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

[edspec]

Great post @UKstages.  

[mking8288]

This is getting noticed elsewhere - news traveled and pretty sure they did facts-checking and asked questions.  Feel free to decide, for your convenience, of course and those that disagree, why not contact cruisehive to express your opinion and dispute, good luck too. 

 

https://www.cruisehive.com/norwegian-cruise-line-changes-bucket-list-itineraries/148309

[Wayward Son]

On 10/20/2024 at 6:50 AM, njkate said:

If I wanted to just float around the sea for a few days I’d book a cheap Carribean cruise, not spend thousands

 

I'd float around anywhere other than the Caribbean. To each their own.

 

[One More for the Road]

On 10/19/2024 at 6:46 PM, UKstages said:

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.

 

Correct. They are just whining because, you know, that's what they do. Whiners whine. Cruisers cruise.

 

 

[QuestionEverything]

Over the years there has been plenty of complaints on the Oceania board about similar tactics used - Oceania is owned by NCL.

Oceania, in January 2024, announced a 1 hour shortening of each port for "environmental" reasons, ah BS. 

I personally have had ports deleted while on board due to "operational reasons" and ports deleted before the cruise.

Suffice it to say, I will not cruise with any NCL cruise line going forward.

 

Previous posters have well documented the obvious deliberate NCL decisions that harm paid customers.

[Capitan Obvious]

39 minutes ago, QuestionEverything said:

Over the years there has been plenty of complaints on the Oceania board about similar tactics used - Oceania is owned by NCL.

Oceania, in January 2024, announced a 1 hour shortening of each port for "environmental" reasons, ah BS. 

I personally have had ports deleted while on board due to "operational reasons" and ports deleted before the cruise.

Suffice it to say, I will not cruise with any NCL cruise line going forward.

 

Previous posters have well documented the obvious deliberate NCL decisions that harm paid customers.

 

Despite the underlining, NCL does not own Oceania. Both NCL and Oceania are owned by NCLH. 

[herbanrenewal]

10 hours ago, One More for the Road said:

 

Correct. They are just whining because, you know, that's what they do. Whiners whine. Cruisers cruise.

 

 

Why the pejorative term? When others have a point of view differing from yours is it necessary for you to "whine" about their desire to express their opinion, frustration? The world will be a better place when divergent opinion are heard, considered, evaluated without insulting anyone with opposing point of view.

 

[sanger727]

17 hours ago, DCGuy64 said:

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.

 

One of two things is true.

1. NCL is intentionally waiting until after final payment date to make undesired cruise changes

2. NCL is terrible at planning cruise ship itineraries

 

Take your pick, neither is good. 

[vacation44]

7 minutes ago, sanger727 said:

 

One of two things is true.

1. NCL is intentionally waiting until after final payment date to make undesired cruise changes

2. NCL is terrible at planning cruise ship itineraries

 

Take your pick, neither is good. 

I pick "1".

[herbanrenewal]

18 hours ago, DCGuy64 said:

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.

I'm not sure if this makes a difference as a level of correlation but many have found that Cruisemapper.com does not show a particular ship in port when the published itinerary indicates it will be there. Then after final payment, low and behold, cruisemapper was correct. This has changed my booking paradigm - I will now look to see if my ship is booked where it is advertised to be before looking for independent tours.

[QuestionEverything]

1 hour ago, sanger727 said:

 

One of two things is true.

1. NCL is intentionally waiting until after final payment date to make undesired cruise changes

2. NCL is terrible at planning cruise ship itineraries

 

Take your pick, neither is good. 

100%, evidence is there for all to see.

After final payment, then they change ports.

Disgusting. 

[Capitan Obvious]

Well, it would seem logical that unexpected itinerary changes would, by definition, occur after final payment. 

 

If a person finds that hard to accept, then the simple solution is to not book until the itinerary is final. You aren't "required" to book far in advance, if you're sensitive to changes, then just delay your booking until the itinerary is set. 

[cruiseny4life]

3 hours ago, sanger727 said:

 

One of two things is true.

