Selbourne

Thanks. After I posted I managed to work it out on Google Maps. Looks like Seven Sisters is just over half way along Geiranger Fjord but they probably go a bit further to turn around where the fjord widens. As I say, I just hope that this is the absolute minimum that they do on all cruises that were advertised to call at Geiranger. Can I ask those who have cruised all the way to Geiranger to advise whether the remaining fjord between Seven Sisters and Geiranger is the real highlight of that fjord? In other words, how short changed will we be (in terms of scenery, rather than mileage) if the extent of our transit is Seven Sisters?

Thanks for the info. Hopefully P&O will do this for all cruises that were sold as calling at Geiranger in order to help reduce the negative impact of the curtailed route. Out of interest, do you happen to know roughly what proportion of the Geiranger Fjord between Hellisylt and Geiranger is covered by cruising down to the Seven Sisters and back? I’m keen to understand what proportion of the fjord we would miss if we didn’t do an excursion. Thanks.

Well that would be a good compromise from our point of view. I wonder whether those who were fleeced for a P&O excursion down the fjord to Geiranger may now feel that they could have saved their money?

I think that’s a fair summation of P&O’s attitude. Sadly, they seem to ignore the fact that many customers don’t take that view and book cruises for maybe one specific port. I’m wondering if there are any other consumer markets where one product is advertised and sold yet a different product is delivered - with seemingly no comeback? Can’t think of any offhand.

I’m pleased to hear that you are having a lovely time. Whilst this curtailment hasn’t been an issue for you, it will be for those of us who expected to see the cruise into Geiranger from our balcony and not from an additional cost excursion which, incidentally, people such as my wife are unable to do anyway.

To be fair, that was always the case so nothing has changed in that respect. We specifically booked our cruise because it was one of those that included Geiranger.

Our cruise is still showing both Olden and Geiranger, but I shall be interested to read @molecrochip reply to my earlier questions. If Geiranger is no longer possible then clearly P&O should stop advertising Iona cruises featuring it and contact all passengers on the affected cruises. Anything less is sharp practice IMO.

Spot on. I’m afraid that P&O is now appearing to treat its customers with complete disdain. It’s all very well switching their focus to the ‘new to cruising’ market, but surely any company needs to ensure repeat custom for long term sustainability? To a degree, we are all used to these port change nonsenses, but it won’t even be considered by those booking their first cruise that they might not get to where they have booked. It’s a bit like booking a city break to Paris and then being told by the operator that they’ve changed it to Reims and when you query it being told that they can’t understand why it would matter to you!

If I am reading all of this correctly, Iona will now be unable to call at Geiranger - ever? If correct, this would be completely and utterly inexcusable. We booked our Iona cruise specifically because it went to Geiranger, as it is the only one of the top 3 fjords that we haven’t been to. Not only does it now appear that we will no longer go there, but P&O now has the bare faced cheek to sell overpriced excursions to the place that we have paid to go to anyway which, to rub salt into the wound, they describe as “the most beautiful fjord in the World”! We hate going on excursions at the best of times as we prefer to look around places independently rather than be herded in groups, but due to my wife’s disability we wouldn’t be able to do them anyway. Would you please be kind enough to state very clearly if my understanding of this situation is correct (I.e. NO Iona cruise will now go to Geiranger at any time in the future), or whether this is temporary? I’m afraid that P&O has considerable form for continuing to sell cruises to locations that they know full well they are unable to get to. They have a terribly arrogant attitude that people book cruises purely for the ability to be on a specific ship and where it goes is of no relevance. Wrong. We booked our cruise to go to Geiranger and wouldn’t have booked it had we known that it wouldn’t get there. I hope that I have misunderstood all of this and it’s a temporary problem, but my confidence in P&O has waned considerably in recent years and if this is true then I’m afraid that what confidence or enthusiasm that I have for P&O is left in tatters.

