flagger Posted February 11, 2008 #1 Share Posted February 11, 2008 I wonder what would happen if a company or heck an individual who had just won the lottery came to Celebrity and said they wanted to charter a ship that had already been chartered to another company. What if that company or individual was willing to pay more or even double what the current charter was paying? Do you think Celebrity would tell the first charter, 'tough luck, them's the breaks' or would they not take the money? They and all cruiselines seem to have no problem taking deposits for people and then selling the cruise to a charter company and canceling the cruise for those already with a deposit. Part of me thinks they would go for the bigger money. Another part of me thinks they would not want to lose a client who books charters again and again, yet that thought is in conflict with those repeat clients to whom are given the heave-ho when the chance for a charter comes along. Furthermore, I think that any cruise line that does this should be required by law to pay interest when refunding the deposit money either in the form of cash or shipboard credit for those who are able to move their deposits to another sailing date. In addition, I would like the cruiselines be required by law to pay any airline change fees when they do this no matter if the passengers booked via the cruiseline or on their own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scubarn1 Posted February 11, 2008 #2 Share Posted February 11, 2008 To whoever wins the lottery and charters the whole boat...... Please can I come too!:D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sky Sweet Posted February 11, 2008 #3 Share Posted February 11, 2008 I wonder what would happen if a company or heck an individual who had just won the lottery came to Celebrity and said they wanted to charter a ship that had already been chartered to another company. What if that company or individual was willing to pay more or even double what the current charter was paying? Do you think Celebrity would tell the first charter, 'tough luck, them's the breaks' or would they not take the money? They and all cruiselines seem to have no problem taking deposits for people and then selling the cruise to a charter company and canceling the cruise for those already with a deposit. Part of me thinks they would go for the bigger money. Another part of me thinks they would not want to lose a client who books charters again and again, yet that thought is in conflict with those repeat clients to whom are given the heave-ho when the chance for a charter comes along. Furthermore, I think that any cruise line that does this should be required by law to pay interest when refunding the deposit money either in the form of cash or shipboard credit for those who are able to move their deposits to another sailing date. In addition, I would like the cruiselines be required by law to pay any airline change fees when they do this no matter if the passengers booked via the cruiseline or on their own. Hi Flagger :) That is a very interesting question and I think it would be dependent upon the wording of the contract. When our daughter got married, we signed a contract for the nicest ballroom at a Hyatt hotel. That contract included our obligation to spend a specified minimum dollar amount for food and beverage. One thing that concerned me at the time was that their contract included a clause in the fine print which gave the hotel the right to to use a different ballroom for our daughter's wedding if they felt it was more appropriate. My first reaction when I saw it was that if another party subsequently offered to pay more for that ballroom than we did, they could displace us. If that happened, it would have been a big deal because most of their ballrooms had no windows, while the one we reserved for our daughter's wedding had windows on three sides overlooking Chicago. To prevent that from happening, I added an addendum to their contract which was signed by all parties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildescapade Posted February 11, 2008 #4 Share Posted February 11, 2008 Hi, I was booked on the March 8th sailing of the SOLSTICE...we did transfer our reservations (in fact my whole group) to the 22nd..we received a $200 onboard credit and the lower price that we had on the 8th was also honored. My travel agent (me) also got a $50 bonus commission per cabin! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calgarygary Posted February 11, 2008 #5 Share Posted February 11, 2008 I wonder what would happen if a company or heck an individual who had just won the lottery came to Celebrity and said they wanted to charter a ship that had already been chartered to another company. What if that company or individual was willing to pay more or even double what the current charter was paying? Do you think Celebrity would tell the first charter, 'tough luck, them's the breaks' or would they not take the money? They and all cruiselines seem to have no problem taking deposits for people and then selling the cruise to a charter company and canceling the cruise for those already with a deposit. Part of me thinks they would go for the bigger money. Another part of me thinks they would not want to lose a client who books charters again and again, yet that thought is in conflict with those repeat clients to whom are given the heave-ho when the chance for a charter comes along. Furthermore, I think that any cruise line that does this should be required by law to pay interest when refunding the deposit money either in the form of cash or shipboard credit for those who are able to move their deposits to another sailing date. In addition, I would like the cruiselines be required by law to pay any airline change fees when they do this no matter if the passengers booked via the cruiseline or on their own. Contracts written between cruiselines and passengers are done so to protect only the rights of the cruiseline. Contracts written between cruiselines and charters are written to protect both parties' interests. Your example is unlikely to happen in the real world as the penalties written into such contracts would be very high. