clojacks

8 hours ago, mauibabes said:

@clojacks

Every night is SPECIAL. We have found when new friends join us on a cruise, there just isn’t enough meals to be eaten to taste all the delicious presentations and I am not talking just dinners. We have one friend we call”Lobsterman” and he eats Lobster Every Dinner, no matter where they are dining. He says Jacques is his FAVORITE. 

 

if you are on Marina, Riviera or Vista, you will have Red Ginger to dine in and my personal FAVORITE. You must try the Duck and Watermelon Salad, the Miso Glazed Chilean Sea Bass and if you like Rack of Lamb, the best served on the ship is in RG. I get the Sea Bass, DW gets Teriyaki Beef, aka Filet Mignon, and we order the small rack for the table to share as a taster. So many other favorites there too so everyone has something different. 
Toscana, the Olive Oil and Balsamic cart full of options to supplement the wonderful bread basket is Special too.  Try DW’s favorite, the Lasagne Bolognese, Grandma’s recipe that we have been eating for over 15 years ❤️. 
Bottom line, just go and enjoy. Northern Minnesota huh, we spent 3 years in the service in Duluth.
Mauibabes

Welcome to our home. Air Force, I'm assuming? 148th?

We have typically sailed Celebrity for a number of years, where there typically is a night or 2, depending on the length of the cruise, that is a special dining night where they serve lobster, etc. We are preparing to reserve our dining on our first Oceania cruise and are wondering if Oceania has any particular nights that are not to miss in the main dining room because of menu or experience? I believe we read that Lobster, etc is available in one or more of the dining venues, but is that an every night thing or a rotating thing? Any help on things for us to consider as we prepare to reserve is welcome. I believe we have 4 specialty dining meals at our disposal. 

Does anyone know what the current onboard booking promo is? We are sailing on the Marina in mid-March and just saw a Barcelona to cape Town cruise that looks real inviting, but are wondering if we should jump on what looks like a real good price right now, or wait to book onboard?

7 hours ago, julig22 said:

So, now that it's officially listed as a BF sale, there's another $40/p reduction. So getting better, probably worth a phone call now.

Also, Triple up is now in effect, balcony and above. Through November 15.

Excuse my ignorance, but what is a BF sale?

Just now, Asawi said:

I am monitoring a particular cruise. The price difference between the 35 % and 50 % promos came to a few Euros. The crossed over price was increased for the 50% promo. It went from around 2200 to 2600 or something like that.

This is exactly what I suspected….

24 minutes ago, cruiser2015 said:

It's just advertising to try to capture shopper interest.

If you see something "new" being promoted, do a mock booking to check out the net price for the cruise. Then you will know for sure.

Problem is, I didn’t check prices before, so kind of tough to do it now. I was in hopes that someone who HAS been checking prices would respond with their observation.

The latest offer of 2nd guest sails free supposedly ends today...though, I have my suspicions. The 35% off ENDS TODAY scam has been ongoing for months, so I have my doubts when it says ends today. My real question is, were the prices increased at the same time the 50% off came into play, or is the 50% truly a savings over the 35% off. I wish I had been watching NCL prices, but I really haven't, so I don't know if this is a good time to bite or not.

22 minutes ago, Harters said:

I've no idea how your government currently rates the warning level for the UK - but our own government rates the threat as "substantial", meaning an attack is likely. 

Well, the US just did this....

Worldwide Caution: Due to increased tensions in various locations around the world, the potential for terrorist attacks, demonstrations or violent actions against U.S. citizens and interests, the Department of State

advises U.S. citizens overseas to exercise increased caution. More at https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/traveladvisories/traveladvisories/worldwide-caution.html

36 minutes ago, Harters said:

Add France, Spain and the UK to your list of countries where terrorist attacks  have occured with some regularity. 

I don't think my intent was to initiate a list of every single country where some form of "terrorism" has occurred in the last 10 years, but it seems that's the interpretation some of you are making to my post. There are obviously countries where Terrorism has a much higher potential for occurring, as evidenced by State Department warning levels. But if it fits your "where are you going to travel then" narrative, knock yourself out.

7 minutes ago, ak1004 said:

 

Add to the list countries that support and/or finance terror and/or have a history of terrorist attacks and/or high crime (India, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, Oman, Turkey, South Africa, Honduras, Brazil etc) and the list of places to visit becomes really small.

I think you're missing my point and blowing this a little bit unrealistically.

