Big change to UK sailings

[hamrag]

1 hour ago, kernow said:

I think most NHS staff will have been double vaccinated a while ago. If not at least they can now rebook with price protected.

The discount will not be protected, it will be whatever the discount is for the rebooked cruise.

[Cruiseforever11]

11 minutes ago, ziggyuk said:

 

I added a bit more to that post after you quoted me but it just does not make any sense these rules could have been forced on MSC for a ship sailing in 5 days, they literally never do anything that swiftly when it comes to covid.

I agree and whats more it looks like our cruise is 50% but going to mixed as they can't impose the fully jab rule for people getting on at Liverpool this week. But now I wouldn't put it pass them. I'm trying to refresh my memory regarding the ABTA rules because I can't believe they can get away with doing this to people with 4 days to go. Sold as a vaccinated and un- vaccinated cruise.

Edited June 28, 2021 by Cruiseforever11

[ziggyuk]

1 minute ago, Cruiseforever11 said:

I agree and whats more it looks like our cruise is 50% but going to mixed as they can't impose the fully jab rule for people getting on at Liverpool this week. But now I wouldn't put it pass them. I'm trying to refresh my memory regarding the ABTA rules because I can't believe they can get away with doing this to people with 4 days to go. Sold as a vaccinated and unvacinated cruise.

 

Exactly right, those people who remain onboard will be a part unvaccinated which makes our cruise not compliant with the 50% capacity IF vaccinated.

[Beamafar]

Just now, ziggyuk said:

 

Exactly right, those people who remain onboard will be a part unvaccinated which makes our cruise not compliant with the 50% capacity IF vaccinated.

…and, of course, your new health secretary is anxious to lift restrictions on July 19th so this may only apply for the next couple of weeks of sailings.   Rules today may not necessarily apply tomorrow.   Shifting sands etc etc

[CaroleC]

1 minute ago, ziggyuk said:

 

Exactly right, those people who remain onboard will be a part unvaccinated which makes our cruise not compliant with the 50% capacity IF vaccinated.

I really can’t get my head around it. The only way to make our sailing compliant is to implement the change from tomorrow but SURELY they can’t do that??

[hamrag]

17 minutes ago, ziggyuk said:

 

Exactly right, those people who remain onboard will be a part unvaccinated which makes our cruise not compliant with the 50% capacity IF vaccinated.

I guess, given previous with shifting sands, the WG may have agreed to a phased methodology being the only way to get to fully vaccinated compliance! Otherwise, the only way is to disembark the unvaccinated before their cruise is complete.

 

I fully understand, and sympathise with those adversely affected, but as far as my brain capacity goes at this time of night I see no other way to have the ship only accommodating vaccinated passengers at a given point i.e. by Saturday 3rd July.

[ziggyuk]

17 minutes ago, hamrag said:

I guess, given previous with shifting sands, the WG may have agreed to a phased methodology being the only way to get to fully vaccinated compliance! Otherwise, the only way is to disembark the unvaccinated before their cruise is complete.

 

I fully understand, and sympathise with those adversely affected, but as far as my brain capacity goes at this time of night I see no other way to have the ship only accommodating vaccinated passengers at a given point i.e. by Saturday 3rd July.

 

Yes and if we are being totally honest a drop of 4000 to 1000 would probably have meant a lot more people removed than what is now happening.

It's just the "first come" system appear fair, when you read peoples stories of the unvaccinated being removed it's extremely emotional, especially as our rollcall was so active & we have built a rapport and been planning to have a meet up.

Edited June 28, 2021 by ziggyuk

[CaroleC]

2 minutes ago, ziggyuk said:

we have built a rapport and been planning to have a meet up.

We’ll still meet up Tony, let’s arrange something via the roll call in a couple of days if that’s not too insensitive?

[hamrag]

11 minutes ago, ziggyuk said:

 

Yes and if we are being totally honest a drop of 4000 to 1000 would probably have meant a lot more people removed than what is now happening.

It's just the "first come" system appear fair, when you read peoples stories of the unvaccinated being removed it's extremely emotional, especially as our rollcall was so active & we have built a rapport and been planning to have a meet up.

 

I guess it's easier for me, as I have not read the rollcall, other than dipping in a few days ago following a comment you'd made on the main boards.....so there is no emotional connection for me, other than heartfelt sympathy for those adversely affected.

 

From my low vantage point, it seems MSC could never win no matter what way the decision fell. Either way would have meant winners and losers. The Corporate strategy is what comes to the fore in times like these, passengers become a lesser priority on the premise that the fallout results in 'a seven day wonder' and then it passes very quickly.

[CaroleC]

4 minutes ago, hamrag said:

From my low vantage point, it seems MSC could never win no matter what way the decision fell. Either way would have meant winners and losers. The Corporate strategy is what comes to the fore in times like these, passengers become a lesser priority on the premise that the fallout results in 'a seven day wonder' and then it passes very quickly.