1. NCL is intentionally waiting until after final payment date to make undesired cruise changes

2. NCL is terrible at planning cruise ship itineraries

 

Take your pick, neither is good. 

Either option means NCLH is a poorly managed corporation. They're either ethically compromised or don't have smart people running their operation.

[RocketMan275]

3 hours ago, sanger727 said:

 

One of two things is true.

1. NCL is intentionally waiting until after final payment date to make undesired cruise changes

2. NCL is terrible at planning cruise ship itineraries

 

Take your pick, neither is good. 

There is a third option. 

NCL knows more about planning itineraries than the average Platinum poster.

[Capitan Obvious]

11 minutes ago, RocketMan275 said:

There is a third option. 

NCL knows more about planning itineraries than the average Platinum poster.

 

Wondering if "average Platinum" is simply repetitive?

 

With three levels below, and three levels above, Platium is the very definition of average...right in the middle. Kind of like getting a "C" grade in school. The way people brag on it, you'd think Platium was some sort of accomplishment.

[JSar]

2 hours ago, Capitan Obvious said:

Well, it would seem logical that unexpected itinerary changes would, by definition, occur after final payment. 

 

If a person finds that hard to accept, then the simple solution is to not book until the itinerary is final. You aren't "required" to book far in advance, if you're sensitive to changes, then just delay your booking until the itinerary is set. 

Now THAT would be too logical.

 

Lesson learned here? Book a cruise AFTER final payment is due AND the final itinerary is confirmed OR be willing to be flexible when changes happen. But even if you wait until after the itinerary is confirmed... there could still be changes due to unforeseen circumstances... so again... be willing to be flexible when changes happen. But regardless of when you book, which cruise line you book, and which itinerary you select... once you book the cruise, the itinerary is out of your control. That is the nature of booking ANY tour/cruise. You are a prisoner of the company, captain of a ship, or tour guide... you are going where they take you. And that isn't always where you want to go. 

 

Not willing to be flexible when changes happen that are out of your control? Then book an independent land vacation where you ARE in control of the itinerary a vast majority of the time (excluding unforeseen circumstances). If you CANNOT miss a port at all or on a certain day or a certain time? Book an independent land vacation to visit that location.

 

If all these itinerary changes make your squeamish... there are other options to cruising with NCL or other cruise lines. 

 

Me? If I paid for a cruise - I will find a way to make the best of it - even when my favorite port is dropped and/or itinerary is changed. I can tell you that I always have a better vacation when I go into it with a positive attitude and am willing to adapt to any and all circumstances thrown at me. Choose to be miserable? You are going to be miserable.   

[CruiseMH]

22 hours ago, DCGuy64 said:

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..

 

NCL gives the proof/reason by themselves. In many many cases they are mentioning "fuel saving" as the official reason for itinerary changes. But the distance of a specific itinerary is exactly the same as it was when the planned it months or years ago. Yes, the continents on earth are still moving but not that much.;)

So they knew the exact distances and they also knew the average fuel consumption of their ships. So they knew how much fuel they would need for a specific itinerary. I don`t know exactly how extreme the fluctuation in fuel price is (especially in the one they are using) but if this would be the case how do they know it 4 months in advance ?

So at least the reason "fuel savings" is for me something they for sure know months in advance(if not from the beginning of the planning)

Any other official reason given can of course be discussed or speculated about whether they knew it earlier or not.(and i also tend to think that NCL doesn`t change itineraries just for their own fun )

 

 

Edited Tuesday at 06:07 PM by CruiseMH

[Capitan Obvious]

11 minutes ago, JSar said:

Now THAT would be too logical.

 

Lesson learned here? Book a cruise AFTER final payment is due AND the final itinerary is confirmed OR be willing to be flexible when changes happen. But even if you wait until after the itinerary is confirmed... there could still be changes due to unforeseen circumstances... so again... be willing to be flexible when changes happen. But regardless of when you book, which cruise line you book, and which itinerary you select... once you book the cruise, the itinerary is out of your control. That is the nature of booking ANY tour/cruise. You are a prisoner of the company, captain of a ship, or tour guide... you are going where they take you. And that isn't always where you want to go. 

