Thinking about Alaska with NCL? Don't do it.

[Stacy Cruiser]

If you are thinking about booking an Alaskan cruise with NCL, think again. Our family was very disappointed with their service, food, children's programs, rooms and mechanical dependability. My biggest complaint was missing Glacier Bay and being re-routed to Sitka. This was why we made the choice to use NCL instead of Carnival or Princess (which we enjoyed on past cruises). The captain apologized for some mechanical difficulty which was causing the ship to leak something that would pollute the environment, so we couldn't enter the bay to see any glaciers. The food was inferior to Carnival and Princess (less choice for normal fair like chicken and fish). My twelve year old son hated the kid's program where we had to sign him in and out. It was not age appropriate for him. My daughter was sick on board. The room arrangement was ridiculous. One bunk bed and a pull out so that there were three beds side by side with no walk ways. And the staff walked around without smiles. Maybe because the passengers were so grouchy about missing Glacier Bay...They did give us an on-board credit (which you could spend in the gift shop), but did nothing else when I wrote to their customer service representative and C.E.O. two times. I would recommend that you don't cruise with NCL.:(

[Len3]

We cruised on the Sun Princess in August and simply loved every minute of it. In researching which ship to book, I took the info on the Alaska board and it was hands down for Princess. I'm sorry that you didn't enjoy NCL for this experience, but Princess does seem to "own" Alaska and have the system down pat. We're sailing on the Spirit in February to the caribbean, but would never select NCL to Alaska. Glacier Bay was a true highlight that I'm sorry you missed. Also, Princess has an exclusive on some shore excursions that other lines don't offer. If you decide to do the inside passage ever again - take Princess.

[SailAways]

So Sorry that you did not enjoy your cruise, and that you feel that missing Glacier Bay ruined your entire cruise.

 

Being re-routed to Sitka would have pleased many. Receiving an on board credit seems very generous. What more were your expecting in the way of compensation?

 

We did NCL Spirit to Alaska in September, and had a grand time. We missed Sawyer Glacier, but this in no way diminished our cruise. (No credits were given - and none were expected).

 

We did not hear any grumbling about the switch in plans, as it was explained to us that it was a call being made by the Captain for safety purposes. We cruised into an inlet to view Dawes Glacier, much wildlife,and a truly awesome amount of beauty during the entire day.

 

The folks aboard who we talked with who had children had nothing but praise for the Kid's program. Something must have changed.

 

As for the room accommodations, it truly seems that you would have been aware of those prior to your cruise. Perhaps, if you do go on Princess, you should investigate the room layout prior to booking.

 

It truly is sad to only hear of your disappointments - did you enjoy any of this cruise at all? Please let us know.

 

We are not only wanting to hear the good, as often stated on these boards, but a review which is only negative leaves us wondering. I would have to agree with your assessment that grouchy passengers could indeed affect the crew and cause them to be grouchy also.

[hotspur]

I really feel it's a disservice when someone comes on here and tries to dissuade everyone else in the world from a cruise line or a specific ship because of their one experience--especially when their attitude is overwhelmingly colored by one event that to them, for whatever reason, seems very significant (e.g., not getting a shore excursion they wanted; having their beds made up as twins, not queens; or missing one port or major sight).

 

Like SailAways, we had a wonderful Alaska cruise on NCL--sailing the much-maligned Dream, no less--and would recommend NCL's Alaska cruises to anyone. Why anyone would say Princess "owns" Alaska is beyond me, and is also misleading to people coming here for useful information in planning their cruise.

[Host CMLA]

I really feel it's a disservice when someone comes on here and tries to dissuade everyone else in the world from a cruise line or a specific ship because of their one experience--especially when their attitude is overwhelmingly colored by one event that to them, for whatever reason, seems very significant (e.g., not getting a shore excursion they wanted; having their beds made up as twins, not queens; or missing one port or major sight).

I tend to agree. I've cruised to Alaska three times with NCL on the Wind. None of the cruises was perfect but I wouldn't hesitate going to Alaska again with NCL.

