Marina November 1 “Holy Lands and Treasures” Itinerary Changes

[Sthrngary]

4 minutes ago, Croooser said:

IMO, the real insurance issue for the OP was not having CFAR insurance, especially when planning a trip to such a volatile region. 

@Croooser This is why making comments on Social Media is so hard sometimes.  Written Words take us just so far.  I use an American Express Platinum Card, it also has travel insurance benefits and it is complementary with the card as long as you pay the entire vacation with the card.  I have used and been paid off by it many times.  Chase Sapphire I am sure has some outstanding travel benefits.  No doubt.  However as stated, not the issue.  Not what I was attempting to point out or say. Planning, experience as a long-term cruiser, making smart decisions and living with the decisions you made is my point. One poster is the kindest way said on the topic of Travel Insurance that they had saved over $100,000 by not taking or purchasing it.  That is a fair and reasonable decision as long a you know the consequences and accept accountability for your decisions. 

 

Let's take the Travel Insurance topic off the table for a moment.  One is booking ports that are super special to them, important, and as with this situation somewhat risky.  If those are the places you really want to go to, fly and stay in the area.  If you choose to cruise, which would be my choose also, this comes with baggage. In most cases, things will be just fine.  But because of the region, it can also be an issue at a moments notice.  Nobodies fault.  Been this way for a long time.  Common sense tells us, take extra precautions on that trip. More importantly, know that it might not work out and if that is the case, it is not the cruise brand fault.  

 

To expect a cruise brand to take a financial hit by "expecting" a full refund, FCC, and other benefits because of a situation out of their control is a big ask.  The brands obligation is to change ports which they did.  If you don't like the change, which some folk won't, you agreed to this when you agreed to the contract terms.  If the brand for client satisfaction provides compensation for this situations out of their control, that would be ideal but not expected. 

 

Now we can talk about the options we have if now the cruise port changes are unacceptable.  Whether travel insurance, looking for something else that many or many not be offered.  To make the brand the Bad Guy, any brand, to not take any accountability for the choice one made, is unfair.  Then to post to gain folks to agree you have been so wronged is simply not fair. All it is is venting, looking for folks to support your position so yo can feel justified in your feeling.  It fixes nothing except an outlet for you emotions. Welcome to social media. 

 

I feel really bad for the author of this thread.  But they have not been wronged by the brand.  Should Oceania offer them and other some level of compensation or benefit, in my opinion YES.  But it is not a given nor should be expected.  Brand bashing is a thing and a unforeseen war makes brand bashing again simply not fair.  

 

Just my two cents nothing more or less.  

 

Cruise well and enjoy every moment. 

[babysteps]

There are organizations that specialize in travel-related consumer complaints. Two that I know of are The Elliott Report and Consumer Rescue. Not sure how we got to page 4 without a mention of these yet - did I miss it?

 

OP if you haven't yet, you may wish to reach out to such an organization - they will have good insight as to whether it's worth pushing for some kind of compensation or not.

 

I do think it's possible for these 2 things to both be true at the same time:

1) OP's trip looks much different than planned at no fault of OP, and

2) O doesn't contractually owe OP anything

[basor]

Just now, babysteps said:

There are organizations that specialize in travel-related consumer complaints. Two that I know of are The Elliott Report and Consumer Rescue. Not sure how we got to page 4 without a mention of these yet - did I miss it?

 

OP if you haven't yet, you may wish to reach out to such an organization - they will have good insight as to whether it's worth pushing for some kind of compensation or not.

 

I do think it's possible for these 2 things to both be true at the same time:

1) OP's trip looks much different than planned at no fault of OP, and

2) O doesn't contractually owe OP anything

3) The trip has not commenced yet and so do not know for sure that O will not offer some sort of compensation.....

[laspetzia]

It should be noted that as of today the Oceania Marina leaving Istanbul NOV.1st that has drastically changed their itinerary ( although not updated the original sailing map) is not longer overbooked!  2 Penthouse suites are available along with Concierge level A1,A2 and A3 as well as B2. People have abandoned the voyage due to safety concerns and Oceania’s inability to come up with a new itinerary of interest. Understandably Israeli ports were cancelled, but so was Antalya and Cyprus..the company needs to do what is right and offer an alternative cruise in the future. 

