Cutting corners?

Most people are happily back on board for the Sea Bass or whatever great food they choose. And Happy Hour is always packed on long port days. We take all day private tours and our goal is to be back for the end of happy hour, we grab drinks and go to the cabin to relax.

I would bet Oceania ran the numbers and determined most everyone is back on board by dinner.

We often sit and watch crews tear down the port, it is usually mostly torn down a couple hours before sailing. Activity at the gangway is mostly dead in the evening.

While you might be correct about Oceania running some numbers regarding people being back on board, it just seems too coincidental that they have taken a look at all cruises at this time and made significant changes almost all seemingly resulting in less time in ports and longer cruising hours between ports just before the end of the year after the purchase of PCH when the amount of bonus paid to previous PCH stockholders is getting ready to be calculated.

Also, while these changes might be good for some of the customers, making changes after final payment for people counting on the port times promised when they booked and made final payment is like a kick in the butt to them and cause them significant costs and energy while still losing time on shore that they were counting on.

Have already seen posts from several people complaining about the changes and/or saying these changes are giving them serious thought about not booking with Oceania again. Is the extra bonus money worth alienating those people who may never be booking again????

I agree cutting port time saves money but for me it doesn't rise to the level of other potential cutbacks as long as the time in port allows for a full day of touring.

Believe me if Oceania cuts back food quality, service or ship maintenance I'm out of here, it will be Crystal?? here we come full time. Truthfully I'm not sure what is going on at Crystal now, they cut crew wages and staff is very demoralized.

We've spent about forty days on board since the NCL deal closed and I see no difference in the key areas important to me. And I'm watching hard.

While you might be correct about Oceania running some numbers regarding people being back on board, it just seems too coincidental that they have taken a look at all cruises at this time and made significant changes almost all seemingly resulting in less time in ports and longer cruising hours between ports just before the end of the year after the purchase of PCH when the amount of bonus paid to previous PCH stockholders is getting ready to be calculated.

 

Also, while these changes might be good for some of the customers, making changes after final payment for people counting on the port times promised when they booked and made final payment is like a kick in the butt to them and cause them significant costs and energy while still losing time on shore that they were counting on.

 

Have already seen posts from several people complaining about the changes and/or saying these changes are giving them serious thought about not booking with Oceania again. Is the extra bonus money worth alienating those people who may never be booking again????

The bottom line, bonuses aside, has always been important to Oceania as well as to any other business with a wish to avoid bankruptcy.

The changes discussed here may very well be a way for O to save money in view of rising costs of labor, food, ship maintenance, etc (just think of what you are paying for a gallon of milk or your steak at the supermarket compared to what you paid a couple of years ago :)). The alternatives may include letting some people go or increasing cruise fares, lowering the food budget, among others.

Of those choices I prefer to leave a port at 7 PM instead of 11 PM rather than the other alternatives.

While Oceania values its loyal customers (to a point), I believe their future heavily depends on "new blood". After all, how many times can the true loyalists cruise the Med, Carib and Baltic over and over again.

On our last cruise (Baltic), full 2/3 of the passengers were first time O cruisers. This represented a significant change for us. Many of these come from the mass market cruise lines where their expectations are different from those of O regulars.

Perhaps O is in a process of some changes and is accommodating to the current business environment.

All I can say is that I hope that these changes (if any) are minimal and do not affect our overall cruising experiences as we really like O and would hate to look for a new cruise line. So far we are OK - we'll see what tomorrow holds.

PS Cross-posting with Sammiedawg and agreeing with the sentiment expressed there.

Yes, I think we will all be watching closely, now more than ever. The only time we ever had a port missed (not really missed but did not tender) we were headed to Portofino Italy and it is one of my favorite places (hint). We were told the seas were rough, could not tender, and we instead headed to Genoa. Terribly disappointed and we all had to take the train to Portofino. We had a lovely day, enjoyed a seaside lunch in Santa Margherita, but it still was not the same.

We did feel something was not correct relating to the rough seas because it was as smooth as glass that day?? Grateful we had been there prior and know it well.

It has only happened once in over 30 days with O.

The bottom line, bonuses aside, has always been important to Oceania as well as to any other business with a wish to avoid bankruptcy.

The changes discussed here may very well be a way for O to save money in view of rising costs of labor, food, ship maintenance, etc (just think of what you are paying for a gallon of milk or your steak at the supermarket compared to what you paid a couple of years ago :)). The alternatives may include letting some people go or increasing cruise fares, lowering the food budget, among others.

