LoonCall

I actually have a top Regent TA and she is frustrated as well. Point being a TA should not be a necessity to deal with Regent.

As I understand it, the TS/OP has not combined back-to-back voyages to create a longer cruise, but booked a single cruise as marketed and sold by Regent.

In Looncall's case the phrase that you have quoted would only apply to Barcelona (first day) and London (last day), not to the intermediate port of Lisbon.

That is correct Flossie.

To make matters worse as I posted earlier there was still no tour to the Alhambra listed as of yesterday. Today there is an option showing SOLD OUT. How can that be possible? You can imagine my frustration level with Regent right now since I've been inquiring about this tour option for nearly two months.

"I have never seen excursions listed On Regent's website for a embarkation port unless the ship overnights there. Could be a website error."

The website has excursions listed and has had them listed for that port since I booked 6 months ago. Pre website reconstruction.

https://www.rssc.com/cruises/EXP180515A/activities/regent-choice-plus-free/day-8

Thanks for the reassurance, portolan.

Regent never offers regular excursions in turnaround ports. This is typical for cruise lines and, IMO, is not something that needs fixing. We have found the excursions offered onboard to be adequate - no complaints whatsoever. The focus on turnaround days is to get the passengers off of the ship and prepare the ship for guests that will be boarding. They likely offer the excursions to get continuing guests out of their hair.

I don't know if that is the case or not. However, Regent advertises included excursions for the port; if there are no offerings until onboard that should be noted.

Wanted to update my OP. Excursions were bookable Sunday 9/17. On Saturday available postings showed in my account without times or cost. After reviewing the options, I found 4 ports did not have the first choices I selected from the historical excursion listings and still no Alhambra tour for Granada and no tours available for Lisbon. This is apparently due to the fact that Lisbon is a turn port and tours are not offered until onboard due to low guest counts. Lisbon in particular is frustrating as the cruise is sold as one itinerary and should include tours for that port low number of guests or not. At this point I am reconsidering my decision to book this cruise as my frustration level with the excursions continues to rise.

I also wanted to note that I've had further communication with Jason O'Keefe and appreciate him reaching out and offering some explanations. My take is that he is genuinely receptive to comments from customers and while he stands solidly behind the Regent product he acknowledges there is always room for improvement in any business. I hope that the Regent higher ups feel the same.

Wow! Congrats on that upgrade! Look forward to hearing your thoughts on Voyager.

The post before mine was, once again, trying to tell us what to post or not post. Other than that, it has been a great thread. Didn't mean to imply that the entire thread was going downhill - just that one. Posters need to be free to post opinions, personal experiences, points, counterpoints, etc. The art of debating is about debating a subject - not making it personal. I have great debates with a poster over the years and not one personal slam has been made (thinking of you - wripro - wherever you are today). BarbarianPaul and I had a healthy debate on his recent Viking vs. Regent thread. At the end, neither one of us are upset and our opinions remain different. I have the utmost respect for these CC members. I am just throwing another aspect of how great Cruise Critic can be posters don't slam others.

I wish I could talk to you face to face TC as I think it would make a difference but alas I don't have that option.

The prior poster did not in any way suggest "what to post or not post". What he/she said was "I like to see what posters have to say about their experiences, both good and bad." They did go on to speak of excessive excuses by posters for shortcomings which IMO really are not helpful, as I feel it creates a best of the worst scenario. While I wholeheartedly agree there is nothing wrong with a good back and forth, there is a big difference between debating and denigrating.

Hearing all sides and all experiences is crucial for this site to work for everyone. If I came on CC and simply said that I didn't like a cruise (food, service, code red or whatever) and no one gave their positive experience, posters would have no choice other that to believe that all cruises may have poor service, etc.

 

This thread started out so positively -- it is a shame that it is going downhill. Goodness, if someone doesn't like what they are reading, simply don't read it. Problem solved!

Ummmm....I'm not sure what you are perceiving that makes you think this thread "is going downhill". All the posts I've read agree that there should be acceptance of everyone's opinions and a tacit agreement to a validation of same.

