So now that they've back-pedalled..

[jtl513]

Also I would appreciate it if everyone can give me some ideas as to what they would settle for.

I gave mine in post 141.

[kazu]

There's more money to be made charging people for wine, beer, and soda than having people bringing their own. Just ask any sports team.

 

really?? if there's nothing there that appeals then we won't be drinking much so HAL will make more money from me letting me pay corkage. thought about that one?

 

How about suites being upsold at dirt cheap prices because some of us will either leave or not pay the prices.?

 

thought about that one?

 

guess you should go work for HAL (like you don't already) and fix things.

 

You obviously know more than the rest of us.

 

So get to to Seattle and fix it or figure out how they are going to fill the ships when the faithful leave - but I'm sure you have a plan for that in place now.

 

end of rant.

[kazu]

No way! Here I thought the only way to bring money in was for charging for corkage. Sure could have fooled me. Now you tell me that they can make money by selling booze:D;). That's absurd;).

 

Most people that bring wine on board spend money in the bars and the MDR. We can tolerate that wine/drinks as we have the other to balance it off.

 

My on board expenses are nothing to sneeze at - but, of course if I say that I'm bragging - you can't win on these boards.

 

seriously - don't assume if someone brings wine on board for their balcony that they don't support HAL's existence. That's a big assumption. There are too many people making it. And those are incorrect assumptions to make - at least for many of us.

 

don't colour us all with the same brush just because we want to sample some wines in port and have a drink in peace in our cabins/balconies.

 

I really don't understand why this is so hard to get:confused:

[arewethereyet]

Most people that bring wine on board spend money in the bars and the MDR. We can tolerate that wine/drinks as we have the other to balance it off.

 

My on board expenses are nothing to sneeze at - but, of course if I say that I'm bragging - you can't win on these boards.

 

seriously - don't assume if someone brings wine on board for their balcony that they don't support HAL's existence. That's a big assumption. There are too many people making it. And those are incorrect assumptions to make - at least for many of us.

 

don't colour us all with the same brush just because we want to sample some wines in port and have a drink in peace in our cabins/balconies.

 

I really don't understand why this is so hard to get:confused:

Some of us do get it.

[Boytjie]

I do judge, because I think there's already far too much drinking onboard as it is.

 

Limiting how wine can be acquired to be consumed onboard may not make much of a difference in how much wine is consumed, so your judgment is misplaced and silly.

[sail7seas]

really?? if there's nothing there that appeals then we won't be drinking much so HAL will make more money from me letting me pay corkage. thought about that one?

 

How about suites being upsold at dirt cheap prices because some of us will either leave or not pay the prices.?

 

thought about that one?

 

guess you should go work for HAL (like you don't already) and fix things.

 

You obviously know more than the rest of us.

 

So get to to Seattle and fix it or figure out how they are going to fill the ships when the faithful leave - but I'm sure you have a plan for that in place now.

 

end of rant.

 

 

 

Suites are being upsold at dirt cheap prices now. They've been doing that for quite a while.

 

[Wakepatrol]

Suites are being upsold at dirt cheap prices now. They've been doing that for quite a while.

 

 

 

There's 7 billion people roaming the earth. Hal is probably rolling the dice that they can find 2 or 3 to book a suite.

[startwin]

B-I-N-G-O

 

I'm not going into details about where I worked for almost 30 years except to say it was the world headquarters of a Fortune 100 company with divisions all over the world. I can tell you from experience that what is said "at the highest top level" is many times not what happens at the "implementation level."

 

Personally, I don't think HAL was trying to sneak anything into their cruise guidelines - someone took control and did their own thing. I do think they indeed intended to change their wine policy - just not the way it happened. That's my opinion - I know others will disagree.

 

 

I tend to agree with that. Wonder which whizz-kid came up with the implementation plan:rolleyes:

 

Well, I've been gone for a few hours, haven't caught up yet, but just found out there's too much drinking on HAL anyway! But let me just add..... I don't smoke (I'm one of those nasty reformed smokers!) but had smoking restrictions been brought down suddenly with no notice, I would have been protesting along with the smokers.

[cruz chic]

I'm sorry but I still don't see how smoking is the same as a wine policy change but I guess it's the principle. HAL needs to learn that they can't do anything without prior approval of cruise critic:D.

[lcand1923]

I have read some good suggestions here. Let me restate them to make certain I properly understand them.

 

I like the idea of 1 bottle of wine per 7 cruise days allowed at embarkation or during the cruise. In other words, as part of my cruise documents, I would be able to print out the proper number of vouchers and use them at will.

 

If I take a HAL sponsored wine tasting shore excursion, I should be given another voucher to use to bring a bottle of wine that I purchased on that shore excursion and/or at a wine shop in port.

 

The final suggestion that is good is the, any wine over and above the limit will be charged a corkage fee OR will be held until the end of the cruise. This way, if I purchase wine in port, I have the option of consuming it in on the ship or taking it home with me.

[startwin]

I'm sorry but I still don't see how smoking is the same as a wine policy change but I guess it's the principle. HAL needs to learn that they can't do anything without prior approval of cruise critic:D.

 

 

You answered that yourself.... it's the principle. That's exactly what we have been discussing for the past 3 days. Smart-alec remarks really don't help a useful conversation. I believe HAL has already a useful lesson from the protests and how powerful social media is. Let's face it - they didn't even communicate the change with their own employees, or the vast majority of TAs. But social media sure got the message across.

[Laminator]

I gave mine in post 141.

 

Thank You!

[Cruise or Lose!]

It's amazing. All HAL has said is that they will DELAY IMPLEMENTATION of the policy. They have not said the policy will revert back to what it was. They have not said they will change the policy. They have not said their new policy is wrong.

 

Some public relations victory.

