorex credit and an additional $1000 or so on our CC. Most of our tours are scheduled for the last week of our cruise (Japan) because we’ve done most things “Alaska”. 
 

If rumblings are correct it is likely (or at least a good chance) we will have ports/tours cancelled near the end of the cruise with no opportunity to use the shorex credit. This is a worry - one I hadn’t really considered. 😕

If I understand all the posts, the fact that you have booked tours/excursions via Oceania, and your SM excursion gets cancelled, then they will credit your cc. If all of yours are backloaded in your itinerary, but you still have $1k on your cc, it sounds from other reports that you should be okay.  It’s those of us who don’t book ship excursions and do not have extra excursions booked on cc that end up with “simply less”. 

[mc_reeve]

9 hours ago, durberville said:

I must say that now I’m a tad apprehensive about our first Oceania cruise. We have booked an excursion package which used all of our shorex credit and an additional $1000 or so on our CC. Most of our tours are scheduled for the last week of our cruise (Japan) because we’ve done most things “Alaska”. 
 

If rumblings are correct it is likely (or at least a good chance) we will have ports/tours cancelled near the end of the cruise with no opportunity to use the shorex credit. This is a worry - one I hadn’t really considered. 😕

Us too - this is a big cruise for us (50th anniversary) and our first on O.  We used up our SM credit plus quite a bit more on a 20+ day BTB cruise.  We have been X Retreat cruisers in the past and one thing X did was refund cancelled excursions whether the port was cancelled or not.  

Edited March 29 by mc_reeve
typo

[aussietwo]

1 hour ago, mc_reeve said:

Us too - this is a big cruise for us (50th anniversary) and our first on O.  We used up our SM credit plus quite a bit more on a 20+ day BTB cruise.  We have been X Retreat cruisers in the past and one thing X did was refund cancelled excursions whether the port was cancelled or not.  

As you have used “quite a bit more” buying other ship excursions you would have to be unlucky to lose funds.  Those extra funds are credited back first.  It is only when those funds are exhausted and the credited amount comes from your “Simply More” ship excursion credits that you will lose funds.   Be aware that you will have an amount of “Simply More” ship excursion credits allotted to each cruise.  If you have excursions cancelled I suggest that you ask reception where the funds have been credited to and whether there is any remaining excursion credits.  
 

Best wishes for a very special anniversary cruise.  There are so many positives with O that I would be surprised if you returned to X or any other big ship.  

[aussietwo]

One question for our regular Oceania gurus - can ship excursion credit be used for transfers?   

[1985rz1]

13 hours ago, aussietwo said:

One question for our regular Oceania gurus - can ship excursion credit be used for transfers?   

No.

[IDL]

On 3/25/2024 at 4:39 PM, ORV said:

Most other reports say $100 per excursion, regardless of original price. Of course Olife could only get an excursion up to $200.

We were on the Vista last year and couldn’t dock at a port due to the weather.  As stated, we were credited $100 for the missed excursion which was not the stated price of the excursion but I was satisfied and we had a great cruise. 

[tigerfan75]

24 minutes ago, IDL said:

We were on the Vista last year and couldn’t dock at a port due to the weather.  As stated, we were credited $100 for the missed excursion which was not the stated price of the excursion but I was satisfied and we had a great cruise. 

Yes, as you say, O-Life had a recovery option.  Too bad SM does not have something similar.

[ak1004]

23 hours ago, Croooser said:

A point of view:

 

1. Whether or not Oceania anticipated that unused shorex OBC would become a margin enhancement is speculation. Maybe they did not see this coming. Only O management knows for sure.

 

However, given the reports on these boards from more than one recent cruise, there are issues with availability of tours AND O shipboard personnel refusing to provide an alternative means of the customer recouping the value of the unavailable shorex.

 

IMO, There can be no way that O is not NOW aware of the situation and is actively choosing to NOT come up with an equitable solution. Otherwise, shipboard management would have the authority to provide refundable OBC or OBC not restricted to shorex if there is no shorex resolution.  

 

Perhaps, they are sailing mostly full and don't see the need to make any changes?

 

Perhaps, their financials are horrible and they feel they have no choice other than take advantage and not allow people the opportunity to use the shorex OBC in some cases? Remember, as has been previously pointed out, they not only capture all of the revenue from the booking, but also undoubtedly don't have to pay the 3rd party excursion providers? More revenue and lower operating cost. 

 

But, there is no way that they don't know about this and thus far they have chosen to do what has been reported.

 

At this point, it is becoming a test of integrity. And so far, O is failing the test. 

 

 

 

 

 

I believe this is a common problem for all lines that have "free" (included) excursions or excursion credit.

 

Consider Silversea as an example.

 

Their pricing is significantly higher than their closest competitor Seabourn because they include 1 "free" excursion in each port. However, when I'm looking at our upcoming SS cruise in May, about 70% of the included excursions are waitlisted or full. They have "select" excursions which are extra cost. So you paid more for the cruise itself, and now you have to pay extra for some excursions because the included excursions are full.

 

Also, if they miss a port or cancel an excursion, there is no refund or credit. This is even worse than O.

