empress first 6 sailings canelled

[Big_G]

Empress seems to have set sail from Cadiz

 

http://www.cruiseshipposition.com/royal-caribbean/empress-of-the-seas-position/

 

What's in Tenerife?

[John&LaLa]

What's in Tenerife?

 

The rest of the crew. They were dropped off for a while. Better airport as I recall

Edited March 22, 2016 by John&LaLa

[Big_G]

The rest of the crew. They were dropped off for a while. Better airport as I recall

 

Thanks.

[Expat Cruise]

I'm not criticizing anyone that wants to visit Cuba but besides jailing dissidents and other civil rights violations let's not forget Cuba:

 

• Stole millions from US companies doing business in their country
  
• Pointed nuclear missiles at the US
  
• Possibly conspired in the assassination of a US President
  
• Exported their revolution to three Central American countries
  
• Shot down two unarmed US civilian aircraft that were doing leaflet drops
  
• Emptied their prisons of some of their worst criminals and sent them to the US
  

Right or wrong, they're just a few reasons why some people have a different perspective on Cuba and who do you think benefits most from tourism to that country?

 

OK so do we also boycott Japan and Germany for the actions they took during World War II? Like it or not the United States is moving towards normal relations with Cuba. The cruise lines if they need do claim cruises for social reasons they will.

 

As for those saying the cruise lines can't just change ports I strongly suggest you read your cruise contract. They are not required to go to any port listed within the cruise information they can change as required and needed.

 

Royal will be cruising to Cuba along with the other major cruise lines, just to much money involved here. And if they cruise lines need to go around the edges of the law they will.

[Big_G]

OK so do we also boycott Japan and Germany for the actions they took during World War II? Like it or not the United States is moving towards normal relations with Cuba. The cruise lines if they need do claim cruises for social reasons they will.

 

 

Not comparable but that's the typical response when you put facts out there. Look, I'm just trying to put the other perspective out there. People shouldn't trivialize others for not wanting to go there. Do note that my comment started with, "I'm not criticizing." As for Germany and Japan, we invested so much money rebuilding those countries that have reformed their governments, why wouldn't we go there.

[Paulette3028]

And if they cruise lines need to go around the edges of the law they will.

 

I can't imagine the cruise line going around the edges of the law.....this makes no sense. Maybe you should elaborate on your thinking.

Edited March 22, 2016 by Paulette3028

[Aquahound]

As for those saying the cruise lines can't just change ports I strongly suggest you read your cruise contract. They are not required to go to any port listed within the cruise information they can change as required and needed.

 

Perhaps you should look at the discussion a little closer and re-read exactly what was said. What I and others said was a cruise ship sailing out of the U.S., under current law, cannot alter it's itinerary to Cuba. I don't care what the contract says. Federal law and Cuban law say this isn't permitted.

 

And if they cruise lines need to go around the edges of the law they will.

 

I'd also like to know what you mean by this.

Edited March 22, 2016 by Aquahound

[coaster]

I believe they were referring to trying to book on ANY other ship besides Majesty which is a downgrade in nights and ship IMO. Not to mention majesty didn't have really any availability or room selection.

 

I moved my sailing to OASIS 7 nighter in a JS on 4/9. It was around the same price as both of my cancelled sailings combined. 4 and 5 nighter in a JS. I too got the great early rates.

 

How they managed to make them the same price, and this is only coming to light now, is they took ALL of the money on each of those sailings, including drink packages and dining, and put it towards OASIS.

 

SO now I need to purchase the package and dining again. Not so cheap nor as good of a deal as they made it seem when they switched me.

 

I got 200$ obc for having 2 sailings cancelled but that still is what... less than half of my drink package and NO specialty dining. Oi

 

Thank you Powersboyee2... Your response captured everything I was trying to convey. Many of us share the same disappointment in how RCI handled the Empress cancellations.

[MattInFLL]

Not comparable but that's the typical response when you put facts out there. Look, I'm just trying to put the other perspective out there. People shouldn't trivialize others for not wanting to go there. Do note that my comment started with, "I'm not criticizing." As for Germany and Japan, we invested so much money rebuilding those countries that have reformed their governments, why wouldn't we go there.

 

Part of the process for Cuba to come off the State Sponsors of Terrorism list is for reparations to be made (actually this generally goes for any country, like Libya), and as we all type, there are wheels in motion for claims against Cuba by US citizens to be paid. The big corporations are not so concerned, because they just see dollar signs for getting access to a new market. And I have no doubt there are many cases where no amount of reparations could ever make what Fidel and company did right - but there is a process in action. Time will tell how successful it is.

 

I also don't think Empress is going anywhere near Cuba anytime soon. Fathom is a very specific circumstance with a very specific type of cruise. RCI does not have that kind of thing in place yet. I also don't think Cuba is the reason for the extra drydock time. But we will hopefully find out soon who is correct.

