News on the Westerdam

[Mandalay1903]

2 minutes ago, AncientWanderer said:

 

Yes.  So from HAL's announcement about the Feb 29 departure from Japan, it seems like they've decided to muddle through on a cruise-by-cruise basis.  At least that's my interpretation.  Maybe others see something different?

That's how I see it. Abe and Taiwan still haven't lifted their bans against international cruise ships docking at their ports. I think HAL is just trying to get passengers to take the 100% FCC so those passengers have to book another HAL cruise this year. That way there will be fewer passengers to refund when they actually cancel the cruise in another two weeks or so.

[Krazy Kruizers]

31 minutes ago, thyme2go said:

So maybe this question has been answered but I did not see it..........what about people who rely on medicines and were not prepared to spend extra time on the ship?   Are they transporting meds for individuals in need?   I'm thinking life maintaining med's such as insulin, immune suppressants for transplantee's, heck, even heart meds that some people rely on.   What, if anything, is HAL doing re: these situations?    And again, if this was already covered please list message site..................TIA!

 

I mentioned this several days ago about medications.  Too many people use those pill boxes and take only what they need -- nothing extra.

 

Don't know what HAL is doing about this.

 

The other night -- from one of the ships -- someone held up a sign "Need Medications".

[MAVIP]

11 minutes ago, thyme2go said:

Thanks.........I crossed the med situation up with the Diamond Princess where they are over their planned dates...........sorry.

And if I remember well it was the captain of DP who announced that the ship would take care of suppletion of necessary medicaments.

[cruiseing marly]

6 minutes ago, AncientWanderer said:

 

Yes.  So from HAL's announcement about the Feb 29 departure from Japan, it seems like they've decided to muddle through on a cruise-by-cruise basis.  At least that's my interpretation.  Maybe others see something different?

Agreed looks like they will cancel one cruise at a time. I'm not sure what they can do other than that. Its a tough situation if they cancel all the cruises tell Vancouver and Japan opens there port as they are affected with the virus ,that will also upset people. Right now there damed with do and damed if they don't.

[3rdGenCunarder]

41 minutes ago, Mandalay1903 said:

That's how I see it. Abe and Taiwan still haven't lifted their bans against international cruise ships docking at their ports. I think HAL is just trying to get passengers to take the 100% FCC so those passengers have to book another HAL cruise this year. That way there will be fewer passengers to refund when they actually cancel the cruise in another two weeks or so.

 

That may be. The FCC is a way of getting all your money back IF you can use it. They say it's for a cruise to be taken in the next 12 months. I think that's too restrictive. They really should make it a cruise to be booked in the next 12 months. 

 

Edited to add: I was in the supermarket this morning. Slow line, so I read the rags on the rack. The Enquirer, always a good source of information 🙄, says scientists predict 65 million people will die from the virus. Didn't take them long to put their version of hyperbole into print. (And for those who are concerned, Harry and Meghan are very happy)

Edited February 8, 2020 by 3rdGenCunarder

[ed01106]

4 hours ago, Level six said:

I had a strong feeling this was going to happen on the Westerdam and that is why I did not get on the cruise on FEB 1 and instead cancelled. (Boy am I so glad I did even with losing the money) 

 

If you paid in full for the Feb 1 cruise, if I were you demand that you get the same compensation/refund as those who actually cruised. Why should HAL get to keep your money because you understood the situation better than them.  Even if you don’t get exactly what those on board get, don’t agree for anything less than a full refund.  If HAL denies you that it will undermine the argument they will make when others sue them for negligence in putting them in that situation.  HAL will respond to that allegation with, “you knew as much as us and still choose to sail” Denying you a refund will undercut that defense.

[Level six]

33 minutes ago, ed01106 said:

Denying you a refund will undercut that defense.

 

Wow, I like the way you think.  Thanks.   I am sure it will work out okay.
 

 

Edited February 8, 2020 by Level six

[Stateroom_Sailor]

13 minutes ago, Level six said:

 

Wow, I like the way you think.  Thanks.   I am sure it will work out okay.
 

 

 

You did the right thing, refund or not.  A few years back, I remember carnival encouraging passengers to fly into evacuation zones with an approaching hurricane, hoping to salvage some of their FL sailings.  Trust your own instincts first.

