Accurate Canadian Intel

[Maddysdaddy]

Restricting OBC is not the issue. The issue is HOW NCL has implemented it.

 

Agreed wholeheartedly. This is what I posted on another of the many threads on this.

----------------------

 

As posted previously, I'm one of those who has been affected by this.

 

I booked my cruise over a year ago at a rate of $1.11 and was told that I could purchase as much OBC as I wanted at that rate. I could have purchased USD at that time at about $1.15, but based on what I was told, I gave my money to NCL. That is how I budgeted for my cruise, and they have had long-term use of my money under the terms of that agreement.

 

Now NCL has come back to say that they've changed their mind about the promotion, and everything I purchased over $1000 is being cancelled.

 

As a result, for my family to have the same experience on the cruise/gambling/shopping/etc, I would have to purchase USD at just under $1.45.

 

I have no objection to the imposition of a $1000 limit, but what I do object to is that NCL has not grandfathered my purchases, thereby adding many, many hundreds of dollars to my vacation at the last minute.

 

Is a business entitled to terminate a promotion at any time if it makes financial sense? Absolutely. Are they legally entitled to impose it retroactively? Maybe they are under Florida law, but as a Canadian attorney, I'm now aware of what legal theory that would be - under the terms of the cruise contract, I don't see them having that right.

 

I'll wait to see what the investigations department of my credit card comes back with, and then I'll consider whether I'll seek to pursue the matter under the dispute resolution provisions of the contract. Yes, that would cost me more than what I'm losing, but if people don't object to these types of actions, NCL will have no disincentive to continuing to act in this manner.

 

Consider this - what if NCL emailed everyone tomorrow to say "Yes, you do have the unlimited beverage promotion, but some people have been abusing it by ordering drinks that they never finish or take one sip of it and then leave it. This is an abuse of the program and is costing us too much money. So, notwithstanding that you have the UBP and everyone who has previously sailed with that promotion had unlimited beverages, we're capping it at six drinks a day. Please feel free to purchase as many extra beverages as you wish at $11 per." I have a feeling that those saying "too bad, so sad" would be the first ones jumping up and down saying that NCL can't change the rules of the game retroactively.

 

========================

[Kingmaker_inc]

Nothing accurate about OP's post.

 

 

The OP - me - reported what she was told... accurately.

[Shawnino]

The OP - me - reported what she was told... accurately.

 

So then title the thread "Accurate Hearsay".

[hamrag]

Restricting OBC is not the issue. The issue is HOW NCL has implemented it.

 

Absolutely true, for the vast majority, and is evident across all 3 recent threads on similar subject.

[RCmommy]

Will do. It was about time for them to limit subsidizing trips of Canadiens with other people's money, I will gladly commend them for that.

 

I wish there was a 'scratcing my head' emoji.

[RCmommy]

Is NCL refunding/crediting the money in USD or CAD?

[Lady Arwen]

Is NCL refunding/crediting the money in USD or CAD?

 

Canadian, for whatever amount you paid originally.

[zqvol]

IMO all purchases should always be made at the existing bank exchange rate. This idea of giving Canadians a break is an affront to Americans. It does nothing but cost NCL and its shareholders untold amounts.

[willise]

IMO all purchases should always be made at the existing bank exchange rate. This idea of giving Canadians a break is an affront to Americans. It does nothing but cost NCL and its shareholders untold amounts.

 

LOL - NCL made these rules. They must have felt, at one time, that a special exchange rate a few points less than the bank, would entice Canadians to book with them. And, from reading the posts here over the years, it worked well for them.

 

What they failed to forecast was the decline in oil prices which drove the CDN currency down.

 

I remember when people would lose their mind because passengers would sneak liquor on a ship. "Rule breakers", "thieves" were some of the names used since they were not playing by the rules NCL set out. Now you have Canadians abiding by NCL's rules (and they are in favour of the passenger) and they are still being called out for it.

 

"...an affront to Americans" LOL

[Canagirl]

IMO all purchases should always be made at the existing bank exchange rate. This idea of giving Canadians a break is an affront to Americans. It does nothing but cost NCL and its shareholders untold amounts.

 

No different than resident rates. One cruise I was on 30% of the passengers were Canadian. Once a large number of them stop sailing, that is what will cost NCL.

 

As I said earlier, there aren't a lot of people that would look at posted prices and pay 40% or more on top of that when there are other vacations that are far cheaper all in for Canadians despite our dollar. I LOVE cruising, but I won't do it. I'll be vacationing elsewhere with the current dollar and cost of cruising and saving a substantial amount over a cruise.

[NLH Arizona]

No different than resident rates. One cruise I was on 30% of the passengers were Canadian. Once a large number of them stop sailing, that is what will cost NCL.

 

The only difference from the resident rates given to US passengers, is that NCL doesn't sell OBC at a reduced cost because of the resident rate.