[Retired not Expired]

I really feel it's a disservice when someone comes on here and tries to dissuade everyone else in the world from a cruise line or a specific ship because of their one experience--especially when their attitude is overwhelmingly colored by one event that to them, for whatever reason, seems very significant (e.g., not getting a shore excursion they wanted; having their beds made up as twins, not queens; or missing one port or major sight).

 

Like SailAways, we had a wonderful Alaska cruise on NCL--sailing the much-maligned Dream, no less--and would recommend NCL's Alaska cruises to anyone. Why anyone would say Princess "owns" Alaska is beyond me, and is also misleading to people coming here for useful information in planning their cruise.

 

Hotspur, you and I both know that when a ship on any line misses a port, there are threads like this that show up. If the OP had taken a little time to search, they would have found them from back when this happened.

 

Funny, though, when ports aren't missed, people report of the great time they had on the same ship. That's why I picked the Star for my Alaska for the coming season and I'm sure I will have a wonderful time.

 

And as for Princess, it's all the post like that is why I would never sail with them. I don't like to look up nostrils when talking to someone and almost all the posts that Princess people make comparing them to other lines, their noses seem to be......well......you make the choice.

[jeffinhburg]

The real question - what brings this up NOW? Did you take an Alaskan cruise in December (rhetorical question)? Has the OP been stewing about this since August and just decided to join today and post that now? Some of those things would be, IMO, legitimate complaints, comparisons, or responses to questions about Alaska experiences (for instance, I love NCL, but would not rate the kids programs among the best at all), but to join cc and start a new thread in order to post a warning four months after the fact without any context is odd.

[shoreguy]

This is old news - The Star missed Glacier Bay once last summer. Not sure why months later a new member registers, takes the time to star a new thread, as so often happens post a one sided review.

 

Many were disappointed with the miss of Glacier Bay and shared that here in a timely manor. The also shared the good things from their cruises.

 

From my point of view this thread is of no value. It provides dated information, and a reason not to cruise NCL because of a problem outside the control of NCL or any other line.

 

Perhaps a better post for the Princess Board. I seem to remember one of the Princess ships had major problems in Alaska last summer. I am not going to do a search to find the details and post on the Princess board - don't cruise on Princess.

[shoreguy]

The real question - what brings this up NOW? Did you take an Alaskan cruise in December (rhetorical question)? Has the OP been stewing about this since August and just decided to join today and post that now? Some of those things would be, IMO, legitimate complaints, comparisons, or responses to questions about Alaska experiences (for instance, I love NCL, but would not rate the kids programs among the best at all), but to join cc and start a new thread in order to post a warning four months after the fact without any context is odd.

 

Great minds think alike at the same time:D

[7SeasLover]

Sounds like sour grapes to me. I can appreciate a post that issues a serious complaint about something, but then goes on to report the good things. This post is merely intended to bash. It doesn't sound any anything makes you happy - even people.

 

It's too bad you didn't enjoy your time on boar NCL. If you cruise long enough, you're going to miss ports and have itinerary changes - that's life. It's very nice that NCL offered on-board credit.

 

I've cruised NCL many, many times and I love the cruiseline! I've cruised with other lines and didn't like some. Usually, however, there was something I didn't like - not everything.

 

The only negative experience I had on NCL was having all the China come crashing out of our China Cabinet during a sudden storm in Alaska. The next day at the Captain's party he said the ship lost lots of China that night! The butler quickly replaced the broken pieces the next day. The storm was so rought that my bed moved away from the wall sometime during the night.

 

We had a wonderful time and any port in Alaska is awesome! Life is what you make it.

[Bennett'sCruise]

 

The only negative experience I had on NCL was having all the China come crashing out of our China Cabinet during a sudden storm in Alaska. The next day at the Captain's party he said the ship lost lots of China that night! The butler quickly replaced the broken pieces the next day. The storm was so rought that my bed moved away from the wall sometime during the night.

