ok, has ncl finally crossed the line?

[Anoynmous Phoenix]

I think lots are not getting the real moan.

 

The major/massive change is AFTER final payment and there is NO FREE OPTION to cancel.

Edited Friday at 11:30 PM by Anoynmous Phoenix

[Travelling2Some]

8 hours ago, PATRLR said:

You used the word incentive.  For me, it's not lack of incentive it's downright concern.  I'll probably use NCL again for something mindless like the Carribean where we really don't care where the ship stops, but for more "interesting" itineraries I'm concerned enough to look at lines other than NCL.

This has become our exact attitude towards NCL, having been burnt 3 times in the last couple of years by itinerary changes with completely bogus reasons given.  No longer booking NCL for "important stuff" only maybe for mid-winter Caribbean breaks and, TBH MSC has got our attention for that this coming winter out of NYC.  Booked Princess for our next two "important" cruises because we can no longer trust NCL to deliver the itineraries they advertise.

[BunnyHutt]

6 hours ago, Anoynmous Phoenix said:

Lots of theorizing but I would still love to see the two documents put out by NCL.   One for those now debarking in Hong Kong and then for those embarking in Hong Kong.

 

Or is only the first one available?   Has the second to wait till after the final payment for that cruise? 

 

What me cynical!

Someone on one of these sailings posted in the “just the facts” thread last week. Can’t remember which end it was. They were notified 1 day after final payment, I believe. 

[smallestdog]

11 minutes ago, BunnyHutt said:

Someone on one of these sailings posted in the “just the facts” thread last week. Can’t remember which end it was. They were notified 1 day after final payment, I believe. 

 

I believe that would be me. I've attached the contents of NCL's email below for those interested to read it. This is for the 10 December 2024 sailing from Manila.

 

On closer inspection of the date and time stamp on the email in my Gmail inbox, it is dated 12 hours after the final payment deadline. So not even 1 day after.

 

 

[Travelling2Some]

7 minutes ago, smallestdog said:

 

I believe that would be me. I've attached the contents of NCL's email below for those interested to read it. This is for the 10 December 2024 sailing from Manila.

 

On closer inspection of the date and time stamp on the email in my Gmail inbox, it is dated 12 hours after the final payment deadline. So not even 1 day after.

 

 

Twelve hours after final payment on what is probably the very worst itinerary change to date.  A new low.

[DorothyB]

My final payment was 6/29.  I actually never received a change of itinerary from "NCL".  Others posted about it so I contacted my PCC and she sent it to me.  It was dated July 30th and my cruise departs Oct 27th so 88 or 89 days prior to sailing . . . . So right after the non-haven cancellation policy went from 25% to 50%

[kitkat343]

1 hour ago, Travelling2Some said:

This has become our exact attitude towards NCL, having been burnt 3 times in the last couple of years by itinerary changes with completely bogus reasons given.  No longer booking NCL for "important stuff" only maybe for mid-winter Caribbean breaks and, TBH MSC has got our attention for that this coming winter out of NYC.  Booked Princess for our next two "important" cruises because we can no longer trust NCL to deliver the itineraries they advertise.

Princess also has a nice transpositioning cruise that visits the ABC islands, Dominica, St Martin and Puerto Rico.  It travels from FLL to Brooklyn in August and then does the reverse in (I think) October or November.    

[Middleager]

This is BAD.

 

I would've be very upset.

 

I wouldn't want to go to Hong Kong or any part of China.  China kidnapped two Canadians, the two Michaels.  So many people from Canada (and other parts of the world) are weary of going to China.  This is not politics, just facts.

 

NCL needs to let people cancel with full refund, and give people still going a big OBC. 

 

Hotel bookings, if not non-refundable, can be cancelled.  But many people would've purchased flights out of Manila, and there can be a big cost to change, if changeable at all.

 

We were on a South Africa cruise last year.  Only after we got on the ship, we were notified the cruise would no longer be going to Durban.  There were discussions and some people indicated they heard from local excursion operators knowing the ship wasn't going there many weeks before, but NCL did not let people know ahead of time.

[Luffe]

Yep, NCL has crossed the line for our family. Still waiting for our next year med cruise with NCL high hopes and fascination as it is our first NCL cruise. But I have been looking these asian cruises for possible future trip. Now with these changes it will be certain that if we take an asian cruise it won't be with NCL.  A Basic med or Caribbean cruise I could still use NCL but any exotic port is no go. Which is sad as that cruise itinerary was really interesting.

