NCL ruined vacation

You should also read Start at the top

@RocketMan275hmmm no direct evidence as no cruise line will open their books to the public. I suggest that skipping a port saves on port fees and regulatory charges. An extra day at see increases their bar, casino, beauty spa and other department revenue. Yes it impacts on shore excursions but they only lose their margin for a small percentage of passengers the take an excursion. @Panhandle Couple the captain of the star directly told my wife and me that the Star's itinerary allowed for the speed restriction. He confirmed the there was no reason why we couldn't have sailed to Antarctic peninsula. NCL saved approximately 700km of fuel. @Redtravel i totally agree. However, in our case weather was perfect, there were no health, security, mechanical, bio hazard or other reasonable reason for our change in itinerary. @cruiseny4life i cant deny that we still might have take the cruise. However Australian consumer law affords certain rights that cant be waived by an all encompassing get out of jail clause. The issue for us is that we weren't given the opportunity to consider our options. Re cost cutting. I also dont have a problem with that but it should be fair and reasonable and not at the expense of the passengers expectation and experience

@RocketMan275 i thought you were asking for evidency regarding cost cutting - which is the key reason why they drop ports. They are not going to publish that they intentionally delay advising passengers!

@RocketMan275https://cruiseindustrynews.com/cruise-news/2024/02/nclh-new- transformation-office-driving-cost-cutting/

@complawer: If we would have been advised before leaving Australia then yes. We would have had a discussion with our travel agent to move us to another cruise. Regarding tracking down 2000 people - yes that's what they should do. NCL does have everyone's contact details so how difficult can it be to email their 'valued guests'? The issue is that they didn't and not advising us until after boarding was strategic/intentional. The change of itinerary was driven by a cost cutting initiative (as described by NCL's President and CEO). This is where IT IS WRONG. My bucket list destination should not change because NCL want to make more money.

@complawyerNCL replaced Antarctic mainland and a day of coastal sailing with a few hours at South Shetland Islands and no explanation. Miami told the captain 2 days before cruise departure but didn't tell passengers until they were onboard. Then they did the same thing to the cruise that followed our cruise. The did same to a cruise around south africa. This is NCL’s current operating model.

In our case booking through a local (Australian) travel agency for a cruise provided by an American billion dollar company is better for us. NLC is happy to ignore complaints from a few thousand customer when they take nearly 1 million passengers per year. On the other hand the travel agency cannot ignore us and have to explain how our consumer guarantees have been provided.

See message #212 to understand NCL’s mode of operation

Compensation? Many passenger have written to NLC. They all received a standard reply saying nothing, offering nothing and rejecting demands for compensation. That's why our current strategy is to go directly to the company in Australia that sold us the cruise. Technically we dont have a commercial relationship with NCL Holdings. Our demand letter is in and now we wait for a reply

@KSSS2013 thanks we will. We have one booked for September but not NCL @yakcruiser missing ports for weather security or bio/health reasons are understandable but to drop the bucket list port on the bucket list cruise with no explanation is not acceptable especially when they withhold that fact until getting on board. We had 100s of angry passengers fronting reception on board demanding an explanation and none was provided and no sign of the captain

In Australia you cant waive your consumer rights (law) by taking a cruise under their contract. 2 days before sail NLC dropped the bucket list destination (paradise bay on mainland Antarctica) and waited untill after departure to advise passengers. Then they did the same thing to the passengers on the cruise straight after ours. On a cruise around Africa the did similar. This behaviour is actually NCL’s current mode of operation. We have learned through many sources, including Cruise Industry News, that this is part of NCL’s cost cutting transformation initiative. Harry Sommer, president and CEO of NCL Holdings is quoted as saying that NLC has adopted a “company-wide focus” to reduce costs, and a “relentless focus on cost optimisation”. We will not sail with a company that displays such low regard for its customers. NLC has lost its way because its moral compass is broken.