Fully 1/2 of itinerary switch/deleted, no refund of fee to change date or ship

[dexddd]

10 hours ago, kasimir said:

After hearing so many stories this year on cruisecritic about NCL changing/cancelling ports after final payment for BS reasons (like environmental reasons), I also truly believe this is intentional bait and switch tactic for NCL to increase their profits.
Especially when only providing a $50 OBC as compensation, which to me is NCL waiving to us customers with one finger. 
 

I mean, it wasn’t too long ago (May 2023) that our NCL Iceland cruise got caught in a storm and the captain wasn’t able to make one of the ports for safety and weather conditions, which is completely fair. 
But we were surprised when a day later we all received an apologetic letter in the cabin, explaining the situation, and where NCL would offer support if required, FCC, 50% discount on our next cruise and a second 25% discount coupon. 
This showed us that the company cares for their customers and goes a long way and because of things like that and our up to then positive experiences with NCL, made us book another NCL cruise right away and we also used to recommend NCL to our friends and family. Not anymore! 
 

At this point, it looks like the itinerary at NCL became optional and they really don’t care about their customers. 
Even if it’s technically the cruise lines right to change the itinerary, but NCL’s behavior and strategy this year from the many concerning stories shared on here is highly unethical. And we will not be supporting this kind of behavior and are also taking our money elsewhere. 

That's great.  We missed a port on an Iceland cruise too apparently due to weather.  Only announcement was. ..don't line up at guest services and berate them..Asked for refund of port fees and nothing. 

[Goldenknight]

Oopsie daisy.... here we go:

 

If whiners don't like NCL, yet  continue to post repeatedly, it's a red flag.  So many red flags, enough to make a bunting!

You may have your opinions, but you can't have your own facts.  

Hundreds of thousands of cruisers choose NCL, and will continue to do so, including us

Edited Saturday at 08:07 PM by Goldenknight

[aussie cruzer]

On 10/19/2024 at 2:31 AM, herbanrenewal said:

"To continue elevating the quality of the overall guest experience while positively impacting society and the environment. As we continue to optimize itineraries for fuel efficiency, as a part of our commitment to the environment and sustainability efforts, we have adjusted the itinerary as shown below."    Virtually every day changed, dropping 3 port, adding 3 at sea days. Have they done right by me - I am to receive $50 OBC.

That is crazy by Ncl,I totally understand your displeasure…I’m booked on that itinerary,I will be considering cancelling with the cost paid being over $4K p/p…missing 3 ports would make that cruise unviable.

[newbiewaves]

Having been to many of the ports on the original itinerary I wouldn't have worried too much as not exactly bucket list. Travel any which way is getting hit by wars and climate change zealots. Eventually we will be guilt hit for daring to travel anywhere! Ports also know when ships arrive and rip passenger off with staged excursions. We mainly cruise for the onboard experience especially if all inclusive gratuities included ports are just an added bonus but visits often so short cant do much anyway.

[UKstages]

3 hours ago, Goldenknight said:

If whiners don't like NCL, yet  continue to post repeatedly, it's a red flag.

 

OK, i'll bite. what do you believe these red flags indicate?

 

tell me, have you never had a challenging "tough love" conversation with somebody who has disappointed you?

 

it is precisely because many of those you likely call "whiners" love NCL that they take to cruise critic (and fill out surveys and onboard comment cards) to express their displeasure with the cruise line, as service and the onboard experience continues to decline. some believe their words can help to reverse a sinking ship, so to speak.

 

3 hours ago, Goldenknight said:

You may have your opinions, but you can't have your own facts.  

 

thank you, senator moynihan.

 

which facts about NCL are "whiners" presenting that aren't true?

 

2 hours ago, newbiewaves said:

Travel any which way is getting hit by wars and climate change zealots.

 

i don't think a single person here has complained about an NCL port cancellation due to war or civil unrest. that's not relevant to the discussion at hand. 

 

i know what climate change is. and i know what a zealot is. but i have no idea what a climate change zealot is or how they might impact NCL itineraries.

