Did NCL make a big mistake using the NCLA brand

[electricron]

I think that as long as a particular ship remains American flagged, it would continue to enjoy the benefits of the PSA. But once a particular ship is reflagged to another nation, it loses PSA benefits.

Except for the limitations imposed on where they could sail, the only changes to the PSA was to allow NCL to American flag three foreign-built "passenger" ships. As long as the ships, or ship remains under the American flag, it will continue to enjoy the PSA benefits, with the limitations placed upon it.

 

That's the reason refurbishing the SS United States may happen, gtetting the full benefits of the PSA without any legal restrictions.

 

Obviously, NCL has an agressive plan to grow the Hawaiian cruise market. Therefore NCL probably already has plans already figured out what they plan to do if the market doesn't grow as fast as they planned. It's also apparent the relative low fares is a part of NCL's plans to growing the market. As demand increases, so will the fares.

[electricron]

I know this comment is half tongue-in-cheek, but it is also half-serious. Can NCLA hire workers with green cards? How about workers with fake SSNs? The way I see it you could address two problems at the same time - service on NCLA and the illegal immigrant issue.

NCL can hire workers with green cards, as that qualifies the worker as an American worker. Never-the-less, these workers will still be required to join the union and go through all the background checks to work aboard the ships. There's no easy way to skirt the labor laws.

[newmexicoNita]

"I was thinking - American Casual Cruise line - ACCL" quote from shoreguy

 

ACLU= American Cruise Line Union:rolleyes:

Please we wouldn't want anything to do with NCL to be linked with ACLU: I knew someone would think about that.

 

Let's stick with Shoreguys' idea for now. LOL

[dwrist]

:eek: Just a light hearted play on words. Didn't mean it to be taken seriously.

[Goldryder]

The powers at be at Star Cruises need to 'divorce' NCL and NCLA as soon as they can. Set up NCLA under a new name (just as they have with Orient), new website that explains all the differences regarding staffing, autograts etc and websites like these also need to seperate the two individual companies too.

 

This would cut back on all the confusion about which ships which, what crew, what flag etc etc etc

 

It would also cut back on those who have a bad time on either company and then state that they will never sail with NCL/NCLA again not realising that any crap on one company's ship is unlikely to happen on the other.

 

And if, as expected, NCLA does go down the proverbial plughole, it won't be dragging everything else down with it, the ships can be reflagged and recrewed and be swallowed into the NCL fleet thus releasing the older ships to be transferred out to Star, Orient or sold (as per Crown).

 

If the newly seperated company survives and the crews finally pull their corporate acts together, then all's well that ends well.

[sunshine 229]

An interesting side note to this discussion about NCL 'divorcing' itself from NCLA:

just this afternoon I tried calling the NCL reservatrion number to get pricing information about an NCL cruise for a friend. I was on hold for a long time ( about 20 minutes) before I gave up, but during that time I had a chance to listen several times to the canned messages that NCL puts out while they have you on hold.

 

The recordings are pushing the Hawaii cruises, in particular the 'luxurious new Pride of Hawaii'. Throughout, this hawaii cruise is presented as an NCL product. NCLA is not mentioned once nor is there any differentiation that I could find about it being a different kind of cruise or cruise experience. They were also promoting their Alaska cruises and, if had not followed the whole NCL vs NCLA and American flagged ship discussion on the cruise boards, I would have come away with the impression that NCL's Hawaii and Alaska cruises differed only in destination but were products of the same company and could be expected to offer similar services etc.

 

My point being that however much some of us might like to see NCL try to seperate the NCLA product from the more traditional NCL products, that sure does not seem to be the route that NCL is choosing to go.

 

On the other hand, the fact that I waited 20 minutes on the reservations line without getting through, would seem to indicate that NCL is getting a lot of calls and a lot of interest which should be a good sign, of course I can't tell how many of those calls were interested in the Hawaii cruises.

[honestguy]

One thing NCl has in its favor is Hawaii itself. what a great asset to have. They do have the market cornered, and all they need is a slight improvment. they are not as far off from it. Ive been all over the Carb. and its nice but its no Hawaii. I would gladly take the long flight to and from to see it. Its been almost a year since I been there, and I'm dying to go back(this time as a guest lol) the same cant be said for the Carb.

