Haven perks for 2nd cabin?

[sanger727]

In the situation that they are trying to do they are actually paying more. They are paying full fare for 2 passengers in a balcony room as compared to either reduced or no charge for 3rd and 4th in the aft penthouse. Why penalize them for spending additional money.

 

Sent from my SM-G935V using Forums mobile app

 

 

 

Not really from NCL's point of view. The ships sail full; NCL will sell that balcony, probably at double occupancy rate to someone. They would prefer the extra money to have those 2 passengers paying 3rd and 4th in the haven cabin, or, even better splurging for 2 haven cabins or a 2 bedroom suite. Policies exist to maximize their profit. They know that 4 adults typically don't want to share a 1 bedroom cabin.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[keep on cruisin]

Not really from NCL's point of view. The ships sail full; NCL will sell that balcony, probably at double occupancy rate to someone. They would prefer the extra money to have those 2 passengers paying 3rd and 4th in the haven cabin, or, even better splurging for 2 haven cabins or a 2 bedroom suite. Policies exist to maximize their profit. They know that 4 adults typically don't want to share a 1 bedroom cabin.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

Most adult couples also would not typically want the 2nd bedroom in the 2 bedroom.

[jem1949]

I equate it to parents flying in first class and having the kids back in coach. Assuming empty seats, airlines aren't going to let the kids come up to FC into empty seats.

 

Or having club level seats at a ball game with friends being up in nose bleed section then inviting them down to join them in empty seats. Ushers would/should ask to see their tickets and politely ask them to leave.

 

IMO, if your key card does not have an H on it, you should not be using Haven facilities other than a guest room visit or being a dinner guest in the Haven restaurant.

[keep on cruisin]

For any other room on the ship than the connected stateroom on a linked reservation I would agree 100% with all of you that Haven is Haven non-Haven is non-Haven. But in a connected stateroom there is an expected relationship between the two. They do not offer any Haven suite options as a connected cabin to the aft, so the best alternative for a group wanting the benefit of the large balcony of the aft suite is the connected cabin.

 

As for the size of the Haven that has already been discussed by 2 in each suite. They could offer a 2 tier pricing. Maybe have the H6 aft have 1 price and the combination be an H10 or whatever and have it booked as a combined stateroom.

 

Sent from my SM-T810 using Forums mobile app

[Two Wheels Only]

But in a connected stateroom there is an expected relationship between the two. They do not offer any Haven suite options as a connected cabin to the aft, so the best alternative for a group wanting the benefit of the large balcony of the aft suite is the connected cabin.

They DO have H6 connecting to balcony on BA/GA. There have been mixed results with Haven access for the connecting balcony (usually minors). Now, it is almost no access for the connecting balcony (NCL has become more strict).

 

Your results may vary but more than likely, it will be no access for the connecting.

[keep on cruisin]

They DO have H6 connecting to balcony on BA/GA. There have been mixed results with Haven access for the connecting balcony (usually minors). Now, it is almost no access for the connecting balcony (NCL has become more strict).

 

Your results may vary but more than likely, it will be no access for the connecting.

I know they have them. We stayed in the aft penthouse on Breakaway. We did not have the adjoining storeroom. It was just DW and DS and I. But we were told if we had the adjoing storeroom with 4 or less total we would all have access. We were contemplating booking port and starboard afts with adjoining along with my parents, brother and his wife and son. 2 in each aft and 2 in each adjoining.

 

That has never happened but we were told it would be allowed. I would never book it that way unless it was in writing in some fashion that all would have priveledges.

 

 

 

Sent from my SM-G935V using Forums mobile app

[Deck boy Dave]

Just a thought, couldn’t you just book them as the 3rd and 4th passengers in the haven room and also book them in the connecting room.

[SeaShark]

I am finding conflicting Information:we are thinking about booking a H8 Haven corner suite for 2 ppl with a connecting BB Balcony room for 2ppl.

Will all 4x travelers be able to take advantage of the Haven privileges, i.e. Private pool, Haven Restaurant & Bar etc?

Thanks for your input!

 

Allow me to present this in a different light which may help with the answer.

 

In the described scenario, the OP has a group of 4 and they want to put 2 in the Haven cabin and 2 in the connecting balcony (non-haven) cabin. They question is can the 2 in balcony cabin have Haven access they did not pay for?

 

Look at it this way: Let's say the OP and his/her spouse were in the same Haven suite. And presume that the connecting balcony cabin is occupied by two people who are total strangers to the OP and their spouse. Would those 2 total strangers still get Haven access? Remember, they would be in the same cabin with the same connecting door as the 2 people in the OP's scenario.

 

If the answer is "yes" for one, it has to be "yes" for the other.

[ColinIllinois]

Just a thought, couldn’t you just book them as the 3rd and 4th passengers in the haven room and also book them in the connecting room.