 

It's just like the people who are always saying "I have a RIGHT to do X, Y, Z". I always want to ask them where in the Constitution / Bill of Rights / etc. that is codified.

[Tampa Girl]

it was total speculation, for context only.

 

Fair enough. But consider this: If HAL were to allow one bottle of wine, per person, every seven days, HAL would only lose (at $8.00 a glass and 5 glasses a bottle) $40 per cabin every seven days. I, for one, would be willing to have my fare increased by that amount.

 

Plus, because someone is bringing in additional wine to either open in the MDR, or to drink on the balcony, which is going to cost a $20 corkage fee does not mean that the individual is not running up a large bar bill in addition. I guess what I am saying is that HAL is not losing enough money by allowing a reasonable amount of wine on board that the lower-than-anticipated increase in revenue, through reasonable restrictions, cannot be made up by a very slight increase in fares.

[Tampa Girl]

I just hope that folks don't place too much hope in them going back to the old policy. I do think that the "new" policy will still change. I think people should be very aware before they make final payment.

 

As far as people not knowing about the change I think it is up to people to do research. I know that is always given as advice here.

 

How can one do research? Our e-docs are not available until 50 days out, and by that time it is too late to cancel. Where else are we supposed to look? HAL hasn't exactly been prompt, consistent or public with their changes.

[caladezi]

As I read the alcohol policy now, there is none until the end of Jan. 2014. In the FAQ's it just states that the policy goes into effect Jan 31, 2014 but does not state any policy up to that point.

[81Zoomie]

I gave mine in post 141.

Perhaps HAL could strike a happy medium by falling back to the new Princess policy. Check that thread... It caused quite a stir in the the spring (2013). But, having a sommelier, nice glasses, and a well priced comprehensive wine list would also help HALs bottom line. HAL could really improve their wine service and offerings. Many Mariners like HAL and like our wine. It would be a shame if we couldn't enjoy both!

[jtl513]

As I read the alcohol policy now, there is none until the end of Jan. 2014. In the FAQ's it just states that the policy goes into effect Jan 31, 2014 but does not state any policy up to that point.

The policy is now (and has been for many years) no alcohol in the form of beer or hard liquor. They state it as "all the wine and champagne you want".

[81Zoomie]

Presuming you meant HAL, not Princess, click HERE and then Onboard Policies under Shipboard Life on the left side. That is official print. KBYG has not yet been corrected.

Oh yes, you are correct.... Page 6 on the HAL documents. No change.

 

Freudian slip..... I was busy booking a replacement cruise. We are voting with our feet and taking our business to a sister line.

[Laminator]

Fair enough. But consider this: If HAL were to allow one bottle of wine, per person, every seven days, HAL would only lose (at $8.00 a glass and 5 glasses a bottle) $40 per cabin every seven days. I, for one, would be willing to have my fare increased by that amount.

 

Plus, because someone is bringing in additional wine to either open in the MDR, or to drink on the balcony, which is going to cost a $20 corkage fee does not mean that the individual is not running up a large bar bill in addition. I guess what I am saying is that HAL is not losing enough money by allowing a reasonable amount of wine on board that the lower-than-anticipated increase in revenue, through reasonable restrictions, cannot be made up by a very slight increase in fares.

 

If you, and this is a guess, figure $40 for let's say 300 cabins you're looking at $12,000 a week times 15 ships for $180,000 a week. Times that by 52 weeks and you're looking at over $9,000,000. That is a lot of money. As part of a publicly traded company it has become more and more apparent that HAL is more concerned with the treatment of their stockholders than their pax.

[NoWhiners]

What's the reality show that CEO's go incognito to work on-board? Maybe some Hal Headquarters upper management should go on some cruises unknown and have the same delayed dining room, wine services that we shareholders and financier's to their pocketbooks experience.

 

Many of us have experienced how corporate VIP's are treated while on cruises. They walk away with a false view of reality.

 

Have three cruises booked but will be looking at future alternatives.

 

Love our Dam cruises and will continue to voice our opinions to management.

 

Undercover Boss. And the NCL top dog was on a year or 2 ago. Fun to watch him try to be a CD and a poker dealer!! I think it would be great if Stein or one of his boys did this. And i also liked the suggestion that they be made to drink the (awful) wine offered in the wine packages.:D

 

ML

[rafinmd]

Do you think it would be useful to contact the people who run the "Most Ethical Companies" program with some feedback. Somebody who could document what was said 2 or 3 days ago could send them a pretty convincing heads up.

 

Roy

[cruz chic]

How can one do research? Our e-docs are not available until 50 days out, and by that time it is too late to cancel. Where else are we supposed to look? HAL hasn't exactly been prompt, consistent or public with their changes.

 

Yes, a google search would likely come up empty:confused:. There is only a million threads on here plus Facebook.

[kazu]

If you, and this is a guess, figure $40 for let's say 300 cabins you're looking at $12,000 a week times 15 ships for $180,000 a week. Times that by 52 weeks and you're looking at over $9,000,000. That is a lot of money. As part of a publicly traded company it has become more and more apparent that HAL is more concerned with the treatment of their stockholders than their pax.

 

the only problem with this assumption is that you are assuming these people will be drinking.

 

If a certain poster has their way, HAL will be full of tea toatltlers (don't know how to spell it and not looking it up) who will not spend a dime in bars on board. Of course, they know how to make their own fun - at the risk of everyone else's cruise price.

 

should make the share holders really happy. The cancellations I am seeing are people who do spend money on board. I guess HAL doesn't need them either.

 

If HAL doesn't have any pax, trust me the shareholders will not be happy;)

[kazu]

Yes, a google search would likely come up empty:confused:. There is only a million threads on here plus Facebook.

 

oh, so we need to check every day to make sure that the rules haven't changed? seriously?