Exceptional Initiative Email

[Cancun01]

Have the rules to the Exceptional Initiative changed.  I am not sure if I was asleep at the switch or if I received today’s email in error.

 

We applied 1 of the 5 sub-credits on/before October 1, 2023 and sailed in December 2023.   We received the max $2225 from the administrator in early November 2023 for the impacted voyage.  I didn’t book anything else using one of the remaining 4 sub-credits because it was my understanding that once monies were received from the administrator that the remaining unused sub-credits were considered to be null/void. 

A short while ago, I received an email from Crystal that stated as a “friendly reminder” we needed to use  our remaining exceptional initiative sub-credits for a voyage that takes place before Dec 31, 2025. 
 

I looked on the website and it doesn’t appear that the rules have changed but I thought I would double check with the “experts” on this board!

[BWIVince]

I don't know if they've done the true-up yet with MM&A (or even if they definitely will, considering the marketing value of the promotion)...  My remaining credits (such as they are) are still valid too.  If anyone wants to use them, now's the time.

 

Vince

[Mrs. Claypool]

I received that same email message, encouraging us to use all of our EI subcredits before they expire.

 

Thing is, we HAVE already used all 5 of our subcredits as partial payments on bookings that will take place before December 31 of next year.  

 

So I expect the email was sent to us in error.

 

For Cancun01– we made bookings with at least 4 of these subcredits even after we had received the $4,450 settlement money, and Crystal still went ahead and accepted our remaining subcredits.

 

So it appears that the EI offer is still good.

 

Emily

 

Edited April 25 by Mrs. Claypool

[cruise_loverinlaval]

1 hour ago, Cancun01 said:

Have the rules to the Exceptional Initiative changed.  I am not sure if I was asleep at the switch or if I received today’s email in error.

 

We applied 1 of the 5 sub-credits on/before October 1, 2023 and sailed in December 2023.   We received the max $2225 from the administrator in early November 2023 for the impacted voyage.  I didn’t book anything else using one of the remaining 4 sub-credits because it was my understanding that once monies were received from the administrator that the remaining unused sub-credits were considered to be null/void. 

A short while ago, I received an email from Crystal that stated as a “friendly reminder” we needed to use  our remaining exceptional initiative sub-credits for a voyage that takes place before Dec 31, 2025. 
 

I looked on the website and it doesn’t appear that the rules have changed but I thought I would double check with the “experts” on this board!

Hello, I see it as a very nice recognition of OC passengers.  New Crystal wants you back!  

[Galan32]

Called Crystal about the Exceptional initiative today.

They confirmed that we would receive one of 5 credits towards our up coming cruise in May.

I am wondering if this an internal mixup on their part in that we received a credit from them already.  However if valid it will pay for our excursions. 

[Galan32]

Forgot to add that the agent said that the amount would go towards the cruise fare and not obc.

[cruise_loverinlaval]

5 hours ago, Galan32 said:

Called Crystal about the Exceptional initiative today.

They confirmed that we would receive one of 5 credits towards our up coming cruise in May.

I am wondering if this an internal mixup on their part in that we received a credit from them already.  However if valid it will pay for our excursions. 

Hello, do you mean that you receive 2 of your 5 credits towards the same cruise?

[Keith1010]

13 hours ago, Cancun01 said:

Have the rules to the Exceptional Initiative changed.  I am not sure if I was asleep at the switch or if I received today’s email in error.

 

We applied 1 of the 5 sub-credits on/before October 1, 2023 and sailed in December 2023.   We received the max $2225 from the administrator in early November 2023 for the impacted voyage.  I didn’t book anything else using one of the remaining 4 sub-credits because it was my understanding that once monies were received from the administrator that the remaining unused sub-credits were considered to be null/void. 

A short while ago, I received an email from Crystal that stated as a “friendly reminder” we needed to use  our remaining exceptional initiative sub-credits for a voyage that takes place before Dec 31, 2025. 
 

I looked on the website and it doesn’t appear that the rules have changed but I thought I would double check with the “experts” on this board!

Maybe this will help.

 

I have used all of my credits totaling 10 sub-credits. I got the e-mail too.

 

I believe it went to everyone who had submitted requests for the Exceptional Initiative program.

