tarheelmjfan

2 hours ago, Germancruiser said:

That lawyer of the good Granpa is just plain greedy- there so a lot of money it for him- if the family wins that case. Which I don´t think they will- every court should dismiss this law suit without hesitation.

 

I've seen nothing that makes me think the Grandpa's lawyer is greedy. As a matter of fact, I haven't seen much of anything from his lawyer. The lawyer of the parents, who are also a lawyer & cop, is the one that is pursuing the civil case. The parents are the ones that are suing for monetary gain.

On 11/1/2016 at 4:26 PM, Homosassa said:

OK, as a follow up question: Which is the best side to book to see the ocean when at sea? :rolleyes:

Seaside, of course.

41 minutes ago, pinkie60 said:

David Sobe he never lived in South Florida. It probably wouldn’t bother me. 

Have you ever been to Alaska? If not, my guess is it would bother you. Hearing the big glaciers (not the frozen rivers 😋) calving is part of the experience. The guy that made the video is also correct that people will yell out, when they see something, so everyone can see it. I hope the other people around the loud cabin aren't on their once in a lifetime Alaskan cruise. 

FWIW, I live in South Florida & I would be annoyed to have to deal with that on an Alaskan cruise.

10 minutes ago, navy60wife said:

Well for me is better than going to Nassau and getting nothing as a refund.  It's in the contract, ports are NOT guaranteed.  end of story.  

I agree it's better than getting nothing, but it's not comparable to what those who booked on other lines received. The other lines aren't hiding behind their contract. As I mentioned earlier, this doesn't apply to me, but I think it's ridiculous that some people are equating a 50% + 50% discount to a 100% refund. They're not even close to equal.

1 hour ago, Birdie And Sue said:

Tips go to whomever you give them to, not to NCL.  The DSC also goes to the crew.  Excursions are 100% optional.  You get two cruises and pay for one, which is far more than what is required.  As they say, no good deed goes unpunished.

NCL also charges gratuities on their "free" perks. With this offer, you need to take two cruises you may not have chosen to take & pay gratuities on the "free" perks for another cruise to get the extra 50%. 

Is NCL giving 50% off of the total price of the cruise? If not that's not 50% off the cruise, if you're comparing it to a 100% refund. You'll need to pay those charges for two cruises you may not have chosen to take.

As far as no good deed goes unpunished, the good deed isn't very impressive, when it's self serving compared to other offers. Again, I can't believe anyone considers this offer comparable to the other cruise lines. This is simple math that should be obvious to everyone. So far, NCL is the only cruise line that's guaranteeing the results will come out in their favor.

5 minutes ago, Kingkonig said:

It’s not a “total refund” in the same way a cancelled cruise with a check in the mail would be, but a 50% refund, 50% cruise credit is them refunding 100% of the amount that you paid, whether you get it now or later.

 

Which might be (would be) considered shady business practices if you didn’t get to go on a cruise.  Is it to Havana?  No.  But it’s still (what was it, a 3, 4, or 7 day cruise?) a cruise.  There’s a reason there’s Terms and Conditions that protect the cruise line - and inform the customer - about port changes.

If it's the same as most cruises, it will be 50% off the base cruise fare not 50% off the total cruise price. If that's the case, people will have to pay the extra taxes & port fees for two cruises in order to take full advantage of the offer, even though they may not have planned to take another cruise prior to the cut-off date. They will also be giving NCL extra money for any gratuities added for perks, tips, any excursions booked through the cruise line & any other onboard expenses they may incur. The other cruise lines are giving guests a chance to cancel their cruise & be refunded all money they spent. They can then decide what they want to do with that money. NCL is guaranteeing they will be paid 50% of a Cuban cruise rate to go to the Bahamas, which won't come close to a 50% discount. They're also going to receive all added gratuities & onboard expenses on that cruise + 50% & added expenses on another cruise. They're guaranteeing they'll still make a substantial amount of money. The other cruise lines are cutting their losses & willing to not make any money on the customers that cancel. In this case 50% + 50% doesn't equal 100%. It's not even close.

PS: If they went against what is commonly done & truly deducted 50% off the entire cruise price, they would still be making money.

It's hard for me to imagine that anyone thinks 50% off of one cruise & 50% off on another cruise equals a total refund. We don't have a cruise booked, so this doesn't affect me at all. Regardless, it's easy to see that isn't the same as a cancellation, with a 100% refund.

