leaveitallbehind

I don't see how it would be remotely feasible to include any possible optional purchase in the total cruise fare plus port fees and taxes scenario. There are dozens of options including wifi, drink packages, shore excursions, etc. How could you possibly include any or all of them in a total fare disclosure under the CA regulation? That IMO is not what that is about. CA is mandating only required fees and charges to be included with the total fare cost so that there are no "hidden" or additional required charges added later. It does not include optional additional on board purchases which one may or may not decide to add. When a decision is made to purchase a cruise, optional planner charges are not mandatory costs that would be included in the base fare scenario. Unless I am missing your point.

Got it. In other words, to qualify go on the Celebrity website and look at the CC benefits.

....as are you. LOL

LOL. Probably a generic anonymous mailer name as they also are including what likely is a bogus CC number - especially as there is no loyalty tier level as "Preview".

Got it and thank you. That was kind of what I suspected, which is why I asked. Just got off Eclipse and no such thing existed.

If you have it, it would be helpful if you could attach the actual ad, or a link to it, so we can see what it says.

Agree with some of the previous comments. The one fallacy I see with this is that a reason that taxes and port charges are shown separately is that they can and do vary by sailing and are not a "constant". Having them shown separately allows for full transparency of the cruise fares which provides direct category comparison and clarity with any fare changes over time. You then get the total of the fees and fare combined with any mock booking. Simple and fair. If port fees and taxes are buried into this total, IMO that benefit is lost and deciphering actual fare changes would be more difficult. As planner purchases are optional and not mandatory they would not be required to be included. Not clear how gratuities should be handled but my understanding is the regulatory change looks to only apply to the required fare purchase fees such as port fees and taxes. IMO the whole exercise is unnecessary.

The only "reconsideration" with RCCL we've seen in recent years regarding casino smoking is to have a section that is smoking and a section that is non. The smoking section may be vented to assist that, but the smoke still "travels" and is noticeable in the non-smoking area. On some ships (Oasis class as one) the former Comedy Club venue is a small non-smoking casino. To date is limited to only certain ships. But the main casino still provides areas for both smoking and non-smoking. Fortunately we are not gamblers so we can avoid that area other than to walk through. Specific to Radiance class ships, the casino smoking criticism has been that the entrance to the casino is at the Centrum and when smoke travels from the casino the aroma occasionally will find its way to the Centrum and then up to the higher decks through that area.

I completely agree regarding the indoor smoking. However, we don't gamble so the smoking in the casino is not a big factor other than smoke can travel - LOL. We do primarily specialty dining, so that with us is a factor. But as I said we like both for different reasons and have cruised both.

I wasn't suggesting that the PA would be holding the pier open for RCCL "just in case". Clearly RCCL will schedule arrival and departure times based on their itinerary and pay only for the time they are actually in port. I am saying that the pier may just be available during the period you indicate due to no other ships scheduled to be in port requiring that pier at the time. RCCL clearly books the pier arrival and departure time they need and that pier may be available beyond that as no other ships happen to be planning to be there then. Not every pier has ships scheduled 24 / 7 - there are open times. It's not a debate. If that is not the case and they ultimately plan to overnight there, you will clearly hear from RCCL to confirm it. If so, that would be nice so that you can have an extended stay. Brilliance has an itinerary that allows for that, but that is clearly indicated on their itinerary currently. So maybe Radiance will change their current times and will do so as well. Time will tell.

Different ship, different itinerary. But I can see why the OP is asking the question since the Port of SF apparently has the dock space cleared for overnight. But, again, IMO it only is certain if RCCL says it is.

Maybe it will still happen. But I would only plan on that if RCCL indicates it, unless you don't mind missing the ship - LOL.

That is what they issued on board twice at Sushi on 5 and I didn't question it.

Very similar and have sailed on Summit several times, but given the choice, I like Radiance class ships better. If for no other reason Radiance, in particular, has more alternative dining choices with their specialty restaurants Izumi, Chops, and Giovanni's. Also offer Park Cafe and Dog House as complimentary options. You also can go to the helipad on the front of Radiance and IMO have more glass views from more decks of the ocean. Don't get me wrong, I like both, but that's JMO given the choice. Of course RCCL caters to families with children more......