 

 

No.

[keep on cruisin]

Allow me to present this in a different light which may help with the answer.

 

In the described scenario, the OP has a group of 4 and they want to put 2 in the Haven cabin and 2 in the connecting balcony (non-haven) cabin. They question is can the 2 in balcony cabin have Haven access they did not pay for?

 

Look at it this way: Let's say the OP and his/her spouse were in the same Haven suite. And presume that the connecting balcony cabin is occupied by two people who are total strangers to the OP and their spouse. Would those 2 total strangers still get Haven access? Remember, they would be in the same cabin with the same connecting door as the 2 people in the OP's scenario.

 

If the answer is "yes" for one, it has to be "yes" for the other.

 

As stated before, they can easily determine if the bookings are linked. If they are not a linked booking than no access. If they are linked allow access but adjust DSC to Haven for both rooms.

[SeaShark]

As stated before, they can easily determine if the bookings are linked. If they are not a linked booking than no access. If they are linked allow access but adjust DSC to Haven for both rooms.

 

Well, there are a couple of rather huge flaws in your logic.

 

First, the people in the balcony cabin did not pay for the Haven amenities. The people in the suite did, as the cost is included in their fare. Those amenities are not offered for FREE, they are offered to the people who pay for them. No Haven guest has the right, or authority, to give Haven amenities to people who didn't pay for them.

 

Second, NCL does not "link" reservations. On cruise lines that still have assigned dining, people can link reservations. This is done so that people traveling with people in different cabins can be assigned to the same dining table. Since NCL does not assign dining in any way, shape, or form, the don't "link" reservations...there is simply no need. (That said, a good many people don't understand this simple concept. Rather than having to explain it to people over and over again, many PCCs and TAs simply tell their guests a little white lie ("I linked your reservations") which harms no one since the pretend "linking" doesn't actually do anything.)

 

Bottom line: if you want Haven amenities, then book a Haven suite. Booking a connecting room or claiming to "know someone" in the Haven isn't sufficient. It isn't fair to the people who actually did pay for those amenities. Either book the entire party IN the Haven, or book the entire party OUT of the Haven. Pick one.

[Deck boy Dave]

No.

 

Why? Why would that not work?

[keep on cruisin]

Well, there are a couple of rather huge flaws in your logic.

 

First, the people in the balcony cabin did not pay for the Haven amenities. The people in the suite did, as the cost is included in their fare. Those amenities are not offered for FREE, they are offered to the people who pay for them. No Haven guest has the right, or authority, to give Haven amenities to people who didn't pay for them.

 

Second, NCL does not "link" reservations. On cruise lines that still have assigned dining, people can link reservations. This is done so that people traveling with people in different cabins can be assigned to the same dining table. Since NCL does not assign dining in any way, shape, or form, the don't "link" reservations...there is simply no need. (That said, a good many people don't understand this simple concept. Rather than having to explain it to people over and over again, many PCCs and TAs simply tell their guests a little white lie ("I linked your reservations") which harms no one since the pretend "linking" doesn't actually do anything.)

 

Bottom line: if you want Haven amenities, then book a Haven suite. Booking a connecting room or claiming to "know someone" in the Haven isn't sufficient. It isn't fair to the people who actually did pay for those amenities. Either book the entire party IN the Haven, or book the entire party OUT of the Haven. Pick one.

They paid for a room that allows priveledges for 4 in the room. They could either pay a reduced 3rd and 4th person rate in the room, or even 0 if 3rd and 4th free if applicable. Or they could pay full fare for another cabin and be given the same benefit of the invisible people in the paid Haven. But the group has paid more in this option than they would have. And even if what you say about linking is correct, which I find hard to believe, it would not be difficult for notes to be in both reservation allowing it. They as a group have paid more for 2 rooms than they would have with 1. And since they will not allow them to book the same passengers as the 3rd and 4th in the H6 and the connecting room which could alleviate all of the problems of everyone saying they didn't pay for Haven suite.

 

Sent from my SM-T810 using Forums mobile app

[Two Wheels Only]

No Haven guest has the right, or authority, to give Haven amenities to people who didn't pay for them.

I stated pretty much the same in an earlier post.

 

Second, NCL does not "link" reservations.

Slight disagreement there. NCL does link Haven and non-Haven reservations. I've done the exact thing. My family (Haven) and my mom and sister (non-Haven) had our reservations linked so that we could board together (priority boarding). It wasn't automatic. It was asked and approved by NCL.

 

 

Obviously, granting priority boarding isn't the same as granting Haven access but it was much appreciated (first cruise for both my mom and sister). In fact, the email specifically stated that my mom and sister were not given Haven access even though the concierge (Adrien) did invite them into the Haven for a tour and he invited them back into the Haven to meet the captain later that evening.

[SeaShark]

They may have paid more, but they paid more for a balcony cabin with no Haven amenities.