[urlaub]

On 10/15/2023 at 3:43 PM, GeorgiaPeach51 said:

 

 I certainly don’t think this is a problem unique to Oceania.  I have read this week that Celebrity has offered FCC’s, so I certainly don’t think it is fair to call me selfish if I have a problem with my cruise line provider!  That is my right as a buyer!  Sheesh, are we not allowed to even say a peep over our issues on this forum that is called Cruise Critic?!

 

To me, and apparently ONLY to me, there is a difference in O, or any cruise line, having time to make substitute ports, which, believe it or not I understand, and them reaching out to passengers with an FCC offer that allows passengers so severely affected by their changes that gives an option other than shut up and sail, regardless.  I fully recognize that they are scrambling and that is not my point.

 

well, thanks to all who responded.  My intent was to put this out where O may see it, since they probably don’t read the roll calls, where there is ample unhappiness and dissatisfaction, along with some who are happy campers because they have never been to the Greek ports.  In addition to contacting the top folks, which I have done, this board can be used to voice opinions that are sometimes noted by the cruise line, so we will see if there is any effort at all from O.  From your adamant responses, I expect that will not be the case.  If they do respond, I will let you know.

 

Joanie

Joanie, you are so right. If you have any critic about Oceania many people find themselves criticized.

[PhD-iva]

I think that most responses to the OP have been respectful enough, even when not in agreement w OP’s position or statements. For example, I stopped reading X’s forum a few years ago as I felt those CC posters were very “flamey” and could be very rude. Now I only go to that forum when I want to read about how unhappy they are about price increases and declines in service. 
I did read a related thread on the X forum, and several posts did state they have been offered FCC’s or other concessions (don’t recall details). Of course, that’s only relevant if you’re willing to sail with X, and I’m NOT!

[Yesimapirate]

11 hours ago, ToxM said:

One thing I have learned which is more of a caveat emptor: If you are off the ship O (and I would suspect all other cruiselines) then consider yourself on your own.

 

A couple I am friends with had a truly terrible experience when they were removed from the ship so one of them could be admitted to hospital. The port agent defrauded them, one of them was placed in a very substandard hotel, no real help from O and it cost them a lot of money and even more stress. Both of them had covid, one of them was in ICU, the other was then admitted to hospital when they didn’t need to be. 

 

O literally washed their hands of them. They have vowed never to cruise again because of the experience. 

 

I now consider the cruiseline to only be responsible for me when I am on the ship, and plan accordingly. 

 

I book my own airfare, I overinsure, I have contingency in place at every port. 

 

 

I mean this sincerely.  Why would you think the cruise line would be responsible for you when you leave the ship on anything but a cruiseline excursion. 

 

It seems that many people have unrealistic amd possibly unreasonable expectations for a cruise.   I'm curious to know where this comes from.   No one would ever think an airline would take care of them in the middle of their trip.   If you stay at a hotel, the second you walk off their property, you're not their responsibility.   Sure, occasionally some will give some basic help out of customer service but that's it.  No one is going to make sure a hospital takes good care of you.  I just don't get why so many people think a cruiseline is different. 

 

Who knows, maybe I'm way off base and should expect more?

 

Edited October 17, 2023 by Yesimapirate

[ToxM]

23 minutes ago, Yesimapirate said:

I mean this sincerely.  Why would you think the cruise line would be responsible for you when you leave the ship on anything but a cruiseline excursion. 

 

It seems that many people have unrealistic amd possibly unreasonable expectations for a cruise.   I'm curious to know where this comes from.   No one would ever think an airline would take care of them in the middle of their trip.   If you stay at a hotel, the second you walk off their property, you're not their responsibility.   Sure, occasionally some will give some basic help out of customer service but that's it.  No one is going to make sure a hospital takes good care of you.  I just don't get why so many people think a cruiseline is different. 

 

Who knows, maybe I'm way off base and should expect more?

 

When someone is released to a port agent that person is contracted by the cruise line to continue service. Not through duration of treatment but certainly not to defraud the passenger. 
 

The same should go for pre and post cruise tours paid for as part of the cruise by the cruise line. 
 

I certainly don’t think that the cruise line is responsible for anything before I am onboard if it’s not offered as part of the trip (that’s why I book my own airfare). I do think there is some duty of care if there is an emergency and passengers are debarked before the conclusion of their cruise. 
 

in the case I mentioned the port agent was derelict in their duty. 

[Snaefell3]

28 minutes ago, Yesimapirate said:

I mean this sincerely.  Why would you think the cruise line would be responsible for you when you leave the ship on anything but a cruiseline excursion. 