RCCL allows smoking outdoors typically on one side of the ship on the pool and promenade decks, as well as in the casino. The outdoor locations may vary by ship. However they typically limit smoking to a section of the casino and some ships also offer a small non-smoking casino as well. (Radiance does not have a separate small non smoking casino). As to a comparison, Radiance class ships are essentially the same age and size, in both gross tonnage and length, and passenger capacity as Millennium class ships, although designed somewhat differently. We have not sailed on Radiance but have a number of years ago on Jewel and Serenade, essentially her twin sister ships, and they have been one of our favorite ship classes.

We just got off Eclipse and can give you our direct experience with both ways of booking. We are also Elite+. Prior to sailing we booked a 3-night dining package. In doing so we contacted Captains Club and they compared our Elite+ discount to the sale price being offered and provided the best option of the two for our booking. In our case it turned out that our CC discount was the better of the two and that was what we had them apply. But it is, as mentioned, an either / or choice with planner bookings. On board we dined two additional nights at Sushi on 5, which of course is a la carte, and in our experience not a good choice for a package credit based on our history with a la carte purchases. When the bill was presented, the restaurant discounted it on both occasions by our CC 20% discount, which made that the far better option for an on board purchase v prior to sailing. Out of curiosity we also checked as an option for a second on board purchase night at Murano and the pricing was indeed based on the on board price, but our CC 20% discount would be applied to that if we had wanted to dine there a second night. So prior to sailing v on board can depend on the sale price being offered on the planner versus your tier level discount. But on board the pricing typically is not sale based, but your full discount will be applied to any booking made. You just have to do the math ahead of time to compare. As further example, we have a November cruise upcoming. The current planner dining package pricing is not very attractive and our CC discount for individual purchases on board surprisingly is more attractive. (It would also be similar with individual planner versus package pricing). It just depends on the sailing.

If I am interpreting you original post correctly you indicated the Port of SF information as ETA and ETD which indicates to me "estimated" times of arrival and departure. That may mean nothing more than the docking availability window for the ship at the port and not the actual times, indicating the dock space is available without conflict between those times. Not that it is the actual ship arrival and departure times. Those times are determined by the cruise line. And I am not trying to be contradictory or argumentative. Just that I would rely on those times as published by the cruise line on your booking confirmation as correct. In my experience (which has occurred on a few occasions) the cruise line notifies the passengers of itinerary and port time changes as they are implemented. If and when it would change, IMO you will receive notice directly from the cruise line and / or from your TA, if one was used, when the change is made. At least that has been our experience.

Typically when you are docked overnight, unless you are tendering or there are local port time restrictions, you only have to be back on board at the usual 30 minutes prior to departure. You do not tender in SF, and I doubt SF has any port time restrictions, so I don't think there will be any issues with coming or going from the ship as you wish.

As I see the itinerary, you are docked in San Francisco from 12:30 PM to 8:00 PM on Oct.1, with 8:00 PM as your departure time. I would trust the cruise line itinerary and any updates published by them as being the correct information.

It generally is for age at sailing where certain age based activities come into play, such as on board drinking age, children's program levels, etc. I assume you are referring to on line travel agencies, whose booking processes may vary from cruise lines. But when that data is entered with the cruise lines it would become DOB, as typically the cruise lines when booking directly provide for DOB as the data entry. I was referring to booking directly through the cruise lines and live TA's I've worked with in the past.

We just got off Eclipse and the only deposit option shown on the form for the Future Cruise was non refundable, with a 6 month booking window. Book Now provided for a refundable option. I would call Celebrity to confirm your options.

Every cruise we've ever booked has been DOB only - no other option. It's part of your profile questions when entering a booking. The cruise lines then determine your age at sailing.

Have not seen any of that in recent years. Reduced deposit and some amount of OBC is about it.

One major difference is with primary target demographics for their cruising style. Here is a generalization: Princess: Families and adults HAL: Older adults Celebrity: Adults 40+ RCCL: Families with children Carnival: Young adults and families with children

Not an issue - just acknowledging it. I appreciate when incorrect statements or information is corrected on my behalf. So much changes in this industry frequently its hard to keep up. And I don't like responding with incorrect information.