NCL Star passenger revolt

[reporterjen]

15 hours ago, SeaShark said:

ADDING...

I also love that fact that the lazy journalist responsible for the linked story couldn't even be bothered to show the right cruise ship. The photo used is the Norwegian Sun, not the Star, and was taken waaaaaaaaaay back before the ships had hull art.

A bit off topic, but I wanted to provide some context around that “lazy” journalist: Just want to make clear that a reporter doing a story on this (or anything else) is generally not also picking any associated art or, in many cases, writing the headlines, especially with any large publication. That is often a separate editor or designer’s role. Mistakes in photo selection do happen, but it is also quite likely that the photo library to which the editor had access did not contain a better option, with a pic of the Star (recent or otherwise). An image of the Sun, another NCL ship, would be seen as iconic and generally representative of cruising for a story on an NCL cruise matter. 

[ontheweb]

6 hours ago, BirdTravels said:

You can suggest whatever you want. Cancelled Shore Excursions will be refunded as OBC. Spend it. Cash it. Alaskan ShoreEx are also very expensive and some are cancelled on most cruises due to weather. Pre-pandemic, we booked 3 air tours on one Alaska cruise and all three cancelled due to weather (low ceilings). We spent some of the OBC [quickly] booking alternate excursions. 

 

Pre-pandemic, NCL was very strict and really didn't do anything for cancellations or re-routing. Post-pandemic, they seem to be giving out a few more "good will" credits... even for missing GSC. We were on RCCL cruises where we got a 50% of cruise fare OBC for re-routing because of a hurricane (zero business sense in that offer). 

 

And yes, the cruise line owes you nothing for changing itineraries. Anything you get is "good will". 

 

And yes, we have received [a lot] more than the published offer when changes are announced in advanced by being polite, professional, and making reasonable requests,,, and not going in with guns blazing. Heck, last year, after politely noting a discrepancy in the preparation of my fish, the ship's Executive Chef and Restaurant Director came to our table and we were offered a complimentary surf-n-turf dinner for two with a bottle of wine at Ocean Blue the next night. 

Yes, the cruise contract says they can cancel a port. And we had 2 ports cancelled on our Prima cruise last summer. On one of them had bought an excursion pre-cruise from NCL, and when NCL cancelled the port even before the cruise, I called to have the money refunded to our credit card. I was told I was going to be given NON-REFUNDABLE OBC instead and I should be grateful for it since they did not have to give me anything. After more discussion, the representative finally realized I was not asking for compensation for a missed port, but rather a refund of an excursion they could no longer provide as they were not going to the port. She put me on hold and consulted a different department. I was given the refund as their policy allows you to cancel an excursion for a refund if it is more than 48 hours before the excursion.

Edited February 14 by ontheweb
accidentally hit save to soon

[VJWcruiser]

17 hours ago, SeaShark said:

 

So the only definate here is that "they are entitled to an explanation", and an explanation was given. So what is the problem?

I'm on the cruise right now and we have received no explanation. We got a paper in our cabin with the new itinerary when we embarked and nothing has been said. The captain hasn't even made any announcements all cruise. 

[floridafish]

I took the Escape out of NYC last September to Maine and Canada for 7 nights. Literally days before departing NCL posts an updated itinerary which ADDED a stop in Newport. Personally, I loved the change and enjoyed that port. I did meet some people who were pretty upset about losing a sea day. 

Common thread is zero explanation from NCL for the change in plans. That's just how they roll. Or sail). 

 

[njkate]

4 minutes ago, ontheweb said:

Yes, the cruise contract says they can cancel a port. And we had 2 ports cancelled on our Prima cruise last summer. On one of them had bought an excursion pre-cruise from NCL, and when NCL cancelled the port even before the cruise, I called to have the money refunded to our credit card. I was told I was going to be given NON-REFUNDABLE OBC instead and I should be grateful for it since they did not have to give me anything. After more discussion, the representative finally realized I was not asking for compensation for a missed port, but rather a refund of an excursion they could no longer provide as they were not going to the port. She put me on hold and consulted a different department. I was given the refund as their policy allows you to cancel an excursion for a refund if it is more than 48 hours before the excursion.

