Enforcement action expected affecting Holland America Hawaii Cruises

[Princess Chatterer]

***********************************index.php/topic,142.0.html

[Cruzman]

It simply means that cruises to or from Hawaii will no longer originate or end in one of the US ports. Instead, the ports will either be Ensenada or Vancouver. Bottom line is that US west coast ports will suffer some economic impact, but the cruises most likely will continue to and from Hawaii, just not from a US port. NCL America will have gained nothing!

[jtl513]

NCL America will have gained nothing!Good! :D

[Princess Chatterer]

The problem in departing from Ensenada is that it requires an uncomfortably long bus ride from San Diego through blighted Mexico to Ensenada. The question with Vancouver is can the port accomodate more cruise ships?

[jtl513]

The question with Vancouver is can the port accomodate more cruise ships?Yes, IMO. If you look at cruisecal.com, even during the busiest months of Jun/Jul/Aug there are many days with no ships there, and many more with just one.

[Roz]

I didn't find the bus ride to Ensenada to be uncomfortably long. Maybe more people need to see "blighted" areas. It may give them an appreciation for what they have and the fact that are able to cruise. The only blighted area I saw was Tijiuana. After that there were a lot of oceanside condos and villas.

Roz

[takemewithyou]

Well, I wish they would just make a decision! I have a Hawaii cruise booked for this Fall and it has been booked for a year and a half. I would like to know where I'm leaving from. Haven't made airline reservations - thank goodness!

Roz - or anyone else with info...just how long is that bus ride to Ensenada? I'm thinking there is no way DH is going to suffer through a long bus ride over bumpy roads through Mexico? I would rather leave from Canada! I may have to cancel the cruise once a decision is made. :mad:

[sppunk]

The following thread is dedicated to this: http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=687517

It's been around a long while and contains a tremendous amount of information and great posts.

[Princess Chatterer]

Well I've taken that bus ride from San Diego to Ensenada and it's bad. Seriously bad.

[cactusmo]

I recently went on a Celebrity cruise, with a bus ride from San Diego to Ensanada, we will never again do this, it was a 6hr 10 min checkin!

[casavaha]

I guess my $600,000 house is blighted, plus the many million dollar plus
houses.

The bus ride is about 1 1/2 hours on a 4 lane toll road.

I don't know what time you rode the bus but you must have been asleep.

Check out some major US cities, talk about blight.

[sail7seas]

Are you serious? A SIX hours bus ride? :eek:

[sail7seas]

I guess my $600,000 house is blighted, plus the many million dollar plus
houses.

The bus ride is about 1 1/2 hours on a 4 lane toll road.

I don't know what time you rode the bus but you must have been asleep.

Check out some major US cities, talk about blight.


Sorry.... I was posting the same time as you.

Never having made the bus ride, I really am curious. Is it 1 1/2 hours vs. 6 hours?

How long/how far is the ride?

Thanks.

[jhannah]

The poster said it was a 6 hour and 10 minute checkin. Not that long of a bus ride. Does that mean it took that long to check in after arriving in California?

[wrp96]

The bus ride from San Diego to Ensenada itself should only be a couple of hours (it's only 70 miles). The issues come with the border crossing. Sometimes it can be fast, sometimes it can be really slow.

[Princess Chatterer]

My memory is a little foggy but I believe we left the San Deigo pier sometime between 1 pm and 3 pm and arrived at the Ensenada pier parking lot in the dark between 8 pm and 8:30 pm. The sun was setting as we headed south out of Tijuana. We only stopped once in a very long line of traffic to get through customs at the U.S. Mexico border. The blight I referred to was pretty much continous all the way to Ensenada. It was very informative watching Mexicans outside our bus windows loitering on the south side of the border walls waiting for their opportunity to enter the U.S. illegally. What a wonderful way to start our cruise vacation to beautiful Hawaii. Do I feel sorry for the Mexicans. Yes. Would I have rather cruised out of Vancouver? Yes.

[Roz]

The road our bus took to Ensenada was a modern highway, not a bumpy dirt road. We checked in at the San Diego terminal at the normal time, then were instructed to come back around later that afternoon. Boarded the bus around 5 pm. Drove down the coast and arrived in Ensenada around 6:30 pm. Buses were unloaded one by one, so it was 8-8:30 before I saw my cabin.

It was a long day, don't get me wrong, but not the horrendous ordeal that's being portrayed here.

I've traveled a lot; visited many city in the US, Canada, and Europe. All had "bad", or blighted, areas.

Roz

[Sbilko]

Yes, IMO. If you look at cruisecal.com, even during the busiest months of Jun/Jul/Aug there are many days with no ships there, and many more with just one.


After the winter that most of Canada has had,:mad: even Lotus Land, (Vancouver), I believe that the Hawaii Cruises should go out of Vancouver, IMHO. The system and infrastructure for supplying the cruise industry and it's passengers is already in place.

Our economy is still strong,:D and the prices of our homes are still increasing:D . Canada is experiencing a very large labor shortage, especially in Alberta, where you can find a job on the first day you arrive. There is a lot of excess cash around, you should see the toys people are buying,:confused: and it would be very attractive to us “Frost Backs”:eek: , to sail to the sun, and then return to a Canadian port, eh, in the middle of a true Canadian Winter:mad: .

[sassyredhat]

That's why we take HAL. They sail right from San Diego to Hawaii.

On our last Hawaii cruise, we had 3 medical helicopter evacuations, and were late, so we never did get docked in Ensenada. Their customs guy met us off the coast and boarded.

This time, April 3rd, HAL has actually scheduled a full port day in Ensenada--8am to midnight. Doesn't thrill me--I live in San Diego-- but will be nice for out of staters.

Guess HAL is planning ahead.

Pat

[RuthC]

My government in action. :rolleyes: (Is "inaction" one word, or two? ;) )
So now we have different federal rules for different states.

I wonder how long it will take after NCLA goes under to change the interpretation of the law back to something reasonable. :mad:

[RevNeal]

1. Latest On Battle Over Hawaii Cruising
No official word yet, but well-placed sources tell Cruise Week that the government has reached a resolution in determining how they will interpret the foreign-flag cruise ship rule. "They've decided to limit enforcement of the Passenger Vessel Services Act to markets where there are large U.S.-flagged ships currently operating--and there's only one: Hawaii," one insider said. "So Alaska, Key West, Maine, etc., don't have to worry about changes."....

If this is the case, then it won't last long. NCL America is going out of business. Once there are no US Flagged cruise ships operating in Hawaii, then it will be exempted too.

Still ... until NCL pulls the plug on NCLA, it's still a concern. I wonder ... could an argument be made that the new interpretation says "ships" while NCLA will only be operating a single "ship" ... hence, Hawaii is already exempt, too!? Hey ... I'm trying to think like a Lawyer.

[RevNeal]

My government in action. :rolleyes: (Is "inaction" one word, or two? ;) )
So now we have different federal rules for different states.

I wonder how long it will take after NCLA goes under to change the interpretation of the law back to something reasonable. :mad:

Hmmmm ... your point about different Federal Rules for different States is an interesting point. I wonder if the implementation, in this way, might be construed as a violation of the Constitution ... specifically, Article IV Section 1 ??

Hmmm ... grasping.

[RuthC]

Article IV Section 1 ??
:confused: I used to know the Constitution pretty well for someone not a legal scholar. I don't anymore.
Will you please refresh my memory?

[jhannah]

Hmmm ... grasping. I don't think it's a grasp at all. If you give deference to any entity over another with regard to law, then it's unconstitutional.

I would not sail out of Ensenada.

[lka1012]

My guess is that when the first few shiploads of passengers that have the cruises they have already paid for start being cancelled, we will see this change.

[RevNeal]

:confused: I used to know the Constitution pretty well for someone not a legal scholar. I don't anymore.
Will you please refresh my memory?

It's otherwise known as the "Full Faith and Credit Clause" of the Constitution. It is generally applied to the laws of one state being honored in another state. That's why I say I'm just grasping. This is a matter of States being treated unequally by the US Government (i.e., Hawaii being given preference over California).

[leoandhugh]

Well, the infamous Senator "I" from Hawaii who has been protecting NCLAmerica with sweetheart deals must love this one. But, I predict it will be a two edged sword when lines like HAL and Princess and RCI cease their Hawaii cruises except, perhaps for Spring and Fall repositioning.
Who in their right mind wants to cruise out of Ensenada with having to bus from San Diego and cross one of the busiest border crossings we have. Sure glad we did Hawaii last October on Serenade OTS round trip SanDiego, having already done it on Statendam and Amsterdam. But no more if this proves to be true:(

[sail7seas]

This certainly is no incentive for this right coaster to even think about sailing around the beautiful islands of Hawaii. I'll just have to find a way to get through the rest of my life without sailing out of Ensenada. Won't see this girl getting on/off a bus there any time in the foreseeable future. ;)

[takemewithyou]

Well, the infamous Senator "I" from Hawaii who has been protecting NCLAmerica with sweetheart deals must love this one. But, I predict it will be a two edged sword when lines like HAL and Princess and RCI cease their Hawaii cruises except, perhaps for Spring and Fall repositioning.
Who in their right mind wants to cruise out of Ensenada with having to bus from San Diego and cross one of the busiest border crossings we have. Sure glad we did Hawaii last October on Serenade OTS round trip SanDiego, having already done it on Statendam and Amsterdam. But no more if this proves to be true:(

Well, I guess everyone has answered my questions about embarking from Ensensada. Doesn't sound like something I want to do. One description I read is that after you cross the border, you then are taken to a hotel hospitality suite and given free drinks (another cruise line, not HAL) until your number is called and then they take you to the ship to embark. :eek:

I am now looking towards cancelling this cruise which I have had booked forever and looking at other cruises!

It's really too bad. Wonder how many others who have Hawaii bookings will be cancelling? Ought to be some good deals on cabins for those who don't mind the Ensenada trip!

[takemewithyou]

This certainly is no incentive for this right coaster to even think about sailing around the beautiful islands of Hawaii. I'll just have to find a way to get through the rest of my life without sailing out of Ensenada. Won't see this girl getting on/off a bus there any time in the foreseeable future. ;)

Sail - one of the cruises I am looking at to replace my Hawaii cruise this Oct is a trip on your favorite, the Maasdam to Canada/new England!

