Rant about HA port times!

[Hlitner]

When on our recent 35 day Westerdam cruise we had a fabulous time and never whined about any of the obvious cutbacks we encountered during the cruise. But CC is a good forum for rants and HA is beginning to annoy me with their lousy port times in the name of saving some money on fuel costs.

 

Near the end of our long cruise the Westerdam did a short segment to relocate from San Diego up to Seattle. This involved cruising for 73 1/2 housr from San Diego to Victoria...with a scheduled arrival time of 5pm in Victoria. This meant that we arrived at Victoria in time for sunset, closing shops, chilling weather (it had been a gorgeous day)

etc etc. By the time the ship was cleared by the Canadian authorities it was about 5:45 and those with early dinner were already in the MDR. In order to get to Victoria that late in the day our ship cruised at about 17.5 knots between the ports (this was for 3 days). An increase to 19 knots (well within the normal cruise speed of the ship) would have gotten us to Victoria by noon (both piers in Victoria were empty that day). But HA saves money by slowing down the ship (a senior officer explained to us that this was the only reason we arrived so late in the day). We have seen the same thing on Caribbean cruises (Westerdam's 14 day Caribbean itinerary is a good example) where the HA ships leaves some ports at 3pm and arrives at the next port at 11am while other cruise lines leave the same port at 5 and arrive at their next port by 8am. Again, its because HA has been slowing down its ships to save on fuel costs.

 

So, here is my message (what we really think). A cruise line can only cut costs so much until folks start moving towards other options. With the obvious cutbacks in cuisine, entertainment, staff, and port times...HA is driving some of us to other lines.

 

Hank

[Krazy Kruizers]

I agree with you.

We have cancelled a couple of cruises because of the shortened time in most of the ports.

DH thinks it is just a waste of money to spend most of the time on the ship when there are lots of things we can do ashore.

Yes we do have some health issues, but they don't keep us from getting off the ships and roaming around.

Something else that bugs us -- more excursions for snorkling, giving, 4X4's, etc. which we are not able to do. We are thinking about canceling our fall cruise as there isn't any intersting excursions. The few that are offered we have done a couple of times. That is just my rant.

HAL will be forcing people to move onto other cruise lines.

[RuthC]

Hummm. Less time in port, and more time at sea. Arriving later and sailing out earlier means I stand a chance of being outside to enjoy those special times.

I'm not seeing a downside here.

Which is all to say that everyone likes/wants something different. I can easily live with what you described.

[cruisemom42]

I agree.

 

For those who cruise for the onboard experience, it may make little difference. But for those of us who cruise more for the ports, it makes a HUGE difference.

 

I always look carefully at arrival/departure times when booking a cruise.

 

And if you don't mind, I'll pile onto your rant with something else that's related....

 

One other thing I've noticed on a couple of recent cruises in the Med is that cruise lines have published a schedule in advance that will provide a port time of, say, 7:00 am to 7:00 pm.

 

But a day or two before we arrive (while tours are still bookable), I find the port times have been changed to something more like 8:00 am to 6:00 pm. This effectively shaves two hours off a port day that may already be very tightly scheduled (for DIYers). I always plan carefully to be back at the ship in plenty of time for departure, whether doing the port on my own or taking a private tour (I avoid most ship tours.)

 

Yet....I notice, after I am back at the ship earlier than I'd originally planned, that the ship tours arrive back late, one after the other, and the actual departure time seems to creep back to the original one. :mad:

 

I have a sneaking suspicion that another reason cruise lines are "tightening" their port hours -- especially in places like the Med -- is that they want to make it more difficult (and more scary) for do-it-yourselfers. Many a time I've heard folks express great concern about getting back to the ship on time as being a major reason for booking a tour through the ship. Now, the cruise lines are making that "window of time" with an even smaller opening.

 

I'm sure lines are suffering a drop in revenue as regards shore excursions, because of all the available information on the internet, making it easy to find out how to do things on your own or book a reputable private tour. But these tactics are extremely annoying. As it is, I'm trying to avoid cruises that stop for only one day in a major city and am instead focusing on sites that can give me a more satisfying "visit" in a few hours, such as the Greek Isles (or that have overnights in ports).

[CowPrincess]

Friends who live in Victoria and are involved with a couple of community associations have told me several times that there is a vocal group of residents who do not want cruise ships calling. From what they told me, and what I've read, it seems that some of the problem MAY be with the Victoria port itself, not the cruise lines -- lots of regulations and (from what my friends said) "unfriendly" port fees.

[1025cruise]

Let's be realistic. Victoria is just a stop to satisfy PVSA on the Seattle round trips. Nothing more, nothing less, or the scheduled stop would be a lot longer, and earlier.

[innlady1]

I agree with you.

 

We have cancelled a couple of cruises because of the shortened time in most of the ports.