 

They way it is supposed to work is there was a point in time that Crystal would start to reconcile with Moecker to find out any money you got. So let's say you were owed $20,000.  You had five sub credits each worth $4,000.00. You used one.  You got back $2,225.00.  They would reduce the amount of remains sub-credits by $2,225.00. Now I don't know if they take $2,225.00 and spread it evenly amongst your four unused sub-credits or take it off one. My guess is spread it evenly.

 

So ,yes you could have gotten money back from Moecker but if your outstanding money that you were owed when Crystal went bankrupt was greater than $2,225.00 you are still eligible to get some money off your cruise fare as part of the exceptional initiative assuming you previously applied for the program by the timeframe that was published.

 

Keith 

[vistaman]

1 hour ago, Keith1010 said:

Maybe this will help.

 

I have used all of my credits totaling 10 sub-credits. I got the e-mail too.

 

I believe it went to everyone who had submitted requests for the Exceptional Initiative program.

 

They way it is supposed to work is there was a point in time that Crystal would start to reconcile with Moecker to find out any money you got. So let's say you were owed $20,000.  You had five sub credits each worth $4,000.00. You used one.  You got back $2,225.00.  They would reduce the amount of remains sub-credits by $2,225.00. Now I don't know if they take $2,225.00 and spread it evenly amongst your four unused sub-credits or take it off one. My guess is spread it evenly.

 

So ,yes you could have gotten money back from Moecker but if your outstanding money that you were owed when Crystal went bankrupt was greater than $2,225.00 you are still eligible to get some money off your cruise fare as part of the exceptional initiative assuming you previously applied for the program by the timeframe that was published.

 

Keith 

Is some additional money  due to be expected from the assignee ?  Later the  river cruise ships were sold as well ?  

[Keith1010]

13 minutes ago, vistaman said:

Is some additional money  due to be expected from the assignee ?  Later the  river cruise ships were sold as well ?  

Not sure.

 

There are several additional legal pleadings on the Moecker site.  This seems to show there is a good amount of money on hand if I am reading it all correctly.

 

https://crystalcruiseclaims.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/04.19.24-Motion-Motion-For-Assignee-Fees-Healy.pdf

 

Keith

 

[vistaman]

I am not acquainted at all with a bankrupcy in the US ,  in Belgium it was already complicated...

[Galan32]

Cruise Lover, No we received 1 of the five

I was referring to a refund of our original deposit

[PaulMCO]

10 hours ago, vistaman said:

Is some additional money  due to be expected from the assignee ?  Later the  river cruise ships were sold as well ?  

No.  None of the ships were owned by Crystal Cruises LLC.

There were supplies and spares held in Holland and a settlement for these has already been made and accounted.

Edited April 26 by PaulMCO

[Whipsnade]

Moecker has indicated they will no longer mail checks. Any money from them will now come by wire directly to your account provided you sent them the proper information. 
EIs come directly from Crystal and are a marketing scheme to lure us back (working quite well) and have nothing to do with Moecker and any funds coming from them. 

[Whipsnade]

Finally received my wire transfer today. $4450 as promised. Also had an email from them indicating possibility there may be more coming before  the end of the year. Very happy. 

[vistaman]

I hope for a decent amount as CC went completely wrong in my country 

My losses were 18 k  and i cannot execute all the "special" initiative vouchers 

[travelberlin]

13 hours ago, Whipsnade said:

Finally received my wire transfer today. $4450 as promised. Also had an email from them indicating possibility there may be more coming before  the end of the year. Very happy. 

Glad for you. In our case it was not US 4450 for a claim for a booking for 2 people. It was just US 2225. Who knows the reason…they treated the claim as if it was ony one passenger.

Edited 20 hours ago by travelberlin

[Texas Tillie]

43 minutes ago, travelberlin said:

Glad for you. In our case it was not US 4450 for a claim for a booking for 2 people. It was just US 2225. Who knows the reason…they treated the claim as if it was ony one passenger.

 

Perhaps it's a local law that they followed. (You live in Germany?) Or, perhaps there was a mistake made. I'd certainly inquire as to the reason.

