Allure and propulsion problems.

[sweetpee_1993]

A bit of a contradiction I would say. And, yes, the itinerary can be altered for any reason. But if RCI knows in advance of a sailing that a ship is having issues and there will be alterations it would be appropriate to inform the affected customers as soon as possible. And that, to me, means before they walk onto the ship. RCI has been denying any issue with the ship or alterations in itineraries even though we all know that both conditions exist.

 

But, hey, you are right, there is no mention of ethics any where in the cruise contract.

 

Yep. No doubt we're all at the mercy of the cruise contract. However, cruise contract aside, would it not be general decency in the way of customer service to notify your guests of any KNOWN changes ASAP regardless of how minor the change may be? What's minimal in 1 person's opinion isn't necessarily the same for everyone. As a repeat cruiser on one of RCI's competitors (7 cruises in 2 years actually) this sort of thing is not starting us off with a positive impression at all. So maybe I suck it up and go on with our Thanksgiving cruise. If we were outside the penalty period I don't know that I would still be going. Will I consider routing any of my future cruise funds back to RCI? If this is what we should expect as far as consideration and customer service from RCI, most likely not. It would truly behoove RCI to consider the much bigger picture here. Their actions or lack thereof have the potential to define their company with their current and potential future guests.

[broberts]

Passengers on consecutive Eastern sailings reported shortened port calls at Nassau and St Thomas. Only if you use the most pedantic, rigid terms can RCL argue this isn't an itinerary alteration.

 

Acts of nature are one thing; mechanical issues are the responsibility of the operator.

 

If my cruise weren't three weeks out, I'd cancel.

 

I think an assumption is being made based on very few facts. There several reasons why a ship might leave early. There may be weather to avoid. The harbor may ask the ship to leave. I've been on several ships that altered departure and/or arrival times for reasons other than mechanical issues.

 

While there are a few reports of shortened calls, there are also numerous subsequent reports of scheduled time in port.

 

I too tend to obsess over details as my cruises approach, so I sympathize with what you are going through. I can only say that because of my tendency to worry, I never pre-book private excursions.

[barryg9999]

 

BTW, if this was a Carnival ship, there would be a whole tab on their website giving updates!

 

If this was a Carnival ship, it would have been pushed by three tugboats and everyone on deck 7 would be sharing the same bathroom. Can you spell "Triumph"? :-)

[Ocean Boy]

I think an assumption is being made based on very few facts. There several reasons why a ship might leave early. There may be weather to avoid. The harbor may ask the ship to leave. I've been on several ships that altered departure and/or arrival times for reasons other than mechanical issues.

 

While there are a few reports of shortened calls, there are also numerous subsequent reports of scheduled time in port.

 

I too tend to obsess over details as my cruises approach, so I sympathize with what you are going through. I can only say that because of my tendency to worry, I never pre-book private excursions.

 

As far as I know Allure is on its second eastern run since the problem was reported so where are you seeing these numerous reports of normal scheduled port times? It will be interesting to see what people on this weeks cruise have to say once they get back on Sunday.

[Ocean Boy]

I'm not sure that it is reasonable to assume that Royal Caribbean knows in advance that alterations in an itinerary will be necessary. People here and who follow Royal Caribbean on Facebook are aware that there are mechanical issues.

 

 

Is it reasonable for RCI to state that the ship has no problem and no itineraries have been altered?

[Knolmom]

I don't know where anyone is reporting that the current Eastern Itinerary has not seen abbreviated port calls. Not only have passengers reported it, but CC persons following the cruise cam saw the Allure dock in STT at 11:30 AM and saw pax making their way back to the ship after 4 hours onshore at dusk at 5 PM. For the poster who insinuated that I was upset about the port change, allow me to share something. As it stands now, given my companion's current medical condition, I can cancel if I choose, and there is also a good chance we may not even get off the ship. That will be our choice. Be that as it may, I feel it is just unconscionable for Royal not to advise their cruisers that for the foreseeable future and until the propulsion problem that does exist on the Allure is fixed, there may be adjustments made to the Eastern Caribbean itinerary. That is transparency and shows responsible customer service. Who is the arbiter of that. Why me, the consumer. Not Royal, the provider. They don't pay me, I pay them.

[joeski27]

I know that you feel bad based on your post here, however, if you read your cruise contract that you signed before printing your Set Sail Pass, you would have noted that itinerary and times can be adjusted for whatever reason the cruise line feels is necessary. If you booked beach days with a private provider, you should have made sure that your money was refundable if you couldn't make it for any reason.

 

That isn't the point being argued here; rather what many of us are getting miffed about is the fact that Royal is quite obviously being about as transparent as a wooden door on the issue. I think the entire world can at this point accept as fact that these itinerary changes are obviously occurring, yet for absolutely inexplicable reasons RCI has yet to acknowledge it without beating around the bush with their responses. If nothing else, just this idea out of principle should be enough to aggravate people, let alone the many of us who actually don't want our excursions to be affected at Nassau or St. Thomas.