[Big_G]

Part of the process for Cuba to come off the State Sponsors of Terrorism list is for reparations to be made (actually this generally goes for any country, like Libya), and as we all type, there are wheels in motion for claims against Cuba by US citizens to be paid. The big corporations are not so concerned, because they just see dollar signs for getting access to a new market. And I have no doubt there are many cases where no amount of reparations could ever make what Fidel and company did right - but there is a process in action. Time will tell how successful it is.

 

I also don't think Empress is going anywhere near Cuba anytime soon. Fathom is a very specific circumstance with a very specific type of cruise. RCI does not have that kind of thing in place yet. I also don't think Cuba is the reason for the extra drydock time. But we will hopefully find out soon who is correct.

 

Agree with all your points and suspect the Freeport availability mentioned earlier in this thread may have been cause for a delayed departure from Cadiz.

[iMedic]

A quick update:

 

I emailed the executive offices on Friday and this evening I received a very dismissive response from them today. Same key messaging as when I called in and a unenthusiastic "hope you consider us again" closing.

 

Very clear they're not interested in my business.

[NCEMT]

I just looked at my shipmate app and the Empress of the Seas has left Cadiz!

[Powersboyee2]

I just looked at my shipmate app and the Empress of the Seas has left Cadiz!

 

 

She left quite some time ago hehe

[Merion_Mom]

What's with the Cube hate? It's not like you would be going there to have lunch with government officials.

 

I was never able to solve it. :rolleyes:

[Merion_Mom]

Not comparable but that's the typical response when you put facts out there. Look, I'm just trying to put the other perspective out there. People shouldn't trivialize others for not wanting to go there. Do note that my comment started with, "I'm not criticizing." As for Germany and Japan, we invested so much money rebuilding those countries that have reformed their governments, why wouldn't we go there.

 

I know plenty of people who won't go to one, the other, or both of these countries.

[Big_G]

I know plenty of people who won't go to one, the other, or both of these countries.

 

...and they probably all have valid convictions.

[GottaKnowWhen]

... Those of us who thought we were fortunate to catch the huge C&A discounts that lasted just two days are now at a disadvantage, as there is a large difference in what we paid versus booking a different cruise that does not include the discount. Guess we weren't so lucky after all. It makes me think that perhaps RCI regrets those discounts and is trying to force those bookings to cancel.

 

I guess I just don't understand the whole discussion about "disadvantage" of buying at one rate vs. another.

 

I'll use round numbers for a simple example. Lets say you spent $500 for an Empress cruise. John Doe spent $1500 for the same cruise because John doesn't know how to look for the good deals and also because part of what he spent was for a premium drinks package and fancy dinners. The ship has a problem, your cruise is canceled. Royal says "you spent $500, we'll give you $500 credit toward any Royal cruise you want to take." John Doe gets the same deal, but since he has spent $1500, he gets a $1500 credit. You are not at a disadvantage of any sort because you are getting back what you put in.

 

I do agree with the general feeling that Royal could have been a bit more generous (maybe a 150% credit toward future cruise rather than 100%?) but it seems that everyone is getting back what they had put in (airfare aside).

[John&LaLa]

I guess I just don't understand the whole discussion about "disadvantage" of buying at one rate vs. another.

 

I'll use round numbers for a simple example. Lets say you spent $500 for an Empress cruise. John Doe spent $1500 for the same cruise because John doesn't know how to look for the good deals and also because part of what he spent was for a premium drinks package and fancy dinners. The ship has a problem, your cruise is canceled. Royal says "you spent $500, we'll give you $500 credit toward any Royal cruise you want to take." John Doe gets the same deal, but since he has spent $1500, he gets a $1500 credit. You are not at a disadvantage of any sort because you are getting back what you put in.

 

I do agree with the general feeling that Royal could have been a bit more generous (maybe a 150% credit toward future cruise rather than 100%?) but it seems that everyone is getting back what they had put in (airfare aside).

 

I think the point some are trying to make is the delta between what they paid for Empress and the cost to use the refund to join another ship. This would not apply to the price match trips on Majesty

[Maybug7]

Saw this today on Instagram...

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums mobile app

[SaintL]

OK so do we also boycott Japan and Germany for the actions they took during World War II? Like it or not the United States is moving towards normal relations with Cuba. The cruise lines if they need do claim cruises for social reasons they will.

 

As for those saying the cruise lines can't just change ports I strongly suggest you read your cruise contract. They are not required to go to any port listed within the cruise information they can change as required and needed.

 

Royal will be cruising to Cuba along with the other major cruise lines, just to much money involved here. And if they cruise lines need to go around the edges of the law they will.