[sail7seas]

TakeMe, IMO, you could not make a better choice.
We love, love, love that cruise and the beautiful Maasdam....cannot do it enough! Hope you love it as much as we do. Ask away if there are any questions you think I can help you with. :)

[takemewithyou]

TakeMe, IMO, you could not make a better choice.
We love, love, love that cruise and the beautiful Maasdam....cannot do it enough! Hope you love it as much as we do. Ask away if there are any questions you think I can help you with. :)



Thanks so much! I will let you know! It was something we wanted to do some day anyway. There is one thing....Any suggestions on where to stay pre-cruise in Montreal? :)

[boccismom]

This time, April 3rd, HAL has actually scheduled a full port day in Ensenada--8am to midnight. Doesn't thrill me--I live in San Diego-- but will be nice for out of staters.

Pat

Pat,
According to my docs, we're only in Ensenada from 8PM to 11:59PM, not even worth getting off the ship. Been there, done that!

Can't wait to see you.

[kryos]

It simply means that cruises to or from Hawaii will no longer originate or end in one of the US ports. Instead, the ports will either be Ensenada or Vancouver. Bottom line is that US west coast ports will suffer some economic impact, but the cruises most likely will continue to and from Hawaii, just not from a US port. NCL America will have gained nothing!
This sucks because I'm going on a cruise in September that offers embarkation in any one of three ports -- Vancouver, San Francisco or San Diego. Guess this means that San Diego and San Francisco will probably be eliminated? But then, I don't know because the cruise doesn't just go to Hawaii, but also to the South Pacific (non-US ports) as well. So maybe that one won't be affected?

Blue skies ...

--rita

[kryos]

It's really too bad. Wonder how many others who have Hawaii bookings will be cancelling? Ought to be some good deals on cabins for those who don't mind the Ensenada trip!
If people cancel, then in my opinion NCL will have gained a lot cause that's exactly what they want people to do ... cancel and then fly to the islands, cruising NCL Hawaii as an alternative to island hopping by air.

Personally, I'd rather see people deal with the Ensenada bus ride or the trek to Vancouver, and one day watch NCLA go completely belly up when they can't even fill the one lousy ship they still have there.

Wonder what this new law is going to do to Alaska cruises, though? Sounds like they will all have to embark in Vancouver from here on in?

Blue skies ...

--rita

[Tucker in Texas]

Wouldn't this "interpretation" also apply to foreign flagged ships that leave the East Coast and go to Canada before returning? They don't stay in one port up there for 48 hours.

Tucker in Texas

[kryos]

Wouldn't this "interpretation" also apply to foreign flagged ships that leave the East Coast and go to Canada before returning? They don't stay in one port up there for 48 hours.

They would have to start the trip in Canada and then go to the East Coast. You couldn't board in a U.S. port anymore ... not unless the cruise line was planning to have over half the port stops in foreign countries, with one stop for at least 48 hours.

To get around this rule they can't board the cruise in the U.S. at all.

Blue skies ...

--rita

[takemewithyou]

Right now, it is only rumor from "Cruise Week", but it will only effect Hawaii cruises R/T out of US ports, like the one I am taking. It is a compromise that pleases both Sen Inouye (probably spelled wrong!) from Hawaii - who backs NCL BTW and Sen Stevens from Alaska - so it will only effect Hawaii! believeme, I have been following this situation closely with both an upcoming Alaska and Hawaii cruise booked!

We will have to wait to see the actual ruling when it is published, but these sources from Cruise Week say the compromise has been reached. It is probably premature on my part, but I am thinking ahead. We aren't sure how HAL will deal with the implementation of this regulation, but my money is on an Ensenada embarkation for Hawaii cruises- simple and most cost-effective for them.

And NCL won't be winning anything on me because I will rebook with HAL for another destination more to my liking! :D

[docksider21]

Maybe Dubai Ports World could build a port in
Tijuana.

Then it would be a quick and breezy bus ride to
the port. And with a pre-screen agreement
with the Mexican government, and border
customs check southbound would be easy, too.

Don't know about the border crossing on the
return to the US, but at least that would be
post-cruise.

[Fblack]

Not to mention how expensive transfers are to go from San Diego to Ensenada. Unfortunately, there are not many private ways to transfer between the two cities. The cruise liens charge over $100 per person.

[legalslave]

I'm really trying to understand just what will be affected by this law. Would it affect Alaska cruises that are 7 day cruises roundtrip Seattle?

Thanks in advance,
Diane

[takemewithyou]

I'm really trying to understand just what will be affected by this law. Would it affect Alaska cruises that are 7 day cruises roundtrip Seattle?

Thanks in advance,
Diane

You know we have all been trying for so long to figure out how this would impact our cruises leaving from any US ports - it's no wonder you are confused. So am I!! And frustrated! But the latest I am seeing is that there has been some sort of agreement between the "powers that be" in our government that it will only effect R/T Hawaii cruises from the West coast. That is the latest right now, but stay tuned!

[hammybee]

This sucks because I'm going on a cruise in September that offers embarkation in any one of three ports -- Vancouver, San Francisco or San Diego. Guess this means that San Diego and San Francisco will probably be eliminated? But then, I don't know because the cruise doesn't just go to Hawaii, but also to the South Pacific (non-US ports) as well. So maybe that one won't be affected?

Blue skies ...--rita
If the speculation occurs it will have no effect on your planned cruise because you are sailing to non U.S. ports.

[Atomica]

So here's an interesting thought: say this law does come into effect. How do you think HAL will respond? I can't see them pulling the Zaandam out of Hawaii entirely, but I also can't see them putting the ship in Ensenada (the consensus here seems to be not many people would want to sail out of there). They could base the ships here in Vancouver, but that would make the cruise longer than 14 days - more like 17 or 18. That might limit their passenger base.

I guess the question is this: do you think they'll settle for R/T Ensenada, or start having segment cruises (like Vancouver to Hawaii, Hawaii to Tahiti, and then the reverse)?

[Boatdrill]

We aren't sure how HAL will deal with the implementation of this regulation, but my money is on an Ensenada embarkation for Hawaii cruises- simple and most cost-effective for them.


HAL's Hawaii pax who sail from San Diego are not the kind who will accept having to go to Ensenada. They'll find other cruises. Regardless of how long the bus ride (which can be unpredictable), its a hassle, and there's too much at risk.

With the increasing violence in Baja California against tourists (and against their own law enforcement !), perhaps HAL will just pull the Ensenada-Hawaii route all together. Or hire armed escorts for the busses...

So there are two strikes against Ensenada to Hawaii: the inconvenience to embarking/disembarking passengers, and the security risk.

It isn't worth it !

[RevNeal]

So here's an interesting thought: say this law does come into effect. How do you think HAL will respond? I can't see them pulling the Zaandam out of Hawaii entirely, but I also can't see them putting the ship in Ensenada (the consensus here seems to be not many people would want to sail out of there). They could base the ships here in Vancouver, but that would make the cruise longer than 14 days - more like 17 or 18. That might limit their passenger base.

I guess the question is this: do you think they'll settle for R/T Ensenada, or start having segment cruises (like Vancouver to Hawaii, Hawaii to Tahiti, and then the reverse)?

The round trip to Hawaii out of San Diego it's already a 15-day cruise, not a 14-day one. IF they have to leave San Diego, I would hope they would operate out of Vancouver. I'd much rather have a 16 or 17 day cruise (more sea days!!!!!!!!) than go out of Ensenada.

Another alternative would be to relocate to a Mexican port further south, where they have a sufficiently major airport ... like Acapulco. I would fly to Acapulco to take a cruise to Hawaii.

However ... with NCLA about to go kaput it may well be that this whole question is academic, and that may be the reason why the implementation has been couched the way it has in the leak. It may be that it only holds for a year or two, at most, until NCLA folds ... and, in the mean time, HAL and the other lines move for a court ordered injunction on the implementation of this new interpretation of the law.

[silvercruiser]

The cost of flying to Vancouver is much higher than flying to San Diego ... at least for those of us in Florida. And the cost of getting from the airport in Vancouver is fairly high.

[sail7seas]

Thanks so much! I will let you know! It was something we wanted to do some day anyway. There is one thing....Any suggestions on where to stay pre-cruise in Montreal? :)


That's the one question I'm sorry I cannot help with. We always do back-to-backs, Boston to Montreal to Boston so we never stay over in Montreal.

In the past for land trips, we have stayed at two very pricey hotels in Montreal (Four Seasons and The Ritz) but I would not recommend spending that kind of money for a brief pre-cruise stay. Doesn't seem worth it.

[Atomica]

The round trip to Hawaii out of San Diego it's already a 15-day cruise, not a 14-day one. IF they have to leave San Diego, I would hope they would operate out of Vancouver. I'd much rather have a 16 or 17 day cruise (more sea days!!!!!!!!) than go out of Ensenada.


Agreed! I know HAL does one roundtrip Vancouver-Hawaii cruise each April, and it always seems to be sold out well in advance. We've got such nice cruise facilities here; it's a shame they sit unused for six months of the year...

[Roz]

On my Hawaiian cruise on the Carnival Spirit, the transfer was automatically included in the fare, since everyone was required to check in at the terminal in San Diego and take a bus to Ensenada. There was not an extra transfer fee of $100.

Roz

[kryos]

HAL's Hawaii pax who sail from San Diego are not the kind who will accept having to go to Ensenada. They'll find other cruises.Yeah, but that's not gonna help them if they want to go to Hawaii. And, I would imagine if this rule will apply to HAL, it will apply to all cruise lines wanting to sail to that region. Ensenada will be the only way to go and if passengers want to sail to Hawaii, they'll have to grin and bear the long bus ride.

Or, they will do exactly what NCLA is hoping they will do. They will sooner fly to the islands, and then use the Pride of America to sail around the islands for a week, or maybe even two. A cheap cruise ... far cheaper than a 15-day HAL would be ... and they still get to see all the islands. I'd be willing to bet that a b2b NCLA sailing around the islands, coupled with airfare say from the west coast, won't cost anything more then a 15-day HAL sailing. The overall quality will just be a lot lower.