Because they *do* in many circumstances: the early days of COVID (read the stories of Coral Princess, Grand Princess, and Diamond Princess), fire (Star Princess), groundings (Norwegian Escape).

 

Lately not so much though, because cruise lines are (still) financially stressed.

[RD64]

9 hours ago, Sthrngary said:

@Croooser This is why making comments on Social Media is so hard sometimes.  Written Words take us just so far.  I use an American Express Platinum Card, it also has travel insurance benefits and it is complementary with the card as long as you pay the entire vacation with the card.  I have used and been paid off by it many times.  Chase Sapphire I am sure has some outstanding travel benefits.  No doubt.  However as stated, not the issue.  Not what I was attempting to point out or say. Planning, experience as a long-term cruiser, making smart decisions and living with the decisions you made is my point. One poster is the kindest way said on the topic of Travel Insurance that they had saved over $100,000 by not taking or purchasing it.  That is a fair and reasonable decision as long a you know the consequences and accept accountability for your decisions. 

 

Let's take the Travel Insurance topic off the table for a moment.  One is booking ports that are super special to them, important, and as with this situation somewhat risky.  If those are the places you really want to go to, fly and stay in the area.  If you choose to cruise, which would be my choose also, this comes with baggage. In most cases, things will be just fine.  But because of the region, it can also be an issue at a moments notice.  Nobodies fault.  Been this way for a long time.  Common sense tells us, take extra precautions on that trip. More importantly, know that it might not work out and if that is the case, it is not the cruise brand fault.  

 

To expect a cruise brand to take a financial hit by "expecting" a full refund, FCC, and other benefits because of a situation out of their control is a big ask.  The brands obligation is to change ports which they did.  If you don't like the change, which some folk won't, you agreed to this when you agreed to the contract terms.  If the brand for client satisfaction provides compensation for this situations out of their control, that would be ideal but not expected. 

 

Now we can talk about the options we have if now the cruise port changes are unacceptable.  Whether travel insurance, looking for something else that many or many not be offered.  To make the brand the Bad Guy, any brand, to not take any accountability for the choice one made, is unfair.  Then to post to gain folks to agree you have been so wronged is simply not fair. All it is is venting, looking for folks to support your position so yo can feel justified in your feeling.  It fixes nothing except an outlet for you emotions. Welcome to social media. 

 

I feel really bad for the author of this thread.  But they have not been wronged by the brand.  Should Oceania offer them and other some level of compensation or benefit, in my opinion YES.  But it is not a given nor should be expected.  Brand bashing is a thing and a unforeseen war makes brand bashing again simply not fair.  

 

Just my two cents nothing more or less.  

 

Cruise well and enjoy every moment. 

Thank you for being the voice of reason - although the OP will certainly disagree.

[Woodrowst]

On 10/14/2023 at 11:35 PM, GeorgiaPeach51 said:

Our requests for a FFC, not a refund, have been met with a response of “It is a hard no.”  

 

 

I am not familiar with “FFC”.  What is it and why is it better than a refund?

Edited October 18, 2023 by Woodrowst

[babysteps]

7 hours ago, basor said:

3) The trip has not commenced yet and so do not know for sure that O will not offer some sort of compensation.....

@basorvery true. If I were considering not sailing a confirmed cruise, not sure I'd wait until after embarcation day to ask for compensation though. In this case I fear the OPs chance of getting a personal (vs general) settlement is low. But if you *are* seeking specific settlement (that is, an exception) does waiting help? If you are indeed sailing the changed itinerary, then waiting makes more sense to me. 

[Queen of DaNile]

57 minutes ago, Woodrowst said:

 

 

I am not familiar with “FFC”.  What is it and why is it better than a refund?

She may have meant Future Cruise Credit but can't say for sure.

[Cruzin Terri]

12 hours ago, Croooser said:

Sthrngary,

 

I tend to agree with almost everything that you have posted on this thread.

 

However, I think that you may not completely understand the Chase Sapphire insurance. I would encourage you to check it out before dismissing it out of hand. It is comparable to other travel insurance policies in terms of coverage and limits. However, it is not CFAR. It does provide coverage for cancellation due to illness, death in the immediate family, etc. We use it for all of our trips for cancellation insurance along with an annual Geo Blue policy for medical and evac. Fortunately, have not had to make any claims. We fully recognize that if we choose to cancel a trip for a reason not covered by the Chase Sapphire insurance that we will take the financial hit. Have had to do that a few times for forfeited deposits and flights.