[newbiewaves]

I thought i read one of the reasons for itinerary change was to be a more 'eco' route maybe i'm wrong. Several lines have had to change itineraries due to routes impacted by Israel Lebanon et al. It would be convenient for some to use that as an excuse even if not actually stated. Climate change zealots are those that are convinced we are all going to die unless we revert to caveman living and emit nothing (before anyone says fire emits hey ho) Certain countries have embraced this to the detriment of their people whilst the biggest offenders laugh and carry on. Cruises imply some 'entitlement', how dare they use fuel sailing miles to give enjoyment. Many countries are now tourist haters and impose fees for passengers helping their economy. They blame the fees on ecological reasons. It could be in the future more ports of call charge a penalty to land and we cant blame lines for saying 'ok we wont visit'. Bali has 2 fees to go there for a few hours! We also dont know what ports charge the ships to dock, maybe that impacts itineraries. Some cruise lines have themselves to blame building mammoth 5000+ passenger ships. Anyway back to the NCL issue it is poor show if they will not give a full credit for another cruise with a better itinerary given they have made the changes before sailing. Our insurance pays for missed ports even if another replaces it however that is after sailing. Another NCL bait switch is low prices but by the time you add drink packages and gratuities and maybe a slight cabin upgrade they can even be more expensive than others, then also need to check if flights included...minefield.

[Krazy Kat]

3 hours ago, UKstages said:

i know what climate change is. and i know what a zealot is. but i have no idea what a climate change zealot is or how they might impact NCL itineraries.

 

Look to the protesters at the Port in Amsterdam.  They were successful in shutting down the port and sending cruise ships on their way to find another port.  Some conspiracy folks on this post may create a story how NCL was behind the protesters as a "bait and switch".

[UKstages]

oh!

 

in other words, a climate change "zealot" is simply somebody who believes in science and believes in climate change and understands the negative effects of tourism, particularly the problems caused by cruise ship travel, which has a carbon footprint far greater than any other form of travel.

 

hey, officer krupke, i'm a "zealot" and i didn't even know it!

 

i live in new york, a few blocks from the manhattan cruise ship terminal and can attest to the lower quality of air in my neighborhood, largely caused by cruise ships docking nearby several days a week. 

 

regarding amsterdam, it wasn't zealots or protestors that shut down the cruise ship terminal (which isn't actually closed and won't be until 2035). it was city officials who voted to do that to reduce carbon emissions, much the same way venice did. they will slowly phase cruise ship travel out, but 190 ships may still visit this year, down to 100 in 2026. they will also require ships to use shore power, which will be a requirement in NYC - and many other cities, as well - in the next few years..

[ChiCruzr]

Amsterdam, NYC, and Venice will do just fine with fewer tourists.  What about those ports of call where a significant portion of their GDP relies on tourism, often via cruise ships?

[smallestdog]

On 10/19/2024 at 12:31 AM, herbanrenewal said:

"To continue elevating the quality of the overall guest experience while positively impacting society and the environment. As we continue to optimize itineraries for fuel efficiency, as a part of our commitment to the environment and sustainability efforts, we have adjusted the itinerary as shown below."    Virtually every day changed, dropping 3 port, adding 3 at sea days. Have they done right by me - I am to receive $50 OBC.

 

The changes are quite similar to the changes made to my itinerary earlier this year in February 2024 for the Dawn sailing from Cape Town to Port Louis. 

Extra sea day instead of overnight in Richard's Bay,  all Mozambique ports dropped, Fort Dauphin dropped, Nosy Be and Antisiranana as substitutes.

So it looks like the changed itinerary is not a one-off

 

[njkate]

It’s happening way too much with ridiculous reasons instances are not just reported here, that other social media site has plenty!! If I wanted to just float around the sea for a few days I’d book a cheap Carribean cruise, not spend thousands, air fare to fly half way across the planet!!! 
Fuel efficiency?? Give me a break when you were planning an itinerary to sell you dam well know it’s x amount of miles from one port to another and the approximate fuel costs. 
 

if NCL continues on this trajectory sooner or later it’s going to come back to bite them in the ass!