Blue skies ...

--rita

[kryos]

On my Hawaiian cruise on the Carnival Spirit, the transfer was automatically included in the fare, since everyone was required to check in at the terminal in San Diego and take a bus to Ensenada. There was not an extra transfer fee of $100.

LOL ... trust me, the cruise lines ain't Santa Claus. That $100 transfer fee was built right into the cost of your cruise. Bottom line, you paid for that "elegant" bus transfer to Ensenada, whether you realize it or not. :)

Blue skies ...

--rita

[kryos]

If the speculation occurs it will have no effect on your planned cruise because you are sailing to non U.S. ports.No, I'm spending six days first in Hawaii ... Kona, Hilo, Maui, Kauai and Oahu (overnight). Then we go on to the South Pacific.

The cruise starts in Vancouver, so there is no problem with that. But then it also picks passengers up in San Francisco and San Diego. That's where I'm wondering if there could be a problem. The ports would be split about 50/50 between US and foreign, and I don't think there is any one 48 hour period in a foreign port, though we do have an overnight in Bora Bora.

I'm just wondering how this new law, if it is approved (and personally I think that's a big if) will affect a sailing like this one. Will everyone now have to board in Vancouver?

Blue skies ...

--rita

[kryos]

The cost of flying to Vancouver is much higher than flying to San Diego ... at least for those of us in Florida. And the cost of getting from the airport in Vancouver is fairly high.
I don't think Vancouver is gonna be a viable option for most Hawaii sailings. There are a lot of folks for whom a 17 or 18-day sailing will be too much time to be away from work. 15 days is barely manageable for a lot of people, 17 or 18 would be impossible. I think the only viable option will be Ensenada. You fly into San Diego like now, and then are bussed to Ensenada for your normal 15 day Hawaii sailing.

Just how long a bus ride are we talking about here? An hour? Almost anything is bearable for an hour, don't you think?

Personally I hope HAL passengers go with the flow if this law is enacted, and just deal with the Ensenada bus ride. I tend to think NCLA is hoping just the opposite happens and that drives more business to their ships, allowing them to fill the Pride of America every week, and maybe even bring back another of the ships they pulled out of the Hawaii market. I'd like to see that little plan blow up in their face and everyone just stick with their round trip sailings on decent cruise lines and deal with the rather short bus ride to Ensenada in order to do so.

I'd like nothing better than to see NCLA go belly up.

Blue skies ...

--rita

[kryos]

I guess the question is this: do you think they'll settle for R/T Ensenada, or start having segment cruises (like Vancouver to Hawaii, Hawaii to Tahiti, and then the reverse)?I wouldn't mind at all seeing something like that. It would be nice to be able to spend some time on land in Hawaii. If HAL had a couple of ships doing the run, it could work out that there would be like a four or five-day period when the one sailing from Vancouver or Ensenada to Hawaii would drop you off, and another ship would be coming back from the South Pacific and picking people up in Hawaii for the trip back to Vancouver or Ensenada. That would allow you to have five or so days on land in between the cruises. That would actually be nice in that it would give you the time to thoroughly explore your favorite island, or maybe a couple, before reboarding the ship for the trip back to the mainland.

Depending on how the timing worked out, maybe I'd actually get to attend the Maui Writers Conference again. I would like that.

Blue skies ...

--rita

[RevNeal]

The cost of flying to Vancouver is much higher than flying to San Diego ... at least for those of us in Florida. And the cost of getting from the airport in Vancouver is fairly high.

It's more expensive to fly to Vancouver from Dallas, too. It's also more expensive to fly to Acapulco. However, that may be the cost of getting to take this kind of a cruise. Indeed, it'll be more expensive to get to the ship no matter from where they operate. After all, when one tacks on the cost, time, and effort of the bus trip from San Diego to Ensenada, the difference between flying to San Diego and flying to Vancouver becomes much less (if not, indeed, flip-flopping).

[RRTrain]

I believe there could be another option. Since it is much easier to pass into Mexico than back into the US. HAL could originate it's cruises in Ensenada but end them in San Diego. You would meet at the San Diego pier board a bus for an evening departure from Ensanada. On returun the ship would sail to San Diego have the passengers disembark (possibly provision the ship) and then dead head to Ensenada to pick up that evenings passengers.

This would now be a one way cruise originating in a foreign port. HAL also could if they wanted, carry passengers from Hawaii to Ensenada or disembark passengers in Hawaii from Ensenada as a oneway service. This would allow passengers to board in Ensenada get off in Hawaii spend a week and then sail back to Ensenada.

[RevNeal]

Personally I hope HAL passengers go with the flow if this law is enacted, and just deal with the Ensenada bus ride. I tend to think NCLA is hoping just the opposite happens and that drives more business to their ships, allowing them to fill the Pride of America every week, and maybe even bring back another of the ships they pulled out of the Hawaii market. I'd like to see that little plan blow up in their face and everyone just stick with their round trip sailings on decent cruise lines and deal with the rather short bus ride to Ensenada in order to do so.

I'd like nothing better than to see NCLA go belly up.

Ditto, Rita. However, there is a THIRD possible outcome if HAL goes to Ensenada: HAL's cruise business is hurt because FAR fewer HAL passengers are willing to make that trek to take that cruise, and NCLA continues to collapse. I am not unusual in being very angry about this and not being willing to do such a cruise. The round trip out of San Diego is one of my favorite cruises; but while it operates out of Ensenada I seriously doubt I'll be aboard. :( That, or I'll try to snag one of the cruises operating out of Vancouver. I like going out of Vancouver.

[pvlover]

I suspect that CCL has enough practical political clout to delay or derail this whole mess.

However, if not, since we´re living in speculation land, how about Puerto Vallarta? :D Our airport is just completing a massive expansion and is about one mile from the cruise terminal, which has also been greatly enlarged. There are no weather delay issues and there are quite a number of reasonable air options. There are also quite a few excellent hotels in the immediate vicinity of the docks.
CCL already has a massive presence here (Carnival, Princess and HAL), so negotiations with the Port Authority ought to be viable.

It is about the same distance to the islands in nautical miles, and you get to begin or end your cruise in yet another paradise! (Rev, it sure beats Acapulco). Just a thought.....

[RevNeal]

I believe there could be another option. Since it is much easier to pass into Mexico than back into the US. HAL could originate it's cruises in Ensenada but end them in San Diego. You would meet at the San Diego pier board a bus for an evening departure from Ensanada. On returun the ship would sail to San Diego have the passengers disembark (possibly provision the ship) and then dead head to Ensenada to pick up that evenings passengers.

This would now be a one way cruise originating in a foreign port. HAL also could if they wanted, carry passengers from Hawaii to Ensenada or disembark passengers in Hawaii from Ensenada as a oneway service. This would allow passengers to board in Ensenada get off in Hawaii spend a week and then sail back to Ensenada.

The next step will be for NCL to push to have the US Board Service disallow crossings of the boarder for all US citizens for the purpose of joining a ship in circumvention of this rule (or returning from a ship for the same reason). I can see it now ... HAL passengers with their Walkers and Wheel Chairs, trying to illegally re-enter the USA along with thousands of Mexicans!!!! :D

[hammybee]

No, I'm spending six days first in Hawaii ... Kona, Hilo, Maui, Kauai and Oahu (overnight). Then we go on to the South Pacific.

The cruise starts in Vancouver, so there is no problem with that. But then it also picks passengers up in San Francisco and San Diego. That's where I'm wondering if there could be a problem. The ports would be split about 50/50 between US and foreign, and I don't think there is any one 48 hour period in a foreign port, though we do have an overnight in Bora Bora.

I'm just wondering how this new law, if it is approved (and personally I think that's a big if) will affect a sailing like this one. Will everyone now have to board in Vancouver? Blue skies ...--rita

Rita, the PSA regulates foreign-flagged ships transporting passengers solely between U.S. ports. Your fabulous September cruise includes multiple distant port calls in French Polynesia. There is absolutely nothing to be concerned about other than affording the time and expense of the cruise.

[RevNeal]

However, if not, since we´re living in speculation land, how about Puerto Vallarta? :D Our airport is just completing a massive expansion and is about one mile from the cruise terminal, which has also been greatly enlarged. There are no weather delay issues and there are quite a number of reasonable air options. There are also quite a few excellent hotels in the immediate vicinity of the docks.
CCL already has a massive presence here (Carnival, Princess and HAL), so negotiations with the Port Authority ought to be viable.

It is about the same distance to the islands in nautical miles, and you get to begin or end your cruise in yet another paradise! (Rev, it sure beats Acapulco). Just a thought.....

I was thinking about Puerto Vallarta, too, but wasn't sure as to air routing and terminal facilities. Until recently HAL had to anchor and tender in at that port. Increasing traffic there could be a problem. HOWEVER, if the port facilities could tolerate becoming an operational home port for Hawaii operations, I would say "go for it."

[RevNeal]

Rita, the PSA regulates foreign-flagged ships transporting passengers solely between U.S. ports. Your fabulous September cruise includes multiple distant port calls in French Polynesia. There is absolutely nothing to be concerned about.

I'm not a lawyer, but looking at the proposed re-interpretation, I think that's correct. However, it would probably result in penalties, etc., if someone boarded in SF and disembarked (without making the trip to French Polynesia) in San Diego or in Hawaii.

[pvlover]

The airport expansion is huge.... moving sidewalks, the whole nine yards.

There are four ships in port today. Three are docked and one is tendered. (NCL:p)

[hammybee]

I'm not a lawyer, but looking at the proposed re-interpretation, I think that's correct. However, it would probably result in penalties, etc., if someone boarded in SF and disembarked (without making the trip to French Polynesia) in San Diego or in Hawaii.

I agree. I am not sure why anyone would cut short this cruise by 20 days, other than an emergency.

I think the same risk applies on Alaska sails departing from Seattle whereby the port call in Canada is at the end of the cruise. If a passenger prematurely aborts their cruise and disembarks in Alaska, the passenger is subject to a Government penalty.

I wonder if trip insurance covers this risk.