 

 

[Faels]

14 hours ago, doctoranna said:

Yeah, that was me.  Back then, we actually collected twice on itinerary change benefits from Nationwide, once on the pre-departure change ($750 payout each) in 2017 due to Irma and Maria, and once on a change that occurred during the cruise ($500 payout each) in Oct 2019 when we had to miss the Azores due to Hurricane Pablo.  We did not pay extra for the policies with these benefits.  It was included in the price of the policies, which was very competitive with the prices of policies from other companies.  Unfortunately for us (but probably fortunately for Nationwide), they have dropped that benefit since cov!d. They do still have a benefit that pays for nonrefundable private shore excursions if the port is missed due to an itinerary change, but that's about it.  That being said, I can't say enough good things about Nationwide's family of cruise-only travel insurance policies.  We still purchase coverage from them, having had not only the two itinerary change claims, but also 2 medical claims, and all were handled promptly and cheerfully.

 

Thanks for the follow up!! I really appreciate the updated info. 🙂

[Faels]

Imo if I was a passenger affected by this I would be demanding NCL pay for the flight between ports to ensure I make it to the ship in time. Like on Dec 10 there are seven flights nonstop Manila-Hong Kong that land before noon all under $200 CAD. There must be a way for them to transit passengers from old port to new port or vice versa for those getting off in Hong Kong.

[Asawi]

I'm pretty easy going and can accept a lot. But changing departure or arrival port without compensation, that's going too far! So yes, I think they have crossed a line!

[herbanrenewal]

On 9/19/2024 at 10:22 PM, JSar said:

 

I did a quick flight search and found economy one way from Hong kong to Manila in the $170-350 range in December. I think if i were in this unenviable position I'd book the extra flight. Its way cheaper than losing prepaid non-refundable tickets for destination other than Caribbean. I generally stay a few days in embarking/disembarking ports so i would have a few days to maneuver.  But I would have expected some compensation for this change in ports, even $250 FCC would sooth my angst. I agree day after final payment, most have booked post cruise arrangements. and to just leave loyal customers stranded is at best a poor business decision.

[v3cruiser]

IMHO, I dont foresee ncl changing their ways till a class action lawsuit is filed when there is enough customers that can show proof of losses sustained from these last minute changes. In court ncl will most likely have to provide documents when they knew ports were not going to work out as well reasons why they kept that info from its customers. Seems like an embarkation or debarkation port change should necessitate an all money back cancellation option if not a future cruise credit on top of that. 

[luv2kroooz]

11 minutes ago, v3cruiser said:

IMHO, I dont foresee ncl changing their ways till a class action lawsuit is filed when there is enough customers that can show proof of losses sustained from these last minute changes. In court ncl will most likely have to provide documents when they knew ports were not going to work out as well reasons why they kept that info from its customers. Seems like an embarkation or debarkation port change should necessitate an all money back cancellation option if not a future cruise credit on top of that. 

It's coming and will likely result in additional protections for the consumer. However, it is not easy to organize, sustain, and fund a collective, grass roots effort. But, yes, I predict it is coming.

 

For us, we don't have any skin in this game so it is easy for us to say we aren't interested in suing NCL. It is just easier and cheaper for us to sail HAL or Princess or Carnival. I mean, we prefer not to give our business to a company that does right by its customers only when a court might require it to do so. That speaks volumes to us about their leadership.

 

Courts could and most likely would also subpoena records of independent third parties like port authorities, food suppliers, excursion operators, and companies that provide embarkation security and port staffing. It would be interesting to me to know when NCL informed them of their changes versus when it informed it's guests. Those records exist and would help me to understand better the level of misconduct/negligence involved. That is the missing piece right now.

[The Traveling Man]

@complawyer

There have been many threads on this forum concerning last minute itinerary changes.  In most cases I have shrugged them off, thinking that I could tolerate them if they occurred on one of my trips.  I even was satisfied with NCL’s response to the fiasco of the 2016-2017 misadventures of the Star.  Changing the debarkation/embarkation port, however, really gives me pause.  I think that in future I may only book an NCL cruise a few weeks before it sails, well after the final payment date.  If they ever were to change a port of embarkation or debarkation so near to travel time that it cost me extra money to change my flight or hotel, I’m pretty sure that would be my last NCL cruise.

[complawyer]

if  you recall, i was on the cruise right after yours. you underline my point exactly! 

changing or cancelling a cruise port, while certainly both an inconvenience and disappointment, shouldnt ruin the entire cruise.

 

changing the final disembarkation port is beyond outrageous.

[2bc cruisers]

I’m flabbergasted at this whole scenario.   NCL is certainly way over a reasonable line here.  I don’t know how I’d handle this for myself. One thing is certain, if I had been in this scenario, I’d be in line for a class action, and I’d be writing every address I could get ahold of at ncl and telling them my thoughts on their no help offered information. Right now my money is on an upcoming transportation/compensation offer.  
 