It seems to me that CC is very useful for several purposes:

 

1. To "meet" people with whom you may soon be cruising' date=' and to re-connect with past cruise mates.

 

2. To obtain information about a cruise line, ship, and/or cabin at a level of detail not available on the line's website or sometimes even through your TA (ranging, for example, from how the muster drill is conducted, to the amount of vibration in a certain cabin, to where to find the hair dryer).

 

3. To gather information to determine whether a particular line, ship, or specific cruise is right for you.

 

We all also use it to grouse about certain things, and to praise other things. And this helps with reason #3--much can come to light through the grousing-and-praising process. It's important to remember that what one person is grousing about may be something that is appealing to someone else, and what merits praise from one person may be a negative or even a deal-breaker to someone else. And, often, the grouse or the praise is about something that is a matter of indifference to some. That all of this information is elicited in the process lets us all make better-informed decisions on where to spend our finite travel funds and time.

 

So, let's all remember that as we comment and discuss, and try to avoid belittling others' perspectives.

 

And, let's also keep in mind how incredibly privileged we are to be able to access such vacations, whether frequently or as once-in-a-lifetime treat.[/quote']

 

Thank you for this post wishIwercruisin'. You've stated how I have been feeling of late (especially #3) and far more eloquently than I could have.

I go to CC to glean as much information as I can whether it's good or bad. I believe we are all able to read the reviews, comments, complaints and compliments and separate the wheat from the chaff. CC would be nothing more than a propaganda site if all we read about was the good stuff. Personally, I want to hear it all and don't think anyone's opinion or experience should be invalidated just because it's not "your" opinion or experience.

Thanks again for this reminder.

Agree, Bellagio that was a question I had as well. Accessing the excursions (when they are finally available) through the website is awkward when you have two people trying to review the options. It's much easier to sit down and make notes on certain tours and then talk them over.

You know your old movies TC, that is where the term originated. Don't think it's a strange thing to say, it's a term used commonly these days.

Clearly there is an incentive to get it "right", but this of course, needs to be balanced against cost - IMHO there is less incentive for Regent to provide high quality excursions', with high availability, because it is not another income stream which they have to sell to their customers to generate - we have already purchased them in the "all inclusive fare". This balancing act appears to result in "ok" trips that most people can accesses, but clearly not what their marketing material advertises e.g:

 

"Only Regent Seven Seas Cruises offers FREE UNLIMITED SHORE EXCURSIONS in EVERY port of call. And unlimited means you can take as many excursions in a day and during your entire voyage as time and your penchant for adventure allows."

When we first started with Regent we could do 2 excursions in a day, morning and afternoon. That has not been the case recently.

I am reposting this question in the hopes that Jason will respond:

Thank you very much for the response, Jason. I followed the process you described to access the historical listings and have to say while it works it's an incredibly awkward process to go through, particularly when dealing with many ports. There really has to be a better way to handle this.

One further question: You say that "the historical shore excursion listing is suppressed intentionally from the voyage information page."If that is the case, why are some ports showing offerings and others are not?

After researching threads as TC2 suggested to do, the thread

 

http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=2429884

 

 

that began on December 7th, 2016, is an interesting read. Cruise industry news came out with the information about Cuba before passengers on the cruise had been notified of the change to Cuba. If you read posts #29 by fizzy, #30 by TC2, #31by Marq, #32 by RachelG, and #33 by the cleave, one can certainly understand the issues that changing the cruise to include Cuba created. It also documents the delay in getting the information out from Regent to passengers.

 

 

In the past, which is over 7 years ago, Regent changed a couple of itineraries we had booked. Not only did they make us "whole" if we chose not to sail on the new itineraries, but they ensured that they kept us sailing with them by going above and beyond what we would have expected.

 

 

TC2, I think that if you can take a step back and "be fizzy", you would understand why, for her, Regent needed to step up to the plate. (This is not about all of the passengers who were happy.)