[Nutrioso]

You know, this whole issue could go on for a long while. Years, maybe. With suits, counter-suits, stays, etc., etc. Every single entity with an economic interest will have very busy and vocal agents trying to have their needs encompassed. Egad!
PENNY

[RuthC]

I can see it now ... HAL passengers with their Walkers and Wheel Chairs, trying to illegally re-enter the USA along with thousands of Mexicans!!!! :D
The visual this generated is making me laugh!
I'm seeing a scene from The Producers ...

[RevNeal]

I agree. I am not sure why anyone would cut short this cruise by 20 days, other than an emergency.

Unless I'm mistaken, HAL offers Pacific Coastal cruises. However ... yes ... it's a matter of not getting ill and needing to disembark until one has fulfilled the requirement of the "law." Frankly, there should be a clause in there to enable someone in a declared medical emergency to not be in violation of that regulation.

[RevNeal]

You know, this whole issue could go on for a long while. Years, maybe. With suits, counter-suits, stays, etc., etc. Every single entity with an economic interest will have very busy and vocal agents trying to have their needs encompassed. Egad!

Yes, Penny, and with the Lawyers racking in the dough! Indeed, they'll be the big winners in this. Not NCLA. Not HAL. Not the American People. Lawyers. :cool:

Maybe they'll buy cruises to celebrate? Watch 'em be mad that they can't get the product they want due to their victories. ;)

[RevNeal]

The visual this generated is making me laugh!
I'm seeing a scene from The Producers ...

LOL ... yep ... me too. The mental image is hilarious. That's why I shared it. It's a good thing to laugh, even toward the end of Holy Week.

[RuthC]

I've never held anything against NCLA, or NCL for that matter. I don't want to sail them, but know that others do, and believed there's a place for the line in this world.

Until now. Now I want them to go out of business. They can't play fair, then leave the sandbox. :mad:

[sassyredhat]

I agree with you guys. We're taking that RT San Diego in 2 weeks. It has an 8am to midnight port call in Ensenada, which we really don't care about.

This will probably be the last time we go. Mike WILL NOT fly, so if it doesn't leave from the West Coast or Galveston, we're out of luck.

HAL does have the Pacific Coast mini cruises. We take those from San Diego to repo in Alaska, then Amtrak home.

Pat

[lka1012]

LOL ... yep ... me too. The mental image is hilarious. That's why I shared it. It's a good thing to laugh, even toward the end of Holy Week.

Hey, I did not give up laughing for Lent!

[RevNeal]

Hey, I did not give up laughing for Lent!

Neither did I.
Neither did I give up chocolate.
I wanted to give up steamed okra, but that could hardly be construed as a sacrifice.
What I DID end up giving up has done me a world of good.

[kryos]

Rita, the PSA regulates foreign-flagged ships transporting passengers solely between U.S. ports. Your fabulous September cruise includes multiple distant port calls in French Polynesia. There is absolutely nothing to be concerned about other than affording the time and expense of the cruise.
Thanks, hammybee. That's a relief. I guess it's only the solely Hawaii sailings that we have to be concerned about then, huh?

Just like I told Trish in a phone call today, guess if these rules go into effect, we'll just have to do the full Hawaii/South Pacific run year after year. :)

Though, for me at least, that might be something that will be hard to afford. :)

Blue skies ...

--rita

[kryos]

I'm not a lawyer, but looking at the proposed re-interpretation, I think that's correct. However, it would probably result in penalties, etc., if someone boarded in SF and disembarked (without making the trip to French Polynesia) in San Diego or in Hawaii.
It's highly unlikely that someone would do that, especially when considering the cost of this cruise. They would, in essence, be spending a bundle of money that they would then forfeit by not completing the cruise.

Also, from what I understand, were someone to do that ... disembark without a valid reason for doing so (such as a family or medical emergency), I think the cruise line could access a fine (of a considerable amount) against their onboard account ... and thus their credit card.

I tend to doubt someone would disembark without visiting the South Pacific ... not after paying the rather steep fare to do so.

Now what is a problem for some cruise lines, from what I've heard, is on 15-day Hawaii sailings. Sometimes people will take them, enjoy the days at sea to get to Hawaii, and then tour the islands, getting off the boat with their luggage at the last stop. Then they don't reboard for the return trip home (along with that mandatory Ensenada stop). The cruise director on a Princess cruise I took to Hawaii back in 2005 was telling us about a family that did that at our last port stop, and he mentioned that the family was gonna be in a whole world of hurt when they got their credit card bill because there was gonna be a charge of something like a couple of thousand each in fines for violation of the PVA. He said the only way to avoid that is if there is a bona fide emergency requiring you to leave the ship and then either fly directly home or enter a hospital for emergency medical care. It is only in those two cases where the fine would be waived.

Blue skies ...

--rita

[Michele Noel]

We went to Ensenada from San Diego on our own to meet a Celebrity ship. We took our luggage to the pier in San Diego and Celebrity took the luggage down to Ensenada.
We researched how to do this on the web. We took the San Diego trolley (1$ for seniors) system to the border (one hour ride). We went to a McDonalds before the border to get salads and snacks. Then we walked across the border - I remember there were a lot of ramps up and down. We then took a two block walk into Mexico and went to the bus station (a very helpful cab driver took us on foot to the correct street). Paid $5 @ for a nice reserved seat on the bus, excellent reclining clean plush seats, with individual airconditioning (bus had a great movie for us to see - subtitles in Spanish, but words in English) and got off 1 1/2 hours later in Ensenada. Took a taxi, another $5 to the loading hotel for the pier.
We would do this again because now we know exactly where the bus station is in Ensenada. Cost was $15 for two and we rode in fine style.

[jhannah]

It's amazing what one can do with the know-how. Sounds like a good arrangement for you. I fell, however, that many HAL cruisers would not be comfortable wandering around this part of Mexico on their own.

[sassyredhat]

Pat,
According to my docs, we're only in Ensenada from 8PM to 11:59PM, not even worth getting off the ship. Been there, done that!

Can't wait to see you.

OOOps~~~~senior moment :o !

We aren't getting off either.

Me too. Do you have your knitting packed yet ? :D

Pat

[boccismom]

Not packed exactly, but the yarn is chosen and in the knitting bag. It still isn't in the carry-on.

We finally got our cabin assignment and, even though it's not a huge upgrade, it's just about dead amidships and I'm happy.

The days are dragging.

[kryos]

I've never held anything against NCLA, or NCL for that matter. I don't want to sail them, but know that others do, and believed there's a place for the line in this world.

Until now. Now I want them to go out of business. They can't play fair, then leave the sandbox. :mad:
That's my feeling exactly, Ruth. And that's exactly why the prospect of NCLA going bellyup fills me with glee right now.

It appears to me that NCLA had what they thought was a great idea ... ships sailing within the Hawaiian islands that wouldn't have to sail from the main land, nor would have to make a stop at a foreign port. In theory that should have been a great idea. There are a lot of people out there who want no parts of nine days at sea. They would go nuts. For them, this NCLA concept would have been perfect. It would also have been perfect for those who want to combine a sailing with a land vacation. They could tack on a few days pre and/or post cruise and make a real trip of a lifetime out of it.

But NCLA went wrong somewhere. Their service onboard the "Pride" ships sucked and people were very, very unhappy with the product offered. I also think that NCLA tried to keep the price down in order to be competitive with the other cruise lines sailing from the west coast. NCLA tries to charge rock bottom prices for their cruises around the islands because they know that people have to factor in airfare from the main land if they want an NCLA cruise.

As a result of the low prices and the poor delivery, NCLA can't make a profit on these cruises. Because their profit margin is so low, they have to offer a very basic product and then hope people "upgrade" it by spending onboard.

The bottom line, at least in my opinion, is that NCLA is not getting what they feel is their fair share of the market. They've been forced to pull one ship out of Hawaii, and will pull another one soon. My guess is that they see the last ship being pulled within a year probably because they can't fill it week after week.

So, NCLA is looking to the government to "rescue" them. Make it difficult for the other cruise lines to sail to Hawaii, and people will flock to NCLA because they are the only cruise game in town. Well, guess what? I'll give up Hawaii before I'll set foot on an NCLA (or for that matter now, even NCL) ship.

That's exactly why I'd rather see folks deal with the bus ride to Ensenada, or the extended length cruise from Vancouver, before they break down and use an NCLA ship to sail Hawaii.

NCLA is not playing fair here. Instead of expending so much effort to crush the competition, they should be taking a hard look at their own product and trying to determine why it is failing, and then fiixing it.

I think NCLA could have been a success ... and still could be ... right along with the other cruise lines sailing from the US mainland. The idea is sound. Cruises around the islands lets people see several islands without the need to fly between them, checking in and out of hotels, packing and unpacking, etc. Even if NCLA's prices were higher, in order to provide a better product, they would still almost have to be more reasonable than staying in hotels in the Hawaii market, plus meals on land. I don't know about you, but I was shocked back in 2001 when I took a land trip to Maui for a 12-day writer's conference and retreat, and several times paid in excess of $25 for LUNCH! And that wasn't an elaborate lunch either! I paid over $225 a night (with special group rates!) for my hotel, with the total bill coming to close to three grand.

So I think NCLA would have a nice market if they delivered a better product, and their ships (yes, probably all three of them) would have sailed full week in and week out. If they fixed that product, they could still make a success of NCLA. They don't need to get "big daddy Uncle Sam" to thin out the competitive market in order to claim their rightful share of it. And, because they choose to "play dirty" I won't sail their ships ... no matter how good the product ever becomes.

Blue skies ...

--rita

[takemewithyou]

All I can say is "AMEN". I don't know you, Rita, but you are OK in my book!!!!!:D :D :D

[cruisinjudy]

We did the Ensenada embarkation and debarkation on Celebrity on a B2B and found the ride wasn't bad at all. Some buses had to let passengers off with the luggage at the border but ours didn't. However in teh Seattle to Vancouver bus we did have to get off at the border...what a hassle!

[CrystalLady]

That's why we take HAL. They sail right from San Diego to Hawaii.

On our last Hawaii cruise, we had 3 medical helicopter evacuations, and were late, so we never did get docked in Ensenada. Their customs guy met us off the coast and boarded.