I think you’re right, it’s just left a really sour taste. I posted earlier on the rollcall that I would think twice before ever booking with MSC again, however, your comment about the fallout being a seven day wonder struck home. Ask me in six months time about booking with them again and I’ll probably respond a lot differently.

[Chrish2]

That's quite the bomb shell to drop so close to departure.

 

I have to say when I looked at the MSC options for UK Staycations I started to get a bit queasy on noticing same ship with overlapping itineraries and different embarkation ports. Even more so when I noticed the "Grand Voyage" mixed in too. Throw in non-vaccinated passengers and things started to feel having too many moving parts. I put it down to MSC been greedy and assumed something would have to change. Greenock was the first shock, this the second shock ... wonder what's next?

 

All this is why I would not be surprised if MSC requires unvaccinated passengers on in progress itineraries to disembark. On the other side of the table public health mostly trumps customer service so exemptions may have not been forthcoming. That could now put it down to MSC to decide if they want to turf people out of cabins so they can meet the new requirements and load more passengers.

[kernow]

8 hours ago, hamrag said:

The discount will not be protected, it will be whatever the discount is for the rebooked cruise.

Really, have they actually said this? That seems very unfair.

[Malibustacey79]

8 hours ago, CaroleC said:

I think you’re right, it’s just left a really sour taste. I posted earlier on the rollcall that I would think twice before ever booking with MSC again, however, your comment about the fallout being a seven day wonder struck home. Ask me in six months time about booking with them again and I’ll probably respond a lot differently.

I was thinking the same. I’ve dodged a bullet twice now - the Greenock issue, which would have wiped out our cruise if it was a week later I think, and now the vaccines as although I was vaccinated in Dec (NHS) my husband is just going for his second today.
 

So I’ve been incredibly lucky but it’s made me very dubious about MSC; I’m not completely blaming them but I was already very dubious about the Government! Once my booked cruise in July is over (if it goes ahead) I don’t think I’ll book with them again because of the stress I’ve had and the many upset people I have read about. 

 

But will my principles remain if I see an amazing deal in a couple of years? I’m not sure - and MSC are fully aware of that. Most people can be tempted back eventually. I totally see the economics of it but their USP was ‘unvaccinated allowed’ and it’s just not right to go back on that, especially for the sake of three weeks. If the next ‘Freedom Day’ is put back then maybe, but not now and at such short notice. 

 

[soulstar]

9 hours ago, Cruiseforever11 said:

I was thinking the same thing. What are the likes of p&o and RC doing are they still sailing with 1000pax fully vax? I did wonder a couple of days ago that if the government allowed msc to change the rules if it is msc then surely the other cruise lines would be up in arms about it 🤔

I too am wondering where I can find evidence of this government change of policy on cruise ship  numbers. 

[kernow]

7 minutes ago, Malibustacey79 said:

I was thinking the same. I’ve dodged a bullet twice now - the Greenock issue, which would have wiped out our cruise if it was a week later I think, and now the vaccines as although I was vaccinated in Dec (NHS) my husband is just going for his second today.
 

So I’ve been incredibly lucky but it’s made me very dubious about MSC; I’m not completely blaming them but I was already very dubious about the Government! Once my booked cruise in July is over (if it goes ahead) I don’t think I’ll book with them again because of the stress I’ve had and the many upset people I have read about. 

 

But will my principles remain if I see an amazing deal in a couple of years? I’m not sure - and MSC are fully aware of that. Most people can be tempted back eventually. I totally see the economics of it but their USP was ‘unvaccinated allowed’ and it’s just not right to go back on that, especially for the sake of three weeks. If the next ‘Freedom Day’ is put back then maybe, but not now and at such short notice. 

 

The thing is, are the other cruise lines any better? RCL appears to have been fairer on this issue and we've done many cruises with them but there have been times in the past where I've felt really hard done by them and said 'that's it' but have always ended up going back when something I like comes along.

 

 

[hamrag]

10 hours ago, hamrag said:

 

Duplicate post.

Edited June 29, 2021 by hamrag

[hamrag]

11 hours ago, kernow said:

I think most NHS staff will have been double vaccinated a while ago. If not at least they can now rebook with price protected.

 

10 hours ago, hamrag said:

The discount will not be protected, it will be whatever the discount is for the rebooked cruise.

 

1 hour ago, kernow said:

Really, have they actually said this? That seems very unfair.

 

No, I don't believe they have, my comment is simply based on how cruise pricing works. There is a base gross fare, and that is what they will protect....any discounts etc. from that base will depend on the sailing chosen and could be lower, the same, or higher (4th September, I understand is 50%).

[ziggyuk]

56 minutes ago, soulstar said:

I too am wondering where I can find evidence of this government change of policy on cruise ship  numbers. 