[tomluvsaida]

Yes, and no. One must be able to read between the lines when looking at quarterly reports on profits and losses. For example, the company I work for three years ago had a large one time loss that drove it's stock price down below $11 per share. Today, after a stock split, the stock goes for $60 per share ($120 per share before the stock split). The point being, the core business of the company was unaffected. When looking at cruise line reports, make sure you read the reports carefully and look at year to year same quarter sales and expenses. After all, the cruise business is cyclic, with huge profits when the schools are out, and small profits and loses when schools are in session.

 

I know little about stocks but I do know the quality of the product and the success of the company may not necessarily coincide. If you chose a restaurant this way you would mostly be eating at McDonalds.

[tomluvsaida]

Let me see.........It takes you longer there (8hr)....., the food is bad...., housekeeping stinks..., its more expensive..., and service is lousy.........duh its a no brainer.

 

The food and the housekeeping.......maybe. The expense?????

How manny of the reviews have you read? I've read manny that said the food was great, the housekeeping seems to be hit or miss but for even the bad reviews they got action and polite service when they complained about it. As for the expense, which cruse line are you comparing it too? Every cruse line I saw that did Hawaii was more expensive! My major reason for picking NCL was the price and the freestyle crusing.

[CruisinMK]

Shoreguy -- Thank you so much for the clarification.

It seems as I read thru this thread that the NCLA ships aren't up to par as compared to the NCL ships.

 

 

Pay attention, you are about to get the most important lesson you will ever learn about Cruise Critic. :)

 

 

All of the following participants in this discussion here about NCLA have something in common.

Can you guess what it is?

 

 

1) Shoreguy, who started this NCLA discussion topic, having over 13,000 posts.

 

2) Goldryder, with 1500+ posts, who boldly states here that "NCLA has failed"

 

3) Sunshine229, who frequently comments about NCLA on this forum, most recently warning people about to sail NCLA to have "low expectations"

 

4) Globalizer, with over 10,000 posts, who says "NCLA hasn't worked well"

 

5) Snowman, who says "the food is bad...., housekeeping stinks..., its more expensive..., and service is lousy"

 

The answer is, envelope please.... **drumroll**

None of them has EVER been on any NCLA "pride" ship.

 

Shoreguy has never even been on any cruiseline in Hawaii, not once. :)

 

Reading their comments, you naturally assumed each of them were speaking from their firsthand experience on NCLA ships, but none of them were.

 

You assumed they would have mentioned if they were speaking based on something they heard or read, but none of them did.

 

You can say anything on the internet, accountability and fact checking are rare.

 

I have been on cruise sailings where I distinctly remember coming across nothing but happy people, only to come home and read a review here describing what a nightmare the whole ship was, and how "everyone" was miserable.

 

It is also sad to see wildly inaccurate popular sentiments about cruiselines dissuading people from cruise experiences they would really enjoy. It's even worse when people here are expounding confidently about cruise sailings they haven't even been on.

 

I haven't done a huge amount of cruises, but I have done most mainstream cruiselines without any particular allegiance-- Celebrity, HAL, RCCL, Disney, Carnival, NCL. If I hadn't, I wouldn't know that a great deal of what is said in these forums comparing the lines is utter hooey. I would look at the high post counts, the authoritatively spoken words, the nodding heads, and assume what was said here was generally true.

 

I sailed on the Pride of America in October, and our family looked at each other at the end and said wow, that was a really fantastic amazing cruise. We then booked the Pride of Hawaii maiden voyage 6 months later, which was also fantastic. The people I met on the maiden voyage were all very happy, but I did read a rash of bad reviews for the following sailing on June 5th, think something went wrong there (perhaps the fact that passenger size was suddenly doubled). We have also previously done and liked the NCL Star in Hawaii, which is internationally flagged, but guess what the American flagged ships was better overall. On balance we actually prefer the American crew. Our room stewards were great, one from American Samoa, another from Wisconsin. The only shortcoming for us was occasionally slow dinner service in the main dining hall (and we showed up when it opened). However in the specialty restaurants, you have maitre D's like Blaze from Houston watching the overall service like a hawk, and service/food are just great. Butlers were mostly good, and we received exceptional personal service for breakfast in Cagney's for suite passengers, gal named Karen was amazing with the elderly in our group. The Hawaiian activities offered on the Pride of Hawaii were great, not sure if they kept that pace up after the maiden voyage.

 

I recommend both Pride of Hawaii and Pride of America. The American flagged 7 day itinerary has to be among the absolute best in the industry. The other cruise offerings have an absurd number of sea days (9 of them), or go out to a flat atoll 1000 miles away (fanning, done it). Freestyle really fits Hawaii, who wants to pack and wear a suit here. I have no particular interest in feeling good about a cruise, or seeing NCL do well. I just think it is sad people might be dissuaded from doing PoH or PoAM based on puffery and hearsay, when they really are among the best cruise experiences out there overall.