 

 

In this instance, there is no insurance that would cover the loss of flights, hotels, etc. If, as you appear to say, all or many of the other passengers were happy with the change and many/some passengers paid more money for the cruise, why wouldn't Regent make things right for those passengers who were not happy with the change? This was not a changed "port"; it was a changed itinerary.

 

 

Now, to try and emphasize how a change in itinerary can matter. You stated on the other thread that your DH could not go to North Korea. Imagine if your Japan and China cruise was changed to skip either Japan or China and go to North Korea instead. Regent didn't inform you or your TA of the change before it was published as well as posted on CC. - How would you feel? What would you expect? It's about "you" and how you feel when you have to cancel the cruise. It's not about all of those other passengers who might be happy with the change.

 

 

IMO, fizzy's issues were as a result of Regent's lack of communication and lack of timely communication. As well, because Cuba was the change in itinerary, she should have got every penny she had spent back and made "whole".

 

 

To the OP, fizzy, and others who are/were directly affected by the issues, I hope that Regent uses these comments to help them improve their onshore service(s).

Well said.

Fizzy COULD NOT take the other cruise as in she had no other option available to her.

And I don't know if I'm sticking up for her or not I just hate to see people get bashed for no good reason.

You either can't or won't understand the issue TC, which is unfathomable to me. This was not an emergency mechanical situation, it was not a heartbreaking sudden death, nor was it a Code Red.

Regent chose to change an itinerary adding a port that is very controversial for a lot of people and then failed to communicate those changes to paid customers. I'm sure there were some cruisers who were thrilled with the change and others who were not. Flossie wasn't happy with the change. She clearly said it would not have been her choice. Can't you let her have her opinion and leave it at that rather than argue every point about a cruise that you were not on and didn't affect you?

Host Dan: At the risk of getting myself shut down but I'm going to ask if we can get a "virtual" vaudeville hook for this board?

Back at ya' fizzy ;)

Cute song, clasater.

To fizzy: Since it has been brought to my attention, my apologies for using the incorrect pronoun when referring to you.

"And, although the subject of this thread is not as specific as it should have been, the first post made it crystal clear that the TS was discussing communication. Unfortunately, the subject of the thread opened it up to many possible off-topic posts. People could complain about food, service, itineraries, etc. but it was obvious to us that this was not poss'intent when she began this thread.

No matter how I twist this in my mind, I cannot imagine how changing one port in the Caribbean being an indicator that Regent does not care about their passengers.

LoonCall, all I can say is that I do not agree with your assessment of the situation. I could go on and on about it but, again, I do not believe that this would help the TS. However, if fizzy would like to start a thread regarding her Cuban cruise, I would be happy expand on what I have already posted. Also, IMO, it is not fair to hijack this thread with an unrelated subject - specific only to one or two posters."

It you read fizzy's initial post it was about communication or lack thereof. Fizzy clearly said he was surprised by the port changes when he went to look at excursions, I would take that to mean he wasn't notified by Regent ahead of time. Correct me if I'm wrong, fizzy. Threads evolve; and it's unfair to say this one was hijacked.

Agree with you in part. Firstly, Regent did offer another cruise. Additionally, she did not pay for the Cuba port addition which passengers that booked after the addition of Cuba had to pay for. Taking the political situation into consideration does not count IMO. After all, Regent goes to many countries where there are political issues (several communist countries such as Vietnam, etc.) They also visit countries with questionable human rights issues. What I felt was insignificant (perhaps I used the wrong choice of words), is that the complaint was made on a board regarding communication. Regent did, in fact, communicate to passengers on the Cuban cruise while there was miscommunication surrounding poss' cruise. Inserting complaints about something that happened in the past and also does not include communication issues is, IMO, simply off topic.

Sorry but your arguments are not rational. Yes, he/she was offered another cruise that they were unable to take. It didn't fit their schedule, etc. whatever the reason - they could not take it and it was not what they purchased. If you went to a car dealer and bought a Lexus but on delivery was presented with a Toyota and told it was close enough would you take it?