This time, April 3rd, HAL has actually scheduled a full port day in Ensenada--8am to midnight. Doesn't thrill me--I live in San Diego-- but will be nice for out of staters.

Guess HAL is planning ahead.

Pat

Unless they've recently changed the schedule, you're in Ensenada from 8:00PM until midnight (actually, 11:59pm), not 8:00am. I just returned from Zaandam two days ago.

[MARYVB]

What if NCLA decides to pull their Hawaii ships out to Alaska during the summer? The way that original post read, every non-American flag ship would have to get out immediately. What is to stop NCLA from doing that? Did I mis-interprete that possibility?
(and I do hope they go out of business for being such rats.)
Mary

[cruisecrasy]

That's my feeling exactly, Ruth. And that's exactly why the prospect of NCLA going bellyup fills me with glee right now.

It appears to me that NCLA had what they thought was a great idea ... ships sailing within the Hawaiian islands that wouldn't have to sail from the main land, nor would have to make a stop at a foreign port. In theory that should have been a great idea. There are a lot of people out there who want no parts of nine days at sea. They would go nuts. For them, this NCLA concept would have been perfect. It would also have been perfect for those who want to combine a sailing with a land vacation. They could tack on a few days pre and/or post cruise and make a real trip of a lifetime out of it.

But NCLA went wrong somewhere. Their service onboard the "Pride" ships sucked and people were very, very unhappy with the product offered. I also think that NCLA tried to keep the price down in order to be competitive with the other cruise lines sailing from the west coast. NCLA tries to charge rock bottom prices for their cruises around the islands because they know that people have to factor in airfare from the main land if they want an NCLA cruise.

As a result of the low prices and the poor delivery, NCLA can't make a profit on these cruises. Because their profit margin is so low, they have to offer a very basic product and then hope people "upgrade" it by spending onboard.

The bottom line, at least in my opinion, is that NCLA is not getting what they feel is their fair share of the market. They've been forced to pull one ship out of Hawaii, and will pull another one soon. My guess is that they see the last ship being pulled within a year probably because they can't fill it week after week.

So, NCLA is looking to the government to "rescue" them. Make it difficult for the other cruise lines to sail to Hawaii, and people will flock to NCLA because they are the only cruise game in town. Well, guess what? I'll give up Hawaii before I'll set foot on an NCLA (or for that matter now, even NCL) ship.

That's exactly why I'd rather see folks deal with the bus ride to Ensenada, or the extended length cruise from Vancouver, before they break down and use an NCLA ship to sail Hawaii.

NCLA is not playing fair here. Instead of expending so much effort to crush the competition, they should be taking a hard look at their own product and trying to determine why it is failing, and then fiixing it.

I think NCLA could have been a success ... and still could be ... right along with the other cruise lines sailing from the US mainland. The idea is sound. Cruises around the islands lets people see several islands without the need to fly between them, checking in and out of hotels, packing and unpacking, etc. Even if NCLA's prices were higher, in order to provide a better product, they would still almost have to be more reasonable than staying in hotels in the Hawaii market, plus meals on land. I don't know about you, but I was shocked back in 2001 when I took a land trip to Maui for a 12-day writer's conference and retreat, and several times paid in excess of $25 for LUNCH! And that wasn't an elaborate lunch either! I paid over $225 a night (with special group rates!) for my hotel, with the total bill coming to close to three grand.

So I think NCLA would have a nice market if they delivered a better product, and their ships (yes, probably all three of them) would have sailed full week in and week out. If they fixed that product, they could still make a success of NCLA. They don't need to get "big daddy Uncle Sam" to thin out the competitive market in order to claim their rightful share of it. And, because they choose to "play dirty" I won't sail their ships ... no matter how good the product ever becomes.

Blue skies ...

--rita

Rita - u are correct - the main problem for NCL has been the labor problem - having to hire mostly Americans and we all know that a lot of Americans aren't prepared to work like their Asian counterparts..
Even after starting the job some quit part way thru their contracts and were sullen & rude during the cruises..forcing NCL to scramble to replace them and in some cases failing to have enough staff.. Sorry if this offends anyone but I am simply stating what friends have told me and I have read here on the boards..

Without the decent service found on HAL, Princess, RCL, Celebrity etc. NCL lost customers and continues to do so. Might not be the only problem but it is a major one.

Seems to me at least, it is the US causing the problem in the first place since the US law states no co can ply US waters without a 75% US crew onboard and therein lies the main problem.

I have a bit of sympathy for NCL - its between a 'rock & a hard place' - They are trying to fix the problem..but won't be able to because they can't get the labor law changed & so they at least need to reduce the competition which in turn alienates folks... So I guess they will likely go 'belly up'.
They were encouraged to start it all up but hamstrung with the US laws. No wonder they claim the other cruiselines have an advantage - they do!

Perhaps if the US relaxed that law (which is 'protectionism' by the way) NCL cld hire reliable Asian crews (and of course, any US folks willing to 'work' totally thru a contract without being sullen & rude) then the service wld rival that of other cruise lines & the problem might be solved..without all the legal wrangling & NCL also asking for 'protection' from other cruiselines without the same labor problem!!

Add my vote against travelling to Ensenada..

Anyway, whatever happens to NCL, I hope u have the best cruise ever to Hawaii & the South Pacific.. :)

[RevNeal]

What if NCLA decides to pull their Hawaii ships out to Alaska during the summer? The way that original post read, every non-American flag ship would have to get out immediately. What is to stop NCLA from doing that? Did I mis-interprete that possibility?
(and I do hope they go out of business for being such rats.)

Correct, Mary ... that IS a possibility. They could do it, if they wanted, and the implementation of the regulations would entail precisely what you suggest. In fact, if I were NCLA, and given the popularity of Alaska cruise offerings, that is precisely what I would do.

It certainly is a good example of the rank idiocy of this implementation of the regulations. Indeed, I'm sure that some lawyer has already pointed this out in a brief on the subject. It's just that the government agency making this decision is ignoring input from the elected officials and from local authorities (like Govenors of States and Senators and members of the House, etc).

[jhannah]

Our tax dollars at work!

[jtl513]

Seems to me at least, it is the US causing the problem in the first place since the US law states no co can ply US waters without a 75% US crew onboard and therein lies the main problem.
They don't have to be Americans, they just have to have a green card work permit. But still, most residents of HI are not going to be willing to work for the same wages as Indonesians or Filipinos.

[hammybee]

They don't have to be Americans, they just have to have a green card work permit. But still, most residents of HI are not going to be willing to work for the same wages as Indonesians or Filipinos.

The average annual income in Indonesia is $800. Room stewards and wait staff are guaranteed more than this each month on most cruise lines. Such incomes are not subject to U.S. income taxes for non U.S. residents.

The annual poverty threshold in the U.S. for one person is about $10K. Cruise lines would need to guarantee more than $10K each month to U.S. citizens or those with green cards, living in the U.S. to begin to level the playing field. And given U.S. residency, such incomes are subject to U.S. income taxes.

A front line cruise line employee from Indonesia working a foreign -flagged cruise ship, has tremendous incentive to work longer hours and deliver good service. Where is the incentive for a U.S. resident to do the same on a U.S.- flagged cruise ship?

Passengers are not willing to pay a substantial premium to be served by U.S. residents.

[hammybee]

Rita - u are correct - the main problem for NCL has been the labor problem - having to hire mostly Americans and we all know that a lot of Americans aren't prepared to work like their Asian counterparts..
Even after starting the job some quit part way thru their contracts and were sullen & rude during the cruises..forcing NCL to scramble to replace them and in some cases failing to have enough staff.. Sorry if this offends anyone but I am simply stating what friends have told me and I have read here on the boards.

Seems to me at least, it is the US causing the problem in the first place since the US law states no co can ply US waters without a 75% US crew onboard and therein lies the main problem.

They were encouraged to start it all up but hamstrung with the US laws. No wonder they claim the other cruiselines have an advantage - they do!

Perhaps if the US relaxed that law (which is 'protectionism' by the way) NCL cld hire reliable Asian crews (and of course, any US folks willing to 'work' totally thru a contract without being sullen & rude) then the service wld rival that of other cruise lines & the problem might be solved..without all the legal wrangling & NCL also asking for 'protection' from other cruiselines without the same labor problem!! :)

NCL NA was created by what was then, an Asian holding company, Star Cruises. They invested based upon the come......

It is obvious to the most casual observer that impact of Asian tourism in Hawaii. Star Cruises knows and serves the Asian market, well. NCL intended to target the lucrative Asian group market and to do so, needed to be exempt from Hawaiian gaming laws. It was probably reasonable for them to assume that with enough political clout, they would obtain the necessary exemptions and be allowed to offer onboard gaming. I mean, how many states are willing to to put their principals on the line, when the consequence is gain/loss of substantial revenues?

Instead, the Hawaiian people stuck to their principals, despite the loss of potential tourism. There are not many places in the world that would put principals before their economic gain.

Putting as many ships as they did in Hawaiian waters was evidence of their commitment to make it work. Instead of attracting the Asian groups they expected, NCL NA had to rely upon U.S. passengers. Capacity exceeded the demand, and so they were forced to compete on price, among themselves.

It's unclear to me what the thinking was as it relates to onboard employment. It's obvious that expecting U.S. residents to deliever comparable service for U.S. poverty levels wages was not practical.
Once NCL NA went to a non-refundable Hotel charge, service did improve, over the initial mayhem.

As one who subsequently sailed with NCL NA, the ships are clean and the service is adequate, especially considering that most waking hours are spent on shore. With only one ship in Hawaii, it is apparent that they can sell out, without substantial discounting and so the supply/demand thing has balanced, for now.

If this persists, they may be able to maintain a single ship in Hawaii. The passengers who prefer to sail from a mainland U.S. port are not likely to be the same as the ones willing to fly over and maximize their port time.
Given the cost of lodging and food in Hawaii, sailing with NCL N.A. is a great value for those who want to see it all and do so at reasonable cost.

Airfares from LAX, with planning, are less than $300.

