Jump to content
Cruise Critic Community

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, libertyelle said:

Our sailing is even worse- both summaries still show Glacier Bay. That was part of the motivation for writing them, in addition to seeking a more fair resolution- it's indefensible to still be accepting bookings for this sailing while presenting customers with false information.

 

 

rc-website-screencap-2.jpg

 

If you click the "Explore This Itinerary" button, you should see the screen I posted where the left side show Endicott Arm and the right side show Glacier Bay.

 

This will probably form the basis of their "we are not responsible for typos" defense.

 

I'm not saying it's right and I'm on your side but I think the odds are stacked against you.

 

Good luck though.  Hopefully there are enough people that can band together to force Royal  to do the right thing.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, we booked when it was still Glacier Bay, before the itinerary change, so I'm not worried about the typos defense in our case. But I am concerned for people who may be in the process of booking and not aware of what they are getting. The entire situation is just being handled very ineptly by Royal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, HBE4 said:

 

Hopefully you can get this resolved to your satisfaction.  It seems Royal jumped the gun in marketing this cruise before securing the necessary approvals. A mistake of their own making.  Which is no surprise as they can't even get the information on their own website correct. I did a mock booking. Note the itinerary summary on the left & right sides in  the screen print below.

 

 

 

GB.PNG

They received permissions to enter Glacier Bay, it was published by the responsible authorities first. The reason for canceling must be something else.

Edited by Saab4444

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Host Clarea said:

 

Lots of time for things to change, unfortunately.

 

Que sera sera...  😉 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just in case this was missed...

cut and pasted from the "Deployment" thread (credit to Kroozfoolz)

https://www.cruisecritic.com/news/4720/

 

"The National Park Service confirmed that the cruise line recently elected not to finalize its agreement to visit the park. Earlier this year, the federal agency announced that seven cruise lines had won 10-year park access including Cunard, Princess Cruises, Holland America Line, Norwegian Cruise Line, Seabourn, Viking Cruises and Royal Caribbean.

 

This means that Royal Caribbean won't be visiting the UNESCO World Heritage Site until at least 2029, when the current agreement expires."

Edited by Hoopster95

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Hoopster95 said:

Just in case this was missed...

cut and pasted from the "Deployment" thread

https://www.cruisecritic.com/news/4720/

 

"The National Park Service confirmed that the cruise line recently elected not to finalize its agreement to visit the park. Earlier this year, the federal agency announced that seven cruise lines had won 10-year park access including Cunard, Princess Cruises, Holland America Line, Norwegian Cruise Line, Seabourn, Viking Cruises and Royal Caribbean.

 

This means that Royal Caribbean won't be visiting the UNESCO World Heritage Site until at least 2029, when the current agreement expires."

 

So that means that Royal was marketing the cruise to Glacier Bay before the deal was finalized?

 

No surprise from a company that STILL can't figure out how many people sleep in a cabin on the newly renovated Oasis just days before she is to set sail.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Hoopster95 said:

Just in case this was missed...

cut and pasted from the "Deployment" thread (credit to Kroozfoolz)

https://www.cruisecritic.com/news/4720/

 

"The National Park Service confirmed that the cruise line recently elected not to finalize its agreement to visit the park. Earlier this year, the federal agency announced that seven cruise lines had won 10-year park access including Cunard, Princess Cruises, Holland America Line, Norwegian Cruise Line, Seabourn, Viking Cruises and Royal Caribbean.

 

This means that Royal Caribbean won't be visiting the UNESCO World Heritage Site until at least 2029, when the current agreement expires."

It is crazy/madness that Royal sold something to cruisers and then cancelled those itineraries. We had picked Ovation to Glacier Bay. Ovation had 3 sailings to Glacier Bay in 2020. sigh. We are keeping our iten and will return to Endicott Arms and Dawes Glacier. It is still going to be beautiful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Hoopster95 said:

Just in case this was missed...

cut and pasted from the "Deployment" thread (credit to Kroozfoolz)

https://www.cruisecritic.com/news/4720/

 

"The National Park Service confirmed that the cruise line recently elected not to finalize its agreement to visit the park. Earlier this year, the federal agency announced that seven cruise lines had won 10-year park access including Cunard, Princess Cruises, Holland America Line, Norwegian Cruise Line, Seabourn, Viking Cruises and Royal Caribbean.