 

Patty

[vistaman]

reading all the above : did old Crystal not file for bankrupcy too early ??

years ago there was the case of AA airline  - they called for a particular    article or chapter  : some protection ? 

and mr manfredi  d' ovidio already made his interests somewhat clear   before the bankrupcy? 

in my offices we had to deal with so called fraudulent  bankrupcies  -  owners of companies took the money and made huge debts  ...and filed for bankrupcy 

 

 

 

[BWIVince]

1 hour ago, vistaman said:

reading all the above : did old Crystal not file for bankrupcy too early ??

years ago there was the case of AA airline  - they called for a particular    article or chapter  : some protection ? 

and mr manfredi  d' ovidio already made his interests somewhat clear   before the bankrupcy? 

in my offices we had to deal with so called fraudulent  bankrupcies  -  owners of companies took the money and made huge debts  ...and filed for bankrupcy 

 

Crystal wouldn’t have qualified for bankruptcy itself before the GHK shutdown, and Genting wasn’t interested in selling Crystal for what Manfredi and party offered.  Hindsight being 20/20, if they had known how the shipyard dispute would play out, MAYBE they would have made a different decision pre-Covid, but there were multiple factors back before the pandemic in play with the GHK shutdown that were different when the offers were declined.

 

I also don’t know that the path would have been so smooth if A&K or some other combo of investors had bought Crystal before the pandemic.  If someone had bought a going concern, their investment cost would have been infinitely higher than just buying two old ships and their branding out of liquidation — and pandemic shutdowns are expensive as heck…. More expensive than restoring a damaged brand, usually.

 

Also, people often forget Crystal’s liquidation wasn’t about Crystal or anything going on there.  Genting put GHK into liquidation as a circuit breaker to keep the shipyard dispute from hurting the parent company, since the liability with the yards and its property/projects was exponentially higher than GHK was worth.  Crystal was just collateral damage.

 

Vince

Edited 14 hours ago by BWIVince

[Whipsnade]

Excellent recap. 

[travelberlin]

5 hours ago, Texas Tillie said:

 

Perhaps it's a local law that they followed. (You live in Germany?) Or, perhaps there was a mistake made. I'd certainly inquire as to the reason.

 

Patty

No local law involved. Thanks for your advice. We will ask the reason.

[FlyerTalker]

1 hour ago, BWIVince said:

Also, people often forget Crystal’s liquidation wasn’t about Crystal or anything going on there.  Genting put GHK into liquidation as a circuit breaker to keep the shipyard dispute from hurting the parent company, since the liability with the yards and its property/projects was exponentially higher than GHK was worth.  Crystal was just collateral damage.

 

DING DING DING.

 

Absolutely.  And folks keep wanting to say that "Crystal went bankrupt".  Thanks for the reminder that it was the shipyard fiasco that dragged down the rest of GHK.

 

As I've said many a time....if Micky Arison ain't doin' it, there's a reason.

 

 

[Keith1010]

1 hour ago, BWIVince said:

Crystal wouldn’t have qualified for bankruptcy itself before the GHK shutdown, and Genting wasn’t interested in selling Crystal for what Manfredi and party offered.  Hindsight being 20/20, if they had known how the shipyard dispute would play out, MAYBE they would have made a different decision pre-Covid, but there were multiple factors back before the pandemic in play with the GHK shutdown that were different when the offers were declined.

 

I also don’t know that the path would have been so smooth if A&K or some other combo of investors had bought Crystal before the pandemic.  If someone had bought a going concern, their investment cost would have been infinitely higher than just buying two old ships and their branding out of liquidation — and pandemic shutdowns are expensive as heck…. More expensive than restoring a damaged brand, usually.

 

Also, people often forget Crystal’s liquidation wasn’t about Crystal or anything going on there.  Genting put GHK into liquidation as a circuit breaker to keep the shipyard dispute from hurting the parent company, since the liability with the yards and its property/projects was exponentially higher than GHK was worth.  Crystal was just collateral damage.

 

Vince

Vince as usual you are Correct.  It was caused by Genting and there is a lot to the story that may never be written.  On another note if the former Chancellor of Germany stayed on it is possible Genting would have gotten more money.  In the end just glad Crystal has the exact ownership they needed.

 

Keith.