Of those choices I prefer to leave a port at 7 PM instead of 11 PM rather than the other alternatives.

While Oceania values its loyal customers (to a point), I believe their future heavily depends on "new blood". After all, how many times can the true loyalists cruise the Med, Carib and Baltic over and over again.

On our last cruise (Baltic), full 2/3 of the passengers were first time O cruisers. This represented a significant change for us. Many of these come from the mass market cruise lines where their expectations are different from those of O regulars.

Perhaps O is in a process of some changes and is accommodating to the current business environment.

All I can say is that I hope that these changes (if any) are minimal and do not affect our overall cruising experiences as we really like O and would hate to look for a new cruise line. So far we are OK - we'll see what tomorrow holds.

PS Cross-posting with Sammiedawg and agreeing with the sentiment expressed there.

Very interesting post. I also put aside the bonuses that a couple of posters like to bring up constantly (even on the Regent board). Thankfully, the year will be up soon and that will no longer be an issue.

When we last sailed Oceania, we did notice that there were many passengers from main stream cruise lines. IMO, this is what many passengers will do as they get older (hopefully they will sail Oceania and/or Regent without children since neither cruise line can really compete with mainstream cruise lines in this area -- nor do they want to). Also agree that the expectation of the mainstream cruisers is different than going from premium cruse lines (HAL, Princess, Celebrity). I also depends upon whether they are used to the huge suites on a mainstream cruise line or not. I have met people that sailed in top suites and expect to be treated considerably better than passengers in the lower categories (i.e. a typical "class" system). I wish those passengers would stay with mainstream (just my opinion).

Strongly agree that the future of most cruise lines is dependent upon new cruisers (although "Baby Boomers" have many more years of cruising ahead of them.) The next couple of years will be most interesting.

The main reason I'm responding to your post is that you stated that would switch to Crystal if Oceania changed in a way that you did not like. Why do you feel this way? I understand that you may not want to sail on Regent since it is a sister company and Seabourn has too much smoking onboard...... but Crystal with set seating (or open seating by reservation)??????? We have sailed on Silversea and find it quite nice (only the two medium sized ships - the Shadow and Whisper). While we dislike the dress code, the ships are comfortable, service is great and the food is almost as good as Oceania's specialty restaurants (but definitely better than the Terrace Café or the MDR).

P.S. We will look at Crystal again when their new ships are built..... but, for now, we would not sail on their ships with small cabins and set seating.

TC2,

I did not say anything about Crystal - it was Sammiedawg that mentioned Crystal.

Crystal is the ONLY major cruise line we have not sailed on and have no plans to do so anytime soon.

However, never say never :)

TC2,

I did not say anything about Crystal - it was Sammiedawg that mentioned Crystal.

Crystal is the ONLY major cruise line we have not sailed on and have no plans to do so anytime soon.

However, never say never :)

I finally took the bait because my TA kept telling me I would love it. 2 on O for 2016 and Apr 2017 is Crystal Serenity. It will be a while before I can let you know what I think LOL!

We had 13 cruises with Oceania and only this year ( after NCL ) we had time cuts

in different ports. In the Baltic and now in October in the Med. There is a cutting of 7 hours on a 10 days cruise. I didn't get any information why. So I need to think it is to save money.

This thread made me check our Sirena inaugural in April and sure enough three of the ports have shortened times versus when we booked.

This thread made me check our Sirena inaugural in April and sure enough three of the ports have shortened times versus when we booked.

I am on the Sirena May 11 right after yours and just checked and we are OK so far. The only change is we disembark Rome at 8am vs 7am.

Also checked my July Sirena Med cruise - in two ports the departure time has been moved from 11:59 pm to 11:00 pm - a non-issue. And arrival time in one port went from 8:00 am to 8:45 am. Another non-issue as this is an overnight port anyway.

But I watch these boards just for the reason of learning what's new - thanks!

Most people are happily back on board for the Sea Bass or whatever great food they choose. And Happy Hour is always packed on long port days. We take all day private tours and our goal is to be back for the end of happy hour, we grab drinks and go to the cabin to relax.

I would bet Oceania ran the numbers and determined most everyone is back on board by dinner.

We often sit and watch crews tear down the port, it is usually mostly torn down a couple hours before sailing. Activity at the gangway is mostly dead in the evening.

And what about those ports where you are arriving two or more hours later in the morning?