 

We had a wonderful time and any port in Alaska is awesome! Life is what you make it.

 

Sounds like a WILD party, Ginny!!!;)

 

I agree with anything Ginny says:)

 

~Dianne

[7SeasLover]

Hey there, girlfriend! How are you? How are your cruise plans coming along-- you with 4 cruises booked (one down now, eh?) How'd it go?

 

I need to ask you a questions, but I don't have your private email at home, so I'll email you tomorrow from the office. I want to talk about those Cruise Critic magnets you made for us on NCL's Pacific Coastal.

 

Much to tell you, but I'll wait until Monday at work!

[3dblouder]

Hotspur, you and I both know that when a ship on any line misses a port, there are threads like this that show up. If the OP had taken a little time to search, they would have found them from back when this happened.

 

Funny, though, when ports aren't missed, people report of the great time they had on the same ship. That's why I picked the Star for my Alaska for the coming season and I'm sure I will have a wonderful time.

 

And as for Princess, it's all the post like that is why I would never sail with them. I don't like to look up nostrils when talking to someone and almost all the posts that Princess people make comparing them to other lines, their noses seem to be......well......you make the choice.

 

I cruised Alaska on the star this past September and have to say that it was the best cruise I have ever been on and would do it all again in a heartbeat.

 

As far as not enjoying your cruise all I can say is happy sailing whatever line you t Cruise next maybe it will suit your family's needs better.

3dblouder

[sunshine 229]

I really feel it's a disservice when someone comes on here and tries to dissuade everyone else in the world from a cruise line or a specific ship because of their one experience--especially when their attitude is overwhelmingly colored by one event that to them, for whatever reason, seems very significant (e.g., not getting a shore excursion they wanted; having their beds made up as twins, not queens; or missing one port or major sight).

 

Like SailAways, we had a wonderful Alaska cruise on NCL--sailing the much-maligned Dream, no less--and would recommend NCL's Alaska cruises to anyone. Why anyone would say Princess "owns" Alaska is beyond me, and is also misleading to people coming here for useful information in planning their cruise.

 

I think it is as silly to warn everyone away from a cruiseline because of your one bad experience as it is to recommend a cruiseline to anyone because of your good experience.

 

Not everyone is looking for the same things from their cruise and just about everyline, ship and even itinerary may appeal to some cruisers and not to others.

 

To me it seems more reasonable to just relate your experience and your feelings about your cruise, and let others decide for themselves whether or not it sounds like that particular line or ship is for them, rather than to make blanket statements like 'I would recommend this cruise to anyone' or 'no one should ever take this cruise'.

[seattleadjuster]

"the staff walked around without smiles"? As you can see below, I've been on many cruises, on many different cruise lines. I've never seen a staff that doesn't smile. What I have seen many times is people that gripe about everything.

 

The only way I can rationalize why people are negative about everything is that they get satisfaction from being miserable.

 

Be honest . . . doesn't this happen on every cruise . . . there are certain people that always gripe. The people we meet on cruises all seem to take note of them, and get a chuckle. On the other hand, I enjoy seeing the people who order one entree, get the wrong entree, AND DON'T yell, scream, or post forum messages for the next year.

 

Finally, as to the crew never smiling, when was the last time you smiled at a crew member, and they didn't smile back? Makes sense . . . the originator of this thread was miserable throughout, and did their best to make everybody in their wake miserable too.

 

Hey Stacy, is that a pen name? Are you really my ex-wife?

[cruisingfromMN]

Regular CC Members know that I and my family were on the sailing that missed Glacier Bay AND also one of the sailings that missed Fanning Island. But guess what, it still would not stop me from booking NCL again and in fact, we are looking at the Star for the Mexican Riviera as well as the Sun. My point, even after missing on two itineraries, we would definitely select NCL again and the Star.

[mbisson]

(snip) The food was inferior to Carnival and Princess (less choice for normal fair like chicken and fish). My twelve year old son hated the kid's program where we had to sign him in and out. It was not age appropriate for him. My daughter was sick on board. The room arrangement was ridiculous. One bunk bed and a pull out so that there were three beds side by side with no walk ways. And the staff walked around without smiles.