[joeski27]

I feel it is just unconscionable for Royal not to advise their cruisers that for the foreseeable future and until the propulsion problem that does exist on the Allure is fixed, there may be adjustments made to the Eastern Caribbean itinerary. That is transparency and shows responsible customer service. Who is the arbiter of that. Why me, the consumer. Not Royal, the provider. They don't pay me, I pay them.

 

Very well put, and I'll tell you this - if this situation goes unchanged (i.e. no additional responses or transparency from RCI) by the time the 11/10 eastern sails, then you're REALLY going to see people flipping the eff out on Royal. Because the longer this brews with no direct-to-the-point updates, the worse it is going to get for them. I hope people go off on them as they're boarding and absolutely overwhelm the concierge desk when the board, because I know I sure would (and might, considering I'm on the 11/24 eastern!). I hate to have to board my cruise vacation fired up with my game face on, but we gotta do what we gotta do. Let's all just hope that by the 11/10 sailing all this is just a moot point.

Edited October 31, 2013 by joeski27

[Knolmom]

They will have had plenty of opportunity to address the itinerary issue by then. At present, they have the opportunity via Facebook, where they have addressed the query with only the company line .i.e. The ship is safe, there is a slight reduction in speed. They have not yet been willing to become transparent even in an ongoing dialogue. It's a pretty lively discussion over there, and it appears as if it likely to continue.

[sweetpee_1993]

As far as I know Allure is on its second eastern run since the problem was reported so where are you seeing these numerous reports of normal scheduled port times? It will be interesting to see what people on this weeks cruise have to say once they get back on Sunday.

 

At least 1 person that is on the current Eastern reported the itinerary change notification they received once onboard before sail away this past Sunday. Also, another poster noted seeing the ship dock in St. Thomas via the web cam at the later than usual time.

[Ocean Boy]

At least 1 person that is on the current Eastern reported the itinerary change notification they received once onboard before sail away this past Sunday. Also, another poster noted seeing the ship dock in St. Thomas via the web cam at the later than usual time.

 

Correct. I have not seen one post that said everything was normal.

[reney313]

At least 1 person that is on the current Eastern reported the itinerary change notification they received once onboard before sail away this past Sunday. Also, another poster noted seeing the ship dock in St. Thomas via the web cam at the later than usual time.

 

I have seen people from the last 2 E. Caribbean (the current cruise that left this last Sunday and the one 2 Sundays ago) report the same itinerary adjustment.

 

 

Found them both.

 

The one from post on this thread from someone who is currently on the E. Caribbean.

The second was from a review of their Oct. 13 E. Caribbean cruise:

http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=1924488&page=4

Edited October 31, 2013 by reney313

[lvstitch]

I watched the ship's webcam yesterday and according to the time on the top of the picture, I saw land a little after 11:30. The promenade did not appear to empty out until at least 12:30.

[rcrdale]

Too all the people demanding that RCCL let everyone know that yes they do have a problem with the propulsion system. My question is this, when they do announce that there is a problem and that some port of calls might be shortened, how is that going to change anything? We are all aware that there are people reporting there is an issue. That the last 2 eastern itineraries have had reduced port times in Nassau and St Thomas.

 

I don't understand how having RCCL admit there is a problem changes anything. We will still have shortened times in Nassau and St Thomas reguardless.

 

As I stated in an earlier post, after I saw that they had changed the times a second time, I called and changed my private excursions to be on the safe side.

 

Maybe I just don't get it. :confused:

[PAL_1]

 

I don't understand how having RCCL admit there is a problem changes anything. We will still have shortened times in Nassau and St Thomas reguardless.

 

As I stated in an earlier post, after I saw that they had changed the times a second time, I called and changed my private excursions to be on the safe side.

 

Maybe I just don't get it. :confused:

 

I'm still trying to sort out rescheduling my port excursions. And I'm not too happy about it. The Allure's Eastern port calls are paltry when the ship follows its advertised schedule. I suspect I made a mistake. Minus the time to visit the ports, I could get everything the Allure offers and more in Las Vegas, at much less cost.

 

Another thing. There are what, 5400 passengers when the Allure is full? How many of them are aware of the changes? Probably not too many. RCL's reticence to inform their customers says a lot about how they see us.

[joeski27]

Too all the people demanding that RCCL let everyone know that yes they do have a problem with the propulsion system. My question is this, when they do announce that there is a problem and that some port of calls might be shortened, how is that going to change anything? We are all aware that there are people reporting there is an issue. That the last 2 eastern itineraries have had reduced port times in Nassau and St Thomas.

 

I don't understand how having RCCL admit there is a problem changes anything. We will still have shortened times in Nassau and St Thomas reguardless.

 

As I stated in an earlier post, after I saw that they had changed the times a second time, I called and changed my private excursions to be on the safe side.

 

Maybe I just don't get it. :confused:

 

Well for those of us who have excursions booked outside of Royal, it obviously does make a difference. If we know ahead of time, 1) we can (if need be) cancel those excursions and get refunds, and then 2) at least have ample time to try to make other plans, if that is even possible due the the potential shortened time in port.

[tinkerme1]

Too all the people demanding that RCCL let everyone know that yes they do have a problem with the propulsion system. My question is this, when they do announce that there is a problem and that some port of calls might be shortened, how is that going to change anything? We are all aware that there are people reporting there is an issue. That the last 2 eastern itineraries have had reduced port times in Nassau and St Thomas.