 

I still don't believe it is a mandatory change in the regulations, if you read the words carefully:

• We hereby inform you that the UK Government has today, 28th June 2021, advised an important change to the cruise operators who can now sail at an increased capacity of 50% under the condition that operators ensure that adult guests onboard are fully vaccinated

The word "can" tells me this is optional and not mandatory, nothing in the wording say the change to fully vaccinated is mandatory, I believe this tells us it was as option to move to 50% vaccinated, the trade off being fully vaccinated passengers.

 

[flossie009]

1 hour ago, soulstar said:

I too am wondering where I can find evidence of this government change of policy on cruise ship  numbers. 

 

No evidence of any changes on the relevant ukgov website pages:

 

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/covid-19-coronavirus-restrictions-what-you-can-and-cannot-do

 

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-covid-19-cruise-ship-travel

 

Therefore not sure how MSC think they can sail with more than 1000 passengers under present rules & guidance, whether vaccinated or not ................. but I am sure they know what they are doing 🙄

 

[hamrag]

15 minutes ago, ziggyuk said:

 

I still don't believe it is a mandatory change in the regulations, if you read the words carefully:

• We hereby inform you that the UK Government has today, 28th June 2021, advised an important change to the cruise operators who can now sail at an increased capacity of 50% under the condition that operators ensure that adult guests onboard are fully vaccinated

The word "can" tells me this is optional and not mandatory, nothing in the wording say the change to fully vaccinated is mandatory, I believe this tells us it was as option to move to 50% vaccinated, the trade off being fully vaccinated passengers.

 

 

I agree with your assessment, and they have taken the more profitable option. At the risk of upsetting those adversely affected, I will say that's what any business would do....I wouldn't blame them for doing that, whilst agreeing it's been a PR disaster for them although it'll wash away being a seven day wonder....it's cold, hard business and they need to start making profit again ASAP.

Edited June 29, 2021 by hamrag

[kernow]

55 minutes ago, hamrag said:

 

 

 

No, I don't believe they have, my comment is simply based on how cruise pricing works. There is a base gross fare, and that is what they will protect....any discounts etc. from that base will depend on the sailing chosen and could be lower, the same, or higher (4th September, I understand is 50%).

'For those of you who are not yet fully vaccinated (see definition above) or are only partially vaccinated (i.e. one dose), we encourage you to take advantage of our flexible cruise programme in order to move your cruise, without incurring any price difference, to a sailing that departs after you are fully vaccinated'

 

If I'd received an email that said this I'd be expecting to re book at the exact same price. I'd love to hear what happens when people try.

 

 

[kernow]

4 minutes ago, hamrag said:

 

I agree with your assessment, and they have taken the more profitable option. At the risk of upsetting those adversely affected, I will say that's what any business would do....I wouldn't blame them for doing that, whilst agreeing it's been a PR disaster for them although it'll wash away being a seven day wonder....it's cold, hard business and they need to start making profit again ASAP.

I agree, they have taken that option while the other cruise lines have chosen to reduce their numbers by offering incentives for people to move.

[hamrag]

2 minutes ago, kernow said:

'For those of you who are not yet fully vaccinated (see definition above) or are only partially vaccinated (i.e. one dose), we encourage you to take advantage of our flexible cruise programme in order to move your cruise, without incurring any price difference, to a sailing that departs after you are fully vaccinated'

 

If I'd received an email that said this I'd be expecting to re book at the exact same price. I'd love to hear what happens when people try.

 

 

 

Interestingly, one of the words you have bolded is key....it's about how 'price' is defined,  and I believe my earlier explanation is how it will pan out.

[8420PR]

8 minutes ago, hamrag said:

 

I agree with your assessment, and they have taken the more profitable option. At the risk of upsetting those adversely affected, I will say that's what any business would do....I wouldn't blame them for doing that, whilst agreeing it's been a PR disaster for them although it'll wash away being a seven day wonder....it's cold, hard business and they need to start making profit again ASAP.

I think they have also taken the option that inconveniences the least customers.   If they have 3,000 people booked, then they can either reduce to 1,000 passengers (i.e. inconvenience 2,000 passengers) by following the 19th May capacity limits, or they can reduce to 2,000 passengers (i.e. inconvenience  1,000 passengers) by only allowing fully vaccinated passengers.

 

I feel very sorry for those negatively impacted because they are too young to be eligible for the vaccine.  

 

I cannot see any change in published Government regulation, but I'm sure this comes from the Government and will be published shortly.  It does indicate a big change in health policy - up to now discriminating based on vaccination status was not politically possible - perhaps we will see this type of policy in more areas now. 

[hamrag]

3 minutes ago, kernow said:

I agree, they have taken that option while the other cruise lines have chosen to reduce their numbers by offering incentives for people to move.

If that is the case, I'd say it's less disadvantage to them as their ships are smaller and the 1000 passengers allowed represent a higher percentage of full capacity....Anthem of Seas excepted. Virtuosa is a mega ship capacity 6000+, so to have 3000 on board instead of 1000 is a no brainer in Corporate terms.

 

Incidentally, all I am trying to do is rationalise why MSC made such decision...it remains horrendous for those adversely affected,