 

As someone who has lived in Hawaii most of my life, the one thing I'd like to see NCLA do is a better job with Hawaiian theming on the ships. They had a fantastic job with Hawaiian dancers, historical murals (in main dining), and hula/lei/history talk activities on the PoH maiden voyage, i hope they take it even further!! I think people would be more excited about NCLA if they can make it a more distinctly HAWAIIAN experience on board, and less generic. Like to see more people wearing hawaiian shirts and dresses onboard too. :)

[dwrist]

MikeKaye

 

Since you have a little more insight into the situation, are many Hawaiians working for NCLA? My take of this whole NCLA thing was that it was to help the Islands with the job situation. Any comments??:)

[Warbird]

MikeKaye

 

Since you have a little more insight into the situation, are many Hawaiians working for NCLA? My take of this whole NCLA thing was that it was to help the Islands with the job situation. Any comments??:)

 

That's an interesting question and I'd like to hear MikeKaye's comments also.

 

Back in April I sailed on the NCL Wind out of Honolulu. Hawaii was just getting over the 40 days of rain and for reasons I don't remember the homeless people were camping out on the police dept. front lawn.

 

What caught my attention was there were homeless people in Hawaii and unemployment was real low. I don't remember the exact percent of unemployment, but 4 percent sticks in my mind.

 

Now I realize there are many reasons why someone can end up homeless, but I equate homeless to unemployment and with low unemployment it didn't make sense. Also, as a side note, some homeless people want to be homeless.:(

 

In the newspaper there was an article about the topic and companies were offering incentives to get new employees. Bonuses and paid health club memberships are two that come to mind.

 

My take on the job situation is the Hawaian economy is doing real well. I'm fully aware the Hawaian economy is a service type of employment.

 

Vacancy rates in the hotels are down compared to last year. That explained to me why hotel rates are highter then what I thought they would be thinking that their economy was still suffering and there should be some bargains to fill the empty hotel rooms. Anyway, that's my two cents.

 

John

[dwrist]

Warbird--

 

Four percent of a working population, which to my understanding the unemployment rate is based on, would be huge on the Islands. Simply because they have less people than we have here in the states. But like you, I would like MikeKaye's insight into this.

[electricron]

I know little about stocks but I do know the quality of the product and the success of the company may not necessarily coincide. If you chose a restaurant this way you would mostly be eating at McDonalds.

 

I agree, the quality of the food has nothing to do with the profitability of the company. But you quoted me out of context, as I wasn't discussing the quality of the food when I wrote that. I was discussing if NCL would be successful or not in Hawaii, and whether stock prices reflect a company's profitability.

The bottom line (profitability) is important to discussing if a company's is a sucess or not. A company making huge profits and sharing those profits with its stockholders should gather more stock holders, which should cause higher stock prices. But day to day, or quarter to quarter stock prices really don't mean anything in an industry with cyclic business patterns.

 

If you're going to quote, keep to what's being discussed.

[sunshine 229]

Pay attention, you are about to get the most important lesson you will ever learn about Cruise Critic. :)

 

 

All of the following participants in this discussion here about NCLA have something in common.

Can you guess what it is?

 

 

1) Shoreguy, who started this NCLA discussion topic, having over 13,000 posts.

 

2) Goldryder, with 1500+ posts, who boldly states here that "NCLA has failed"

 

3) Sunshine229, who frequently comments about NCLA on this forum, most recently warning people about to sail NCLA to have "low expectations"

 

4) Globalizer, with over 10,000 posts, who says "NCLA hasn't worked well"

 

5) Snowman, who says "the food is bad...., housekeeping stinks..., its more expensive..., and service is lousy"

 

The answer is, envelope please.... **drumroll**

None of them has EVER been on any NCLA "pride" ship.

 

Shoreguy has never even been on any cruiseline in Hawaii, not once. :)

 

Reading their comments, you naturally assumed each of them were speaking from their firsthand experience on NCLA ships, but none of them were.

 

You assumed they would have mentioned if they were speaking based on something they heard or read, but none of them did.

 

You can say anything on the internet, accountability and fact checking are rare.

 

I have been on cruise sailings where I distinctly remember coming across nothing but happy people, only to come home and read a review here describing what a nightmare the whole ship was, and how "everyone" was miserable.