 

This is why many people consider "free" (or included) excursions not a good deal for guests. You pay for them indirectly, but in many cases you cannot use them.

 

I don't know what a reasonable solution would be.

[Vallesan]

3 minutes ago, tigerfan75 said:

Yes, as you say, O-Life had a recovery option.  Too bad SM does not have something similar.

Who knows? Possibly if there is too much discontent Oceania May revamp its current policy with regards to SM tours. 
 

My thought is that if they start giving OBC to be spent on anything then people could book tours, cancel and then expect a ‘cash’, as in onboard, credit instead. So it could be that people book, cancel and use the credit against gratuities etc. A difficult one I think.

[ak1004]

1 minute ago, Vallesan said:

Who knows? Possibly if there is too much discontent Oceania May revamp its current policy with regards to SM tours. 
 

My thought is that if they start giving OBC to be spent on anything then people could book tours, cancel and then expect a ‘cash’, as in onboard, credit instead. So it could be that people book, cancel and use the credit against gratuities etc. A difficult one I think.

 

Maybe they can give the credit only if they cancel, not the customer (or the port is missed)? Same as with cruise cancellation policy. They cancel = full refund. Customer cancels = cancellation policy applies.

[Yesimapirate]

I'm what the long time Oceania loyalists would call "new".  While I'm not young, let's just say my parents are regulars on O.  Weve outgrown the NCL Haven (or maybe their cut backs forced us away???) and want to upgrade. I'm totally fine with Simply More.  Is it the best thing ever?  No but it's tolerable and I don't see a ton of difference between my upcoming Simply More and O Life bookings. 

 

Having said all of that, I'm be pretty annoyed if O canceled a port or excision I booked and I couldn't at least use it as non-refundable onboard credit.  While I know I'd throw the money away on crap I don't really want it need, at least I'd be able to use it for something.   Taking money from me and canceling through no fault of mine but keeping the money is morally wrong to me.

 

If something like this was done at a land resort in the US, the Attorney General of that state go after them.  If the rationale is O needs money,  raise your fare by $100.  No one would care or not book.  This is just stupid. 

 

 I personally don't think it's malicious,  just incompetence from the corporate office and the shipboard crew have their hands tied.  But I also think there have been enough cases of this happening that management should be aware and have a solution.  

[MEFIowa]

11 minutes ago, Yesimapirate said:

I. I'm totally fine with Simply More.  Is it the best thing ever?  No but it's tolerable and I don't see a ton of difference between my upcoming Simply More and O Life bookings.... 

Having made cruise-only bookings pre-SM and post-SM, and comparing my two upcoming cruises, one SM & the other not, the "difference" for the same cruise & cabin made pre-versus post-SM was about an $800 price increase. That's a "lot of difference". Cash up front increase.

[Yesimapirate]

14 minutes ago, MEFIowa said:

Having made cruise-only bookings pre-SM and post-SM, and comparing my two upcoming cruises, one SM & the other not, the "difference" for the same cruise & cabin made pre-versus post-SM was about an $800 price increase. That's a "lot of difference". Cash up front increase.

I understand your perspective.  But I'm personally ok with it as everything is more expensive and ships are full.  I expect to pay more now. Im also ok with them trying to make a price increase more palpable but wrapping it in a marketing exercise.   But I also get what other people aren't. 

 

What I'm not ok with is not providing something that's paid for. 

 

In addition to death and taxes, the only sure things in life are change and not being able to please everyone. 

[MEFIowa]

12 minutes ago, Yesimapirate said:

I understand your perspective.  But I'm personally ok with it as everything is more expensive and ships are full.  I expect to pay more now. Im also ok with them trying to make a price increase more palpable but wrapping it in a marketing exercise.   But I also get what other people aren't....

It was fascinating that O allowed 2024 bookings in early 2022. They didn't make that mistake for 2025 or 2026. So I could literally watch and compare a September 2024 booking made in early 2022 over time. We booked it cruise-only. Watched prices change due to sales and general price increases. As well as the impact of SM. We stayed cruise only under the 2022 booking.

[Snaefell3]

On 3/24/2024 at 4:28 PM, basenji56 said:

Regarding the canceled excursions, it is criminal that you just lose that money.  Has anyone tried going up the chain of command to get the Simply More changed to usable onboard credit?

 

The reality is that SM is "lipstick on a revenue-enhancement pig".  NCLH (and therefore we paying passengers) have $6,000,000,000 (that's with a 'B') of extra debt from the shutdown to pay off.

[ak1004]

2 hours ago, MEFIowa said:

Having made cruise-only bookings pre-SM and post-SM, and comparing my two upcoming cruises, one SM & the other not, the "difference" for the same cruise & cabin made pre-versus post-SM was about an $800 price increase. That's a "lot of difference". Cash up front increase.

 

I don't know why people still continue comparing pre-SM with post-SM. OLife is history. The only thing that matters is how the current prices compare to other lines. If you still see value with SM, continue booking SM. If not, vote with your wallet and book another line. It's that simple. 

 

We booked 3 cruises with SS despite the fact that we don't drink and prefer to book our own tours. Why? Because the itinerary and the price were right for us and those 3 specific sailings provided better value than O.