Breeze diverted to Livorno

The original port was Portovenere and we were told yesterday that we'd be going to Livorno instead. The official reason is a vague "change in port restrictions" apparently heightened security alerts made the port and/or WS feel that Livirno was more secure.

Many Cinque Terre tours disrupted/cancelled and pax unhappy, but these things happen.

At least Cinque Terre is much closer from Livorno.

Sent from my iPhone using Forums mobile app

Hmm, the next sailing departs Sunday (today if you are in Italy) and is scheduled to be there Monday, I suppose it will likely be diverted... time for some research, thanks for the heads up!

Hmm' date=' the next sailing departs Sunday (today if you are in Italy) and is scheduled to be there Monday, I suppose it will likely be diverted... time for some research, thanks for the heads up![/quote']

 

People who canceled their tour and just walked around Livorno inside the wall said it is a surprisingly interesting city.

 

The replacement for Cinque Terra By Boat involved an hour plus coach, then a packed public train, then a public ferry, then another train and then 90 minutes back by coach. Hardly the relaxing boat your we'd planned on! Some went to Pisa. The ship wanted $129 to go to Florence with a short talk followed by five hours on your own. The train was under EU20 RT. Possibly the biggest WS rip yet.

You would think that WS would give a better explanation relative to the reason for the diversion. Just giving a generic "change in port restrictions" is not what I would like to hear.

At least Cinque Terre is much closer from Livorno.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums mobile app

Actually it's the reverse - Cinque Terre is much, much closer from Portovenere than from Livorno.

Actually it's the reverse - Cinque Terre is much, much closer from Portovenere than from Livorno.

Indeed. I'd say it took 90 minutes by coach and then a train.

A quick google search of "cinque terre port restrictions" yielded this article from Conde Nast Traveler, among others: http://www.cntraveler.com/stories/2016-02-17/italys-cinque-terre-to-begin-limiting-tourists.

Possibly the ship's docking was affected by these tourist limits.

A quick google search of "cinque terre port restrictions" yielded this article from Conde Nast Traveler, among others: http://www.cntraveler.com/stories/2016-02-17/italys-cinque-terre-to-begin-limiting-tourists.

 

Possibly the ship's docking was affected by these tourist limits.

Interesting, but if WS didn't know about this until late in the season and 24 hours before our call they truly dropped the ball.

Agreed, more communication is always better than less with these kinds of things.

It does sound like WS dropped the ball. Since the article was published in Feb., WS should have been working the issue on a daily basis and, as a minimum, told the passengers early that there was a possibility that the would not visit CT.