 

It is also sad to see wildly inaccurate popular sentiments about cruiselines dissuading people from cruise experiences they would really enjoy. It's even worse when people here are expounding confidently about cruise sailings they haven't even been on.

 

I haven't done a huge amount of cruises, but I have done most mainstream cruiselines without any particular allegiance-- Celebrity, HAL, RCCL, Disney, Carnival, NCL. If I hadn't, I wouldn't know that a great deal of what is said in these forums comparing the lines is utter hooey. I would look at the high post counts, the authoritatively spoken words, the nodding heads, and assume what was said here was generally true.

 

I sailed on the Pride of America in October, and our family looked at each other at the end and said wow, that was a really fantastic amazing cruise. We then booked the Pride of Hawaii maiden voyage 6 months later, which was also fantastic. The people I met on the maiden voyage were all very happy, but I did read a rash of bad reviews for the following sailing on June 5th, think something went wrong there (perhaps the fact that passenger size was suddenly doubled). We have also previously done and liked the NCL Star in Hawaii, which is internationally flagged, but guess what the American flagged ships was better overall. On balance we actually prefer the American crew. Our room stewards were great, one from American Samoa, another from Wisconsin. The only shortcoming for us was occasionally slow dinner service in the main dining hall (and we showed up when it opened). However in the specialty restaurants, you have maitre D's like Blaze from Houston watching the overall service like a hawk, and service/food are just great. Butlers were mostly good, and we received exceptional personal service for breakfast in Cagney's for suite passengers, gal named Karen was amazing with the elderly in our group. The Hawaiian activities offered on the Pride of Hawaii were great, not sure if they kept that pace up after the maiden voyage.

 

I recommend both Pride of Hawaii and Pride of America. The American flagged 7 day itinerary has to be among the absolute best in the industry. The other cruise offerings have an absurd number of sea days (9 of them), or go out to a flat atoll 1000 miles away (fanning, done it). Freestyle really fits Hawaii, who wants to pack and wear a suit here. I have no particular interest in feeling good about a cruise, or seeing NCL do well. I just think it is sad people might be dissuaded from doing PoH or PoAM based on puffery and hearsay, when they really are among the best cruise experiences out there overall.

 

As someone who has lived in Hawaii most of my life, the one thing I'd like to see NCLA do is a better job with Hawaiian theming on the ships. They had a fantastic job with Hawaiian dancers, historical murals (in main dining), and hula/lei/history talk activities on the PoH maiden voyage, i hope they take it even further!! I think people would be more excited about NCLA if they can make it a more distinctly HAWAIIAN experience on board, and less generic. Like to see more people wearing hawaiian shirts and dresses onboard too. :)

 

 

Comments on a few of your points:

Pay attention, you are about to get the most important lesson you will ever learn about Cruise Critic. :)

 

I agree, if they pay attention to this exchange they probably will learn an important lesson about CC and about internet boards in general.

 

You can say anything on the internet, accountability and fact checking are rare.

 

Very true! You can say your cruise was terrible when it wasn't, you can also say it was great when it wasn't. To take it one step further, you can be who you say you are or you can be some one entirely different.

 

You can be the son of the owner of the cruiseline you are writing glowing reviews about or you can be the owner of a competitive cruiseline to the one you are writing the terrible review about.

 

It is my belief and hope though, that while you may be deceived by any one poster, over time and over a large number of comments and reviews the pattern that emerges will begin to give an accurate picture of what is going on out there.

 

Even if one poster has an atypically good or bad experience on a ship or another poster purposly gives an inaccurate review for whatever secret agenda they may be pursuing, in the long run the numbers will begin to indicate the truth.

 

And there, to my mind, lies the value in the comments of those people you name in your list, the ones with all those posts, the ones who spend a lot of time following the boards and reading hundreds of reviews of a lot of different ships, they are in a great position to see how the reports for one ship compare with the reports for another.

 

Posters like shoreguy ( with whom by the way I often disagree in outlook)

have a long history of reading the NCL board and more knowledge about maritine regulations etc. then many people who have cruised an NCLA ship. He can give information about the American flagging requirements and how that might affect staff and profitability of these ships. All of which I think are important contributions to the ongoing discussion.

 

Reading their comments, you naturally assumed each of them were speaking from their firsthand experience on NCLA ships, but none of them were.

 

You assumed they would have mentioned if they were speaking based on something they heard or read, but none of them did.