1 hour ago, xDisconnections said:

For comparison, Space Mountain’s max speed is 28mph and with their recently added trim brakes, it generally doesn’t even hit that.

Space Mountain has the benefit of darkness to make it seem scarier. I've seen it lit up. Most people would find it very tame, akin to a kid coaster, if it wasn't a dark ride.

à chacun son goût......we did two back-to-backs on the Star four years ago.....totally unimpressed. It'd take an exceptionally priced deal to lure us back.

I also agree with this. We've cruised on Princess & have taken multiple cruises on Celebrity. The worst cruise I've been on was NCL Star. I've seen enough positives to give NCL another try, but another cruise like that one will be the last. FWIW, we think Celebrity is better than Princess, but we'll also give Princess another try.

cruiselover19811981,

 

A rule of thumb: no loyalty to any cruise line.

 

Three things that limit cruise life:

1. Budget

2. Free time

3. Loyalty to a particular cruise line

 

Enjoy the best option when and where it's available.

No loyalty.

 

Happy cruising!

I agree. IMO, those who are loyal to one line are unnecessarily limiting their options. They often don't know what they're missing.

Just that the OP obviously feels that it's only Americans with oxygen and in wheelchairs.

I'm American & I didn't read it that way. I got the feeling it was American's saying her DD's MIL shouldn't be cruising, if she had a heart condition making her frail. The OP was pointing out Americans have most likely seen people in worse shape on cruises, so they shouldn't be suggesting that someone with a heart condition shouldn't take a cruise. She was right. It was a ridiculous thing to say. Getting old w/failing health isn't a reason to stop cruising or doing anything else. You buy insurance & enjoy the life you have left. If you're going to be offended, be offended by the people who think people with failing health should stop cruising.

Thanks again for reading. I will be posting a little bit tonight. :cool:

 

 

 

Thanks for following along! To tell you the truth, I thought there were more "locals" there than tourists. I would highly recommend it! :cool:

Thanks. We'll have to give it a try.

We ate there a 2 or 3 years ago, it was good but very crowded. We recommended it for some family that live outside of Fort Lauderdale.

Thanks

I've been enjoying your review. You've finally made it to my backyard. I'm looking forward to seeing what you guys did in this area. We've never been to the Rustic Inn Crab House, because we're afraid it's yet another tourist trap. Would you recommend it for locals?

Maybe not a package, but charge, say, $2.00 per soda you bring on the ship. It wouldn't be as much as they would get if you purchase it, but at least it would be some revenue and since folks say they don't bring it on to save money, they shouldn't have an issue.

That would work for me too. Any policy that allows me to carry on my soft drink of choice works for me. Considering how much Diet Pepsi I drink, paying the package price in advance would probably be cheaper.:o

I haven't read all the posts, but I have your solution. As a Diet Pepsi drinker, I think Diet Coke tastes like flat Diet Pepsi. Have them buy a Diet Pepsi in advance, leave it sitting open to go flat & they should love it. ;) Seriously, when I cruise on a line that only offers Diet Coke, I resign myself to the fact that I'm going to be drinking the equivalent of flat Diet Pepsi for a week. Like others have posted, I buy Diet Pepsi in the ports that offer it. I think Pepsi Lite that you find in some countries is more like Diet Coke than Diet Pepsi, so buying that is a waste of time. It's a shame that all cruise lines don't allow you to carry on your soft drink of choice. I'd be happy to buy a soda package on most lines, if that meant they would allow me to carry on all the Diet Pepsi I want. The availability of Diet Pepsi is one of the few things I liked about my NCL cruise. I do want to try one of NCL's newer ships & Diet Pepsi is a selling point for me.

My wife would hope not!

I'm with her. (y)

Totally unrelated to your post, I just wanted to say I love your forum name. As someone who went to UNC-CH, stuff like that always stands out to me. Go Heels!

(y) Gotta represent the Heels. :D That game was too close for comfort today. :eek:

I need to bring my own salad dressing because I have food allergies and I cannot use the salad dressings that they have onboard. Are they going to give me trouble bringing something in a sealed bottle.

 

Last year I tried to bring Coke in a bottle and they confiscated it and told me that I could not bring anything in a bottle only cans.