[Level six]

1 minute ago, Stateroom_Sailor said:

 

You did the right thing, refund or not.  A few years back, I remember carnival encouraging passengers to fly into evacuation zones with an approaching hurricane, hoping to salvage some of their FL sailings.  Trust your own instincts first.

 

I know I did the right thing now, but last week I was a wreck trying to decide.  I even made myself sick.  But, at least I feel better with my decision after seeing all the "cruise news" this week.  

 

  I feel more confident this afternoon that HAL will do the right thing.  

[ed01106]

31 minutes ago, Level six said:

 

Wow, I like the way you think.  Thanks.   I am sure it will work out okay.
 

 

When I posted that I had my ships confused.  I was thinking you bailed on the Diamond. Someone who skipped the Diamond would have more leverage to demand a refund than you.  But still you should ask for a refund and at minimum get 100% applied as a FCC instead of a forfeit.  That assumes the ship safely makes it to a port after having a multiday all sea day cruise.  If it turns into a disaster then your leverage goes up.

[dreamers25]

We are booked on the Feb 29th Cruise as well. We are so torn, we still want to go but the sensible thing is to cancel due to the risks involved. At the end of  the day over 30,000 cases with over 700 deaths and less than 2000 full recoveries does not paint a good picture. Like has been mentioned on here before it is only a matter of time before someone is diagnosed on this or our cruise. Do we want to risk that. I think Not. Just wish that HAL would offer a full refund for the cruise, a future credit is no good to us as we already have another cruise booked and nearly paid for later in the year. Yes we have travel insurance but we still have the excess to pay for. We have already claimed some money for our rescheduled fees which we had to pay the excess for, if we make another claim we would have another excess to pay this is in addition to the other out of pocket expenses that we have paid including visas etc. 

 

The other thing  is the amount of people dropping off the cruise. The ship will be nearly empty.  Lots have and will be dropping out, are they going to offer a flash sale on the cabins for locals...hardly seems fair when we paid close to listed price.

 

I know this is not all HALS fault but just wish that they would be a little more forthcoming with information. 

[iancal]

There is a world of difference between saying that some or all these cruisers are going through ‘hell’ vs. saying that they are anxious.  No need for melodramatics by those who are not even on the ship.

 

They have full run of the ship. Lots of food, etc.  I have no doubt that the staff onboard the ship are doing their upmost for the passengers.  I suspect that they have a reasonably stocked pharmacy.

 

This is not a ship of doom.  No reported cases so far.  The unknown is the port of debarkation.  HAL is no doubt trying to do their best for these folks.

 

Just compare that to those on Diamond Princess or those in hospitals fighting confirmed cases of corona virus.

 

Edited February 8, 2020 by iancal

[AncientWanderer]

6 minutes ago, dreamers25 said:

We are booked on the Feb 29th Cruise as well. We are so torn, we still want to go but the sensible thing is to cancel due to the risks involved. At the end of  the day over 30,000 cases with over 700 deaths and less than 2000 full recoveries does not paint a good picture. Like has been mentioned on here before it is only a matter of time before someone is diagnosed on this or our cruise. Do we want to risk that. I think Not. Just wish that HAL would offer a full refund for the cruise, a future credit is no good to us as we already have another cruise booked and nearly paid for later in the year. Yes we have travel insurance but we still have the excess to pay for. We have already claimed some money for our rescheduled fees which we had to pay the excess for, if we make another claim we would have another excess to pay this is in addition to the other out of pocket expenses that we have paid including visas etc. 

 

The other thing  is the amount of people dropping off the cruise. The ship will be nearly empty.  Lots have and will be dropping out, are they going to offer a flash sale on the cabins for locals...hardly seems fair when we paid close to listed price.

 

I know this is not all HALS fault but just wish that they would be a little more forthcoming with information. 

 

The part I bolded here really caught my eye.  That's for sure something to factor in when weighing how to extricate oneself from an Asia cruise.  An even exchange future cruise might end up being a super depreciated cruise as it gets nearer.  Lots to think of.  It's hard for all involved.

[Mandalay1903]

43 minutes ago, Level six said:

 

I know I did the right thing now, but last week I was a wreck trying to decide.  I even made myself sick.  But, at least I feel better with my decision after seeing all the "cruise news" this week.  