[Maddysdaddy]

As posted on another thread:

--------------

 

Me (a year ago): Hi Caterer. I’m having a party and I’d like you to prepare a dinner for 200 on Date X.

 

Caterer: Sounds great. I’d love to do the job. I’d normally charge $60 per person, but if you pay me in advance, I’ll only charge you $50 a head.

 

Me: Fantastic. I’d like to take advantage of that deal. Here’s my credit card. Please go ahead and charge $10,000 on it.

 

--------------------------------

One week before Date X

--------------------------------

 

Caterer: I wanted to let you know that because the cost of food has gone up since you booked, I’m only prepared to give you 50 meals at $50 per person. Here’s your other $7500 back – thanks for letting me use it for the last 12 months. By the way, if you want the other 150 meals, it will now cost you $65 per person.

 

Me: We had a contract. I paid you for 200 meals at $50 per meal, and you agreed to that. The rise in food prices is your problem, not mine. If we had agreed to pay for 50 meals up front and then you’d charge the going rate for the other 150 at the time of the party, that’s a different story – but you contracted for a fixed price at the time we met.

[Canagirl]

The only difference from the resident rates given to US passengers, is that NCL doesn't sell OBC at a reduced cost because of the resident rate.

 

Correct. But the idea of an incentive is the same. With the current pricing and rates, I won't be cruising and I'm sure I'm not the only one.

 

In regard to the onboard credit, I feel it should NOT be refundable at a profit. It is meant for onboard spending and that is what it should be used for. (I didn't buy any OBC for the last cruise I went on. I knew I wouldn't use it)

[NLH Arizona]

Correct. But the idea of an incentive is the same. With the current pricing and rates, I won't be cruising and I'm sure I'm not the only one.

 

In regard to the onboard credit, I feel it should NOT be refundable at a profit. It is meant for onboard spending and that is what it should be used for. (I didn't buy any OBC for the last cruise I went on. I knew I wouldn't use it)

I don't have an issue with NCL giving you all a break or even selling you $1,000 or $5,000 or $10,000 at a reduced rate in OBC as long as it is spent on board the ship. What I take issue with is those that bought OBC they never intended on using on board the ship and those that feel it is okay to cash it out and spend it in the ports and other places other than the ship. NCL did a great thing for you all, but unfortunately when some treated it other than the way it is intended, it ruins it for everyone who was using it the correct way. Edited February 9, 2016 by NLH Arizona

[Canagirl]

I don't have an issue with NCL giving you all a break or even selling you $1,000 or $5,000 or $10,000 at a reduced rate in OBC as long as it is spent on board the ship. What I take issue with is those that bought OBC they never intended on using on board the ship and those that feel it is okay to cash it out and spend it in the ports and other places other than the ship. NCL did a great thing for you all, but unfortunately when some treated it other than the way it is intended, it ruins it for everyone who was using it the correct way.

 

I totally agree with you on that. It should always have been for onboard use.

 

Any not spent on board should have been refunded in CDN$ at exactly the amount it cost to purchase. Had that been what was done, there wouldn't likely be a limit in place now and others would still benefit from a better rate (which is now completely gone for new bookings).

 

Unfortunately some ruined it for everyone.

[Kingmaker_inc]

I don't have an issue with NCL giving you all a break or even selling you $1,000 or $5,000 or $10,000 at a reduced rate in OBC as long as it is spent on board the ship.

 

 

I've cruised with NCL 5 times with my family. I can predict within about $200 how much we will spend and therefore need in OBC. That is what I want to purchase, and NCL should allow it based on my spending history.

 

I don't want to cash out, I don't want to take advantage... I just want $XXXX OBC at the rate I contracted for when I bought the cruise - because that is what I know we will spend onboard, for excursions, etc.

Edited February 10, 2016 by Kingmaker_inc

[NLH Arizona]

I've cruised with NCL 5 times with my family. I can predict within about $200 how much we will spend and therefore need in OBC. That is what I want to purchase, and NCL should allow it based on my spending history.

 

I don't want to cash out, I don't want to take advantage... I just want $XXXX OBC at the rate I contracted for when I bought the cruise - because that is what I know we will spend onboard, for excursions, etc.

You might not take advantage, but you can blame those that did as the reason the policy was changed.

[Kingmaker_inc]

You might not take advantage, but you can blame those that did as the reason the policy was changed.

 

 

And I do.

 

I noted that on the first of these threads... that it was just a matter of time before NCL closed that "loophole". ANd I am pi$$ed that I can't buy what I need and know I will spend - as would be confirmed by my history of cruising with NCL.

 

It only takes a few to wreck it for all.

[fshagan]

And I do.

 

I noted that on the first of these threads... that it was just a matter of time before NCL closed that "loophole". ANd I am pi$$ed that I can't buy what I need and know I will spend - as would be confirmed by my history of cruising with NCL.

 

It only takes a few to wreck it for all.