 

IMO, the real insurance issue for the OP was not having CFAR insurance, especially when planning a trip to such a volatile region. 

i have been reading this thread with much interest. 

Croooser, i agree with you regarding the Chase Sapphire insurance.  We used to buy insurance as well until I had a chat with the folks at Chase and realized we were duplicating coverage.  We also pick up GeoBlue for DH.  My insurance covers me fully out of the US so I don’t need it.  We find this is sufficient.   We had friends (RIP) that used Chase insurance exclusively and at the end of thire days had to cancel some cruises and Chase paid with very little problems..

Terri

[LHT28]

1 hour ago, Woodrowst said:

 

 

I am not familiar with “FFC”.  What is it and why is it better than a refund?

Nothing trumps  a refund

An FCC  has to be used in a certain time frame 

[Vineyard View]

8 minutes ago, Cruzin Terri said:

i have been reading this thread with much interest. 

Croooser, i agree with you regarding the Chase Sapphire insurance.  We used to buy insurance as well until I had a chat with the folks at Chase and realized we were duplicating coverage.  We also pick up GeoBlue for DH.  My insurance covers me fully out of the US so I don’t need it.  We find this is sufficient.   We had friends (RIP) that used Chase insurance exclusively and at the end of thire days had to cancel some cruises and Chase paid with very little problems..

Terri

You bring up such a valid and important point. In the States, for the most part Medicare does not follow your coverage once you leave the country. So insurance specifics can be very different. 
For us, once we no longer had insurance we paid through our employers, we needed to be sure we had coverage once we left the country. We have Chase and Amex, and depending on CC levels the insurance coverage is different. We do not know what OP has. Regardless, we need pre-existing and want emergency evac coverage. Based on that we purchase an additional policy. Maybe I am missing something, but after reading this thread, there are great annual policy companies recommended. We generally only travel internationally 1-2x year, so not sure how that pencils out, but I will sure take a look. There is actually a lot of good info in this thread. I hope the OP is silently checking in to realize that. 

[Snaefell3]

3 hours ago, LHT28 said:

Nothing trumps  a refund

Sure there is...  taking the cruise after all.  😉

 

[cruisemom42]

10 hours ago, Yesimapirate said:

I mean this sincerely.  Why would you think the cruise line would be responsible for you when you leave the ship on anything but a cruiseline excursion. 

 

It seems that many people have unrealistic amd possibly unreasonable expectations for a cruise.   I'm curious to know where this comes from.   No one would ever think an airline would take care of them in the middle of their trip.   If you stay at a hotel, the second you walk off their property, you're not their responsibility.   Sure, occasionally some will give some basic help out of customer service but that's it.  No one is going to make sure a hospital takes good care of you.  I just don't get why so many people think a cruiseline is different. 

 

Who knows, maybe I'm way off base and should expect more?

 

I've given this some thought and I believe cruise lines are not really comparable to an airline or a hotel in regards to a “duty of care”.  They are in a somewhat different position.

 

For a good example, look to a recent discussion on the Holland America forum. One of their ships was actually in port in Israel on the day the Hamas attack started. The ship called back all passengers, many already dispatched on tours, and went to great efforts to ensure that even passengers on private tours were reached and knew to get back. The ship waited many hours to get all souls back on board — and in such a situation, I would expect no less.

[Cruzin Terri]

To get back to the OP’s original topic.  Oceania is within its rights to change the cruise ports.  They certainly cannot go to Israel, and who would expect them to do so.

As for FCC.  That would be a good will gesture and a good business decision, but they are under no obligation to do so.  They are in the business of providing cruises and they are fulfilling their obligation.  That cruise will sail.

If the OP is not happy with the change in itinerary, no one is forcing her to board the ship.

Sometimes we have to take our losses.

Terri

 

[ak1004]

The situation in Israel is tragic. Hundreds of innocent men, women and children have been massacred. We have family (including our daughter) and friends in Israel, so we know the situation first hand. We should all remember how insignificant our problems are compared to what many families in Israel go though.

 

I can completely understand the frustration and the disappointment. And I can completely understand why OP expects O not to hide behind the contract and provide some kind of compensation. 

 

However, those things are beyond their control, so I'm not sure why should they. OP claims that this is a completely different cruise - perhaps, but how we define "a completely different cruise"? 30% of the ports changed? 50%? 70%? Who decides? If the new ports are to your liking, then it's fine, if they are not, you deserve compensation?