20 minutes ago, basor said:

If I understand your comment, you believe the cruise line should stop offering cruises in places that might be dicey.....as I look at the World map and areas of the World that currently have a conflict, political unrest or humanitarian crisis, I am not finding many places that they could sail...add to that areas that have weather issues and the cruise industry might as well close up.  I believe that the passenger does have some personal responsibility to make a decision understanding the potential for an itinerary change or cancelation.   I understand that others feel the onus is on the cruise industry.  We hope to continue to have the opportunity to sail in the future and will choose the itineraries based upon our level of comfort

I think what I am suggesting, is that the cancellation burden not be beared 100% by the passenger, unless they have insurance. To me, it appears that the cancellation rules that have been in place for probably decades, are no longer relevant to today's cancellation situations. Why should those changes be shouldered strictly by the passenger. I'm not saying the passenger should get full compensation, but neither am I saying that the cruise line should get the passengers whole fare if they decide to cancel when a situation exists that obviously is not in either the cruise lines or the passengers best interest to sail in.

54 minutes ago, ak1004 said:

The situation in Israel is tragic. Hundreds of innocent men, women and children have been massacred. We have family (including our daughter) and friends in Israel, so we know the situation first hand. We should all remember how insignificant our problems are compared to what many families in Israel go though.

 

 

 

 

I would encourage ALL Posters to refrain from using the tragedy in Israel and Palestine as an analogy on this topic again. THEY ARE NOT RELATED... as a tragedy example. 

I am 99.9% sure the OP never intended her thread to become a discussion on what happened to her as some form of tragedy, but most likely a level of disappointment. 

As I have stated before, I side with the OP's desire to have some form of compromise arrived at. Whether it is cancellation without penalty, some level of FCC, full or partial, but to "force"...yes I'm going to use that word force, even though the flames are incoming...her to continue on a cruise that she did not book is a very bad look. Granted, Oceania is smart enough to know that the widespread distribution and knowledge of this discussion on CC is in the less than 1% range most likely, it doesn't mean it is any less reasonable to talk about. I have had ports changed, entire cruises changed ( a future Ireland intensive cruise that was100% rerouted as a Baltic cruise due to tender and erosion concerns due to seasonal winds), cruises chartered, and the most recent was a 14 day Best of Japan that was turned into a 12 day taste of Southern Japan and South Korea. I'm amazed at the good luck of some posters who claim to have NEVER had a port change in 30+ cruises. In every one of my cases, there was some form of concession granted without any discussion.

I guess one of the concerns I have is cruise lines themselves continuing to sell cruises to destinations that have had a past history of conflict, cancellations, disruptions, etc. We were one of the last cruises to visit Israel before COVID struck, and almost immediately, we were thankful that we were able to make it there without issue. Is it ethical to sell cruises that you know have a high possibility of not occurring in the sold form, and not offer some form of concession? NOT IN MY MIND. Just because you know that some passengers will book places that might be dicey, doesn't necessarily mean you should sell the cruise. This is not like a Gate 1 land tour where 40 people might be impacted. You are now affecting 700-1300 passengers who in good faith...not necessarily good judgement... trusted you as a cruise line to take care of them...both physically, and ethically. 

This thread has been a real eye opener on disrespect among the boards. Why is it so important to question the OP's motives for starting this thread? If it was to garner  a little sympathy, so what? If it was to gather information from others who may have faced a similar circumstance, so what? If it was to alert fellow passengers to the plight they encountered, so what? If you don't "like" an OP's approach, why do you feel the need to jump on them, as many of you have done. The cruise industry has dramatically changed in the past 3 years, and not necessarily for the better. Is it important that message boards change negatively as well? I hope those of you who felt the need to question the OP, and I'm sure I'll face the same wrath here in a second when I hit "submit reply", ask yourself if your reply is providing assistance or answer, or if it is just showing how smart you are in disagreeing with a poster.

2 hours ago, Psoque said:

I am not clear exactly what the OP is complaining about.  The original itinerary visited ports in Israel, Cyprus, and Egypt.  Now the ship is going to Greek Islands before going to Alexandria.  I’m assuming that it took a few days for Oceania to arrange for these changes, so they could not let OP know of the changes right away when it became clear that cruises to Israel was a definite no go.  I have no idea what can be done to make the new itinerary resemble the old one.