 

Not willing to be flexible when changes happen that are out of your control? Then book an independent land vacation where you ARE in control of the itinerary a vast majority of the time (excluding unforeseen circumstances). If you CANNOT miss a port at all or on a certain day or a certain time? Book an independent land vacation to visit that location.

 

If all these itinerary changes make your squeamish... there are other options to cruising with NCL or other cruise lines. 

 

Me? If I paid for a cruise - I will find a way to make the best of it - even when my favorite port is dropped and/or itinerary is changed. I can tell you that I always have a better vacation when I go into it with a positive attitude and am willing to adapt to any and all circumstances thrown at me. Choose to be miserable? You are going to be miserable.   

 

Very true. I've often heard that the first thing that you should pack for a cruise is your flexibility.

[DCGuy64]

I've still seen no evidence that would convince me that the cruise line is deliberating misleading anyone, cheating people, pulling a fast one, etc. People can think what they like, I'm going to keep on booking cruises and dealing with any changes as they come. Change is inevitable, so either prepare for that or be miserable, the choice is yours. I choose to be happy.

[DCGuy64]

20 hours ago, RocketMan275 said:

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.

Exactly, well said, @RocketMan275! 👏👏👏

[shof515]

7 hours ago, sanger727 said:

 

One of two things is true.

1. NCL is intentionally waiting until after final payment date to make undesired cruise changes

2. NCL is terrible at planning cruise ship itineraries

 

Take your pick, neither is good. 

I recently got back from a Norwegian Breakaway sailing to Canada/New England, it was suppose to stop at Bar Harbor and NCL keep advertising it as a port stop. a month before sail date, Norwegian made a itinerary change removing that port and adding in Boston  

 

To make things even more odd/strange is back in March when the port released their ship schedule, Breakaway was not listed to stop at Bar Harbor and other port schedules had the breakaway port of call times switched by a couple of hours to an afternoon/late afternoon arrival. Final payment for this cruise was due in June 

 

It was not until that official itinerary change from Norwegian a month before sail date that the new itinerary matched the port times from the official port schedule. All of the itinerary changes was made due to the same BS reason of trying to save fuel

 

based on my experience, Norwegian intentionally waited until after final payment and a month before sail date to make the changes official 

 

This is a standard typical Canada/New England itinerary with stops in Newport, Portland, Bar Harbor, St John and Halifax, nothing unusually about this itinerary so its not terrible planning and they do these itinerary every year for many years.  A bigger terrible planning was having both the Breakaway and the Sky tender at Bar Harbor. Unfortunately for the breakaway, it was this ship that had to drop the port call causing the itinerary changes 

 

Norwegian already has a "grandfather" ships for Bar Harbor for the next couple of years and should not be effected by the new cruise ship limitations for this. Cruises for 2027/2028 will be effected by these new limitations 

 

[hoops71]

I am having a hard time figuring out how common this problem is in reality.  My wife and I are have now been on 19 NCL cruises all over the world. (Asia, Europe, Alaska, Caribbean, Bermuda, Northeast, Baja etc.)  In all that time we have missed two ports.  Grenada would not let the Epic dock during COVID.  Barcelona had a fisherman's strike that blocked the port.(I feel like we could have knocked those smaller boats aside).

 

Our most recent cruise was on Breakaway on October 6th.  People assured me for a year we would not stop in Bar Harbor.  We made the stop in Bar Harbor. (It was lovely).

 

I realize others have had varying degrees of disappointment with NCL and port cancellations and a different experience.  For example, the poster who had the beginning and ending points on their Asia cruise changed I believe is rightfully angry.