All I'm saying is "tell me up front" and not after final payment when it;s too late to do anything about it?

And what about those ports where you are arriving two or more hours later in the morning?

 

All I'm saying is "tell me up front" and not after final payment when it;s too late to do anything about it?

I think that's the real issue, do not change the times after final payment, if you want to streamline the operation do it before final payment so people have the option of going or not.

I agree, itinerary changes should be made before final payment, however Oceania lengthy cruises must be paid in full five or six months prior to sailing. I'm guessing Oceania is still sailing itineraries planned prior to the NCL deal.

Some cuts to the schedule may not end up affecting you much. We're currently on the Regatta on its last Alaska cruise of the season. Before the cruise our arrival times in two ports were moved back an hour. But as it turned out we got to every port quite early, and in fact met the original arrival times for those two ports. For Victoria we were off the ship at 9:45 am, when the original schedule had us arriving at noon.

Some cuts to the schedule may not end up affecting you much. We're currently on the Regatta on its last Alaska cruise of the season. Before the cruise our arrival times in two ports were moved back an hour. But as it turned out we got to every port quite early, and in fact met the original arrival times for those two ports. For Victoria we were off the ship at 9:45 am, when the original schedule had us arriving at noon.

Really nice that you got to all those ports early however, for those people planning private excursions, they lost several hours when they could have been on tour because of the schedule change moving the arrival until later.

What is really needed is realism in arrival and departure times and not like what the airlines have done lately and that is to schedule the gate to gate times longer which removes a lot of late arrival information from the records as well as the same as O in that people now have down time that could be used productively and in the case of cruising for more time touring.

for anyone experienced in ocean travel and trying to cut things to the wire I say you should have learned the potential for changes.... really

Cutting several hours from a port should not really impact a experienced traveler. Look at the big pictire and plan for storms, strikes and just general problems. The world and cruise ships are not perfect. Ocean travel is in and of its self an adventure not run against a stop watch. Our reliance on electronic gizmos and instant results lends us to develop false expectations, expectations not possible in an ocean travel environment.

You, that is you and me need to develop a realistic expectation of how we travel and where we travel.

In truth , for me, just being on the ship with my fellow passengers and enjoying them is enough... shore stuff is gravy. To plan otherwise is not reality oriented

So calm down a notch, take life slowly and savor what you experience, not what you can cram into it !!!

hawaiidan,

BZ & +1

for anyone experienced in ocean travel and trying to cut things to the wire I say you should have learned the potential for changes.... really

 

Cutting several hours from a port should not really impact a experienced traveler. Look at the big pictire and plan for storms, strikes and just general problems. The world and cruise ships are not perfect. Ocean travel is in and of its self an adventure not run against a stop watch. Our reliance on electronic gizmos and instant results lends us to develop false expectations, expectations not possible in an ocean travel environment.

You, that is you and me need to develop a realistic expectation of how we travel and where we travel.

In truth , for me, just being on the ship with my fellow passengers and enjoying them is enough... shore stuff is gravy. To plan otherwise is not reality oriented

So calm down a notch, take life slowly and savor what you experience, not what you can cram into it !!!

For some of us 'shore stuff' is more than gravy...it's the reason we travel and the cruise ship is the means in which to do so. We are aware there can be unforeseen glitches but in the few cases mention in previous posts, the reasons given for these seem questionable.

Shore stuff is gravy for us as well; I find the difference in port time from 7 hours or 8 hours is immaterial. Neither is enough for in depth exploring, both are too long for a quick look. I personally believe if I schedule my visit that tight, I won't enjoy it as much because I'll be worried about time.

for anyone experienced in ocean travel and trying to cut things to the wire I say you should have learned the potential for changes.... really

 

Cutting several hours from a port should not really impact a experienced traveler. Look at the big pictire and plan for storms, strikes and just general problems. The world and cruise ships are not perfect. Ocean travel is in and of its self an adventure not run against a stop watch. Our reliance on electronic gizmos and instant results lends us to develop false expectations, expectations not possible in an ocean travel environment.

You, that is you and me need to develop a realistic expectation of how we travel and where we travel.

In truth , for me, just being on the ship with my fellow passengers and enjoying them is enough... shore stuff is gravy. To plan otherwise is not reality oriented

So calm down a notch, take life slowly and savor what you experience, not what you can cram into it !!!