 

It is definitely a complex situation. Maybe other lines handle it better, maybe not. If they do, well done. O was never good in customer relations and/or communications, but once you step on board, you forget about the corporate missteps and focus on the ship experience. I would suggest that OP does the same. If they give you something, consider it a nice bonus. If they don't, try to enjoy the cruise. It is still a good itinerary and I'm sure you will enjoy the on board experience. 

[Psoque]

I hate say this, but based on what has been going on (not just now, but historically), I think it is somewhat unreasonable to assume that that cruises visiting Israel and Egypt will always commence without any drastic changes to the itinerary.

 

I guess the issue OP obliquely raised in the original post is whether the passengers (should) have the right to cancel without penalty if a cruise itinerary gets changed drastically for any reason.   I guess it would be nice if that’s possible.  However, whether we like it or not, the cruise lines are selling their cruises with an assumption that we have absolutely no way to back out of a cruise without a penalty (after the final payment, etc.) if the itinerary is changed.  Perhaps OP did not know this?  Or she was hoping that Oceania will try to placate her and other passengers on the same boat?  I have no idea.

 

I guess if we prefer cruise lines to not sell cruises that they can change the itineraries for any reason without our ability to back out of the cruise, complaining about it here probably does nothing.  I would start with cruise lines first (which I guess the OP did?) then if that does not work, contact the government agency that handles consumer protection for cruises sold in US.

[Snaefell3]

Pre-COVID, the quietly understood bargain between cruisers and cruise lines was that if an issue was within the cruise line's control (breakdowns, groundings, fire), the cruise line would make the passenger whole (well, as whole as possible), but if it wasn't (weather, war, asteroid strike) then it was up to the passenger to have bought insurance.

 

Then came COVID, and a huge exception to that bargain because cruise lines were terrified of folks with COVID hiding it at embarkation, leading to another Diamond Princess.

 

I don't blame the OP for wondering about COVID-like compensation, but its clear that we are back to the pre-COVID bargain.

[clojacks]

54 minutes ago, ak1004 said:

The situation in Israel is tragic. Hundreds of innocent men, women and children have been massacred. We have family (including our daughter) and friends in Israel, so we know the situation first hand. We should all remember how insignificant our problems are compared to what many families in Israel go though.

 

 

 

 

I would encourage ALL Posters to refrain from using the tragedy in Israel and Palestine as an analogy on this topic again. THEY ARE NOT RELATED... as a tragedy example. 

 

I am 99.9% sure the OP never intended her thread to become a discussion on what happened to her as some form of tragedy, but most likely a level of disappointment. 

 

As I have stated before, I side with the OP's desire to have some form of compromise arrived at. Whether it is cancellation without penalty, some level of FCC, full or partial, but to "force"...yes I'm going to use that word force, even though the flames are incoming...her to continue on a cruise that she did not book is a very bad look. Granted, Oceania is smart enough to know that the widespread distribution and knowledge of this discussion on CC is in the less than 1% range most likely, it doesn't mean it is any less reasonable to talk about. I have had ports changed, entire cruises changed ( a future Ireland intensive cruise that was100% rerouted as a Baltic cruise due to tender and erosion concerns due to seasonal winds), cruises chartered, and the most recent was a 14 day Best of Japan that was turned into a 12 day taste of Southern Japan and South Korea. I'm amazed at the good luck of some posters who claim to have NEVER had a port change in 30+ cruises. In every one of my cases, there was some form of concession granted without any discussion.

 

I guess one of the concerns I have is cruise lines themselves continuing to sell cruises to destinations that have had a past history of conflict, cancellations, disruptions, etc. We were one of the last cruises to visit Israel before COVID struck, and almost immediately, we were thankful that we were able to make it there without issue. Is it ethical to sell cruises that you know have a high possibility of not occurring in the sold form, and not offer some form of concession? NOT IN MY MIND. Just because you know that some passengers will book places that might be dicey, doesn't necessarily mean you should sell the cruise. This is not like a Gate 1 land tour where 40 people might be impacted. You are now affecting 700-1300 passengers who in good faith...not necessarily good judgement... trusted you as a cruise line to take care of them...both physically, and ethically. 

[ak1004]

24 minutes ago, clojacks said:

I would encourage ALL Posters to refrain from using the tragedy in Israel and Palestine as an analogy on this topic again. THEY ARE NOT RELATED... as a tragedy example. 