 

 

Why would you have assumed that? As far as I have seen none of them (or myself) ever claimed to have been on these ships. I have posted comments like 'from reading a lot of reviews it seems to me that...' I've never posted anything about my personal ( non-existant) experience on any of these ships and, to the best of my knowledge none of the other names on your list has either.

 

I find your post, which seems like an attempt to discredit some long time posters on this board, a little strange, especially on this thread which makes no claim to being a review of a cruise on any of the NCLA ships but is a discussion about a theoretical question of marketing strategy.

 

Are you saying that no one who hasn't cruised on a PO ship is allowed to have an opinion about the branding of the line?

[CruisinMK]

over a large number of comments and reviews the pattern that emerges will begin to give an accurate picture of what is going on out there.

 

Can you get an accurate picture from a discussion of NCLA's quality, where a majority of participants sharing their strong opinions haven't even been on the ships in question, and neglect to mention so?

 

in the long run the numbers will begin to indicate the truth.

 

I don't think adding lots more opinions from those who haven't even been on the ships makes for more truthful understanding of the situation. When someone writes as if they have been on the ship when they haven't, they actually throw the numbers and perceptions off.

 

It's an honest oversight, but it distorts perceptions all the same.

 

And there, to my mind, lies the value in the comments of those people you name in your list, the ones with all those posts, the ones who spend a lot of time following the boards

 

Good folks who spend way too much time here like I do.

They just haven't been on NCLA, when readers might have gotten the false impression they had.

 

Posters like shoreguy have a long history of reading the NCL board and more knowledge about maritine regulations etc. then many people who have cruised an NCLA ship.

 

You'd think I'd have learned my lesson about making smart remarks. Last time he dumped the olive juice in my martini when I wasn't looking.

 

Why would you have assumed that {I went on NCLA}?

 

The moderator of this forum noticed a similar pattern in your NCLA postings:

 

Um...I'm the one that originally asked if you'd cruised on an NCLA ship because you always respond to the threads about it. If I have it correct...you've never cruised on NCLA and you don't have plans to. Got it. I wanted to know because I got the impression that you'd done one of the cruises because you post as if you've done it. Now I know your knowledge comes from other people's comments. We booked a cruise to Hawaii with NCLA and I'm trying to figure out who's been and who hasn't so I can gauge how much weight I give to comments and also know who I can ask questions to. Thanks for straightening that out for me. :)

 

Here's another example. In this discussion, the topic starter specifically asks for those to share their firsthand experiences with American crews on NCLA.

 

 

http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=381329

"I am really nervous about the American crew. Can someone give me some more details about their experiences with NCLA's crew."

 

Each respondant giving feedback shared firsthand experiences as requested, except for yourself. Your comments varied considerably from the others in the discussion, but readers had no way of knowing you actually have never been on an NCLA and never dealt with an American crew. Your comments read as if you have been on the ship, but a couple words would have clarified they were just a reflection on what some others had written elsewhere.

 

I find your post, which seems like an attempt to discredit some long time posters on this board

 

We can do better. We could praise each other for our high post counts, and act as if it every correction were a personal attack, but then our heads would be so big they wouldn't fit through the cabin door.

 

I notice cruise critic habitually misinforms readers, perhaps we need some measure of discrediting, cautioning readers about the quality of information here. We can do better.

 

I'm never going to get a decent martini again.

 

a little strange, especially on this thread which makes no claim to being a review of a cruise on any of the NCLA ships

 

Much of the discussion is about whether the quality of NCLA is hurting the NCL brand.

So most of the comments revolve around an assessment (review) of NCLA as a whole. Thus Goldryder's comments that NCLA has "failed", Globalizer saying that NCLA "hasn't worked well", and snowman saying the food is bad and service stinks.

Just that none of them have ever actually been on NCLA. I betcha Goldryder's family would absolutely love an NCLA cruise in Hawaii, more than most of their NCL cruises, but Goldryder is assuring everyone NCLA is "failed" without ever even trying them. It's funny! Or sad. It's like the guy I just read who said every port in Hawaii is boring... oh nevermind.

 

Jam810, he did a nice job of summarizing the discussion here:

 

"It seems as I read thru this thread that the NCLA ships aren't up to par as compared to the NCL ships. And, since the NCL name is tied to the NCLA ships, it is bringing the NCL name down. Is it true that the NCLA ships don't have their act together?

[shoreguy]

Pay attention, you are about to get the most important lesson you will ever learn about Cruise Critic. :)

 

 

All of the following participants in this discussion here about NCLA have something in common.