 

Let's see-not enough chicken & fish, made the food inferior (many don't cruise to have what they have everyday). Signing in & out of kids program, humm, that just might provide some security for the kids and keep them from being where they shouldn't. Daughter was sick-I'm sorry she didn't feel well, but how's that NCL's fault? Didn't like the room arrangement-so sorry you didn't do your research. Staff walked around without smiles-at least none that you saw, but sometimes we see what we want to see.

 

First time poster months after cruise-NO COMMENT.

 

-Monte

[greenie]

Huh.

 

I must have missed something. Was part of the OP's post removed?

 

 

Oh, OK. Never mind, I get it now. Nothing was removed. Boy we can all relate to THAT--being on a cruise to Alaska with your loved ones truly IS an awful thought! I can ceretainly see why you were 100% unhappy!

 

 

:rolleyes:

[SailAways]

This is old news.

From my point of view this thread is of no value. It provides dated information, and a reason not to cruise NCL because of a problem outside the control of NCL or any other line.

 

Still true, and the "One Shot Wonder OP" Has Not Shown Again.

Hmmmm - I think this must be the end of the story.........:rolleyes:

[hotspur]

I think it is as silly to warn everyone away from a cruiseline because of your one bad experience as it is to recommend a cruiseline to anyone because of your good experience.

Poppycock. But not surprising.

 

If you take a cruise and find the things that comprise the standard elements of a cruise (e.g., food, service, cabin, entertainment, public rooms, shore excursions, ship's events) to be well done, there is no reason in this world for someone to say it's "silly" for you recommend that cruise line or ship to others. What would be "silly" would be to recommend a cruise line because you happened to win the grand slot machine prize of NNN thousand dollars on your cruise. Or because, when your toilet was mysteriously plugged up and unrepairable, you received a golden upgrade to the only cabin still available: the Garden Villa. Why? Because none of your readers would have a reasonable expectation of having either of these events happen to THEM on THEIR cruise. Either would be a rare event, and not something anyone else could count on experiencing.

 

That's exactly why it's "silly" to tell the rest of the world NEVER to cruise a certain line or ship because of an incident that happened on YOUR cruise that is very unlikely to happen to THEM on THEIR cruise--like having a long-standing reservation for a shore excursion canceled in error, or having your beds made up not in the way you wanted and taking it as a grievous personal offense, or experiencing an unusual mechanical problem that caused your particular cruise to miss a port or sight that was significant to you.

 

I don't expect you to understand it this time, either, sunshine.

[sunshine 229]

Poppycock. But not surprising.

 

If you take a cruise and find the things that comprise the standard elements of a cruise (e.g., food, service, cabin, entertainment, public rooms, shore excursions, ship's events) to be well done, there is no reason in this world for someone to say it's "silly" for you recommend that cruise line or ship to others. What would be "silly" would be to recommend a cruise line because you happened to win the grand slot machine prize of NNN thousand dollars on your cruise. Or because, when your toilet was mysteriously plugged up and unrepairable, you received a golden upgrade to the only cabin still available: the Garden Villa. Why? Because none of your readers would have a reasonable expectation of having either of these events happen to THEM on THEIR cruise. Either would be a rare event, and not something anyone else could count on experiencing.

 

That's exactly why it's "silly" to tell the rest of the world NEVER to cruise a certain line or ship because of an incident that happened on YOUR cruise that is very unlikely to happen to THEM on THEIR cruise--like having a long-standing reservation for a shore excursion canceled in error, or having your beds made up not in the way you wanted and taking it as a grievous personal offense, or experiencing an unusual mechanical problem that caused your particular cruise to miss a port or sight that was significant to you.

 

I don't expect you to understand it this time, either, sunshine.

 

Oh, well in that case I guess your original post wasn't directed to the OP on this thread, since they found they were disappointed with many of 'the standard elements' of their cruise.

