Cruise Terminal difficulties/disappointment

[Toofarfromthesea]

On 5/13/2024 at 4:21 AM, Honolulu Blue said:

Probably not, but I DO select itineraries (and their cruise ships, and cruise lines) based on where they sail from.  All else equal, I prefer to sail from ports with better terminals.

 

Better in what sense, efficiency or aesthetics?

[Honolulu Blue]

30 minutes ago, Toofarfromthesea said:

Better in what sense, efficiency or aesthetics?

Both

[Hlitner]

Select a cruise based on its embarkation terminal?  Really?  Would I prefer to take a cruise from Port Everglades, or Monte Carlo (where the last time we were in that port they did not even open up their terminal)?  One might also choose to cruise out of Civitavecchia (Rome) where it is very possible the "terminal" used might be a large tent!  Our next cruise embarks from Dubrovnik, which does not have what many would consider a luxury port facility.  I can think of many past cruises from awful facilities in parts of Asia

 

If I am taking a cruise that will last for a few weeks/months, I could care less where I might spend 1-2 hours during the embarkation process.  We have embarked on cruises from exotic ports that did not even have a real terminal, but that is the price for being in some fantastic parts of the planet.  Speaking of port facilities, some of the worst we have experienced (over 50 years) have been in the USA, such as an awful facility in Philadelphia, a dump in Seattle, etc.  And DW reminds me that the first time we embarked out of Istanbul (a fantastic city to visit) there was no terminal....we simply boarded from an open pier.  That city has now built a nice new terminal, which many do not like because it involves some long walks.  In the old days, when there was not a facility, a taxi could drop folks very close to the gangway...which we would take over most cruise terminals.

 

Hank

[capriccio]

10 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

Yeah, we carried everything from POV's to Abrams tanks.  Most likely they are using Baltimore or Norfolk for POV's to Europe.

I know the State Department was using Baltimore 10 years ago (when we retired).  With almost 2 decades posted in Europe we have lots of POV transport stories (our own and friends), none of them good.

[JVes]

On 5/14/2024 at 10:35 PM, Hlitner said:

We have been fortunate to have embarked on cruises from 5 continents it many different ports.  Some have decent cruise terminal facilities, and other ports have little (sometimes just a tent).  Cruise Terminals are expensive to build (and maintain) and somebody must pay the big bucks for that type of facility.  In the very busy ports around the world, facilities have been improving.  Other ports, lack the money or do not have the volume that would justify the cost.  In some cases, the major cruise lines (primarily owned by CCL, RCI and MSC) will help finance cruise terminals.  But again, this usually happens in ports where the volume does justify the cost.

 

My question to the OP is "are you prepared to pay more for your cruise if it gets you a nicer terminal?  The reality is that while we all appreciate nicer facilities, many are not willing to pay the extra money to subsidize the construction of new ports and facilities.  I should mention that over the past thirty years, we have seen lots of improvements of port facilities around the world.  Places like Tokyo, Barcelona, and Istanbul, have spent millions to improve their cruise terminals.  Others like Civitavecchia have been slow to spend the money, but even that port now has one very nice terminal (unfortunately it is not nearly enough to handle their volume).  Other ports, such as Venice, spent money to improve things only to later ban most cruise ships due to environmental concerns.

 

Hank

You make an excellent point. And thank you - all of you have managed to explain not only that it's normal, but why.

 

It was all terribly confusing to me, but I get it now.

[Hlitner]

3 hours ago, JVes said:

You make an excellent point. And thank you - all of you have managed to explain not only that it's normal, but why.

 

It was all terribly confusing to me, but I get it now.

You also raise a great issue which is it would be very nice to have a decent port facility in every embarkation port.  Some ports (Port Everglades and Port of Miami come to mind) have been working to improve their terminals and often partner with major cruise lines to pay the cost of new facilities.  But, with the potential of hundreds of embarkation ports, around the world, this is not going to be the norm.  

 

My only suggestion, to fellow cruisers, is to be aware that the port facilities might suck (for lack of a better term) and do not arrive (at the port) earlier than a reasonable embarkation time.  We know folks who will go to the port as early as 9am, when embarkation does not normally begin until at least 11:30.  Some of our friends like to go to the ports somewhat late (such as 2:30pm) which usually ensures they are quickly processed and allowed to board, without needing to spend waiting time in an ugly terminal.  We also know of one cruise line, which has tried a special VIP process at Port Everglades, where they have some cruisers (this is a limited group with status) to report to an off-site facility (i.e. nicer lounge) where they wait until it is time to be transferred to the port/ship.  I do not see much future for this system, since it can only accommodate a small number of passengers (such as those in the most expensive suites) but it does acknowledge that the cruise lines are aware that the process at the port facilities does leave a lot to be desired.

 

Hank

 

Hank

[navybankerteacher]

On 5/14/2024 at 11:06 AM, Mum2Mercury said:

Agree.  I expect a cruise terminal to be clean, have good bathrooms, and be staffed with efficient staff.

 

Beyond that, I have no expectations of the terminal ... certainly not of the ambiance.  It's just a necessary step in reaching the ship.  

Yes - it’s like the telescoping walkway from the airport gate to the plane - it is intended to get you there, not to entertain or educate you.