Can you guess what it is?

 

 

:)

 

I know the answer:D

 

We never take the experience of one person on one cruise as representative of the whole product.

 

As posted often read every review and posting in order to determine the truth and understand what is important to you and not just here.

 

How often do we have two posters same cruise totally different experiences.

 

Not sure why you have an issue with those that have not been on an NCLA ship posting about the impression that is being made in the market.

 

For the record I have never posted that I have been on an NCLA ship, never inferred it, and it fact have posted I have not been on NCLA and have no plans to go on one.

 

In fact in this thread I only referred to the feedback of a member of my staff who just returned and is not a CC member. That was the sick cruise with the graphic thread of horrific conditions. They saw none of what was posted here and had a great honeymoon.

 

Nothing in this thread requires a cruise on an NCLA ship. It was focused on the perception in the market and we are the customer base they are trying to get to book a cruise. What people perceive is more critical then what an individual has experienced. It is in fact those perceptions that will determine future bookings.

[Retired not Expired]

I can only say I've sailed the POA and had a wonderful experience. I've booked it again for January and expect to have a wonderful time again.

 

It took me a long time to open this thread because I've learned on the boards that reading the many posts about NCLA will give a very false impression on what you can expect when sailing with NCLA and, in fact, may taint a new cruiser's cruise because they may go in expecting the worse and spend all their time looking for it.

 

Even poster's who tell of a possitive cruise will have others post telling them they are wrong and the cruise could not have been good.

 

I love CC and it can be very helpful but sometimes it can also give false hopes and expectations if you put too much faith in what others say.

[sunshine 229]

I know I shouldn't but I'm going to anyway.

 

When someone writes as if they have been on the ship when they haven't, they actually throw the numbers and perceptions off.

 

Excerpts from two of my previous posts on the whole NCLA topic;

 

]

I don't have any special inside knowledge at NCL so this is just speculation but , trying to make sense of the varied reviews we are seeing and having followed many many posts about this ship, I think that there is still a bigger turnover of staff on the NCL American ships than on your average cruise ship so, the experience level of employees on these ships is lower...

 

and

 

I haven't been on either of the NCL all Hawaii cruise ships so I can't give you personal information but, until some who have been on those ships answer I can tell you what I have found out from reading this board

 

Last year, before the Pride of Aloha was launched I was planning a trip to Hawaii and I thougt a cruise might be a nice way to see some of the islands. I read a lot of the information posted about the PO Aloha and the PO America.

 

My take on the situation is this...

those are from posts I made several months ago. I don't think this sounds like someone who is trying to deceive people into thinking that they have sailed these ships.I'm sorry if you feel that it is necessary for us to put a banner over evrything we post here that says.

 

Never sailed NCLA!

You wrote on another thread:

 

 

 

Sunshine229 has never been on any Pride ship.

It's a shame this isn't made clear when strong opinions and advise is given, people would naturally be misled to assuming otherwise.

 

It's hard enough to sort out opinions on these boards, when people don't even have the honesty to admit up front that they haven't actually ever been on the ship

 

May I ask how you knew I'd never been on an NCLA ship? If I have been so underhanded and misleading about my lack of experience on NCLA how did you manage to figure out that I ( and any of those other people on your list) haven't beem on one of those ships?

 

May I suggest that it is because none of us have tried to hide the fact and that you and anyone else who has been paying attention or who cared would realize this? Or is it just that you feel you are more astute than the average CC reader and you need to protect those less brilliant than yourself?

 

Much of the discussion is about whether the quality of NCLA is hurting the NCL brand.

 

Is it ? I thought the discussion was about whether the perception of the quality of NCLA is hurting the NCL brand. As well as people who have cruised on one of the pride of ships forming opinions about the line,lots of people out there who have never cruised with NCLA will hear the reports coming from those cruises and will form a perception of NCL as a whole, is that perception going to be a problem for NCL as a whole. I don't think you need to have cruised on NCLA to have an idea how it has come across to the public in general.

 

Anyway, that is it for me on this for now.

 

Just to be extra clear, I'll repeat again, I've never cruised on an American flagged NCL(A) ship.

Sorry if anyone thought I had and that misunderstanding ruined their vacation for them.:rolleyes:

[dwrist]

In reality, quotes used in a answer to a thread can also be altered.:rolleyes:

[sunshine 229]

In reality, quotes used in a answer to a thread can also be altered.:rolleyes:

 

Sure they can, but then if that is something that concerns you you can go back and check the actual post on the board and see if the quote is accurate.