O is doing this to "streamline" as they say. What needs to be addressed here is the fact that they changed all these times after final payment where people had tours pre-planned and this is not fair to the consumer who purchased a product. We all know about ocean travel (and if not I am sure you can fill us in) but the bottom line is "the bottom line" for them. Yes, to me the ship ultimately is the destination but I think we have all been given a raw deal without proper explanation from a customer service department who as we all know does not know the left hand from right. It would be great if someone might be placed in charge to remedy their POOR customer service.

(just joking here, but DH retires in Dec....we could move to MIA if O will offer him an offer his DH can't refuse)

O is doing this to "streamline" as they say. What needs to be addressed here is the fact that they changed all these times after final payment where people had tours pre-planned and this is not fair to the consumer who purchased a product. We all know about ocean travel (and if not I am sure you can fill us in) but the bottom line is "the bottom line" for them. Yes, to me the ship ultimately is the destination but I think we have all been given a raw deal without proper explanation from a customer service department who as we all know does not know the left hand from right. It would be great if someone might be placed in charge to remedy their POOR customer service.

(just joking here, but DH retires in Dec....we could move to MIA if O will offer him an offer his DH can't refuse)

DW of course..somehow can't edit

I understand peoples' frustrations at itinerary changes being made after final payment, and frustration with less time in port than you expected ... and extreme frustration when a port has to be skipped.

But even though we usually opt for DIY tours these things really don't bother me much. And even when a port has to be cancelled because of weather conditions, EVEN when it's a port we really wanted to see, it doesn't bother me that much. It does depend on the port, no question.

But frankly, when we are intent on really seeing a city -- we don't cruise to those places. For us the cruise function is to briefly see a port/city and decide if we want to come back and spend more time. In small ports one day can suffice. When you are talking major cities, it definitely does not --especially if you have to travel several hours just to get there. (That is why I always object to people who want to go to, say, Berlin from Gdansk or Paris from Le Havre!)

We all have different interests in our tours. Yes, if I've scheduled a day tour on a cruise and suddenly the ship changes the time we're in port -- I won't be happy about that. But I'm used to making lemonade out of lemons, and I try to do so at those times as well.

Mura

I understand peoples' frustrations at itinerary changes being made after final payment, and frustration with less time in port than you expected ... and extreme frustration when a port has to be skipped.

 

But even though we usually opt for DIY tours these things really don't bother me much. And even when a port has to be cancelled because of weather conditions, EVEN when it's a port we really wanted to see, it doesn't bother me that much. It does depend on the port, no question.

 

But frankly, when we are intent on really seeing a city -- we don't cruise to those places. For us the cruise function is to briefly see a port/city and decide if we want to come back and spend more time. In small ports one day can suffice. When you are talking major cities, it definitely does not --especially if you have to travel several hours just to get there. (That is why I always object to people who want to go to, say, Berlin from Gdansk or Paris from Le Havre!)

 

We all have different interests in our tours. Yes, if I've scheduled a day tour on a cruise and suddenly the ship changes the time we're in port -- I won't be happy about that. But I'm used to making lemonade out of lemons, and I try to do so at those times as well.

 

 

Mura

Mura,

I agree with your sentiment (except I am sure you meant Warnemunde and not Gdansk for Berlin :D).

Changes like these can be annoying at times (especially if announced after final payment) and non-issue at other times.

Still, I'd rather cruise on Oceania with a few hours less in a given port than on most other cruise lines with the originally kept port hours.

Cruising is so much more to me than a couple of hours + or - in a port (if that even happens).

NB Cinque Terre might be the exception to this as maximum time is really needed there. Also, skipping/short changing a port like Myanmar would be a real shame. For most other places it's a non issue for us.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DOJO466 View Post

O is doing this to "streamline" as they say. What needs to be addressed here is the fact that they changed all these times after final payment where people had tours pre-planned and this is not fair to the consumer who purchased a product. We all know about ocean travel (and if not I am sure you can fill us in) but the bottom line is "the bottom line" for them. Yes, to me the ship ultimately is the destination but I think we have all been given a raw deal without proper explanation from a customer service department who as we all know does not know the left hand from right. It would be great if someone might be placed in charge to remedy their POOR customer service.

(just joking here, but DH retires in Dec....we could move to MIA if O will offer him an offer his DH can't refuse)

DW of course..somehow can't edit

Deb,

Congrats on Jim's retirement - he deserves it and I am sure he will enjoy it

Just to be clear - are you nominating him or you for this position in the Miami office ? :D