 

 

I think I still agree with this, but I also am a bit skeptical. None of us knows why NCL really did this. We are making the assumption that those defrauding NCL by buying OBC just to cash it in are the reason.

 

I'd like to know from some of our corporate CPA friends how these kinds of funds are kept on the books. Usually money received for future product delivery is not booked as income, but I don't know in this case. Does NCL have the funds "in escrow" in CAD, "redeemable" at the rate locked in, at a future date? (I suspect there are funny sounding accounting terms like accrual involved). If the accounting procedures require NCL to "cash in" the CAD at the future date's rate then NCL loses the 30 - 40% even if the passenger spends every cent in the casino.

 

If the accounting works that way, then NCL avoids a huge hit even for those passengers that had no intention of doing anything other than gambling with the money. I don't know if that's the case, but I hope this isn't just a financial decision that has equivalent ethical value as the fraud a few were perpetrating against NCL.

[lettienets]

People are lucky to be able to get to talk to a PCC even if the information isn't totally accurate. I can't get mine to answer an email. I think I will go to a TA that I can communicate with.

The fastest way to get a call back is to leave a message for your PCC saying you want to book a cruise! Mine seems to call back asap after whatever he's been doing. Also if he wants my business he better call or answer emails. I booked a cruise with somebody else one time. He didn't like!

[lettienets]

Just wondering, how much OBC did you purchase? I know here in the United States the interest rates are horrible, what interest would you have gained if you left your money in the bank for 4 months?

Think of all the years when interest rates were high how much interest cruise lines made on our cruise deposits and FCCs etc. They have had lots of our money to put down on fuel futures and new shipbuilding.

[casofilia]

"I know here in the United States the interest rates are horrible, what interest would you have gained if you left your money in the bank for 4 months?"

 

Had I left the money in my bank here in New Zealand for 4 months I would have got 3.2% before tax. However the exchange rate loss would have cost me more than I gained. I therefore bought sufficient OBC using my funds that I transfer to Canada for holidays and cruising that I thought would cover me for a 32 day cruise.

 

Mike

[xcell]

I totally agree with you on that. It should always have been for onboard use.

 

Any not spent on board should have been refunded in CDN$ at exactly the amount it cost to purchase. Had that been what was done, there wouldn't likely be a limit in place now and others would still benefit from a better rate (which is now completely gone for new bookings).

 

Unfortunately some ruined it for everyone.

Devils advocate...

 

 

Isn't cashing it out for casino chips consider spending on board. You might win back the 3% service fee or lose it all (benefits ncl)...

 

 

 

Sent from my SM-N910W8 using Tapatalk

[macandlucy]

I don't have an issue with NCL giving you all a break or even selling you $1,000 or $5,000 or $10,000 at a reduced rate in OBC as long as it is spent on board the ship. What I take issue with is those that bought OBC they never intended on using on board the ship and those that feel it is okay to cash it out and spend it in the ports and other places other than the ship. NCL did a great thing for you all, but unfortunately when some treated it other than the way it is intended, it ruins it for everyone who was using it the correct way.

 

Just for clarification purposes -- with respect to exchange rates, NCL didn't really do anything other than exchange Canadian funds at about the going rate at the time. The Canadian dollar has experienced a rapid decline, largely because of the fall in the price of oil. So the people who booked months ago at $1.11 were booking when the Canadian dollar was higher than it is today.

 

In the time since those people booked, the CDN dollar has continued to slide, so it's now much lower than it was at that time. So people who booked at 1.11 (which again, give or take, was about where the CDN dollar was at the time of booking -- they could have gone to the bank and bought US dollars at about the same rate at that time-- were not getting away with anything. They just happened to book their cruise somewhere near the beginning of the CDN dollar decline.

 

Really, what NCL was doing, was simply standing by their own policy of giving people the rate they booked at for all and future transactions, despite rate fluctuations, right up and until they limited the amount of OBC one could pre buy.

 

(By the time I got around to booking, the rate they gave me was 1.33. Since then, the dollar has fallen a little more.)

 

I believe that is the point many have re: the OBC prepurchase. If they knew at the time that NCL was going to limit the amount of OBC, they may have instead bought a bunch of US dollars at that time, at the bank (for use in ports, etc), but they didn't feel the need to because they had "locked in" at 1.11. Now they find their locked in rate wasn't so locked in after all.

 

I understand why those passengers might be unhappy about that. I understand why NCL had to change the rate. I also understand why they went to a la carte pricing in some cases, and I will understand if they impose a "number of drinks" limit on the UDP.

Edited February 10, 2016 by macandlucy

[NLH Arizona]

Devils advocate...

 

 

Isn't cashing it out for casino chips consider spending on board. You might win back the 3% service fee or lose it all (benefits ncl)...

 

 

 

Sent from my SM-N910W8 using Tapatalk

The problem was that the ones that were bragging about it, were not spending it in the casino. They were putting it in their pockets to make a profit.