Ive already cancelled a European cruise for next year and opted for a land based one, at least I know I’ll get to where I want to go 
 

 

[kasimir]

2 hours ago, smallestdog said:

 

The changes are quite similar to the changes made to my itinerary earlier this year in February 2024 for the Dawn sailing from Cape Town to Port Louis. 

Extra sea day instead of overnight in Richard's Bay,  all Mozambique ports dropped, Fort Dauphin dropped, Nosy Be and Antisiranana as substitutes.

So it looks like the changed itinerary is not a one-off

 

 

The biggest issue we have with the changes are that they are being made right after final payment date, giving the passengers no more options to change without a financial penalty, while with many of these operational schedule changes it looks that NCL knows about these way ahead but chooses to communicate right after final payment date. 

[kasimir]

8 hours ago, ChiCruzr said:

Amsterdam, NYC, and Venice will do just fine with fewer tourists.  What about those ports of call where a significant portion of their GDP relies on tourism, often via cruise ships?

Trust me, those places that rely on tourism are not complaining and are happy with cruise ships coming. I speak out of experience as we live in Curacao and here it is headline (positive) news when we receive record ships (or tourists). 

We live in an affluent neighborhood on the island, where atleast half the houses have been transformed to be AirBnB rentals. While people for example in Barcelona complain about that, we embrace it, the tourists make the island more enjoyable and lively and the value of our home has increased quite a bit. 

We as islanders know that its part of the game if you want to succeed in tourism and especially in the Caribbean you will not see any climate or overtourism protests. 

 

But that doesn't mean we don't have to think about making tourism more sustainable, but that needs to happen on a political and corporate level and not by punishing the individual tourists and scaring them away. 

[commodoredave]

I would never take a cruise with NCL mainly for destinations - there are way better options out there. Having said that, I would be very disappointed if 50% of the advertised ports of call were cancelled. It just doesn’t seem reasonable, especially outside of conflict zones. In addition, cancelling several ports after final payment seems a bit sleazy. 

[Cruisecorn]

On 10/19/2024 at 3:05 PM, Goldenknight said:

Oopsie daisy.... here we go:

 

If whiners don't like NCL, yet  continue to post repeatedly, it's a red flag.  So many red flags, enough to make a bunting!

You may have your opinions, but you can't have your own facts.  

Hundreds of thousands of cruisers choose NCL, and will continue to do so, including us

So glad you have the choice, and now that we know how NCL does business of late so do we. We will be choosing another line that delivers what they advertise in the future, but don’t understand why you care if others let people know their experience. 

[kalyps]

On 9/18/2024 at 3:02 PM, complawyer said:

since we've sailed to many of the ports listed for the luna, im not rushing to book her, and as long as it's only caribbean sailings, probably not at all (to each his own)

 

just remember before you rush to book, june through nov is usually hurrican season In the Caribbean.

 

so, while it might feel/sound exciting to sail on a brand new ship, Caveat Emptor !

 

On 10/16/2024 at 9:17 PM, living at the beach said:

I am Sapphire on NCL and it has been my cruise line to go for many years. But after my last two cruises on CLL where on the  Viva Beetlejuice was canceled on the last cruise before it was supposed to be over, and on the Breakaway where the only good show was Syd Normans with lines 45 minutes to an hour, I took my first cruise on Carnival in many years and really enjoyed their shows and music with small dance floors all over the ship. Have been reading that Royal Caribbean has great entertainment. Now NCL is substituting game shows that you need to pay to play, I am very sad. I am hoping that they will put on better options in 2025. I have booked a 14 day Caribbean cruise on the Pearl and will find read or play video games to amuse me but that is so yuck. 
 I know many people don’t care about the entertainment but lots of us do. Will I have to totally switch to other lines? NCL has a reputation of great entertainment but all that has changed 

 

 

On 10/18/2024 at 2:41 PM, DCGuy64 said:

Agreed. Also, a reminder that if you cruise SOLELY for the ports, you may get disappointed. As it happens, my wife and I DO cruise for the ports, and it's very rare one gets missed. Sadly, this forum is reflective of a general trend in online discussions, which is to cherry-pick a few unfortunate exceptions out of 100s of 1,000s and then conclude "it happens all the time." Yeah, no, it happens occasionally, that's the reality.