 

DH thinks it is just a waste of money to spend most of the time on the ship when there are lots of things we can do ashore.

 

Yes we do have some health issues, but they don't keep us from getting off the ships and roaming around.

 

Something else that bugs us -- more excursions for snorkling, giving, 4X4's, etc. which we are not able to do. We are thinking about canceling our fall cruise as there isn't any intersting excursions. The few that are offered we have done a couple of times. That is just my rant.

 

HAL will be forcing people to move onto other cruise lines.

 

This is something that has bugged us, too. With the older demographic on HAL, why do they not have more excursions better suited for those of us who aren't as active as we used to be?

[Kamloops50]

We enjoy sea days over port time. When we went thru the Panama in 2006 from Vancouver BC . It was two full days and three nights between Vancouver and San Diego. In some ports the cruise lines are reducing port times because moorage fees and line handling costs are going up a lot.

[TxnAquarian]

I completely agree with the OP here. While I LOVE the ships and spending time onboard, I don't want to spend my whole cruise on the ship. I go for the ports as much as the ship. And I have found HAL provides some of the shortest port times on the itineraries I have been looking at. While HAL does have some fabulous itineraries, I chose Celebrity for my Black Sea cruise next year because it overnights in 3 of the ports, where HAL stops for barely a full day. As others have been saying, expensive port fees might be to blame, and this may be a sign of the times. But I will continue to seek out itineraries that offer a significant amount of time in the ports......and don't even get me started on the Princess Asia itineraries that only stay in Hong Kong from 8am - 5pm !!!!!!!!

 

 

Michael

[Sir PMP]

" This meant that we arrived at Victoria in time for sunset, closing shops, chilling weather (it had been a gorgeous day"

 

There is nothing to do in Victoria...

[RuthC]

There is nothing to do in Victoria...

Spoken like someone who has never been to Victoria.

[lovetocruise2020]

I have ALWAYS felt there was no need to leave HMC and Grand Turk so early, Carnival is there at least 2-3 hours longer. If they can swing it so can HAL.

 

St Thomas is another one that leaves wayyy too early.

 

We only do Caribbean so I can only comment on that.

[RandyinDEN]

Spoken like someone who has never been to Victoria.

 

 

Agreed, Victoria is a beautiful city with lots to see and do. The trouble is picking a favorite.

[sail7seas]

Let's be realistic. Victoria is just a stop to satisfy PVSA on the Seattle round trips. Nothing more, nothing less, or the scheduled stop would be a lot longer, and earlier.

 

 

Seems to me this is highly accurate.

 

[Sir PMP]

Spoken like someone who has never been to Victoria.

 

Yes, been there, last year, a cute bay, an old smelly hotel (they like to call it a 'palace') and a bunch of homeless walking around..

[billie5]

Spoken like someone who has never been to Victoria.

Why can't we accept that different people have different opinions.

[Linda&Vern]

We are not fussy about port times ... as long as we don't have to get off the ship. With a few exceptions, sitting on our balcony or at the aft pool is our excursion for the day! :D HAL could reinstate the fuel surcharge and sail "faster." I'm guessing that would not make many happy?

[cruisemom42]

Why can't we accept that different people have different opinions.

 

I can appreciate different opinions, but someone claiming there is "nothing" to do in Victoria smacks of a child surrounded by toys saying "I'm bored. I have nothing to do!"

 

There are of course Butchart Gardens (I'm not much of an outdoors/gardener type, but even I could appreciate them)

 

Having tea at the Empress Hotel

 

There is a a lovely small museum with good exhibits (I saw a special exhibit on Rome last time I was there.)

 

There is an award-winning aquarium, and also an "Undersea Garden"

 

There are ferry tours

 

There is a historic fort and lighthouse that can be visited

 

There is a nice local food scene for foodies

 

 

 

So really.........nothing to do? :confused:

[localady]

Why can't we accept that different people have different opinions.

 

Many of us have been on this board many years. ;)

There are some posters on this board who often post just to stir it up. :eek: ;)

Mom used to say, if you can't say something nice, don't.

Victoria is a lovely community with some wonderful parks, pubs and historic buildings.

 

 

To keep this on point, HAL's shortening the port times in hopes of lower fuel costs and bigger on-board profits

has really taken a noticeable bite out of our time in ports.

Who wants to be in port in Cabo for 5 hours which includes tendering??

Luckily, we are in port for many hours most days on our upcoming Alaskan cruise, something we enjoy very much!

[Krazy Kruizers]

This is something that has bugged us, too. With the older demographic on HAL, why do they not have more excursions better suited for those of us who aren't as active as we used to be?

 

On our 20 day cruise, the majority of us were older people and the majority of the tours were geared for the younger generation.

I found it strange that within days of our arriving home, we got a questionaire about tours we took on our recent cruise. When I marked we didn't take any ship tours -- there was no place to explain why -- and then the questionaire was over with.