 

Our family was very disappointed with their service, food, children's programs, rooms and mechanical dependability

 

TO me service, food and rooms are fairly standard elements of most cruises so, having found all of those things, in their opinion, to be disappointing, I guess 'there is no reason in this world for someone to say it's "silly" for' them to warn others off that particular ship or line.

 

I still would prefer that posters just let us all know about their experiences rather than making those blanket recommendations one way or another.

[Retired not Expired]

Oh, well in that case I guess your original post wasn't directed to the OP on this thread, since they found they were disappointed with many of 'the standard elements' of their cruise.

 

 

 

TO me service, food and rooms are fairly standard elements of most cruises so, having found all of those things, in their opinion, to be disappointing, I guess 'there is no reason in this world for someone to say it's "silly" for' them to warn others off that particular ship or line.

 

I still would prefer that posters just let us all know about their experiences rather than making those blanket recommendations one way or another.

 

All well and good except in a case where a port is missed for any reason. Here's how it normally goes.

 

The ship and crew has been getting good marks up until that cruise. Then it misses a port. The person comes on here, and now the food is terrible, the crew is rude and doesn't do their jobs, the ship is filthy, the Captain placed them all in peril, the shows stunk, the port missed was the only reason for the cruise and the rest of the ports were terrible, etc., etc., etc.

 

When the ship starts hitting all ports again, the ship gets good marks again.

 

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that almost all reports where a port was missed then become suspect at best. It boils down to a port was missed and that is no reason to recommend not to use the whole cruise line.

 

However, there is nothing wrong with recommending or not recommending anything based on normal operation, be it good or bad.

[hotspur]

All well and good except in a case where a port is missed for any reason. Here's how it normally goes.

 

The ship and crew has been getting good marks up until that cruise. Then it misses a port. The person comes on here, and now the food is terrible, the crew is rude and doesn't do their jobs, the ship is filthy, the Captain placed them all in peril, the shows stunk, the port missed was the only reason for the cruise and the rest of the ports were terrible, etc., etc., etc.

 

When the ship starts hitting all ports again, the ship gets good marks again.

 

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that almost all reports where a port was missed then become suspect at best. It boils down to a port was missed and that is no reason to recommend not to use the whole cruise line.

 

However, there is nothing wrong with recommending or not recommending anything based on normal operation, be it good or bad.

Precisely right, Retired Not Expired. You've hit the nail dead plumb on the head. I suspect most regulars here, with one exception who needs no introduction, have come to understand this phenomenon quite clearly.

[Cruise_More_Often]

We considered cruising with that line that "owns" Alaska but quickly tossed it aside. Why? Freestyle cruising!

 

We could have sailed on the Regal Princess roundtrip out of San Francisco, near where we live, for 10 days for about the same as we'll end up paying to do 7 days out of Seattle. But, we'll be sailing on a ship we love, we'll get to eat wherever and whenever we want, at tables for two if that's what we want, wearing what we want. We'll see almost the same sights and go on almost the same excursions. NCL's entertainment is top notch. We've found their crews very friendly and professional.

 

The Regal doesn't have the choices some of the newer Princess ships do, she's older, and IMO that's one fugly ship.

[sunshine 229]

We considered cruising with that line that "owns" Alaska but quickly tossed it aside. Why? Freestyle cruising!

 

We could have sailed on the Regal Princess roundtrip out of San Francisco, near where we live, for 10 days for about the same as we'll end up paying to do 7 days out of Seattle. But, we'll be sailing on a ship we love, we'll get to eat wherever and whenever we want, at tables for two if that's what we want, wearing what we want. We'll see almost the same sights and go on almost the same excursions. NCL's entertainment is top notch. We've found their crews very friendly and professional.

 

The Regal doesn't have the choices some of the newer Princess ships do, she's older, and IMO that's one fugly ship.

 

I think your's is an excellent post. You point out exactly what it is about freestyle cruising that you love and why YOU would prefer this ship over one of the other options. To me that is all good information based on your personal experience.