[CrystalLady]

Two years ago, I sailed Volendam on a Circle Hawai'i cruise from Seattle (could have boarded in Vancouver) to Vancouver - 18 nights from Seattle. It was a wonderful itinerary, but as others have stated, I question how many can consider a "routine" itinerary of this length. Also, in addition to the extra cost of flying to/from YVR, I question how many would be willing to fly in and out of Vancouver during the winter months when the Hawai'i cruises are offered.

On my just-completed Zaandam cruise, I drove to/from San Diego...had my XM Radio tuned to San Diego weather/traffic reports when in the vicinity of the city. Those reports include border crossing delays. They were anywhere from 20 minutes to almost 2 hours.

[Mary Ellen]

I've never held anything against NCLA, or NCL for that matter. I don't want to sail them, but know that others do, and believed there's a place for the line in this world.

Until now. Now I want them to go out of business. They can't play fair, then leave the sandbox. :mad: Amen!

[Jsipes]

The San Diego Hawaii trip is a wonderful trip, so is LA to Hawaii. Maybe HAL will do a Sandiego, Tahiti, Hawaii , to San Diego or some other version that is legal...the REAL ISSUE with the customer is:

" NCL ships and service sux, and HAL and Princess are great.....so no matter what the court rules NCL will probably NOT :mad: receive a sudden huge boost in business, as their product is SUB-STANDARD and LOW Class."

[Jsipes]

If this is the case, then it won't last long. NCL America is going out of business. Once there are no US Flagged cruise ships operating in Hawaii, then it will be exempted too.

Still ... until NCL pulls the plug on NCLA, it's still a concern. I wonder ... could an argument be made that the new interpretation says "ships" while NCLA will only be operating a single "ship" ... hence, Hawaii is already exempt, too!? Hey ... I'm trying to think like a Lawyer.

:) Rev..How Bout a Prayer...Maybe Carnival will buy NCLA, as in a Corporate Takeover, substitute the Ryndam and Noordam, and use HAL ships to tour Hawaii...

[kryos]

I have a bit of sympathy for NCL - its between a 'rock & a hard place' - They are trying to fix the problem..but won't be able to because they can't get the labor law changed & so they at least need to reduce the competition which in turn alienates folks... So I guess they will likely go 'belly up'.

[SNIP]

Anyway, whatever happens to NCL, I hope u have the best cruise ever to Hawaii & the South Pacific.. :)

Thank you so much for the good wishes. I love this Hawaii/South Pacific itinerary, and this will be the second time I am doing it ... so I have no doubt it will be awesome!

As for NCLA, I have no sympathy whatsoever. They knew the constraints within which they would be working when they launched the NCLA brand. They should have had strategies in place to achieve their goals.

I agree with you, sadly any cruise line that must employ such a high percentage of U.S. workers is going to have a problem. We are simply not accustomed to working the long hours required on a cruise ship ... especially in the menial type jobs ... that our foreign-born counterparts are. From what I understand is that NCLA has a hard time keeping workers because of the hours they are required to work. Well, if I were part of the NCLA brain trust, I would have figured out a way to bring American "day workers" onboard at the various Hawaiian islands in order to supplement my onboard staff ... having my regular staff only working 35 to 40 hours a week, and using the "day workers" to get the rest of the tasks done. I would never have allowed service to suffer because I would know that it is on the basis of service that I have to compete with all these other cruise lines coming into the islands from the main land.

Look, I am a staunch union woman, and I like to think of a cruise line that employs mostly American workers. But that said, I do like to be pampered on my cruises as well. I don't think the American workers are providing that pampering ... in fact, they are not even providing a clean, well-run ship. I think it's a cultural thing in that we are not used to the long hours and hard work required on a cruise ship. We want to work our eight hours and then go "home" ... just like a lot of workers on land. NCLA is having problems because they are trying to reverse years of cultural mindset in a nine to twelve month contract, and it is not working. So, wouldn't it be better to work within the cultural confines and supplement the onboard staff with day locals?

There are a lot of things NCLA could have done ... things that even I, with no background in the cruise industry, could figure out ... that would have made this concept a resounding success. But they didn't do those things. As a result, they forfeited what could have been a great market ... one in which they really have no competition.

As I said before, NCLA serves a select customer base, but a big one. There are many people who either don't have the time to do a 15-day sailing from the main land ... or they simply cannot deal with the nine days at sea required for that longer sailing. There are also some people who want time on land too. Maybe they have a favorite island where they want to spend more than a day. NCLA provides what these people are looking for: No sea days at all, everyday in a port of call, plus a chance to tack on a pre and/or post-cruise stay at one of the islands in order to explore and enjoy it more fully.

NCLA, if they had done things right from the get go, wouldn't have had to worry about competition from HAL or Celebrity. They would have had their own market, and a big one, that HAL and Celebrity could not serve with their product.

But instead, they botched things up, and now are looking to the government to bail them out. I say that's childish ... it's almost like the kid who breaks his toy and then whines to his parents to replace it instead of accepting responsibility for his own carelessness. NCLA has serious problems ... true ... but they are not unfixable problems. They should invest the time and energy to fixing them and delivering a product that meets the average cruiser's expectations, instead of trying to crush the competition by lobbying to have this law more strictly enforced. And the funny thing is that even if NCLA is successful and other cruise lines have to sail from Ensenada or Vancouver in order to deliver their Hawaii product, I don't think NCLA will get those passengers. It will not benefit them at all as those passengers will probably just select other itineraries rather than Hawaii. The passengers that sail HAL and Celebrity, in many cases, are those who love sea days which they will not get on NCLA, and many of them either hate to fly or won't fly. There is no way those passengers can switch over to NCLA because of that. So, NCLA stands to gain actually nothing from this move. Their potential customer base is not the same one enjoyed by HAL and Celebrity.

Again, especially if NCLA is successful in forcing other cruise lines to substantially revise their own Hawaii itineraries in order to comply with this law, I hope they go belly up and quickly. It would serve them right.

Blue skies ...

--rita

[cruznon]

I've never held anything against NCLA, or NCL for that matter. I don't want to sail them, but know that others do, and believed there's a place for the line in this world.

Until now. Now I want them to go out of business. They can't play fair, then leave the sandbox. :mad:

Ruth, I completely agree.
The ramifications from such a ruling will also have a huge affect on San Diego. A few years ago, this law was strictly enforced and the San Diego Port suffered incredibly. It has taken years to overcome that setback.

[cruisecrasy]

The average annual income in Indonesia is $800. Room stewards and wait staff are guaranteed more than this each month on most cruise lines. Such incomes are not subject to U.S. income taxes for non U.S. residents.

The annual poverty threshold in the U.S. for one person is about $10K. Cruise lines would need to guarantee more than $10K each month to U.S. citizens or those with green cards, living in the U.S. to begin to level the playing field. And given U.S. residency, such incomes are subject to U.S. income taxes.

A front line cruise line employee from Indonesia working a foreign -flagged cruise ship, has tremendous incentive to work longer hours and deliver good service. Where is the incentive for a U.S. resident to do the same on a U.S.- flagged cruise ship?

Passengers are not willing to pay a substantial premium to be served by U.S. residents.

Well written as usual 'hammybee'!

So I guess the US Govt didn't take that into acct when it said NCL had to hire them thereby almost guaranteeing NCLs failure..??

I agree, particularily when the service is worse than with other nationalities serving them doing a far better job. Lets face it, if travellers had to pay their fares based on US wages most couldn't even begin to consider travelling..

Curious why they wld have to guarantee workers $10K monthly when the poverty rate threshold annually is $10K - approx $834 per mo.? What is room & board & tips worth monthly also?

So having to use 75% green cards holders (folks living in the US & subject to US tax laws & expenses) hamstrings any company trying to compete with companies able to hire much cheaper & better labor.

I agree the wages are a lot less but for a single person, also receiving tips & board & room, why not if they can't get work at home? That wld be the only explanation I can see why so many US citizens & non holding those green cards bothered to apply for jobs knowing the wages, approx tips & hrs & work required? I mean even an idiot knows a contract they sign stating they agree to work for example: 4 months 12 hrs daily, 7 days a week means 12 hrs 7 days a week not 7 hrs 5 days on & 2 days off..or did they think the cruiselines wld simply say GEE but u are working so hard take 2 days off?

Sad it has all come down to NCL almost 'blackmailing' to attempt to survive..

Have happy cruisin'!

[BruceMuzz]

kryos,

Nobody dislikes NCL America more than I do. I used to work there.
Your day worker idea was actually attempted early in the development of the operation. It didn't work.
Although a fine idea on paper, the reality didn't pan out. Although day workers on a US Flag Ship are not required to go through the same crazy regulations and procedures as American Seafarers, there are still some difficult hoops for them to jump through:

1. They must go through the same extensive (and expensive) Safety and Security Training and Certification as the crew. This takes a lot of time and money. Also, if one of the day workers called in sick, his replacement could only be someone with the same safety and security training and certification. Hawaiian workers are famous for calling in sick frequently. NCLA and local companies were not willing to dedicate the necessary time and money to train half the people in the Islands to cover for the ones who called in sick.

2. For security reasons, a list of the day workers must be furnished to port security 48 hours before they go to work. If anyone decides to cancel within the 48 hour period, no replacement can be sent.

3. Since the ships were not calling at each island every day, the day workers would only be part time employees. Hawaii has a very unique legal status for part time workers that makes their total package more expensive than full time workers.

4. With the labor shortage in Hawaii, hospitality workers are paid pretty well - far above the wages paid to the NCLA Crew. The only way NCLA could attract day workers would be to offer wages competitive to local hotels. That would put the day workers in a much higher wage bracket (double in fact) than the crew onboard the ships. You can only imagine the problems that would cause with the onboard crew. Since NCLA is already paying 500% higher wage packages to their American Crew, they would be forced to push that to 1000% in order to keep the onboard crew wages on par with the wages of the day workers. That would force a near doubling of cruise fares to pay for the wage hike.

5. When they tested the day worker idea on one of the ships, the day workers were stealing everything they could get their hands on and taking the stuff home. This included the belongings of the passengers. NCLA even designed pocketless uniforms for the day workers, but they still managed to steal items and smuggle them off the ship.

It was a great idea - but it won't work in Hawaii.

[bepsf]

I have sailed from Ensenada - it's really not that bad.