 

Again, if the two people in the connecting balcony were strangers, there would be no question about the amenities...and the would have paid the same for the cabin.

 

If you want Haven amenities, the pay for...and stay in...and no Haven suite. People need to stop trying to justify trying to get something the didn't pay for.

[SeaShark]

No...they don't link any reservations. Like I stated you were told the little white lie to avoid the pointless explanation/argument. Your Mom and Sister would have been allowed to walk to the ship with you simply by asking. Nobody had to review your reservations.

[Two Wheels Only]

And since they will not allow them to book the same passengers as the 3rd and 4th in the H6 and the connecting room which could alleviate all of the problems of everyone saying they didn't pay for Haven suite.

Your thinking (no matter how much sense it makes) doesn't override NCL's decision. If they say yes, great. If they say no, that's how it is.

[Deck boy Dave]

And since they will not allow them to book the same passengers as the 3rd and 4th in the H6 and the connecting room which could alleviate all of the problems of everyone saying they didn't pay for Haven suite.

 

Sent from my SM-T810 using Forums mobile app

 

Is this a rule where does it say this?

[DMH15]

In the situation that they are trying to do they are actually paying more. They are paying full fare for 2 passengers in a balcony room as compared to either reduced or no charge for 3rd and 4th in the aft penthouse. Why penalize them for spending additional money.

 

Sent from my SM-G935V using Forums mobile app

 

 

 

Your philosophy is flawed. There is NO

difference between their 2 in a balcony and everybody else in a balcony. If the suite actually has an occupancy for four then you should all go in there and then you would get suite perks but your trade off is you're a little cramped with each other. so be it.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[keep on cruisin]

Your thinking (no matter how much sense it makes) doesn't override NCL's decision. If they say yes, great. If they say no, that's how it is.

As I have stated many times. All I can do is go by what I was personally told by both my former PCC as well as the butler we had when in the aft penthouse. Have never actually tried to do it. But was told as long as you don't exceed the aft capacity it was allowed. Perhaps that is controlled by the concierge that is handling the ship, I don't know. All I am saying is how NCL could easily justify their decision to allow it. But since they do not have a written policy to allow it, but do allow on a case by case basis. They make it a confusing situation.

 

Sent from my SM-G935V using Forums mobile app

[Até]

Why? Why would that not work?

Is this a rule where does it say this?

NCL will not allow a person to be booked in two different staterooms. Tried it myself. The best way to think about why is to think of all the people in the Haven that could just list their friends from any other non-Haven cabin as extra people in their cabin if there is officially space for more people in their Haven cabin. Basically you would start getting hundreds of extra quasi-Haven guests being booked. It's like offering the Haven perks for a price, or for free on 3rd/4th sail free cruises.

Edited October 22, 2017 by Até

[keep on cruisin]

Your philosophy is flawed. There is NO

difference between their 2 in a balcony and everybody else in a balcony. If the suite actually has an occupancy for four then you should all go in there and then you would get suite perks but your trade off is you're a little cramped with each other. so be it.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

No flaw in my philosophy. The flaw is with NCL telling people it is allowed, and telling people it is not. You may disagree with my reasoning for them to allow it. And since it has been allowed on a case by case basis that just shows the confusion. But that does not make my reasoning. It actually supports it.

 

Sent from my SM-G935V using Forums mobile app

[DMH15]

No flaw in my philosophy. The flaw is with NCL telling people it is allowed, and telling people it is not. You may disagree with my reasoning for them to allow it. And since it has been allowed on a case by case basis that just shows the confusion. But that does not make my reasoning. It actually supports it.

 

Sent from my SM-G935V using Forums mobile app

 

 

 

I respectfully disagree. Why don't your other 2 adults just book their own suite? Is there some reason they have to be connecting?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[keep on cruisin]

Why book anothe aft suite? Don't need 2. And the aft is as far away from the Have courtyard suites as is possible. Adjoining makes much more sense.

 

Sent from my SM-G935V using Forums mobile app

[Até]

...The flaw is with NCL telling people it is allowed, and telling people it is not. You may disagree with my reasoning for them to allow it. And since it has been allowed on a case by case basis that just shows the confusion....

 

NCL had allowed it for legitimate reasons, usually parents in the suite and kids in the adjoining stateroom - and continues to do so in a slightly modified way since only minors are no longer allowed to be booked in the adjoining cabin. They book one parent in each cabin and the kids wherever, but all will get suite perks. If a grandparent or other family member happens to come along they are usually understanding. Unfortunately there have been some thrifty and innovative groups that try to work NCL's accommodation to their advantage. If you search this forum you will find several interesting scenarios. The OP's case looks like one of these cases and if the concierge feels that way the suite perks will be denied. That is why it will be the concierge's case by case decision no matter what you may hear from NCL on the phone or what others here have experienced.