Is there a salad dressing you can eat in the individual packets that you can buy at grocery stores in the deli section or convenience stores in the premade salads section? You should be able to carry those on. If not, I'd put the bottle in my carry-on & hope for the best.

I work for a legislator (before you start, I’m Canadian...) and we get this argument all the time.

 

Why should I pay for universal health care? Because when you or your loved ones need it, it will be there.

 

Why should I pay school taxes? Because an educated society is of collective benefit to our society.

 

So why should you pay for the casino, the gym, the pool, television channels? Because they increase the variety of entertainment options onboard, attract new people to cruising, and continue to make cruise lines viable for the companies which own them.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I wish I could LIKE this post. More enlightened people shouldn't have a problem understanding this.

Who really cares about tv stations?

Obviously, some people do or this thread wouldn't exist. :confused:

Unless they charge for everything by consumption (which would be a nightmare and is impossible in 2018 as I see it) people are going to be "subsidizing" included services and amenities that aren't used. Childless people "subsidize" camp carnival. People who don't do trivia "subsidize" the trivia. Non-smokers "subsidize" the smoking sections. People who don't workout "subsidize" the gym. I "subsidize" the toilet paper because I am always so constipated the first few days when I travel that there's no way I get my money worth. Poor use or poor understanding of the term when used this way.

I agree. The only way this type of argument holds merit is if everything is charged a la carte. People will always be paying for services they don't use. Until something is taken away that someone uses, they will never see a problem with it. That's short sighted at best. After reading these boards, I think everything being a la carte may not be a bad idea. I don't want to subsidize child care, the gym, trivia, smoking sections, waterworks, the buffet, the main dining room in the evening or other services I don't use. In reality, that's not feasible. People need to realize that the fact that they don't use something doesn't mean it's not important to others. In other words, people need to get over themselves & realize everything isn't about them & their greedy, selfish selves.

FWIW, I wouldn't be happy to miss important sports broadcasts, but couldn't care less about the networks otherwise. That doesn't mean I can't see why some people would miss the scheduled network broadcasts. If it's important to some, I'm okay with paying a stipend for the networks.

Thank you! I'm glad I'm not the only one that thought this.

I'm guessing most of us thought that. A couple people appear to have no objectivity as far as RCI is concerned. If nothing else, I've learned whose opinion to ignore, when asking questions about an RCI cruise. :rolleyes:

Again, I'm not saying anything about travel from Miami to Key West using this ferry service. I'm saying that there exists a US flag ferry operation from Key West to the mainland of Florida, so that if a foreign flag cruise ship is allowed to carry a passenger from Key West to anywhere on the mainland, then that ferry operation would have the ability to argue that they are being discriminated against by being forced to be a US flag operation. It has nothing to do with Miami in particular.

I understand that, but the original discussion we were commenting on was concerning Miami to KW. IMO, it would be a really hard sell to convince anyone that the ferry from Marco Island or Ft Myers is a viable option for those traveling from Miami to KW. I just don't think anyone would buy into that, if that was what it took to allow a foreign flagged vessel to do that run. Port TB would make a good argument, but that wasn't in consideration, when I originally replied to your post. Now that you've evolved the discussion to include all of Florida, in order to support your argument, the discussion has changed. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one, if we're sticking to the original topic of discussion, which was MIA to KW.

I'm not saying that this is in competition to what the people did in the OP's post, of traveling from Key West to Miami. I am saying that the Key West Express ferry would have a legal challenge to claim that they should be allowed to operate the Key West to Fort Myers ferry under a foreign flag if the cruise ship could transport a passenger from Key West to Miami without a penalty. As soon as a precedent is set, everyone in the same, or even similar circumstances gets the same protection under the law (no discrimination), so the small ferry operator could say, "you let the big cruise ship do this, you're discriminating against me, because I'm a small operator. I want to flag my boats in the Bahamas, not pay tax on the revenue, not hire US crew, and not pay US wages, and not have to meet USCG regulations. Your discrimination is harming the ability of my company to make a good income".

I understand what you're saying, but I don't see how you could convince anyone that driving from Miami to Marco Island or Ft. Myers to travel to Key West via Ferry makes sense. That's really not a viable option. As I mentioned earlier, Port Tampa Bay to KW makes sense. Using that option to reach KW from Miami doesn't.