Scotty and I flew down to San Diego and took a private car (which the hotel arranged for us: $150 for up to 3 persons) to a very nice resort where we stayed for a couple days in a Junior Suite: http://www.hotelcoral.com/ The rooms and facilities were spacious and clean, the food was great and the service was impeccable.

The drive was very interesting since I had never been south of the border before - it probably took us only 90 minutes to get from the Airport to the Hotel. It was a beautiful scenic drive - Sure Tijuana wasn't all that, but once we were south of there, it was very nice. The road was fast and smooth and it was a very comfortable drive.

Ensenada itself isn't all that - we drove into town one afternoon and spent a couple hours there. It wasn't anything there I'd get excited about going to again.

We were sailing on X, and they did the check-in for the ship at our hotel in the ballroom. It was a very simple process and we hired a taxi to take us to the pier. I felt badly for the folks who had taken the busses from the airport to the hotel, had to get out of the bus to check in and stand in line, then reboard the bus and sit on the pier until the ship was ready (The ship was late dead-loading from San Diego - So we just sat in the bar at the resort and watched for the ship to sail into the harbor - then we had another drink before deciding that the lines of folks at the pier had probably boarded...)

If you ever sail out of Ensenada, I highly recommend spending a day or two pre-cruise at the Hotel Coral Resort.

[Atomica]

I looked just for fun at the price for an average NCLA cruise on the Pride of America - it's actually more expensive than my upcoming cruise on the QM2! There's no way I would pay that kind of $$$ to sail with them, plus the cost of a flight to HI on top of that.

IMHO, it's just a matter of time before NCLA goes belly-up, regardless of the outcome of this ruling. I just can't see it being sustainable in the long-term.

[bepsf]

On my just-completed Zaandam cruise, I drove to/from San Diego...had my XM Radio tuned to San Diego weather/traffic reports when in the vicinity of the city. Those reports include border crossing delays. They were anywhere from 20 minutes to almost 2 hours.

Yes, crossing into the US can take quite a long time...
...however crossing from the US takes no time at all.

[hammybee]

I looked just for fun at the price for an average NCLA cruise on the Pride of America - it's actually more expensive than my upcoming cruise on the QM2! There's no way I would pay that kind of $$$ to sail with them, plus the cost of a flight to HI on top of that.

IMHO, it's just a matter of time before NCLA goes belly-up, regardless of the outcome of this ruling. I just can't see it being sustainable in the long-term.

And yet, it seems that most of their summer Hawaii sails are sold out.
I wonder how much of this is attributed to transfers from ships that were pulled out of Hawaii.

[LAFFNVEGAS]

I looked just for fun at the price for an average NCLA cruise on the Pride of America - it's actually more expensive than my upcoming cruise on the QM2! There's no way I would pay that kind of $$$ to sail with them, plus the cost of a flight to HI on top of that.

IMHO, it's just a matter of time before NCLA goes belly-up, regardless of the outcome of this ruling. I just can't see it being sustainable in the long-term.
Aaron, I have to agree they are really more expensive but.... if you look at the price of a hotel on land in Hawaii the prices have gone through the roof. Prior to getting hooked on cruising Tom and I would take 2 trips a year to Hawaii, mostly Kona area. I had built up lots of United air miles and would bump ourselves up to first class and the hotel we even had a resort we stayed at that they knew us. The resort was nothing fancy but the location was fantastic. I thought about doing something different this summer so I checked on hotel and to my amazement the cost was triple to what we use to pay even over Christmas week. It would cost me less to take a 7 day cruise to Alaska than 5 nights in a 3 to 4 star hotel and I still have not paid for food or rental car to get me around. I did check the pricing of the NCLA and it was ever so slightly cheaper than a hotel stay when you figure in cost of food.(Food in many restuarants in Hawaii is very costly even Dennys is about double of what it costs in Las Vegas) I think that NCLA is probably a better value based strictly on having your meals included and getting you to the different islands. Now I would never chose that way to see the islands but I think that many think it is a good way to see and get a feel of the different islands if they have never been there.

[Princess Chatterer]

It's easy to stay at a very nice hotel in Hawaii for free You just have to have enough points with that hotel chain.

[CrystalLady]

Yes, crossing into the US can take quite a long time...
...however crossing from the US takes no time at all.

Not much different from the border crossings between Seattle and Vancouver. But you never know if it's going to be one of those days when Customs order everyone and everything off the vehicle, or just come aboard, take a peek-see at passports and wish everybody a nice day.

[birdie16]

I have been reading the posts on this and am very surprised at the attitude some people have. We try to look at all our trips as a "Journey, not a destination" and try to enjoy everything. I have made the bus ride from San Diego to Ensenada, actually the coast is very pretty...kind of a mini Mexican Big Sur. Yes, the people are poor but in my book you don't have to have money to be a good person. Have you ever noticed the areas around airports in just about every US city? We have our own blight too.
The bus was comfortable, we didn't have to do the driving and hey...if I'm on vacation...how can that be bad?

As for NCL...we did the American ship thing...sorry folks, I was not proud to be an American on that cruise! Can we say, "Bad attitude and lazy?" If they go under it is their own fault.

[takemewithyou]

Some people have all they can do to tolerate the airplane ride (due to physical limitations) to get to the cruise, let alone getting on and off the bus at the border and at the hotel to stand in line to check in and again at the pier. It's one thing if you sign up for it, knowing it will be part of your cruise. It's another thing, if it happens after you book!! For me, it really isn't about Mexico.

Each person knows what is best for them and will have to decide what they want to do if the change occurs.

[Atomica]

Aaron, I have to agree they are really more expensive but.... if you look at the price of a hotel on land in Hawaii the prices have gone through the roof. Prior to getting hooked on cruising Tom and I would take 2 trips a year to Hawaii, mostly Kona area. I had built up lots of United air miles and would bump ourselves up to first class and the hotel we even had a resort we stayed at that they knew us. The resort was nothing fancy but the location was fantastic. I thought about doing something different this summer so I checked on hotel and to my amazement the cost was triple to what we use to pay even over Christmas week. It would cost me less to take a 7 day cruise to Alaska than 5 nights in a 3 to 4 star hotel and I still have not paid for food or rental car to get me around. I did check the pricing of the NCLA and it was ever so slightly cheaper than a hotel stay when you figure in cost of food.(Food in many restuarants in Hawaii is very costly even Dennys is about double of what it costs in Las Vegas) I think that NCLA is probably a better value based strictly on having your meals included and getting you to the different islands. Now I would never chose that way to see the islands but I think that many think it is a good way to see and get a feel of the different islands if they have never been there.

Lisa, thanks for the information! I had no idea (but I'm not surprised) that Hawaii is that expensive!

[Juanita462]

You have my sympathy if you have to go the route that is described here to do a Hawaii cruise.

We did the 64 day Australia/Asia cruise last fall - took the shuttle from Van. to Seattle. At the US customs at the border we had to all get off the bus and take all our luggage with us to go through customs. Now, with a 64 day cruise we had 3 suitcases , our carryons and DH's CPAP equipment. There were no carts for the luggage and we had to struggle through the narrow aisles pushing one case and pulling the other with the carryons piled on top. It was a nightmare and not one person stepped forward to help us - we are seniors and Dh is mobility impaired.
Quite different from a customs officer coming onboard and checking our documents which is all we ever experienced before.

When we got to the Best Western in Seattle we found that the hotel did not have anyone to help with the luggage so we had to handle it all ourselves again - into the hotel, up to the room and back down the next day. The shuttle driver to the pier was great and loaded everything for us and unloaded at the pier - for which he was thankfully and generously rewarded!

It was a very stressfull start to our cruise and one that I wouldn't repeat in the future.

The Hawaii cruise roundtrip from Vancouver sells out with a majority of Canadians onboard because it is so great to not have to fly anywhere or cross borders. When we sailed it 2 years ago 60% of the pax were Cdns.

It will be interesting to see how it all plays out.

[Clipper]

We've just booked the May 2009 repositioning cruise from Fort Lauderdale to Montreal. It's a fifteen-day compared to this year's thirteen-day and is considerably more loaded up with Canadian stops -- a week's worth. It also has an overnight in Quebec City. I wonder if the proposed action played a factor in this itinerary change. If it did, it certainly worked to our advantage. There are Canadian ports of call that ships rarely go to.

[RuthC]

I wonder if the proposed action played a factor in this itinerary change.
If the original itinerary was scheduled to end in Canada, then, no, the rule change would not have come into play.
The Passenger Services Act only applies when the cruise both begins and ends in the United States.

[grannynurse]

I have no idea what to do about booking airfare for our Decmber cruise to Hawaii out of San Diego. Ordinarily We book our own domestic air. This time we got HAL's insurance Platinum plan because you can transfer it to a different cruise as long as you stay within the time frame... BUT we didn't book HAL air and would not be covered under the plan if we book our own. I can't imagine that new legislation would take effect before calendar year 2009 BUT again who knows. Does anybody have any suggestions? The only thing that comes to mind is purchasing HAL air with a deviation so we can choose our own flights.
HELP!
GN

[cruisecrasy]

kryos,

Nobody dislikes NCL America more than I do. I used to work there.
Your day worker idea was actually attempted early in the development of the operation. It didn't work.
Although a fine idea on paper, the reality didn't pan out. Although day workers on a US Flag Ship are not required to go through the same crazy regulations and procedures as American Seafarers, there are still some difficult hoops for them to jump through:

1. They must go through the same extensive (and expensive) Safety and Security Training and Certification as the crew. This takes a lot of time and money. Also, if one of the day workers called in sick, his replacement could only be someone with the same safety and security training and certification. Hawaiian workers are famous for calling in sick frequently. NCLA and local companies were not willing to dedicate the necessary time and money to train half the people in the Islands to cover for the ones who called in sick.

2. For security reasons, a list of the day workers must be furnished to port security 48 hours before they go to work. If anyone decides to cancel within the 48 hour period, no replacement can be sent.

3. Since the ships were not calling at each island every day, the day workers would only be part time employees. Hawaii has a very unique legal status for part time workers that makes their total package more expensive than full time workers.