 

I don't understand how having RCCL admit there is a problem changes anything. We will still have shortened times in Nassau and St Thomas reguardless.

 

As I stated in an earlier post, after I saw that they had changed the times a second time, I called and changed my private excursions to be on the safe side.

 

Maybe I just don't get it. :confused:

 

Kudos to you! Thank you for your reply!

[reney313]

Well for those of us who have excursions booked outside of Royal, it obviously does make a difference. If we know ahead of time, 1) we can (if need be) cancel those excursions and get refunds, and then 2) at least have ample time to try to make other plans, if that is even possible due the the potential shortened time in port.

 

I agree. I'm hoping they are trying to buy time to figure out how, where and when to fix. My hope is they will let the future cruises that they expect to have the rescheduled times know at that point.

 

It does make sense if this just occurred a few weeks ago that they have to get the part, figure out the "when" to do the maintenance, etc. My cruise isn't until January 19 (and I hope that is not the "when", selfishly...) so it's not urgent at this point, but I am holding off booking the St. John excursion until I know one way or another.

 

I think the point those of us have is that we would rather know in advance of changes we need to make, if possible, rather than when we are without internet, etc. It's one thing when it's weather or unexpected (such as the first cruise 2 weeks ago with this revised timing). It's another when they DO know they'll be changing the times and they don't tell you until you board.

 

I'm anxious for updates from those who are on this sailing to return and hopefully Royal will provide an update before the next Eastern sailing. I do think they try to give advance warning but maybe they just don't know the details yet.

[tinkerme1]

Well for those of us who have excursions booked outside of Royal, it obviously does make a difference. If we know ahead of time, 1) we can (if need be) cancel those excursions and get refunds, and then 2) at least have ample time to try to make other plans, if that is even possible due the the potential shortened time in port.

 

If you book shore excursions outside of RCCL, you should always ensure that if the ship changes times/itinerary, you can receive a refund. Have you ever been on a cruise when you miss a port due to high seas?

 

Being told in advance of any issue other than the ship can't sail, is pointless. Your shore excursions through RCCL are protected monetarily, so everything remains the same.

[Knolmom]

Let's try this again, folks. We're not talking about missing a port. We're not talking about loosing money on a ship or private excursion. We are talking about perhaps not having time in port to take an excursion, without either being off the ship at 7AM for only 4 hours in one port( will it even be sunrise at 7AM in November in Nassau) or having approximately 4 hours of daylight in St Thomas. We should be afforded the opportunity to make the best of this time by having a "Plan B" if you will, in the likely event that the propulsion problem is not fixed. ROYAL CARIBBEAN..TRANSPARENT AS A WOODEN DOOR IN THEIR DEALINGS WITH CUSTOMERS. Bound by the cruise contract and not necessarily by ethics. And you hear people on these boards being castigated for sharing drink packages and sneaking alcohol onboard. Mother Royal...show us how being upfront and above board really works. I dare you!

[Coralc]

Somewhere there was a captain's reply that "We are saving wear on the third azipod"

 

And your response would almost have to be..."For What?'

 

There was a funny article in the auto section of the paper that mentioned..."Not using your turn signal because there are only a certain number of blinks in the part before it wears out. :rolleyes:"

 

I realize that it is a huge undertaking to repair one of these ships. I believe Oasis is scheduled to go first.

 

However, I don't see the point of letting the ship sail at reduced speed, and affect a huge number of passengers on multiple sailings until it is time to get it fixed.

 

Are they sailing really slow until they can have a 22 day cruise to drydock in Europe?

Edited November 1, 2013 by Coralc

[bilyclub]

More pod education:

 

 

http://www.skipsrevyen.no/artikler/artikler-3-2011/136018.html

[LMaxwell]

I don't understand the 2 port stops that give so little time as to be worth even stopping at. Since Nassau is the furthest north why don't they just eliminate it and head south? That way they could give you the full, or one would hope, much longer time in the other two ports.

 

I think most people would rather have quality time in two ports instead of insufficient time in two ports and regular time in a third.

 

Is it ideal or optimal? No. But that simple change in the itinerary would at least PROBABLY be a better result.

[vega]

I agree entirely. Perhaps they can substitute Nassau for a Western Caribbean island? Given they know this is an issue, they TOO can and should plan ahead to ensure customer satisfaction and loyalty.

 

Besides posting on facebook and calling in, both of which seem to be useless, is there any way we can escalate the issue?

 

Just as an FYI, I called my travel agent and she was shocked that Royal had not alerted her or us about the change in times in port.

[LMaxwell]

And before some dismiss my comment as just being anti-Nassau; I am not entirely anti-Nassau; I just think it is a tourist trap of the finest order. IF the itinerary were Nassau, Coco Cay, and St Martin or St Thomas and they couldn't provide adequate time to one of those further south I'd say to eliminate one of those and make it Bahamas cruise.

 

Having not enough time in multiple ports is clearly not preferential to having a good amount of time in less ports.

Edited November 1, 2013 by LMaxwell