 

  I feel more confident this afternoon that HAL will do the right thing.  

Hey, Level six. I've been following this blog and was reading your comments ten days ago or so when you were wrestling with your cancel/no cancel decision. I admire your fortitude in making the right call, especially with a HK embarkation.

 

I, too, think that HAL will do the right thing at least in the long run. Last week they were right to cancel the 2/15 cruise. While I think they should cancel the rest of their spring Asia season (and indeed they still might), I think they made a reasonably good decision today to offer all passengers on the 2/29 cruise the opportunity to cancel in exchange for a 1-year full cost FCC. This gives the PASSENGERS the decision to sail in these unsettled waters now, or cruise elsewhere with HAL later.

 

Had they done that for the 2/1 cruise, those good passengers who carried on might have not had the stress over losing the value of their cruise/travel fare when making an important decision of personal risk.

 

As ed01106 said, you absolutely should ask HAL for a FCC as was offered to the 2/29 and possibly the 3/14 cruisers.  HAL and CCL are a big company. They certainly have business interruption insurance or other resources that will carry them through this situation. What they value most are happy, repeat clients.

 

We are booked on the 2/29 and 3/14 cruises and working through our go/no go decision.

[BarbarianPaul]

1 hour ago, ed01106 said:

 

If you paid in full for the Feb 1 cruise, if I were you demand that you get the same compensation/refund as those who actually cruised. Why should HAL get to keep your money because you understood the situation better than them.  Even if you don’t get exactly what those on board get, don’t agree for anything less than a full refund.  If HAL denies you that it will undermine the argument they will make when others sue them for negligence in putting them in that situation.  HAL will respond to that allegation with, “you knew as much as us and still choose to sail” Denying you a refund will undercut that defense.

“Don’t agree to anything less than a full refund.” Or what? That contract is pretty airtight. Of course I agree they should do the right thing and refund the full price, but no one is going to successfully sue them for negligence, however poorly conceived that stop in Hong Kong was.

[ed01106]

Just now, BarbarianPaul said:

“Don’t agree to anything less than a full refund.” Or what? That contract is pretty airtight. Of course I agree they should do the right thing and refund the full price, but no one is going to successfully sue them for negligence, however poorly conceived that stop in Hong Kong was.

Yeah, I had a brain fart and was thinking Westdam was Diamond.  Someone who skipped the Diamond could demand a full refund.  Westdam maybe not.

[Mandalay1903]

2 minutes ago, BarbarianPaul said:

“Don’t agree to anything less than a full refund.” Or what? That contract is pretty airtight. Of course I agree they should do the right thing and refund the full price, but no one is going to successfully sue them for negligence, however poorly conceived that stop in Hong Kong was.

Suing probably wouldn't work, but be prepared to tell your PCC you're canceling the future HAL cruises you have booked and shopping at other cruise lines. And compare the situation you were in on 2/1 to the deal that the 2/29 cruisers are getting now from a much less risky port.

[Earthworm Jim]

12 minutes ago, Mandalay1903 said:

What they value most are happy, repeat clients.

 

As a for profit company what they value most is profit. They only value happy, repeat clients to the degree that it assists profits, in their evaluation.

 

(Which I'm not saying as an indictment. But that's what companies are for.)

[summer slope]

***** shows the Westerdam in Okinawa.  I'm sure that is not true, but does anyone know where she is?

[Himself]

I heard on the News that she was not allowed to dock in Japan today. 

[kazu]

3 minutes ago, Himself said:

I heard on the News that she was not allowed to dock in Japan today. 

 

Japan has banned all cruise ships including the Westerdam for a number of days.    No docking anywhere for the last several days and for some time to come until the ban is lifted.  The Prime Minister has been firm even with U.S. State officials.

[Wehwalt]

Latitude: 15.16°  North
Longitude: 115.27° East

 

At least, that's what my cruise map (I'm on the Koningsdam) has to say for the Westerdam! Middle of the South China Sea

Edited February 9, 2020 by Wehwalt

[BarbarianPaul]

11 minutes ago, Mandalay1903 said:

Hey, Level six. I've been following this blog and was reading your comments ten days ago or so when you were wrestling with your cancel/no cancel decision. I admire your fortitude in making the right call, especially with a HK embarkation.