Last August on an Alaskan cruise my daughter booked an NCL helicopter tour to glacier, it was cancelled the morning off because it was way too windy for a helicopter. Refund of the tour went right back to cc used within 48 hours. No clue what bird is babbling about as far as excursions that are cancelled being refunded as OBC unless I’m reading the post wrong. Who the hell wants a cancelled excursion that cost over $500 refunded as OBC

[UKstages]

8 hours ago, Panhandle Couple said:

The point is that no one is getting off the ship in either location.  From the water, both will look the same. 

 

respectfully, that is your point.

 

that view may  not be shared by others.

 

to me, it's a lot like spending $3000 0r $4000 to go see taylor swift and instead i get taken against my will to a charo concert. and when i protest, i'm told that it's really for my benefit because my concert going experience is actually being enhanced. and then several anonymous people online tell me there really is no difference because they are both internationally famous blonde singers and both have been on "the tonight show."

 

8 hours ago, Panhandle Couple said:

Other cruise and tour companies (large and small) advertise the Shetlands as "sailing to Antarctica".

 

bonus!

 

as long as i get to see a pony, i am fine with this.

 

Edited February 14 by UKstages

[ontheweb]

11 minutes ago, njkate said:

Last August on an Alaskan cruise my daughter booked an NCL helicopter tour to glacier, it was cancelled the morning off because it was way too windy for a helicopter. Refund of the tour went right back to cc used within 48 hours. No clue what bird is babbling about as far as excursions that are cancelled being refunded as OBC unless I’m reading the post wrong. Who the hell wants a cancelled excursion that cost over $500 refunded as OBC

Yes, absolutely correct. I had previously posted about that exchange and finally getting a refund for an pre-paid excursion to a cancelled port and was chastised by Bird for not allowing NCL procedures  (OBC given instead of a refund) to be followed. And this was despite they acknowledged that their rules said you could cancel an excursion for a refund if it was 48 hours or more before the excursion. And why would someone not cancel an excursion to a port no longer being offered? 🤦‍♂️

[cruiseamm]

Story on "Good Morning America" today.

Edited February 14 by cruiseamm

[VJWcruiser]

10 hours ago, julig22 said:

That's what I thought. I personally don't know what the difference is between cruising Paradise Bay vs the new itinerary (which is the itinerary I was on last year) - it's all beautiful, weather permitting.

But based on some of the comments you'd think that they were completely skipping Antarctica - they are not.

No...but instead of 2 days of scenic cruising, we ended up with about 4 hours. 2 hours early morning and 2 hours at 7 PM

[david_sobe]

15 minutes ago, VJWcruiser said:

No...but instead of 2 days of scenic cruising, we ended up with about 4 hours. 2 hours early morning and 2 hours at 7 PM

THANK YOU for taking the time to post while on the cruise.  Your details explain everything.  You  nailed it.  Clearly NCL is not enhancing the guest experience for those that wanted 2 days of scenic cruising instead of 4 hours.  Those of us on land and in the peanut gallery who have never cruised to Antartica before don't know these things.  
Sadly NCL has sort of sealed the deal.  I dont see them backtracking since that would make things worse.  A simple, honest explanation is what customers expect.  Customers will respect you for that.

[pete_coach]

21 hours ago, dlh015 said:

This phrase and its variations always puts me in a foul mood. All the cruise lines use it and it is just insulting.

 

Just a couple months ago I got a missive from X informing me that our stop in Key West would be an hour and a half shorter. It started with the same phrase. Somehow, less time in a beautiful port enhances my experience??

 

Not near as serious as this NCL Antarctica thing, but the mindset is the same. Something that nobody wants is presented as in the best interest of the patron. 

 

And I certainly agree...honesty is the best policy. 

 

 

Not to argue but, the ports themselves often ask the ships to alter their itineraries.

 

Key West has many ships sop there and often it overwhelms the city. So, they ask ships to alter their time in port (tender) to lessen the impact.

 

Venice has been restricting passengers for a number of years now.

 

The Alaska cruises are so plentiful now that there are scheduling issues and some ships cannot get into the small villages. This is a problem for the cruise lines as they plan years in advance and the overcrowding issue is often generated by the small villages themselves because they want as many visitors as possible. It is a huge part of their economy.