 

What a dumb argument, you cant compare those those countries, the people of cuba have no freedom, get food by the ration, have people risking thier lives to leave that county.... do i need to go on? go to cuba and keep giving money to a communist regime i dont give a f, but dont expect all to be onboard, people that are all for this obviously have never had to leave thier country with the clothes on there back and fork all thier belongings and properties to the government so whatever.

[actuarian]

OK so do we also boycott Japan and Germany for the actions they took during World War II? Like it or not the United States is moving towards normal relations with Cuba. The cruise lines if they need do claim cruises for social reasons they will.

 

As for those saying the cruise lines can't just change ports I strongly suggest you read your cruise contract. They are not required to go to any port listed within the cruise information they can change as required and needed.

 

Royal will be cruising to Cuba along with the other major cruise lines, just to much money involved here. And if they cruise lines need to go around the edges of the law they will.

 

Japan and Germany are poor examples; Tojo and Hitler are both long gone but the Castro brothers are still there. Nevertheless, the governments of both of the countries that have two syllable names that begin with C and end with A are equally repressive. Indeed, one could argue that the Castros have done nothing as bad as what that other country did to Tibet. So why should cruise ships (and every other type of business) be allowed to deal with one and not the other?

[Ocean Boy]

What a dumb argument, you cant compare those those countries, the people of cuba have no freedom, get food by the ration, have people risking thier lives to leave that county.... do i need to go on? go to cuba and keep giving money to a communist regime i dont give a f, but dont expect all to be onboard, people that are all for this obviously have never had to leave thier country with the clothes on there back and fork all thier belongings and properties to the government so whatever.

 

I can provide a few stories that relatives of mine in Italy had to tell about what sorts of things happened when the Germans decided to roll through the town that we are from over there.

[Islandcrazed]

I guess I just don't understand the whole discussion about "disadvantage" of buying at one rate vs. another.

 

I'll use round numbers for a simple example. Lets say you spent $500 for an Empress cruise. John Doe spent $1500 for the same cruise because John doesn't know how to look for the good deals and also because part of what he spent was for a premium drinks package and fancy dinners. The ship has a problem, your cruise is canceled. Royal says "you spent $500, we'll give you $500 credit toward any Royal cruise you want to take." John Doe gets the same deal, but since he has spent $1500, he gets a $1500 credit. You are not at a disadvantage of any sort because you are getting back what you put in.

 

I do agree with the general feeling that Royal could have been a bit more generous (maybe a 150% credit toward future cruise rather than 100%?) but it seems that everyone is getting back what they had put in (airfare aside).

If you paid 349$ for a oceanview room because you were enticed by a really great deal on a new ship experience, Then booked great rate flights because you are on a budget and have handicapped teenager at home to change diapers and looked forward to all year long for a break for sanity-this was a fellow cruiser. Then the airlines want to charge 400.00 in change fees that you do not have If you look at from a cold business perspective then it makes sense to the corporation. Loyal royals and new Royal customers left with a bad taste.

[actuarian]

I guess I just don't understand the whole discussion about "disadvantage" of buying at one rate vs. another.

 

I'll use round numbers for a simple example. Lets say you spent $500 for an Empress cruise. John Doe spent $1500 for the same cruise because John doesn't know how to look for the good deals and also because part of what he spent was for a premium drinks package and fancy dinners. The ship has a problem, your cruise is canceled. Royal says "you spent $500, we'll give you $500 credit toward any Royal cruise you want to take." John Doe gets the same deal, but since he has spent $1500, he gets a $1500 credit. You are not at a disadvantage of any sort because you are getting back what you put in.

 

I do agree with the general feeling that Royal could have been a bit more generous (maybe a 150% credit toward future cruise rather than 100%?) but it seems that everyone is getting back what they had put in (airfare aside).

 

That is just wrong. Suppose (for example) that you booked the Empress on January 3, 2016. If you had known that the Empress cruise would be cancelled, you would have booked a different ship on January 3, 2016 at whatever rate was in effect on January 3, 2016. It is absolutely wrong for Royal to make you pay March 23, 2016 rates for a substitute cruise when it was they not you who cancelled (unless there was no increase in rates between the two dates). Royal should also take care of ALL incidental costs associated with the change such as airfares, hotels, ground transportation. The airfare issue can be particularly complex if the original airline ticket was purchased or upgraded with frequent flyer miles and those capacity controlled awards are no longer available. A service oriented company would make its customers whole in all of those regards.

[LMaxwell]

Royal should also take care of ALL incidental costs associated with the change such as airfares, hotels, ground transportation. The airfare issue can be particularly complex if the original airline ticket was purchased or upgraded with frequent flyer miles and those capacity controlled awards are no longer available. A service oriented company would make its customers whole in all of those regards.

 

Absolutely, 110% agree. There is no explanation or reasoning around this. What's right is right and you are dead on with that.