Jump to content
Cruise Critic Community

Passenger Vessel Services Act summary to date

cvanhorn

By cvanhorn,
in Ask a Cruise Question

 Share

Recommended Posts

smeyer418

smeyer418

Posted
Posted

Aug 20 - Most Americans have to wait until November to find out who the new president will be, but not the people at NCL Corp, the parent company of Norwegian Cruise Line.

The line confirmed today that Kevin Sheehan, the company's Chief Financial Officer, will also assume the duties (and title) of president...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DAGVBSB

DAGVBSB

Posted
Posted
And ironically, NCL the line that started all this brouhaha with their complaints about technical stops by other cruise lines is going to make technical stops themselves http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=832004

 

Hypocrites is a good word to describe NCL.

 

 

Hopefully with Clueless Colin out... NCL will improve. Of course a trained chimpaneze would do a better job than Colin Veitch.

 

Not only would the chimp be smarter... it would be better looking.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
c-legs

c-legs

Posted
Posted
It seems it it staying or they would have not posted the 2009/10 schedules....

:mad:

With NCL, that means absolutely nothing !!!! That thing could be toast by dec 31st and NCL will simply cancel the schedule !! Pretty well the norm, don't we think ?? I mean...how many times do they ''amend'' their ''original'' schedule and on how many vessels, in a given year ??:eek:

Cheers

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ccrain

ccrain

Posted
Posted

It seems that NCLA still is on the warpath:

 

 

http://www.bizjournals.com/pacific/stories/2008/09/01/focus4.html

 

"NCL America has lost the first round in its attempt to get a federal rule changed in its favor.

 

But it is not giving up. The Miami-based cruise line plans to resubmit a proposal that would effectively limit the amount of time a foreign cruise ship could spend in Hawaiian waters."

 

I'm not a subscriber, so I don't know what scheme they are proposing now, but limiting the amount of time spent in HI waters will certainly not help the tourist economy any.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cruisin' Chick

Cruisin' Chick

Posted
Posted
It seems that NCLA still is on the warpath:

 

 

http://www.bizjournals.com/pacific/stories/2008/09/01/focus4.html

 

"NCL America has lost the first round in its attempt to get a federal rule changed in its favor.

 

But it is not giving up. The Miami-based cruise line plans to resubmit a proposal that would effectively limit the amount of time a foreign cruise ship could spend in Hawaiian waters."

 

I'm not a subscriber, so I don't know what scheme they are proposing now, but limiting the amount of time spent in HI waters will certainly not help the tourist economy any.

 

I hope the governor of Hawaii, as well as several players in the tourism market there, will sit down with Senator Inouye and tell him to butt out of trying to change the PVSA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DAGVBSB

DAGVBSB

Posted
Posted
It seems that NCLA still is on the warpath:

 

 

http://www.bizjournals.com/pacific/stories/2008/09/01/focus4.html

 

"NCL America has lost the first round in its attempt to get a federal rule changed in its favor.

 

But it is not giving up. The Miami-based cruise line plans to resubmit a proposal that would effectively limit the amount of time a foreign cruise ship could spend in Hawaiian waters."

 

I'm not a subscriber, so I don't know what scheme they are proposing now, but limiting the amount of time spent in HI waters will certainly not help the tourist economy any.

 

Hypocritical NCL is at it again. NCL (and OhioNCLCruiser has confirmed) that the Pride of America is sailing full and the bookings are strong. That means that NCL has now achieved one of the complaints that they had about the other lines and the PVSA.... that it was cutting into their bookings. If the ship is sailing full each week, why do you need to limit other cruise ships from coming to Hawaii???

 

They cannot re-introduce the Pride of Hawaii into the market because of restrictions placed on it under law. (once flagged international, she can never go back... the explanation for that was on the thread that was removed.) The Sky is still for sale and when NCL can sell her that means that the Pride of Aloha won't return. NCL's new builds don't meet the qualifications which allowed the first three ships. So there will be no additional NCL America ship in Hawaii for many years. So, why do you need to monopolize the market???

 

I think the outcry and the predictiment that Homeland Security was put in by the first attempt at this stupid rule change will prevent any further attempts from getting very far. If Senator Innoye and Representative Abercumbie couldn't get it through the first time even with their powerful influence and friends, I doubt that they could do it now with all of the negative responses against it. (besides...it has been defeated once, that will be used against any further attempts as well.)

 

California and Hawaii are not going to accept any changes to the PVSA and I think that is why NCL has a huge uphill battle in this fight. (besides...why is NCL pouring so much money into this issue?? Wouldn't that money be better spent on passengers or promotions??)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DAGVBSB

DAGVBSB

Posted
Posted

Oh, and let's not forget this hypocritical fact about NCL.....