 

Antarctic areas are restricting tourists in some areas and when the the quota is reached, they shut the area down.

We were in  Puerto Rico a year ago and there were 4 huge ships at the main docks, we and another ship had to dock at the old Pan Am dock.  There were so many people in town that we spent an hour fighting th crowds we went back to the ship. Restrictions would have made the experience better.

 

We have been in the Bahamas where there were 4 very large ships docked...it was a zoo. maybe restrictions would make the port more enjoyable??

 

So, while I agree the situation NCL situation in the Antarctic was poorly handled, there may very well have been a valid reason.

Edited February 14 by pete_coach

[JulianB]

1 hour ago, david_sobe said:

Thank you. Thats sort of what I thought.  But I swore I heard people talking about excursions on this thread.   So no matter what, no one walks on the continent?  That is for the specialized cruises that go there exclusively?

Then its not really a cancelled port but a cancelled sail by?

Excursions are available on the cruise for ports on the South American continent and the Falkland islands but NOT for Antarctica which was originally two days of cruising the Peninsula and Islands (specifically Paradise Bay and Elephant Island). Paradise Bay has been switched to a Bay close to Elephant Island and happens on the same day. 

[laudergayle]

23 hours ago, BirdTravels said:

I would not be asking for a "goodwill credit". I would be looking for a refund of my cruise fare in the form of a FCC. ShoreEx refunds must be given as refundable OBC (which you can immediately go to Guest Services to get a cash refund). Port Fees, if any since there was a substitution, would be a refundable OBC (which you can get cash for). 

 

7 hours ago, BirdTravels said:

And yes, the cruise line owes you nothing for changing itineraries. Anything you get is "good will". 

 

And yes, we have received [a lot] more than the published offer when changes are announced in advanced by being polite, professional, and making reasonable requests,,, and not going in with guns blazing

 

Oh my…you’re making my head hurt.  Help me understand your position.  Do you think the passengers should get a goodwill credit, a full refund via FCC or nothing?

 

Yes, I agree that shore ex refunds are handled as you say.  I was merely offering a more expeditious way of handling.  Which would have been more customer friendly for both passengers and GS staff.

[laudergayle]

6 minutes ago, JulianB said:

1 hour ago, david_sobe said:

Thank you. Thats sort of what I thought.  But I swore I heard people talking about excursions on this thread.   So no matter what, no one walks on the continent?  That is for the specialized cruises that go there exclusively?

Then its not really a cancelled port but a cancelled sail by?

Excursions are available on the cruise for ports on the South American continent and the Falkland islands but NOT for Antarctica which was originally two days of cruising the Peninsula and Islands (specifically Paradise Bay and Elephant Island). Paradise Bay has been switched to a Bay close to Elephant Island and happens on the same day. 

Just for clarification.  On page one Excursions were mentioned, which is also why there is still some references.  It was later on in the thread that it was disclosed that this was cruising only.  So the missed excursion is really not relevant.

[Davechipp74]

If you are going on a cruise to Antarctica, it is not your first cruise, if it is not your first cruise you know the captain can change the itinerary  at any time. 

 

I did welding on the SPT (South pole telescope) in 2007 at Amundsen-Scott research station population 137 it was really "cool" to be a cog in the Event Horizon Telescope Project. We partied our penguins off.

[VJWcruiser]

15 minutes ago, david_sobe said:

THANK YOU for taking the time to post while on the cruise.  Your details explain everything.  You  nailed it.  Clearly NCL is not enhancing the guest experience for those that wanted 2 days of scenic cruising instead of 4 hours.  Those of us on land and in the peanut gallery who have never cruised to Antartica before don't know these things.  
Sadly NCL has sort of sealed the deal.  I dont see them backtracking since that would make things worse.  A simple, honest explanation is what customers expect.  Customers will respect you for that.