[schnapperin]

11 hours ago, Middleager said:

This is BAD.

 

I would've be very upset.

 

I wouldn't want to go to Hong Kong or any part of China.  China kidnapped two Canadians, the two Michaels.  So many people from Canada (and other parts of the world) are weary of going to China.  This is not politics, just facts.

 

NCL needs to let people cancel with full refund, and give people still going a big OBC. 

 

Hotel bookings, if not non-refundable, can be cancelled.  But many people would've purchased flights out of Manila, and there can be a big cost to change, if changeable at all.

 

We were on a South Africa cruise last year.  Only after we got on the ship, we were notified the cruise would no longer be going to Durban.  There were discussions and some people indicated they heard from local excursion operators knowing the ship wasn't going there many weeks before, but NCL did not let people know ahead of time.

that tour was always schedule to stay overnight in Hongkong 

[Middleager]

5 minutes ago, schnapperin said:

that tour was always schedule to stay overnight in Hongkong 

people don't need to get off the ship to go into HK though.  Now cruisers are forced to disembark in HK.

[UKstages]

OK, this post brought me out of my self-imposed cruise critic retirement.

 

(“just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in.”)

 

first, let me state unequivocally… yeah, this is horrible. it was a very bad series of decisions/operational strategies and - surprise, surprise - it was handled really poorly by NCL, especially with regard to timing and communication. but let me now clear up some of the confusion and offer some missing context and also a few facts, especially when it comes to compensation… what NCL is and is not offering.

 

i’m directly affected by the manila to hong kong switcheroo as I’m booked on the december 10th itinerary originally embarking in manila (now hong kong). but my situation is somewhat unique in that I’m booked through CAS and have used fully “refundable” points and miles for my air travel and hotel rooms. but some of the same principles and “costs” associated with my trip will no doubt apply to cash paying customers, too. 

 

in point of fact, most passengers from the USA who go to manila, transit in either hong kong or tokyo. some of these will have already booked a flight to hong kong, as part of their journey to manila, albeit on the wrong day. (there are only two direct carriers with direct flights to manila that i know of… UA and philippine air.) those passengers flying from within asia will have a relatively short flight (90 minutes to five hours) to get to hong kong. and the flights are not that expensive.

 

inconvenient? you betcha.

 

the end of the world?  nope, especially since NCL is offering some compensation, although the compensation may be different for USA travelers than intra-asia travelers… i don’t know. (and, sadly, very little of it applies to me… more on that later.)

[UKstages]

i had a hotel reservation in manila (booked on points) which I had to cancel. no harm, no foul, no penalty. most hotel reservations can even be canceled by cash-paying customers up to 24 or 48 hours before arrival. so this is not an issue for most people, unless they have paid in full for their hotel room on a nonrefundable rate months in advance.   and I would never advise doing that, as the “discount” for pre-paying is marginal.

 

i have done extensive business travel to the philippines and have friends and colleagues in manila, with whom I was planning to meet. that’s out for me now, and that’s terribly disappointing, as manila will no longer even be a port of call (although the other pinoy ports are still on the itinerary).  my air travel, as I mentioned, was booked using frequent flyer miles and that also had to be changed.  oddly enough, getting a flight to hong kong was a lot easier and actually saved me about 20K miles. i did contemplate proceeding with my original flight to manila, spending time with friends and then continuing on to HKG, but I chose to fly direct to HKG.

 

when purchased for cash, my experience has always been that there is more frequent and much cheaper service from the USA to hong kong than to manila. so even when paying cash for their flights, guests on this cruise might actually save a little money. except for change fees… but more on that later, too. 

 

again, it’s horribly inconvenient, with very bad communication on NCL’s part, but the sky has not fallen.

 

my reservation was booked through casinos at sea, which brings further complexity to my unique situation, but after final payment, even CAS reservations are not cancellable without penalty.

[UKstages]

the official line with this change is that there are “operational challenges.” but nobody is talking or even explaining what that means. to be fair, it’s entirely possible that the port of manila is being maintained in an unsafe manner or that they have been unable to provide a high quality of service or staffing. but by that measure, NCL should pull out of new york! 

 

(i kid… I kid… no, actually I don’t.)

 

it’s also entirely possible they are having trouble provisioning to their standard, but that seems unlikely. the philippines is not a third world country and there are many five star resort hotels within a twenty mile radius of the port. if they can be provisioned, so can NCL. 