Regent may go to countries with political issues but customers have the choice whether to buy into those cruises or not. Cuba was foisted onto these customers, they really did not have many choices. Just because it doesn't count to you it counts to a lot of people.

Arguing that the cost of the cruise went up after the addition of Cuba and the poster didn't have to pay for it is absurd. Again, it was not what they bought into and not where they wanted to go. The cost of the cruises fluctuate all the time. If you get an early booking discount should you pay the difference when the fare later increases?

And btw the title of the original post is: "Has Regent become blasé towards its clients, or am I just not understanding? "

Fizzy's complaint about Cuba certainly falls under that heading.

I really do not think fizzy's situation with the Cuba cruise is in any way insignificant. Changing a Caribbean itinerary to ports in Cuba changes the entire character of the cruise even before factoring in the political aspect. It is a good reminder to all of us to read the contract of carriage; basically Regent can change anything at their discretion ports, ship doesn't matter. It's a case of you don't always get what you pay and the traveller has little recourse.

4. CARRIER’S DISCRETIONAs the Carrier, We reserve the right at any time, without notice or liability for refund, payment or compensation ofany kind or credit except as provided herein, to cancel any Cruise or CruiseTour, change or postpone the date or timeof sailing or arrival, change the port of embarkation or final destination, shorten the Cruise or substitute the Ship orchange or substitute any component of the CruiseTour, including but not limited to aircraft, other transportation orany hotel at which You are scheduled to stay. If We make any of the changes described above, We will be responsibleto You as follows In full and final settlement of all claims and liabilities of Carrier In connection with such actions:A. If We cancel the Cruise or CruiseTour before it has started, We will refund the Cruise Fare or CruiseTour Fare thatWe have actually received (less any air or accommodation charges incurred).B. If the scheduled sailing date or time is delayed and as a result of that delay, You are not otherwise accommodatedon board the Ship, We may arrange hotel accommodations and food at no additional expense to You for the durationof the delay.C. If the scheduled port of embarkation or final destination is changed, We will arrange transportation to the new portfrom the originally scheduled port.D. If the United States Department of State publishes a Public Announcement regarding a specific country or locationincluded in the scheduled itinerary, We reserve the right to operate the Cruise or CruiseTour as scheduled or tochange the itinerary, at Our discretion.E. If the Cruise is shortened or terminated, We will, at Our option, either make a proportionate refund of the CruiseFare or We will transfer You to another Ship or the port of final destination by other means. If the scheduled length of the Cruise is increased, You will have no responsibility for the cost of the additional Cruise Fare and We will have noresponsibility to pay or compensate You in any manner, including any direct or consequential damages. In either ofthe above circumstances, Our responsibility ends once We return You to the point of origination as booked andticketed by Us.F. If any component of Your CruiseTour, such as the hotel at which You are scheduled to stay, is changed orsubstituted, We will use reasonable efforts to obtain a substitute for such component which is substantially equivalenttherefore, but shall have no liability to You in connection with such substitution or change.

We leave next week from San Francisco to New York on the Mariner. We have never cruised at this time of year before. We did encounter rough seas many years ago from Mexico to San Diego. We hit a bad storm and the waves were up to the restaurant level windows on the Diamond Princess, a very large ship. We always choose a midship stateroom and have done the same on Mariner.

 

I am not terribly worried about the Pacific side of our cruise but am feeling a little anxious about the leg from Cartagena-Nassau- New York. We have four sea days with a stop in Nassau. We arrive in New York on Sept 27th. What can we expect for sea conditions?

Very far out for anyone to make solid predictions but keep an eye on developing Hurricane Irma.

I am more than happy to agree to disagree. I do not have a problem with you expressing your opinions. I do think it's patently unfair to portray other posters as "upset" who were merely stating their opinions. There is a world of difference between posters suggesting Regent add some laundry benefits and being upset about not having them. And the latter was not the case.

Now can we please go back to griping about what is going on with the woeful shore excursion situation?:(