Strange.

[Krazy Kruizers]

Let's be realistic. Victoria is just a stop to satisfy PVSA on the Seattle round trips. Nothing more, nothing less, or the scheduled stop would be a lot longer, and earlier.

 

Seems to me this is highly accurate.

 

 

The 7 day round trip cruises out of Seattle do have a short port time in Victoria.

But on the long 14 day cruises -- we had from Noon until midnight there.

[BruceMuzz]

When on our recent 35 day Westerdam cruise we had a fabulous time and never whined about any of the obvious cutbacks we encountered during the cruise. But CC is a good forum for rants and HA is beginning to annoy me with their lousy port times in the name of saving some money on fuel costs.

 

Near the end of our long cruise the Westerdam did a short segment to relocate from San Diego up to Seattle. This involved cruising for 73 1/2 housr from San Diego to Victoria...with a scheduled arrival time of 5pm in Victoria. This meant that we arrived at Victoria in time for sunset, closing shops, chilling weather (it had been a gorgeous day)

etc etc. By the time the ship was cleared by the Canadian authorities it was about 5:45 and those with early dinner were already in the MDR. In order to get to Victoria that late in the day our ship cruised at about 17.5 knots between the ports (this was for 3 days). An increase to 19 knots (well within the normal cruise speed of the ship) would have gotten us to Victoria by noon (both piers in Victoria were empty that day). But HA saves money by slowing down the ship (a senior officer explained to us that this was the only reason we arrived so late in the day). We have seen the same thing on Caribbean cruises (Westerdam's 14 day Caribbean itinerary is a good example) where the HA ships leaves some ports at 3pm and arrives at the next port at 11am while other cruise lines leave the same port at 5 and arrive at their next port by 8am. Again, its because HA has been slowing down its ships to save on fuel costs.

 

So, here is my message (what we really think). A cruise line can only cut costs so much until folks start moving towards other options. With the obvious cutbacks in cuisine, entertainment, staff, and port times...HA is driving some of us to other lines.

 

Hank

 

I have some bad news for you.

ALL the mass market lines are doing the same thing, but to different degrees in different ports, and on different itineraries.

 

Remember when the cruise lines tried to add fuel surcharges to cover the rapidly increasing fuel prices? That didn't go over so well. Despite the fact that our fuel costs have increased by over 200% in most areas - and 300% in Alaska and California - the cruising public decided that Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny could pay the extra costs; they were not about to pay more for a cruise.

The cruise lines listened to you. We did not increase fares. So we had to take other measures to protect profits.

We are still in business, our shareholders are happy, your cruise fares did not go up dramatically, and you get less time in port.

 

As always, be careful what you wish for...............................

 

By the way, more bad news for you. Port stays are going to continue getting shorter in order to keep your cruise fares down.

[peaches from georgia]

I haven't done an Alaska cruise so have in idea how early in the day HAL could get their ship on this itinerary to Victoria if they chose to make it a real port stop. Anyone know? I'll bet its long before 6pm. Even an early afternoon arrival could make for a lovely day- Butchart Gardens, afternoon tea at the gorgeous historic Fairmont Empress hotel, a stroll along the waterfront, shopping in the British shops, dinner in one of the many nice waterside restaurants, etc. So much to enjoy, or not if you cruise just to stay on the ship. But at least those who want to see Victoria would have the opportunity.

 

If Victoria is so boring why do so many tourists take the Victoria Clipper from Seattle and other points in WA in the early morning darkness to spend the day there? It's a port on HAL's itinerary and pax deserve more than they are getting.

 

Edit after reading #22- of course saving fuel and port fees is the reason, but from many posts on CC it is obvious there are cruisers who value enjoying a full itinerary and are moving elsewhere to spend their vacation $$$. Short term profit solutions work for awhile but not always in the long term.

[Kamloops50]

Sometimes ships leave ports earlier because they can't cruise as fast as other ships . they might not as fuel efficient at faster speeds either.

[SilvertoGold]

I have some bad news for you.

ALL the mass market lines are doing the same thing, but to different degrees in different ports, and on different itineraries.

 

Remember when the cruise lines tried to add fuel surcharges to cover the rapidly increasing fuel prices? That didn't go over so well. Despite the fact that our fuel costs have increased by over 200% in most areas - and 300% in Alaska and California - the cruising public decided that Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny could pay the extra costs; they were not about to pay more for a cruise.

The cruise lines listened to you. We did not increase fares. So we had to take other measures to protect profits.

We are still in business, our shareholders are happy, your cruise fares did not go up dramatically, and you get less time in port.

 

As always, be careful what you wish for...............................

 

By the way, more bad news for you. Port stays are going to continue getting shorter in order to keep your cruise fares down.

 

Thanks for the expert explanation. That works for us perfectly. Nice to hear the cruiseline's actual reasoning.