Any explanation would be welcome. We embarked the ship and had a paper in  our cabin with the "new and improved" itinerary. There was no explanation, there was no apology and there was nothing offered. Guest services is clueless and says to email guest relations. The captain has been curiously absent and doesn't even make any announcements. Although the staff on ship are wonderful, nobody is offering an explanation and the only reasons I have seen have been from the media, not NCL

[CroozeNoob]

29 minutes ago, VJWcruiser said:

Any explanation would be welcome. We embarked the ship and had a paper in  our cabin with the "new and improved" itinerary. There was no explanation, there was no apology and there was nothing offered. Guest services is clueless and says to email guest relations. The captain has been curiously absent and doesn't even make any announcements. Although the staff on ship are wonderful, nobody is offering an explanation and the only reasons I have seen have been from the media, not NCL

Quite frankly I am surprised there isn't a mutiny. I would definitely be issuing a charge back on my credit cards, if they can't give a reasonable explanation.

 

Luckily I haven't paid my cruise off for NCL yet. And may just let them eat my deposit if they are going to be pulling this crap.

[dlh015]

2 hours ago, pete_coach said:

Not to argue but, the ports themselves often ask the ships to alter their itineraries.

 

Key West has many ships sop there and often it overwhelms the city. So, they ask ships to alter their time in port (tender) to lessen the impact.

 

Venice has been restricting passengers for a number of years now.

 

The Alaska cruises are so plentiful now that there are scheduling issues and some ships cannot get into the small villages. This is a problem for the cruise lines as they plan years in advance and the overcrowding issue is often generated by the small villages themselves because they want as many visitors as possible. It is a huge part of their economy.

 

Antarctic areas are restricting tourists in some areas and when the the quota is reached, they shut the area down.

We were in  Puerto Rico a year ago and there were 4 huge ships at the main docks, we and another ship had to dock at the old Pan Am dock.  There were so many people in town that we spent an hour fighting th crowds we went back to the ship. Restrictions would have made the experience better.

 

We have been in the Bahamas where there were 4 very large ships docked...it was a zoo. maybe restrictions would make the port more enjoyable??

 

So, while I agree the situation NCL situation in the Antarctic was poorly handled, there may very well have been a valid reason.

Read my post again. I didn't say they didn't have a valid reason. I said I objected to the spin wording...

 

"To enhance the guest experience,"

 

Others are arguing the explanation angle...I'm not...you should have addressed your post to someone who is...

 

 

[Mike07]

1 hour ago, CroozeNoob said:

Quite frankly I am surprised there isn't a mutiny. I would definitely be issuing a charge back on my credit cards, if they can't give a reasonable explanation.

 

Luckily I haven't paid my cruise off for NCL yet. And may just let them eat my deposit if they are going to be pulling this crap.

 

 

You can drop gratuitous to nothing. While it's not fair to the hard-working crew, it is what it is.

 

NCL executed a clause in the passage contract. You're also executing a clause.

[PartyPlannerLady]

On 2/13/2024 at 7:05 AM, david_sobe said:

This has blown up all over the cruise vlogs.  Apparently the bucket list destination Antartica has been removed from the recent Star sailings after the passengers boarded.  There is no explanation of a "go slow" order. No government issued such an order and its speculated that the Star has propulsion issues?  NCL will not comment or explain it.  Passengers engaged in a revolt in the atrium demanding answers.  
I get it.  These cruises are so expensive and Antartica is a bucket list destination.  I can't imagine booking this and then boarding and then being told Antartica is no longer on the itinerary since we have to go "slower."  Yet its not explained why they have to go slower?  

 

Norwegian Cruise Lines drops Antarctica from itineraries leaving passengers furious - NZ Herald

 

 

Read the cruise contract that we ALL agree to.  The cruise line has the full and absolute right to control the movement of ths ship and to change course/destination at any time for any reason with no explanation required.  If you do not luke that, your alternative is to find a different vacation than cruising.  The only person each passenger should be mad at is themself for agree to this ahead of time.

[UKstages]

28 minutes ago, PartyPlannerLady said:

Read the cruise contract that we ALL agree to.  The cruise line has the full and absolute right to control the movement of ths ship and to change course/destination at any time for any reason with no explanation required. 

 

nobody is really disputing the points you have made. and they have been made many times in this thread. what NCL can do and what they should do in a customer service oriented environment, may be two entirely different things.