 

I am 99.9% sure the OP never intended her thread to become a discussion on what happened to her as some form of tragedy, but most likely a level of disappointment. 

 

As I have stated before, I side with the OP's desire to have some form of compromise arrived at. Whether it is cancellation without penalty, some level of FCC, full or partial, but to "force"...yes I'm going to use that word force, even though the flames are incoming...her to continue on a cruise that she did not book is a very bad look. Granted, Oceania is smart enough to know that the widespread distribution and knowledge of this discussion on CC is in the less than 1% range most likely, it doesn't mean it is any less reasonable to talk about. I have had ports changed, entire cruises changed ( a future Ireland intensive cruise that was100% rerouted as a Baltic cruise due to tender and erosion concerns due to seasonal winds), cruises chartered, and the most recent was a 14 day Best of Japan that was turned into a 12 day taste of Southern Japan and South Korea. I'm amazed at the good luck of some posters who claim to have NEVER had a port change in 30+ cruises. In every one of my cases, there was some form of concession granted without any discussion.

 

I guess one of the concerns I have is cruise lines themselves continuing to sell cruises to destinations that have had a past history of conflict, cancellations, disruptions, etc. We were one of the last cruises to visit Israel before COVID struck, and almost immediately, we were thankful that we were able to make it there without issue. Is it ethical to sell cruises that you know have a high possibility of not occurring in the sold form, and not offer some form of concession? NOT IN MY MIND. Just because you know that some passengers will book places that might be dicey, doesn't necessarily mean you should sell the cruise. This is not like a Gate 1 land tour where 40 people might be impacted. You are now affecting 700-1300 passengers who in good faith...not necessarily good judgement... trusted you as a cruise line to take care of them...both physically, and ethically. 

 

Are you suggesting that cruise lines stop selling cruises to Israel? Wouldn't this be a prize and surrender to terrorists? Not to mention that 99% of those cruises sail as planned.

[basor]

Just now, clojacks said:

I would encourage ALL Posters to refrain from using the tragedy in Israel and Palestine as an analogy on this topic again. THEY ARE NOT RELATED... as a tragedy example. 

 

I am 99.9% sure the OP never intended her thread to become a discussion on what happened to her as some form of tragedy, but most likely a level of disappointment. 

 

As I have stated before, I side with the OP's desire to have some form of compromise arrived at. Whether it is cancellation without penalty, some level of FCC, full or partial, but to "force"...yes I'm going to use that word force, even though the flames are incoming...her to continue on a cruise that she did not book is a very bad look. Granted, Oceania is smart enough to know that the widespread distribution and knowledge of this discussion on CC is in the less than 1% range most likely, it doesn't mean it is any less reasonable to talk about. I have had ports changed, entire cruises changed ( a future Ireland intensive cruise that was100% rerouted as a Baltic cruise due to tender and erosion concerns due to seasonal winds), cruises chartered, and the most recent was a 14 day Best of Japan that was turned into a 12 day taste of Southern Japan and South Korea. I'm amazed at the good luck of some posters who claim to have NEVER had a port change in 30+ cruises. In every one of my cases, there was some form of concession granted without any discussion.

 

I guess one of the concerns I have is cruise lines themselves continuing to sell cruises to destinations that have had a past history of conflict, cancellations, disruptions, etc. We were one of the last cruises to visit Israel before COVID struck, and almost immediately, we were thankful that we were able to make it there without issue. Is it ethical to sell cruises that you know have a high possibility of not occurring in the sold form, and not offer some form of concession? NOT IN MY MIND. Just because you know that some passengers will book places that might be dicey, doesn't necessarily mean you should sell the cruise. This is not like a Gate 1 land tour where 40 people might be impacted. You are now affecting 700-1300 passengers who in good faith...not necessarily good judgement... trusted you as a cruise line to take care of them...both physically, and ethically. 

If I understand your comment, you believe the cruise line should stop offering cruises in places that might be dicey.....as I look at the World map and areas of the World that currently have a conflict, political unrest or humanitarian crisis, I am not finding many places that they could sail...add to that areas that have weather issues and the cruise industry might as well close up.  I believe that the passenger does have some personal responsibility to make a decision understanding the potential for an itinerary change or cancelation.   I understand that others feel the onus is on the cruise industry.  We hope to continue to have the opportunity to sail in the future and will choose the itineraries based upon our level of comfort