 

This means that Royal Caribbean won't be visiting the UNESCO World Heritage Site until at least 2029, when the current agreement expires."

Well that ended my wait and see if Glacier bay showed back up at a later date. Cancelled my B2B with two stops at Glacier bay and 2 at Hubbard. Off to HAL for a 14 day out of Vancouver 😃

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow... I mean, I know the onerous terms and conditions that you have to agree to say they can pretty much do anything to the itinerary and you're out of luck, but this sure looks like a bait and switch, especially considering the change appears to be entirely within their control. (If I'm understanding correctly, they received approval from the park service but opted not to finalize the deal?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, strickerj said:

 ...  but this sure looks like a bait and switch ...

 

Would not surprise me if Royal had this in mind all the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 It's very common for a government contract to be awarded and then additional negotiations commence.  Once the actual contracts are finalized only then do they become legally binding contracts.  I've been involved with negotiating state and federal contracts that did exactly this. 

 

The problem becomes the marketing cycle of the cruise industry.  That cycle is often 2 or more years for a particular sail date.  If they waited until the legal contract to be inked it wouldn't flow through until the 2022 cruise marketing season.  Did they jump the gun?  Apparently so.  However the cruise contract we all agree to says they can do this.

 

Part of the blame for this situation lies with the Park who grandfathered two cruise lines without considering the long term impacts of doing so for life and to the end of time.  They've created a situation where they favor specific private companies.  That should probably be challenged in the courts at some point.

 

I can see how only when Royal got into the contract negotiation phase did they really learn how much it would cost for the time slots they would get.  Given that ugly outcome they likely walked away.

 

The good news is that if this has the damning effect that everyone thinks, these itineraries will drop in price.  Eligible for price drops that will flow through to booked guests.  

 

I've been wondering why Royal didn't crank up the marketing hype and only dipped a few toes (itineraries) into Glacial Bay.  Now it's starting to make sense.  

 

It sucks for those that are impacted and I wish you all the best.  I cancelled my refundable Ovation sailing a while ago to make room for a Norway cruise.  I hate to be a broken record but book refundable.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I emailed RCI a few weeks ago and threatened with cancellation if they didn't put Skagway back on the itinerary when I originally book. Guess they listened. 😄 

 

JK  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While this scenario may be covered by the ticket contract, it's a terrible look for Royal Caribbean from a customer service perspective. For example, when the Cuba cruises were rerouted to alternative Caribbean ports earlier in the year (a situation totally outside of the company's control, unlike their decision not to finalize the NPS contract), they gave guests the option to cancel for a full refund or keep their bookings and receive a 50% refund. Yet in this situation they refuse to even waive the change fees? It's bizarre how they have no consistency in how they approach things from a customer service perspective, particularly considering this whole bait-and-switch vibe is a much harder sell than a change in government policy or a hurricane.

Edited by libertyelle
Spelling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, twangster said:

 It's very common for a government contract to be awarded and then additional negotiations commence.  Once the actual contracts are finalized only then do they become legally binding contracts.  I've been involved with negotiating state and federal contracts that did exactly this. 

 

The problem becomes the marketing cycle of the cruise industry.  That cycle is often 2 or more years for a particular sail date.  If they waited until the legal contract to be inked it wouldn't flow through until the 2022 cruise marketing season.  Did they jump the gun?  Apparently so.  However the cruise contract we all agree to says they can do this.

 

Part of the blame for this situation lies with the Park who grandfathered two cruise lines without considering the long term impacts of doing so for life and to the end of time.  They've created a situation where they favor specific private companies.  That should probably be challenged in the courts at some point.

 

 

 

Royal should not have marketed the sailings. At least there is time to cancel.  I wonder how Royal Caribbean got the slots when they were supposed to be permanently banned. The park service should never have given Royal Caribbean permits. 

Edited by Charles4515

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, blueridgemama said:

Princess does Alaska really well.