 

Maybe I am more cynical than the OP, but with what’s going on in Ukraine/Russia and now in Israel, I book a cruise with an assumption that changes could occur to the itineraries.  I’m assuming (perhaps incorrectly), that Oceania decided to visit the Greek islands in place Israel/Cyprus.  This cruise is no longer has any emphasis on Israel/Cyrprus ports, and that’s unfortunate, but I can’t understand what can be done to “fix” this.

If you have read through, which maybe you haven't, I believe all the OP was asking was to be able to cancel without penalty, or to receive some amount of FCC. I, myself, don't find this to be an unreasonable request...all things considered. And before 5 of you chime, I, too, know what the contracts say. That's beside the point. Maybe it is time for the cruiselines to ask themselves (yeah, like that's going to happen) whether their are contracts could be adjusted or changed to accommodate some of the unusual situations that didn't exist when they were written.

13 minutes ago, jonthomas said:

They can go much slower to the next port, thus saving  fuel.

And if staying in port less hours costs the cruise line less, BINGO !

Think of what they could save if they never left their home port and just docked as a floating AI for a week…

Out of curiosity, why would Port Said be changed and not Alexandria? Wouldn't both be considered relatively unstable at this point?

I know a lot of the posters are jumping to O's "legal" defense, but I tend to agree with the OP...these decisions were made prior to sailing. Whether the contracts...THAT WE ALL ARE AWARE OF...I don't see the point of berating the OP with the fine print... support O's ability to not issue compensation or allow the OP to cancel, unfortunately, these political situations are becoming more and more possible across the globe. So, why should the cruiselines not recognize this and alter their legally allowed practices in the name of "good business practices".

11 hours ago, FlyerTalker said:

 

Guess you missed where the OP specifically mentioned USB.

 

 

In the posters defense, as the OP, I was curious about any and all charging options, but may not have been specific about it.

I'm sure this has been discussed, but I'm going to risk it again. I understand that Marina has a combination of US plugs and EU/BG plugs, or at least that's what I think I have seen. What I am wondering is if anyone can specifically define which "international" outlets they are, as there are different ones? I was in hopes of getting the specific adapter, that has USB ports and US plugs on it, instead of the multiple location adapters that usually only have 1 US plug-in on it. We sail on Marina right before her refurb, so I am sure the variety and amount of plugs will change after, but I'm wondering what it has right now.

Wow, never in my wildest did I expect a simple question to elicit this much feedback. It wouldn't have affected our decision to book the upcoming Amazon cruise we have, but it sure does give us a heads-up on what "might potentially" happen. Very very interesting. I genuinely appreciate everything I am reading.

We are taking our first Oceania cruise in March and since we are new, we have been soaking up Oceania info from as many sources as we can, one of them being the social media site no one is allowed to mention by name on here. I have read a few threads that make sound like cancelled ports on an Oceania sailing are more common than one would expect. Is this the case, or have I found a few posts that someone had a bone to pick on?  

5 hours ago, edgee said:

AFAIK everybody gets 2 logins regardless of whether they have Simply More or booked under the older pricing plan. Became effective Oct. 1.

Interestingly, on the latest Oceania email we got, it lists "Free WIFI" under the Simply More program as being "per cabin", which is kind of confusing.

We just booked our first Oceania cruise and are tremendously looking forward to it. I could have sworn that I read that either with the Simply More, which we have, or with a Concierge Cabin, which we are in, we got 2 WIFI accounts, but short of bothering our TA with the minutiae, I thought I'd ask in here.

We recently had a terrible experience with multiple personnel on board the Silhouette that became so frustrating that we cancelled a future cruise to Japan, even though we will never be able to touch the price we were booked at again. Our situation onboard played right up until disembarkation, when it was finally resolved. At that point, we didn't have time to address our dissatisfaction with high enough staff on board, and decided I would follow up once we got home. I would like to contact the proper offices shoreside, that probably being Guest Relations oversight, and Executive Offices to pass on my treatment and concerns. Does anyone have appropriate email address to contact?

1 hour ago, Snaefell3 said:

Understand that until and unless a ship is using Starlink, with its polar-orbit satellites, the ship's latitude makes more difference than which ship.

 

The at-home-speed satellites are in Medium Earth Orbit over the Equator and go below the southern horizon before you get to as far north as Seattle or Southampton.

So, the Amazon cruise we are considering might end being a WIFI bonus? 😉

I’ve searched through older topics, but as with most lines, the quality of Internet is changing frequently and rapidly. I’m curious if anyone has any info on recent Marina internet quality?