 

I, too, think that HAL will do the right thing at least in the long run. Last week they were right to cancel the 2/15 cruise. While I think they should cancel the rest of their spring Asia season (and indeed they still might), I think they made a reasonably good decision today to offer all passengers on the 2/29 cruise the opportunity to cancel in exchange for a 1-year full cost FCC. This gives the PASSENGERS the decision to sail in these unsettled waters now, or cruise elsewhere with HAL later.

 

Had they done that for the 2/1 cruise, those good passengers who carried on might have not had the stress over losing the value of their cruise/travel fare when making an important decision of personal risk.

 

As ed01106 said, you absolutely should ask HAL for a FCC as was offered to the 2/29 and possibly the 3/14 cruisers.  HAL and CCL are a big company. They certainly have business interruption insurance or other resources that will carry them through this situation. What they value most are happy, repeat clients.

 

We are booked on the 2/29 and 3/14 cruises and working through our go/no go decision.

For what it’s worth, I do think the situation will stabilize, but it could take several months. The situation in Japan and Taiwan is too fluid to assume their ports will continue to be open to cruise ships in Feb or March. Who knows what impossible to anticipate complications could come up. And sooner or later, in that part of the world, someone onboard could get sick, and then you could be facing any number of unpleasant scenarios. 
Of course Holland America wants to keep the Westerdam cruising, but that doesn’t mean you should be on it.

[Mandalay1903]

15 minutes ago, Earthworm Jim said:

 

As a for profit company what they value most is profit. They only value happy, repeat clients to the degree that it assists profits, in their evaluation.

 

(Which I'm not saying as an indictment. But that's what companies are for.)

Not disagreeing, but happy repeat clients can lead to profits. But there can be no profits without happy repeat clients.

[Level six]

40 minutes ago, Mandalay1903 said:

Hey, Level six. I've been following this blog and was reading your comments ten days ago or so when you were wrestling with your cancel/no cancel decision. I admire your fortitude in making the right call, especially with a HK embarkation.

 

I, too, think that HAL will do the right thing at least in the long run. Last week they were right to cancel the 2/15 cruise. While I think they should cancel the rest of their spring Asia season (and indeed they still might), I think they made a reasonably good decision today to offer all passengers on the 2/29 cruise the opportunity to cancel in exchange for a 1-year full cost FCC. This gives the PASSENGERS the decision to sail in these unsettled waters now, or cruise elsewhere with HAL later.

 

Had they done that for the 2/1 cruise, those good passengers who carried on might have not had the stress over losing the value of their cruise/travel fare when making an important decision of personal risk.

 

As ed01106 said, you absolutely should ask HAL for a FCC as was offered to the 2/29 and possibly the 3/14 cruisers.  HAL and CCL are a big company. They certainly have business interruption insurance or other resources that will carry them through this situation. What they value most are happy, repeat clients.

 

We are booked on the 2/29 and 3/14 cruises and working through our go/no go decision.

 

 

Thanks Mandalay 103.  I appreciate it and I feel your pain.  It is a hard decision to make.  On one hand, you don't want to seem to be over reacting and on the other.........so much to figure out and what could possibly go wrong.  I wish you the best with your decision.  

 

I hope that HAL will at least give guests on your cruises the option to choose.  Like I said, I didn't want them to cancel the cruise so that all the people who were so wanting it couldn't go.  (wonder what they are thinking now???).  But, I wanted to decide for myself what was best for me in this situation. Probably there would have been less than 40-50 people who would decide, like I did, not to go. 

 

I have traveled to many places that are considered dangerous (Turkey, India, Mexico) with out ever feeling like anything bad would happen to me.   But, this time, it just felt so wrong for me.

 

I hope that this whole situation gets over quickly.  It is scary because it is unknown.  And all the people who say "the flu is more dangerous".....  I have never been treated for the flu with someone in a hazmat suit.  There are just too many unknowns right now.  I did research on pathogens in college and when I saw all that was taking place, my alert was on high, because I knew what the probable course would be for the virus. 

 

So, HAL did do the right thing and I am happy now.  Thanks everyone, this has been a crazy week.