 

Edited Monday at 12:07 AM by kalyps
Error

[kalypso333]

Boy, with the odds of this happening being so small I’m a total loser. 
 

Happened twice in a year. 
 

I’ve walked to another line. Maybe I’ll find better luck…

[Capitan Obvious]

12 hours ago, Cruisecorn said:

So glad you have the choice, and now that we know how NCL does business of late so do we. We will be choosing another line that delivers what they advertise in the future, but don’t understand why you care if others let people know their experience. 

 

"...but don’t understand why..." JMHO, but perhaps you should address the lack of understanding before you comment. At the very least it will help to ensure that you are less surprised by the reactions of others.

[Cruisecorn]

8 minutes ago, Capitan Obvious said:

 

"...but don’t understand why..." JMHO, but perhaps you should address the lack of understanding before you comment. At the very least it will help to ensure that you are less surprised by the reactions of others.

So why is it upsetting for others to hear an opinion on NCL’s actions when we as individuals decide to share our experience so others have the knowledge to make up their minds BEFORE they book and have to be stuck on a radically changed itinerary or pay a penalty because this seems to be common practice now with NCL? 

[mimigatt]

My husband and I were also booked on this disastrous voyage.  First off, I KNEW that there was going to be something up with Cozumel, and this was well before the penalty phase.  When I talked to the shore excursion desk, they said there were 8 ships scheduled to be in port and that was too many.  They had deleted all shore excursions bookable for Cozumel...so I just figured they would either stay at sea or substitute something like Costa Maya or Playa del Carmen.  So AFTER the penalty phase, they do this horrible and nearly total port change.  They took away Antigua and Tortola along with Grand Cayman and Cozumel.  They substituted full days in St. Kitts (just was there) and Montego Bay (just was there).  They chopped San Juan to an arrival of 11am so now you can't get to the rainforest so that killed that port and added St. Thomas from 7am to 2pm...I'm not a shopper and that doesn't leave enough time to get over to St. John to snorkel.  So I also lost $1156 with my 25% cancel fee..and they really only gave you like a weeks notice before it went to 50%.  I was shocked to read many of the replies that say that this is normal for NCL.  I cancelled my other cruise (another $150 down the drain) and will NEVER cruise with them again...and I go back with them from when they sailed the Norway.  Why would anyone spend $7000 to go to places you have no desire to go to.  SHAME ON THEM!!!!!

[cruiseny4life]

10 minutes ago, mimigatt said:

My husband and I were also booked on this disastrous voyage.  First off, I KNEW that there was going to be something up with Cozumel, and this was well before the penalty phase.  When I talked to the shore excursion desk, they said there were 8 ships scheduled to be in port and that was too many.  They had deleted all shore excursions bookable for Cozumel...so I just figured they would either stay at sea or substitute something like Costa Maya or Playa del Carmen.  So AFTER the penalty phase, they do this horrible and nearly total port change.  They took away Antigua and Tortola along with Grand Cayman and Cozumel.  They substituted full days in St. Kitts (just was there) and Montego Bay (just was there).  They chopped San Juan to an arrival of 11am so now you can't get to the rainforest so that killed that port and added St. Thomas from 7am to 2pm...I'm not a shopper and that doesn't leave enough time to get over to St. John to snorkel.  So I also lost $1156 with my 25% cancel fee..and they really only gave you like a weeks notice before it went to 50%.  I was shocked to read many of the replies that say that this is normal for NCL.  I cancelled my other cruise (another $150 down the drain) and will NEVER cruise with them again...and I go back with them from when they sailed the Norway.  Why would anyone spend $7000 to go to places you have no desire to go to.  SHAME ON THEM!!!!!