 

http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?p=5068528#post5068528

[Globaliser]

4) Globalizer, with over 10,000 posts, who says "NCLA hasn't worked well"

 

...

 

Reading their comments, you naturally assumed each of them were speaking from their firsthand experience on NCLA ships, but none of them were.

 

You assumed they would have mentioned if they were speaking based on something they heard or read, but none of them did.

I don't see anything in my post that claims to be a description of first hand experience. Nor, indeed, is it a description of anything to do with service on board the ships. Funnily enough, when I posted I thought the discussion was something to do with cross-brand damage from a subsidiary whose brand identity may or may not have been too closely aligned with the mainline brand, but there we are.

 

And, in any event, you actually have no idea whether or not, or how often, I may or may not have cruised on NCLA ships.

 

In case it is not already abundantly clear, the problems with NCLA and the fact that it has not been working well are matters of public record. Colin Veitch has made a number of statements to this effect. NCLA has been harder work and more expensive than NCL thought when it was set up. NCL has acknowledged that this has led to service problems.

 

But, then, maybe I have been mistaken, and maybe you were referring to something posted by a different poster whose handle includes a "z" and who has posted over 4000 times more than I have.

[CruisinMK]

May I ask how you knew I'd never been on an NCLA ship?

 

I had to go through your months old postings, because your recent ones (before this discussion) habitually talk as if you HAVE been on NCLA when you HAVEN'T. I did this search when the moderator publically asked if you had ever been on NCLA, and I wondered which sailing you had been on that went wrong after seeing you warn people in several discussions. I guessed it was the 6/5 PoH sailing when passenger size doubled when crew size shrank, or the PoA chunderstorm sailing.

 

When I realized you hadn't been on NCLA, I felt like you had misled myself and other readers here repeatedly. The threads where you advise others, or share your experience and opinion about the American crew.

The moderator of this forum also felt misled, as expressed in these comments to you:

 

Um...I'm the one that originally asked if you'd cruised on an NCLA ship because you always respond to the threads about it. If I have it correct...you've never cruised on NCLA and you don't have plans to. Got it. I wanted to know because I got the impression that you'd done one of the cruises because you post as if you've done it. Now I know your knowledge comes from other people's comments. We booked a cruise to Hawaii with NCLA and I'm trying to figure out who's been and who hasn't so I can gauge how much weight I give to comments and also know who I can ask questions to. Thanks for straightening that out for me.

 

I think that message does a good job of explaining why it is a serious issue and how people can feel cheated over advise and reviews written as if they were firsthand when they aren't.

 

If I have been so underhanded

 

While I thought the misleading posts were probably an innocent oversight, your response when the problem is pointed out does show a lack of integrity:

 

those are from posts I made several months ago.

 

Falsely suggesting that problem-free postings from months ago, means there is no problem with a string of recent misleading postings.

 

Sorry if anyone thought I had and that misunderstanding ruined their vacation for them.:rolleyes:

I'm sorry if you feel that it is necessary for us to put a banner over evrything we post here that says Never sailed NCLA!

 

Pretending that it really doesn't matter if misinformation on this forum influences people's cruise choices, suggesting that it is very lame to try to reduce misleading posts and improve the quality of information on this forum.

 

Or is it just that you feel you are more astute than the average CC reader and you need to protect those less brilliant than yourself?

 

Anyone who points out a problem with your misleading posts must be arrogant?

Would you say this about the moderator as well, who likewise pointed out to the forum that your postings are habitually misleading?

 

May I suggest that it is because none of us have tried to hide the fact and that you and anyone else who has been paying attention or who cared would realize this?

 

Since your recent posts are habitually misleading, and I don't think many would go through your months old postings to discover this fact, it is informative to warn others.

 

 

lots of people out there who have never cruised with NCLA will hear the reports coming from those cruises and will form a perception of NCL as a whole

 

Lots of people in this forum have been reading your frequent advise and feedback as if they were from firsthand experience, but we now discover that they weren't. An interesting sidetopic is how this forum misinforms its readers -- thanks for helping to illustrate the problem.

[sunshine 229]

Please find a post of mine which talks about my experiences on any of these ships and post it here.

 

Cecilia asked if I had been on the ship because, as she said, she wanted to find out who had first hand experience in case she had questions she wanted answered. She asked, I told her I hadn't. No problem there that I can see and no offense taken on my part.