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rare Host Anne Posted February 11, 2008 #6 Share Posted February 11, 2008 In all likelihood, the wouldn't (or couldn't) re-charter. I'm fairly certain there is clause in the charter contract that states specific cancellation terms. It probably includes cause for termination and cancellation compensation. An individual reservation contract with Celebrity pretty much states that they can cancel the cruise at any time without anything due to the party who has been cancelled. I'm a believer that cancellation terms should go both ways. We write it into our hotel contracts and would never sign a contract that didn't specifically address and outline the terms for a hotel cancelling our event(or moving space as Sky Sweet mentions). I agree with you, flagger. Cruiselines shouldn't be able to keep a passengers money for months without at least returning interest earned. I'd even be OK with them charging a small cancellation fee right up front. There is work that goes into making and cancelling a reservation just like there is work on a passengers end to make travel arrangements, plan excursions, etc. It's a two way street. Right now however, when it comes to individual passengers, it's pretty much one way. And when we get something like an onboard credit for re-booking, it's for PR reasons in trying to provide something to make the cancelled passengers feel better. It certainly is not required by law as their cruise contract is very specific and available to each passenger before booking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkjretired Posted February 11, 2008 #7 Share Posted February 11, 2008 Good question Flagger, hope everyone is well. Realistically I agree with the concept however it would probably require some type of legislation since all cruise lines do the same thing. I don't have a real problem with pulling a cruise when it is pretty far out but some protections need to be put in place for those who do their own air, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodofpine Posted February 12, 2008 #8 Share Posted February 12, 2008 I suspect your opponent will get the cruise industry PAC money... ;) In a charter situation, the reality is that the line will buy out the original charterer if it gets an offer it can't refuse (the Big person's version of a refund and more, more than OBC). That's the prudent thing, otherwise they're buying a lawsuit. Bill Gates has been known to charter (Seabourn I believe). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schplinky Posted February 12, 2008 #9 Share Posted February 12, 2008 I don't think they could re-charter. The contract that they enter into with us says they can cancel a sailing for any reason at any time. I'm pretty sure a charter company would protect themselces better in a contract than the average person can. I watched the documentary of Rosie O'Donnell when they started R Family Cruises. I recall that the number was $4 million to charter Norwegian Dawn. In all honesty, if I won $30 million or so (in Canada, lottery winnings are not taxed and you receive the full amount the day you claim your prize), I would consider this. That way, when all those friends you forgot you ever had crawled out of the wood work, you could tell them you're treating them to a cruise. Of course, maybe it would be a better idea to send some of those people on different ship, say Easy Cruise... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodofpine Posted February 12, 2008 #10 Share Posted February 12, 2008 I don't think they could re-charter. The contract that they enter into with us says they can cancel a sailing for any reason at any time. I'm pretty sure a charter company would protect themselces better in a contract than the average person can. I watched the documentary of Rosie O'Donnell when they started R Family Cruises. I recall that the number was $4 million to charter Norwegian Dawn. "[D]on't think they could re-charter"? They can do anything they want! It's their ship. The only question is 'What's the fallout?'. When you or I are cancelled, it's negligible. Breaching a more commercially reasonable contract, the fallout will be pretty predictable under the Uniform Commercial Code and its maritime equivalents. As a result, in the example Flagger cites, using your numbers (the line being offered 50-100% more than $4M), the cruiseline will contact Rosie to say, "How'd you like to save a million bucks on your proposed charter? Just move it one week.." The rich didn't get that way being stupid (Rosie's answer: 'Sure'), Rosie gets a big discount, cruiseline makes an even bigger premium on the other cruise - everyone's happy. That how Big Dogs play. Of course, another batch of regular schmeils get their cruise cancelled - and Mr. Flagger get elected to Congress! ;) Where a cruiseline lobbyist takes his family on a beautiful chartered cruise, Flagger gains 'insight' into the difficulties of the industry, stops bothering them, and everyone's happy. :) Remember those Congressional hearings on the cruise industry a couple years ago? And the results? A lot of straw baskets in the closets of the Congressmen... Ever wonder how three generations of Bush became mega-millionaires having spent their adult lives in 'public service'? Or how Hillary last month loaned her campaigne $5M of 'personal money'? (Being a Governor's wife and a First Lady must pay pretty well! I know - she saved the grocery money!) :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schplinky Posted February 12, 2008 #11 Share Posted February 12, 2008 Thanks for the lesson on how the big dogs play but I'm pretty sure that if Celebrity re-chartered Solstice right now, given that Atlantis has already got it nearly sold out, that a million dollar discount would be nothing to them in comparison to annoyed customers and the work they've already put in. I'm also sure that their contract is a little different than the standard form contract we all agree to. Saying it's Celebrity's ship and that they can do what they want with it presumes that they exist in a vacuum, which they don't. They are bound by contract law the same as the rest of us. Their contract with passengers allows them to cancel without compensation but they offered it to try and keep the customers. For some reason, their customers are pretty reliable about sticking with them though was is really a small inconvenience, considering it's still a year out (meaning nobody could have booked air, etc, and those who must request leave a year in advance are in the extreme minority). There is no comparing that to a customer who rents an entire ship and assures an incredible bar and spa revenue for a week, who could just as easily rent a ship from any supplier, in all practicality. Given that the same customer rents several full ships a year, I think that the odds of this ever happening are slim to none. Hillary Clinton sold her book for a crazy amount of money after she left the White House and before she became a Senator. Actually, it wasn't all that crazy, considering it was a massive best-seller. It's interesting that First Ladies' books always outsell their husbands' memoirs. She likely collected lots in speaking fees in that time. Former presidents can command a quarter of a million a night and many of these engagements are private, corporate affairs. The Bushes have been a very successful oil family since long before they were politically successful on the national level. What this has to do with cruise charters, I have no idea... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkjretired Posted February 12, 2008 #12 Share Posted February 12, 2008 "[D]on't think they could re-charter"? They can do anything they want! It's their ship. The only question is 'What's the fallout?'. When you or I are cancelled, it's negligible. Breaching a more commercially reasonable contract, the fallout will be pretty predictable under the Uniform Commercial Code and its maritime equivalents. As a result, in the example Flagger cites, using your numbers (the line being offered 50-100% more than $4M), the cruiseline will contact Rosie to say, "How'd you like to save a million bucks on your proposed charter? Just move it one week.." The rich didn't get that way being stupid (Rosie's answer: 'Sure'), Rosie gets a big discount, cruiseline makes an even bigger premium on the other cruise - everyone's happy. That how Big Dogs play. Of course, another batch of regular schmeils get their cruise cancelled - and Mr. Flagger get elected to Congress! ;) Where a cruiseline lobbyist takes his family on a beautiful chartered cruise, Flagger gains 'insight' into the difficulties of the industry, stops bothering them, and everyone's happy. :) Remember those Congressional hearings on the cruise industry a couple years ago? And the results? A lot of straw baskets in the closets of the Congressmen... Ever wonder how three generations of Bush became mega-millionaires having spent their adult lives in 'public service'? Or how Hillary last month loaned her campaigne $5M of 'personal money'? (Being a Governor's wife and a First Lady must pay pretty well! I know - she saved the grocery money!) :D Flaggers a congressman??????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flagger Posted February 12, 2008 Author #13 Share Posted February 12, 2008 No I have too many skeletons in my front yard. I thought it was an interesting question, but it has been brought up that airfare should not be a problem because of it being over a year in advance. I know some lines though have pulled cruises for charters with less notice. I don't buy the idea that 'because it is in the contract' should always be the answer. The people or customers can vote with their feet or encourage the politicians to do so. I think at least, they should offer interest in the form of cash for holding onto that money before deciding to cancel for a charter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodofpine Posted February 12, 2008 #14 Share Posted February 12, 2008 schplinky... "Contract"... "the law"... according to the law of contracts, Rolls Royce sold X ship propulsion that was reasonably free of defects and breakdowns... Has RR been 'arrested'? Were they prohibited from delivering to X what they chose to sell? Of course, X can breach a charter contract and suffer the consequences (or profits) if it chooses to. It's strictly a business decision (risk:reward). Obviously, the standard pax ticket/contract provides little consequence to the line for cancellation; a charter contract would include greater consequences. But it's still strictly economic. A charter contract isn't secured by anything (as in collateral security); if X breaches a charter contract nobody is sending in the Navy to seize the ship for a week! Realistically, individual ultra-rich vacationers aren't likely to charter a large ship. There are better vacations at that level of money; big ships aren't intimate for that sort of cruise. That's what luxury yatchs are for. A corporate or group charter situation, that's up to X. Flagger's hypothetical is highly unlikely. Even the rich aren't going to rediculously bid to have a particular week on a particular ship. I suspect the super rich tend to consider big ship cruising to be a tad pedestrian. Would it be unwise for X to cancel the first year's voyages on Solstice in favor of a charter cruise? Beats me. Depends on the $$ numbers. Would it generate ill will with X' customer base? Sure. Don't all cancellations? Sure. Is there a reason Solstice would be less prone to charter during its first months? Maybe. I don't know. Might the reason be that Solstice pax would throw a customer rel uber tantrum? That might be a consideration during the first few voyages, but I doubt it after that. Never stopped them before. On the "law". Big business will usually do what it considers profitable. Remember the old Huey Louis and the News hit "I want a new drug". Colombia pictures approached Louis about adapting the song for their soundtrack. He declined... After, all he "owned" the copyright; it was his music, right? So Colombia Pictures hired Ray Parker Jr. to violate the copyright and adapt the song. Isn't that against the "law"? Sure. Louis sued and was eventually paid a bunch, but not so much more than he was offered originally. As Louis indicated, "I said no, and they took it and did what they wanted anyway." Copyrights, contracts, etc. violation or not is a business decision. Making us individual pasengers happy is a business decision. It is profitable to make us happy? Usually. Not always. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schplinky Posted February 12, 2008 #15 Share Posted February 12, 2008 While throwing around legal terms, you should understand the difference between contract law and criminal law. If someone breaks a contract, they settle their differences in court, which iswhat X and Rolls Royce pursued. Breaking a contract doesn't usually send a person to jail. Similarly, copyright law enforced Huey Lewis' rights of ownership of his song. That he didn't get as much as was originally offered is anecdotal. Your ranting is giving me a headache. I'm out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.