This all stinks! Unfortunately, you learned the hard way, that you cannot trust NCL to cruise to the ports they claim they are going to go. Their itineraries are mere suggestions. Alas, I still enjoy NCL, so give them my money. If I want to really go somewhere, it's a land vacation. Maybe a Princess cruise to Alaska in the future, but for now (I've researched a lot of lines), NCL still offers a product I deeply value. 

 

Your experience is terrible and I'm so sorry! Again, unfortunately, cancellations don't even penalize NCL as they can take some of your money and just resell your room. Too bad. I'm glad you learned when you could still get some money back. Best wishes to you! 

[sanger727]

I haven't been on an ocean cruise since 2018.  We decided to take a cruise this year so I've spent alot of time on various boards trying to figure out what each line is like today.

 

Norwegian has always been our favorite line because we like freestyle cruising.

 

This is the only board that has been inundated with complaints about major itinerary changes.  We have decided that if we are cruising for ports, we will absolutely not book with Norwegian.  However, we did decide to book this years cruise with them. It was a fantastic deal with the inclusion of the drinks and specialty dining compared to the any of the other similar cruises.  We are going just for a getaway, not for the ports, so we are fine it they are changed.  But I appreciate all of the warnings about itinerary changes so that we can go into it aware that it is more likely to happen on NCL.

[DCGuy64]

On 10/19/2024 at 7:32 AM, CruiseMH said:

for reasons that they did for sure know already months ago.

I'm sorry, but this is the part I don't buy. Nearly everyone who has complained about this makes the same assertion, but there's no proof. No proof = I don't believe it. Unless and until someone produces actual proof that NCL KNEW about the changes and DELIBERATELY waited until after final payment date, I refuse to believe it. There's an expression that "correlation isn't causation." And it's a good expression for a case like this.

[UKstages]

oh, my.

 

the work of karl pearson, francis galton and auguste bravais does not apply here, as there is no “causation.” NCL has chosen to make late announcements independently, most likely as part of a scheme to defraud its customers.

 

causation is the act of causing something, whereby one event directly contributes or creates another. the two things being discussed here are that NCL cancels ports and that those port cancellations or changes typically are announced after final payment date.

 

nobody is saying that the canceling of ports causes late announcements. nor is anybody saying that late announcements cause port cancellations. there is no causal relationship. there does appear to be a correlation, however.
 

a correlation is an association between two pieces of data. we have empirical data that says NCL cancels ports, and we have empirical data that says most cancellation announcements occur after final payment. we are free to find a correlation there, based on repeated observation of those two things.

 

the data we’ve collected is the proof.

 

you sleep during a rain storm and aren’t woken by thunder. you have no idea it rained. yet when you go out the next day, there are broken tree limbs on the roadways, your car is wet and there are puddles everywhere. it would be foolhardy to insist it didn’t rain because there is no “proof” and you didn’t see it rain.
 

similarly, it would be foolhardy to conclude that there is no correlation between NCL’s late announcements and its cancellations of ports simply because they haven’t issued a press release saying “we’re announcing a bunch of port cancellations after final payment date because we’re attempting to defraud our customers and make it inconvenient and expensive for them to cancel so we have a greater likelihood of retaining their funds.”
 

they’re just not going to issue such a statement.

 

there will be no “proof” to satisfy some of the good people of this forum unless there is a class action lawsuit. 

[RocketMan275]

2 hours ago, UKstages said:

similarly, it would be foolhardy to conclude that there is no correlation between NCL’s late announcements and its cancellations of ports simply because they haven’t issued a press release saying “we’re announcing a bunch of port cancellations after final payment date because we’re attempting to defraud our customers and make it inconvenient and expensive for them to cancel so we have a greater likelihood of retaining their funds.”

No one is arguing that this correlation does not exist.  The argument is the lack of proof that NCL is purposefully taking these actions to defraud their customers.