 

few would argue that NCL has handled the communication on this in anything other than a reprehensible way. they are only making things worse by their obfuscation and delays. they don't have to provide compensation, but they should, they don't have to provide an explanation, but they should. and they should treat the human beings onboard, both employees and guests, with respect and dignity.

 

by all accounts, they haven't done that. my goodness, the captain won't even make a bloody announcement... to apologize, to empathize, to put people at ease. the fish stinks from the head down... and the captain won't even talk to his guests, all of whom have entrusted their safety and well being to him!

[ontheweb]

41 minutes ago, PartyPlannerLady said:

Read the cruise contract that we ALL agree to.  The cruise line has the full and absolute right to control the movement of ths ship and to change course/destination at any time for any reason with no explanation required.  If you do not luke that, your alternative is to find a different vacation than cruising.  The only person each passenger should be mad at is themself for agree to this ahead of time.

Just because the contract allows something does not make it the right thing to do.

[pete_coach]

1 hour ago, dlh015 said:

Read my post again. I didn't say they didn't have a valid reason. I said I objected to the spin wording...

 

"To enhance the guest experience,"

 

Others are arguing the explanation angle...I'm not...you should have addressed your post to someone who is...

 

 

I think you can also read my post again.

My first sentence was "Not to argue but, the ports themselves often ask the ships to alter their itineraries. ".

I went on to provide examples of situations why changes may have been made.

Some of my explanations may have been "To enhance the guest experience".

Not specific, or even about you.

[david_sobe]

1 hour ago, PartyPlannerLady said:

Read the cruise contract that we ALL agree to.  The cruise line has the full and absolute right to control the movement of ths ship and to change course/destination at any time for any reason with no explanation required.  If you do not luke that, your alternative is to find a different vacation than cruising.  The only person each passenger should be mad at is themself for agree to this ahead of time.

Clearly you did not read what I wrote.  I was reporting what happened.  No one disputes what you are saying.  However every time a cruise line changes ports or drops a port, or remains at sea there is an explanation why.  The captain will announce:  Due to weather we must skip this port and remain at sea.  Due to a mechanical issue the ship will have to seek an alternative route.  I've even seen where the ship cannot dock because another ship took its place by mistake.  Passengers are always informed of those decisions.   

Edited February 14 by david_sobe

[Ken the cruiser]

23 hours ago, txjim09 said:

NCL was suppose to be in Port Stanley with us (Sapphire Princess) on Feb 1 but was a no-show.  Our tour guide was informed the prior evening and the rumor was that Captain requested a 5:30AM arrival, was told it was not possible and replied by telling port authorities that he would skip the port because of this.  

I was wondering why the NCL Star bypassed Port Stanley. Initially someone posted the following on my Sapphire Princess Live From thread at 9:13 am on Jan 31:

 

It looks like the Norwegian Star skips Port Stanley tomorrow, as their AIS destination (on Cruise Mapper) now indicates AR BSAS for Buenos Aires. Earlier, it showed FK PSY for Falkland. Port Stanley was on the Star's itinerary: 01 Feb 06:00 - 16:00

Then I posted this observation around 9:30 pm on Jan 31:

 

Port Stanley does seem like a popular place this evening. The blue ship heading south away from the port is the Oceania Marina while the yellow ship above the island heading in a NNW direction is the NCL Sun. The other blue ship heading in a ENE direction is the Azamara Quest while the other yellow ship heading due north is the NCL Star. According to CM (Cruise Mapper), both the Quest and the Sapphire are still planning to arrive in Port Stanley tomorrow morning while the NCL Star seems to be bypassing the port as @EDVM96 mentioned earlier.

 

But I will also note that the weather was forecasted to turn pretty nasty in Port Stanley around 3 pm, which it actually started getting ugly around noon and peaking around 4 pm. About the same time the Star would be tendering back most of their guests.
 

My unofficial guess from over here in the peanut gallery is the Star’s Captain wanted to start tendering earlier, as note above, so they could leave earlier and avoid the heavy winds and rain that were in the forecast. But I imagine that change would also require a major overhaul to their booked excursion schedules, which is probably why the port authority said no.

 

Anyway, thanks for sharing that little tidbit of information. That explained why the Star passed Port Stanley.