 

it’s also quite possible there is a straight up legit logistical or safety challenge in the area… china is currently engaged in somewhat questionable maritime activities in the philippine sea in what can only be described as a territorial dispute.  @NJkate alluded to this in post # 40. 

 

NCL should provide details! if they provided details, customers would be more willing to accept whatever the challenges are. as it stands, guests are left to assume the usual NCL subterfuge, flimflam and smoke and mirrors.

 

i can’t speak for what was originally the tokyo to manila itinerary, but for my cruise, the december 10th departure, NCL is offering the following: 

 

* $300 per person reimbursement for airline-imposed change/cancelation fees not covered by insurance or the airline, for all booked passengers (not just passengers 1 and 2); documentation required  

* $150 non-refundable OBC per stateroom (passengers 1 and 2 each receive $75)

* 15% FCC to be used towards any published sailings through 12/31/25

• flights booked through NCL will essentially be lifted and shifted; NCL will take care of that, with new flight confirmations supposed to have been sent this week. i have no idea if partial refunds will be offered if the new flights cost less than the old flights

 

so, NCL is offering… something! quite a few things actually.  

Edited 13 hours ago by UKstages

[UKstages]

i reached out to my CAS rep a few hours after this communication came out last week and, of course, she knew nothing about it. this is NCL, after all! she forwarded my inquiry to a CAS supervisor type person, who responded. 

 

i basically had one question and a couple of observations.

 

the question was whether they would allow me to cancel, without penalty.

 

the answer: yes.

 

(as a data point, I should mention that i’m “elite” within the CAS ecosystem, so whether that status had something to do with that decision or if any CAS guest who asked - or any guest booked through any channel - was able to cancel without penalty, i don’t know. but they offered me that option after i specifically requested it.)

 

my chief observation was that the compensation was a little thin, especially so for CAS guests. hey, everybody can always find a good way to spend $150 per cabin, and it’s a nice gesture. as it happens, i’ll be solo on this cruise, so it’s only $75 for my “cabin.” and homey don’t get out of bed for $75. but it’s a nice gesture. (not as nice as $500, though.)

 

the other thing is the 15% off a future cruise certificate (FCC). time was, they used to give you dollar value FCC. that was valuable for both “regular” guests and CAS clients. but CAS guests already get free cruises or deeply discounted cruises. the 15% off certificate has a value of about $30 bucks on a ten-day cruise. (you can apply it to that pesky admin fee that casino guests pay.) the same thing happened to me a couple of years ago on my infamous transatlantic prima cruise… as a casino guest, I received a 50% off FCC certificate, the same as every other passenger. (that’s worth about a hundred dollars to a casino guest taking a ten-day cruise.) i say this more for the NCL corporate lurkers on this board than anybody else… NCL has to seriously rethink what compensation should be when they inconvenience casino guests. FCC doesn’t cut it, unless it’s a dollar value certificate.

 

overall, though, while NCL played the despicable “wait until after final payment” game with these two cruises and they once again bungled the communication and they haven’t supplied specific reasons for their decision… i think they actually did a decent job of taking care of (most) of those affected by the change in departure and arrival cities. they indeed provided some compensation… all the gloom and doom reports from people not on these cruises was quite accurate in terms of the inconvenience, but very far off the mark in terms of nearly everything else.  and, not for nuthin’, but many of the port calls have been adjusted to have longer or more favorable hours.

 

the arguments that people don’t want to go to “china” for various reasons don’t hold much water, as “hong kong” and “china” are not the same thing, as pointed out upthread. more importantly, these cruises were already scheduled (on the original itinerary) to spend two days (and an overnight) in hong kong, also as noted upthread. if people truly had objections to visiting hong kong, they would not have booked the cruise in the first place.

Edited 13 hours ago by UKstages

[UKstages]

there is one more thing that I believe guests with independent travel arrangements will realize when they go to rebook this… in addition to (in many cases) cheaper flights, with change fees covered by NCL, they may not need a hotel room in hong kong at all. let me explain. Because of the time difference and the duration of the flight, most flights from the USA land in hong kong sometime between 6 AM and 4 PM. and while i would never recommend flying in on the day of a cruise, here it makes little difference. the revised itinerary has the ship overnighting in hong kong on the first night and leaving late in the afternoon of the next day.  so, even if you were to have a delayed flight, you’d have over 24 hours to catch up and get to the ship.

 

for some people, including me, this horrible bad terrible disappointing bungled change in cities may actually save the cost of a night’s hotel.

 

in the end, i chose to continue with my plans. i’ve never been on the spirit; i hear wonderful things about the spirit and i really wanted to sail her.  yes, it’s horribly inconvenient, and I’ll have to get back to manila another time to visit my friends, but it ain’t all darkness and despair.