 

Both Princess and Holland America. I did Alaska and Glacier Bay on HAL and it was great. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, blueridgemama said:

Princess does Alaska really well.

can make a joke but better keep my mouth shut 😄

Edited by Tulsacoker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Charles4515 said:

 

Royal should not have marketed the sailings. At least there is time to cancel.  I wonder how Royal Caribbean got the slots when they were supposed to be permanently banned. The park service should never have given Royal Caribbean permits. 

 

We'll likely never know.  

 

And they aren't permanently banned.  Not finalizing a contract does not equate to a ban.  

Edited by twangster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, twangster said:

 

We'll likely never know.  

 

And they aren't permanently banned.  Not finalizing a contract does not equate to a ban.  

 

At the time they were banned it was implied it was permanent but that was obviously not true. The pollution was intentional by corperate. They sent their executives to Europe to avoid charges. Very bad. They have been able to apply  since 2007 I believe. They decided not to bid for permits until now. The slots they were awarded this year were not very good. That is probably why they backed out.

Edited by Charles4515

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Charles4515 said:

 

At the time they were banned it was implied it was permanent but that was obviously not true. The pollution was intentional by corperate. They sent their executives to Europe to avoid charges. Very bad. They have been able to apply  since 2007 I believe. They decided not to bid for permits until now. The slots they were awarded this year were not very good. That is probably why they backed out.

 

By polluting they broke the contract they had at the time.  Lesson learned.  That does not equate to a permanent lifetime ban.  

 

Since that time and once the new contract decade began they have been eligible to bid on the contract.  For several decades they chose not to.  The rest is fodder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/31/2019 at 9:25 AM, zepp914 said:

 

If this is true then RCI will never get to go there.  They could wait until RCI had set its dates and then reroute their ships accordingly.

 

I wanted to give HAL a go, but my wife and son looked around on Youtube and determined the entertainment on-board their ships was about as fun as a funeral.  

 

You don't pick an AK cruise based on the on board entertainment.  You go to AK because of what is happening outside of the ship.  Your priorities are all wrong.

 

I will also add that comparing Glacier Bay w Skagway is an absurd comparison.  Glacier Bay is natural and beautiful.  Skagway is an overcrowded tourist trap that would disappear if the cruise ships ever stopped coming.  Just my opinion but I feel that Skagway is the worse stop of any of the AK ports.

 

DON

Edited by donaldsc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, donaldsc said:

 

You don't pick an AK cruise based on the on board entertainment.  You go to AK because of what is happening outside of the ship.  Your priorities are all wrong.

 

 

 

 

I would normally agree, but we have a 10 year old going with us.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, zepp914 said:

 

I would normally agree, but we have a 10 year old going with us.  

 

I have done 2 AK cruises w 10 year old granddaughters.  Neither of them participated in any of the youth activities on the ship  Their attitude and we did not prompt them about this so they made their own decisions was that they were there to see AK and not do the stuff offered in the kids club.  It is possible that your 10 year old might have the same attitude.

 

DON

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, donaldsc said:

 

You don't pick an AK cruise based on the on board entertainment.  You go to AK because of what is happening outside of the ship.  Your priorities are all wrong.

 

I will also add that comparing Glacier Bay w Skagway is an absurd comparison.  Glacier Bay is natural and beautiful.  Skagway is an overcrowded tourist trap that would disappear if the cruise ships ever stopped coming.  Just my opinion but I feel that Skagway is the worse stop of any of the AK ports.

 

DON

 

 

I think the original Radiance itinerary was Endicott Arm /Dawes and Skagway. When they added Glacier bay they dropped Endicott arm and Skagway and added Icy Strait Point. Now they dropped Glacier Bay and added Skagway back which is what most of the sailings except the 15th and 22nd were doing anyway

 

Vancouver, British ColumbiaInside Passage (Cruising) • Ketchikan, Alaska • Icy Strait Point, Alaska • Juneau, Alaska • Skagway, AlaskaHubbard Glacier (Cruising)Seward, Alaska

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Q&A: Cruise Insurance with Steve Dasseos of TripInsuranceStore.com
      • Holiday Exchange - Jingle and Mingle 2019
      • Forum Assistance
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Member Cruise Reviews
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...