 

They are now doing EXACTLY the same thing in Victoria that the other cruise lines are doing in Ensenada. They are pulling in for an hour and not letting anyone off the ship.

 

I hope that someone uses that against NCL in this arguement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kaymbee

kaymbee

Posted
Posted
Oh, and let's not forget this hypocritical fact about NCL.....

 

They are now doing EXACTLY the same thing in Victoria that the other cruise lines are doing in Ensenada. They are pulling in for an hour and not letting anyone off the ship.

 

I hope that someone uses that against NCL in this arguement.

 

When we went to HI in March/April we were in Ensenada for several hours and there were shore excursions available-we went on one of them. Not all the cruise lines are/were doing that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
psbtrvlr

psbtrvlr

Posted
Posted
When we went to HI in March/April we were in Ensenada for several hours and there were shore excursions available-we went on one of them. Not all the cruise lines are/were doing that.

 

Princess was doing it. They changed the itinerary to include more time in Ensenada when this change was proposed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rcacace

rcacace

Posted
Posted
Princess was doing it. They changed the itinerary to include more time in Ensenada when this change was proposed.

 

At the expense of losing 1/2 day in Kona & reducing the cruise to 14 days. I don't suppose they lowered the price to reflect that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
psbtrvlr

psbtrvlr

Posted
Posted
At the expense of losing 1/2 day in Kona & reducing the cruise to 14 days. I don't suppose they lowered the price to reflect that?

 

Last year when we booked our Hawaii cruise, it was at 14 days, no Kona, and Ensenada was a very short stop. Don't remember how long, I just remember wondering if we would have time to get off the ship. At some point before I had to cancel it, maybe in December, we were notified of an itinerary change. Ensenada was going to be 6 or 7 hours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rcacace

rcacace

Posted
Posted
Last year when we booked our Hawaii cruise, it was at 14 days, no Kona, and Ensenada was a very short stop. Don't remember how long, I just remember wondering if we would have time to get off the ship. At some point before I had to cancel it, maybe in December, we were notified of an itinerary change. Ensenada was going to be 6 or 7 hours.

 

I think Princess is really short changing themselves reducing the trip to 14 days. I've got to travel across country & spend a night in a motel just to spend only 4 days in Hawaii. :( They're not doing anyone any favors by spending more time in Ensenada. If & when we do another Hawaii trip I suppose we'll give HAL some consideration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ccrain

ccrain

Posted
Posted

I've read that Princess went to the 14 day trip to primarily go for a Sunday to Sunday trip and appeal to 2 week off vacation crowd.

 

The 15 day trip started and ended on so many different days of the week that some people almost needed 3 weeks off with air travel and decompression time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kaymbee

kaymbee

Posted
Posted
I've read that Princess went to the 14 day trip to primarily go for a Sunday to Sunday trip and appeal to 2 week off vacation crowd.

 

The 15 day trip started and ended on so many different days of the week that some people almost needed 3 weeks off with air travel and decompression time.

 

Not only that but it makes port scheduling easier and less expensive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rcacace

rcacace

Posted
Posted
Not only that but it makes port scheduling easier and less expensive.

 

It very well might, but there are lots of folks that choose HAL instead of Princess because if the 1 day difference & get a better experience for only 1 day more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DAGVBSB

DAGVBSB

Posted
Posted
At the expense of losing 1/2 day in Kona & reducing the cruise to 14 days. I don't suppose they lowered the price to reflect that?

 

I think Princess is really short changing themselves reducing the trip to 14 days. I've got to travel across country & spend a night in a motel just to spend only 4 days in Hawaii. :( They're not doing anyone any favors by spending more time in Ensenada. If & when we do another Hawaii trip I suppose we'll give HAL some consideration.

 

When the PVSA rule change was first brought out, one of the major arguements in favor of the change was the fact that so many lines, like Princess, RCCL & HAL were making "token" stops in Ensenada just to satisfy the PVSA. The stop was only 1-4 hours, sometimes in the middle of the night and passengers were not allowed to go ashore.

 

To try and blunt some of that arguement in the fight against NCL & the PVSA changes, the other cruise lines changed their itineraries to include a longer, daytime stop in Ensenada. The cost of the extended time in Mexico was taking time off the Hawaii stops. It was a change however to try and save the Hawaii cruises.

 

If NCL had gotten their way on the PVSA rule change, then Princess, HAL, RCCL and the rest would not be allowed to make the west coast to Hawaii cruise AT ALL! Be happy that only a few hours were shaved off Kona instead of losing the ability to cruise to Hawaii on any line other than NCL-America!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Welcome to Cruise Critic
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Cruise Critic News & Features
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • Canadian Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...