4. With the labor shortage in Hawaii, hospitality workers are paid pretty well - far above the wages paid to the NCLA Crew. The only way NCLA could attract day workers would be to offer wages competitive to local hotels. That would put the day workers in a much higher wage bracket (double in fact) than the crew onboard the ships. You can only imagine the problems that would cause with the onboard crew. Since NCLA is already paying 500% higher wage packages to their American Crew, they would be forced to push that to 1000% in order to keep the onboard crew wages on par with the wages of the day workers. That would force a near doubling of cruise fares to pay for the wage hike.

5. When they tested the day worker idea on one of the ships, the day workers were stealing everything they could get their hands on and taking the stuff home. This included the belongings of the passengers. NCLA even designed pocketless uniforms for the day workers, but they still managed to steal items and smuggle them off the ship.

It was a great idea - but it won't work in Hawaii.

Sad but true!!!!

Perhaps the solution wld be for NCL to pay their employees equivalent wages and then cruisers wld pay what the Hawaiian trip really costs hmmm except for one obvious detail - they wld go 'broke' trying..

Lets face it, if a company has to pay US wages they need to charge US prices to remain in business but most US citizens want high wages but 'cheap' holidays - Nuff said??

Curious exactly why do u not like NCL America?
If u have ever worked for another cruiseline I wld appreciate it if u wld post your observations about them also so we cld compare policies!

[cruisecrasy]

You have my sympathy if you have to go the route that is described here to do a Hawaii cruise.

We did the 64 day Australia/Asia cruise last fall - took the shuttle from Van. to Seattle. At the US customs at the border we had to all get off the bus and take all our luggage with us to go through customs. Now, with a 64 day cruise we had 3 suitcases , our carryons and DH's CPAP equipment. There were no carts for the luggage and we had to struggle through the narrow aisles pushing one case and pulling the other with the carryons piled on top. It was a nightmare and not one person stepped forward to help us - we are seniors and Dh is mobility impaired.
Quite different from a customs officer coming onboard and checking our documents which is all we ever experienced before.

When we got to the Best Western in Seattle we found that the hotel did not have anyone to help with the luggage so we had to handle it all ourselves again - into the hotel, up to the room and back down the next day. The shuttle driver to the pier was great and loaded everything for us and unloaded at the pier - for which he was thankfully and generously rewarded!

It was a very stressfull start to our cruise and one that I wouldn't repeat in the future.

The Hawaii cruise roundtrip from Vancouver sells out with a majority of Canadians onboard because it is so great to not have to fly anywhere or cross borders. When we sailed it 2 years ago 60% of the pax were Cdns.

It will be interesting to see how it all plays out.

Which cruiseline offers a Hawaiian round trip out of Vancouver - sounds just like what I wld like..??

Thanks in advance..

[RevNeal]

I have no idea what to do about booking airfare for our Decmber cruise to Hawaii out of San Diego. Ordinarily We book our own domestic air. This time we got HAL's insurance Platinum plan because you can transfer it to a different cruise as long as you stay within the time frame... BUT we didn't book HAL air and would not be covered under the plan if we book our own. I can't imagine that new legislation would take effect before calendar year 2009 BUT again who knows. Does anybody have any suggestions? The only thing that comes to mind is purchasing HAL air with a deviation so we can choose our own flights.
HELP!

GN, here's my thinking. If they have to switch to Ensenada for that sailing just go ahead and book to and from San Diego. Only ... give yourself a day's lee-way on both ends to allow for transit logistics. And book yourself into a hotel in San Diego on both sides.

Chances are even if the ruling comes down bad HAL's lawyers will get into the game and a court will issue an injunction to halt it ... or delay implementation until current scheduled bookings are through, etc. My hope would be that, given the worst, by the time it works its way through the courts it will be a moot question ... NCLA will be belly-up and the reported stipulation regarding it only applying to itineraries where there is US flagged competition will come into effect, removing Hawaii from the list.

[chasetf]

On my Hawaiian cruise on the Carnival Spirit, the transfer was automatically included in the fare, since everyone was required to check in at the terminal in San Diego and take a bus to Ensenada. There was not an extra transfer fee of $100. Roz
My Princess cruise was the same. We arrived in San Diego, checked in at the pier, and checked in our luggage. Our bags were loaded on the ship, which then departed SD for Ensenada (deadheading). We were bused to Ensenada, boarded the ship and set sail within a couple of hours. (around 8pm).

It was a longer day, but we had the convenience of the SD terminal until being loaded on our bus. We were one of the later buses, and all the modern conveniences.

Our trip was a one-way 10 day to Hawaii (Ensenada to Honolulu), which is why we had to do the Ensenada busing. For RT's out of SD this would only have to be done on one leg. IE.. the cruise then would be "Ensenada to SD" or "SD to Ensenada" ;)

[grannynurse]

Thanks Greg for your very logical approach to our problem,
We're already booked at the Holiday Inn on the Bay for 2 nights pre-cruise.
After checking with my TA I found the difference between HAL air and booking it ourselves as of now is $80.00 pp cheaper on our own. It would be $80.00 plus $50 air deviation on HAL = $130.00 more pp.

The Platinum plan would cover us for HAL air (no increase in insurance premium); BUT we'd incur at least $100 pp change fee if we booked our own air and had to change port destinations, say Vancouver, plus the additional air fare from Tulsa. AA just announced an increase in their fuel costs, so air fares are most likely going up soon. It sounds like a no win situation.

I'm hoping you're right in your assessment, if so we'll call you the "Bombastic prophet".
GN

[kryos]

I did check the pricing of the NCLA and it was ever so slightly cheaper than a hotel stay when you figure in cost of food.(Food in many restuarants in Hawaii is very costly even Dennys is about double of what it costs in Las Vegas) I think that NCLA is probably a better value based strictly on having your meals included and getting you to the different islands. Now I would never chose that way to see the islands but I think that many think it is a good way to see and get a feel of the different islands if they have never been there.
I think maybe the price you are getting on the NCLA cruise might be on one where the ship is fully booked? I know that some friends of mine priced an NCLA cruise in Hawaii and it came out to be very cheap per person. But then ... look what you're getting. :( Just like I've always said ... you get what you pay for.

I agree about the prices in hotels, though. In 2001 I attended the Maui Writer's Conference in Hawaii. Back then I was shocked what I paid for hotels and food. To be honest, I could not afford to go back there again ... because the price has about doubled ... and that is with group rates at the hotels!

To me, cruising is a far better deal, though you do lose quite a bit of time to fully explore the islands. But I guess one always has to make a compromise ... and that's probably exactly what NCLA is banking on.

Blue skies ...

--rita

[kryos]

Rita - u are correct - the main problem for NCL has been the labor problem - having to hire mostly Americans and we all know that a lot of Americans aren't prepared to work like their Asian counterparts..
Even after starting the job some quit part way thru their contracts and were sullen & rude during the cruises..forcing NCL to scramble to replace them and in some cases failing to have enough staff.. Sorry if this offends anyone but I am simply stating what friends have told me and I have read here on the boards..

No offense taken ... because it's true. We here in America are "soft" ... and that's not meant in a derogatory way. We never had to work the hours people in some countries do and for that reason we can't expect the American workers to hustle onboard ship the way their foreign counterparts do. It's just a cultural thing and it won't change no matter what NCLA does. Also, too, many of those foreign workers on other cruise lines are supporting large families at home. They like to make as much as they can because it makes for a better life for their families while they work at sea. From what I understand, if done right, one of those workers could spend maybe ten to 15 years doing contracts on ships ... perhaps as a waiter or bar staff ... and make enough money to live like a king in their home countries after that. Look, I am as pro-American as they get ... I am also pro-union because my union and my job has been very good to me over the past 30 years. But the fact remains that we Americans just are not used to extended hours of hard, physical labor ... especially as we get older. NCL is not gonna be able to get around this fact ... in Hawaii or elsewhere. Why do you think the cruise lines would rather hit the foreign port that flag in the U.S.? They know the score. They know who their best workers are.

Here in the U.S. I have a feeling most of the workers NCLA hires are probably "kids." They figure getting a job on the ship will allow them to travel, and also provide a bit of security in terms of three squares a day, a place to sleep, etc. The problem is that when they get onboard and see how hard they have to work ... and how little they actually get to see of the places they visit ... they say "screw this!" and bolt. Or worst yet, their attitude and work ethic deteriorates to the point where even the shipboard management doesn't want them around anymore and they are let go.

But do I feel sorry for NCL because of this? No. Surely they took into account these problems before launching the NCLA brand. So, surely they must have had some plans in mind for resolving them. Why no implementation is my question?

Blue skies ...

--rita

[kryos]

kryos,

Nobody dislikes NCL America more than I do. I used to work there.
Your day worker idea was actually attempted early in the development of the operation. It didn't work.
Although a fine idea on paper, the reality didn't pan out. Although day workers on a US Flag Ship are not required to go through the same crazy regulations and procedures as American Seafarers, there are still some difficult hoops for them to jump through:

That you so much for that edifying post. I had no idea day workers would have to meet all the requirements that shipboard ones do. After all, the ship is merely docked when they are on there ... it's not out to sea. That's why I thought the day worker concept would be a good one. I figured it would be relatively easy to have a "pool" of these from which to choose each time the ship is in port. My thinking was that people would apply to get on a "list." Of course, I would imagine some background checks would have to be made, but that's about it. Then, each time an NCLA ship was in port, those day workers wanting a day's wages would just show up at the pier and hope to be hired on for the day. So calling out sick would not be a problem. NCLA would know how many people they needed that day, and would select from the ones at the pier, who had already been "certified" to work on the ships.

As for the theft ... I never took that into consideration ... but you bring up a good point. With shipboard employees, theft is kind of difficult. You're not going anywhere. If a passenger reports an item of value missing, it would be relatively easy for shipboard security to narrow down a list of suspects and probably retrieve the missing item. After all, the cruise line does have the right to inspect their cabins ... there are only so many places to hide things. But with day workers, I guess it would be relatively easy to steal. Unless the passenger missed the item well before sailing, while the day worker was still on the ship, it would be almost impossible to round down the thief and retrieve the missing item.

Guess the day worker idea wouldn't be viable after all.

Again, thanks for that insight into shipboard employment and life.

Blue skies ...

--rita