 

You on the other hand, made a comment on that same thread and then went and dug up a thread that hadn't even been active for several days and launched an expose type post warning others on the board about certain posters and linking our names with the comment " You can say anything on the internet, accountability and fact checking are rare."

 

That I did find somewhat offensive. What I find even more offensive is the fact that you then posted things that weren't even true in an attempt to support your "warnings' against our posts.

 

Again re-read the thread that you linked in your previous post:

 

Here's another example. In this discussion, the topic starter specifically asks for those to share their firsthand experiences with American crews on NCLA.

 

 

http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=381329

"I am really nervous about the American crew. Can someone give me some more details about their experiences with NCLA's crew."

 

Each respondant giving feedback shared firsthand experiences as requested, except for yourself. Your comments varied considerably from the others in the discussion, but readers had no way of knowing you actually have never been on an NCLA and never dealt with an American crew. Your comments read as if you have been on the ship, but a couple words would have clarified they were just a reflection on what some others had written elsewhere.

 

 

I checked that thread after you referenced it thinking maybe I had been the only one who responded without being on the ships and had intruded on a discussion meant only for those who had actually been on the ships. What I found was that 9 posters had responded of those 9, 4 haven't been on an NCLA ship, 4 have been and 1 I can't really tell from their posts if they have or not. Quite different than what you said.

 

Each respondant giving feedback shared firsthand experiences as requested, except for yourself.

In addition you said :

 

Your comments varied considerably from the others in the discussion,

 

These were my comments:

I think the problem might be that experienced cruisers are used to the type of service that they receive from the international crew and so they are not quite ready for the American crew on NCLA ships. I also do think though that on many occasions the NCLA ships have been understaffed and the poor crew, even with the best of intentions, has not been able to meet the expectations of all the passengers. They have just been working too many hours or too many cabins to give excellent service.[/font]

 

Another posters made these comments:

 

Apparently some of the crew isn't quite as willing to work as hard as the crew on some other ships. They have a different constract structure, get paid a little better, because they are from America the tips they get do not support their families like those on the ships from places like the Phillipines etc. This does not mean they are all lazy, don't care or are going to walk off the ship at the first port. i don't know how much you have cruised before, but cruising the ships that do Hawaii only is not the same as cruising the Caribbean or Europe. Expect a little different atmosphere and everything will be fine.

 

and yet another poster wrote this:

A big reason the ships were understaffed was that they took some of the crew from the first 2 ships to help staff the newest ship. Since the crew is almost all American and has to be Coast Guard certified they can not come from international ships so the only experienced crew members come from the first 2 ships. This caused them (the first 2) to be very understaffed.

 

These jobs are decent paying but not top in this country. In foreign countries these are excellent paying jobs so the cruise lines get to pick the cream of the crop and only renew contracts for exceptional. working on a ship sounds fascinating as does working in Hawaii. But long hours and watching ereryone else on vacation while YOU are working is not everyones cup of tea.

 

 

 

Are those comments so different than my comments?

 

Look I get it. You have been on two NCLA cruises, you enjoyed both and you seem to find it impossible to beleive that anyone else who went on those cruises had a different experience so, get upset when peoples opinions of NCLA differ from your opinion.

I ( and most of the others on your list of 'not to be trusted posters') have read a lot of reviews and a lot of comments about those NCLA cruises and have seen that not everyone is reporting the same experience as you reported. For some reason, you seem to feel a need to stop anyone from mentioning that.

 

As Cecilia pointed out on another thread

If you only want responses from people that have cruised on the PO ships, why not read reviews or go to the roll calls of recent cruises and find those people? If you ask a question to the general board, anyone can answer.

In the meantime, as I mentioned on the other thread where you brought up the fact that I hadn't sailed NCLA, I have no desire to mislead people that I have.

 

I have an interest in what happens with NCLA and I have read a lot about this venture on this board and in other places. Sometimes, when someone is asking questions about the NCLA ships, and I think I have information that might be helpful, or an opinion based on everything I have read, I will post. If you want to jump on that thread and let everyone know that I don't have on-board experience I have no problem with that, I would just prefer that you do it in a less accusitory manner than you did on this thread and would avoid implying that just because my comments come from research and not from first hand experience they are dishonest.

 

I would also prefer that if you are going to accuse me of something ( like being the only one without firsthand experience posting on a particular thread) that you would get your facts straight before you make those accusations.

[sunshine 229]

One more thing.

If you are worried about the impression that people are getting about NCLA, why not take the time to post the reviews of your positive experinces rather than using the time to attack other posters and their opinions.

Just an idea.