 

All of this is to say, how common is this versus how often are the cruises delivered as advertised.  Complaining parties are much more likely to post, than satisfied cruisers.  It would be helpful if the Cruise Industry had some reporting mechanism on this issue similar to airlines.  When I book a flight, I can look up the airlines on-time and cancellation rates.  Additionally, the website will normally tell me the on-time percentage success of that particular flight.  One could then look up the success rates of each cruise line, ship or port.  It could be that NCL's successful port rate is 98%, or it could be 80%.  I have now way of telling.  Based on the CC boards I would think it was less that 50%. But, based on my own experience it should be higher.  Once we had such numbers we could compare it to other cruise lines and plan accordingly.

 

Now is the part where someone tells me I am an idiot and this data and website already exist somewhere.

[Ozmodiar]

I think this has become a topic because it seems like a fairly recent, as in the last year or two, issue that started to be noticed. I've sailed on NCL for 20 years and have read this forum for 10 years (but rarely posted) and two years ago I would have this wasn't an issue. So, I think talking about how many trips were changed after final payment in the past is not the issue, the issue is the current and future state of NCL plans. I find things like an hour change here and there, adjusting the order of ports, and relatively close port changes (like Malaga for Motril, different to be sure but some overlap in places to get to) to be things to accept, but this seems at times to go beyond that. 

 

It was mentioned above to not book until the itinerary is "final". When is that exactly? Many use the defense NCL can change the itinerary at any time - if that is the case it can never be final, and if isn't going to be final by final payment, when will it be?

 

My own suspicion is the NCL planners overreached on getting to many smaller or more obscure ports, on journeys they never did before (which they seemed to promote a lot of the last couple of years), and it hasn't worked out in reality when it came to securing ports and excursions and tidal issues and so on. Given this, the decision that was the least disruptive - to NCL - was to wait until after final payment to make the changes. Because the alternative might have resulted in many cancelations.

 

[Turtles06]

2 hours ago, shof515 said:

Norwegian already has a "grandfather" ships for Bar Harbor for the next couple of years and should not be effected by the new cruise ship limitations for this.

Norwegian had the Breakaway going to Bar Harbor in Sept. 2025, but it’s the Getaway that will actually be doing those cruises. I realize the ships are the same size, but what’s your basis for saying the Getaway will be allowed to tender there?  Thanks. 

[UKstages]

once again, i am left gobsmacked and can only exclaim "oh, my."

 

(at least that's the only thing i can say in a public forum.)

 

so many straw men being fought here; so much deflection.

 

if they can't make a sensible argument defending NCL's fraudulent behavior, the good people of this forum attack the latitudes tier status of the poster! as if that had anything to do with the price of hash browns in "harry and david's" c-suite office.

 

they can't defend NCL's deceptive business practices, so they say that travelers must be flexible, which is all well and good... until one realizes that nobody is resistant to flexibility... when an earthquake or weather event or war causes an itinerary to be changed, everybody in this thread agrees that one must go with the flow. what is being objected to here is the deliberate and willful advertising of itineraries that NCL has no intention of delivering. 

 

the good people of this forum repeatedly remind us that once you book, the itinerary is out of your control. well, putting aside for the moment that the itinerary was never under the control of individual travelers, nobody here is disputing this. what we are disputing is that NCL knew long before many of us booked - and long before final payment was due - that they had no intention of making good on these fictitious itineraries. that's the issue. the good people of this forum should stop edumicating others on the cruise contract. we're all familiar with the terms of the cruise contract. we're simply stating that NCL's actions are so indefensible and their behavior so outlandish as to make the contract null and void. there are two or more parties to a contract. and when one of them has been found to not be operating in good faith, it often invalidates the contract.

 

the good people of this forum keep demanding "proof," then when proof is proffered, they reject it saying it isn't proof it all. it's not the right kind of proof. similarly, they reject all personal experiences as one-offs (or two-offs, or three-offs, or four-offs, or seventeen-offs).

 

many of the good people of this forum inexplicably keep urging others not to sail NCL. good riddance, they say: "please never show your trash-talking, cookie-loving, veuve cliquot-swilling, itinerary-clinging, premium plus buying, platinum face around these here parts again!"

 

sad.

 

Edited Tuesday at 11:39 PM by UKstages