Plymouth to Tilbury by train, allowing for the cross London transfer from Paddington to Fenchurch Street, is at least 5 hours each way I’m afraid.

I’ve lost count of how many offers I’ve had from P&O over the past few months. Still not tempted to book though.

Now I might be wrong as it was a few years ago, but I’m pretty sure that when Adonia and Oriana were announced as being sold we were sent a targeted offer for the last few cruises on both. From memory, the prices were exceptionally good and we were frustrated that we couldn’t take up the offer as we were both still working at the time. Oriana holds a special place in our hearts as we did our first cruise on her in 1996. Sadly, we never cruised on Adonia but did a ships tour of her just before the sale was announced and we thought she was a fabulous ship, which made it all the more frustrating that we couldn’t take up the offer. Come the inevitable day that P&O parts company with Aurora we may endeavour to do one last cruise on her, as we have had more cruises on Aurora than any other P&O ship, but we wouldn’t rush back to Arcadia. I know that she’s a firm favourite of many P&O regulars but she wasn’t for us.

It doesn’t surprise me at all to hear that other cruise operators have slicker / quicker processes for tender operations, just as I believe they do with embarkation and disembarkation. I guess that P&O work on the basis that us Brits are a passive lot and love to queue!

I don’t know whether or not any are planned, but I would think that they might try to avoid them whenever possible. With P&O’s target audience for the largest ships being the ‘new to cruising’ market, it wouldn’t give them a good first impression of what cruising can entail. I still recall tendering operations on some of P&O’s largest ships that have gone on for hours and caused much frustration amongst waiting passengers, especially those trying to keep youngsters occupied whilst waiting for prolonged periods.

All of which makes sense, but the decision not to dock can often be made the night before, so there’s a lot of 15 minutes in that timeframe! Obviously with cruise ships they have to plan ahead, so will make a decision based upon a best guess of what the conditions will be. Nobody would ever question that safety comes first but, as TerrierJohn said, it would be interesting to know how the number of failures to dock with P&O compares with other comparable cruise lines. Often the ‘Operational Reasons’ excuse is complete hogwash. On our first fjords cruise, our call at Flaam was cancelled “due to problems with the port” and replaced with Haugesund, which isn’t even a fjord. I couldn’t get anywhere with P&O so I emailed the harbourmasters office to enquire what the “problem” was. I got a very helpful reply, far more than I had expected. He gave the date that our ships slot had been booked, the date it had been cancelled by Carnival, not the port as had been implied (and it was several months before P&O communicated it - so they continued to sell the cruise dishonestly) and the reason for the cancellation - Carnival ‘bumped’ the P&O ship and replaced it with Queen Victoria.

Given the long winded rigmarole that P&O subjects passengers to when using tenders on their larger ships, I should imagine that attempting that on Iona would be unbearable! Also, some passengers (such as my wife) cannot use tenders, so we try to avoid booking cruises with tender ports.

I hadn’t appreciated that Iona took on diesel as well as LNG. Presumably that’s for non-propulsion power systems? More importantly, can you confirm that the Geiranger issue is just a one off? Like many people, Geiranger was the main factor in us selecting our cruise on Iona next year. Of the top three fjords, Geiranger is the only one that we haven’t experienced and we would not be happy if we don’t get there.

That’s a fair question and it doesn’t just apply to the larger ships. We were on Aurora once and couldn’t dock in Zeebrugge due to high winds (it was a named storm) yet a significantly larger ship from another operator had done so.

I completely understand that there are - and will continue to be - outbreaks on cruise ships. As we know, cruise ships are ideal vectors for viruses. Always have been, always will be. My point is that you don’t catch Covid by just walking past someone. Wearing masks whilst moving around the ship might reassure some, but it’s more kidology than infection control.

I suspect that the objections were something to do with the fact that it isn’t common sense at all. It’s completely illogical.

I’m sure that those with inside cabins only use them as you describe, as frankly you wouldn’t wish to spend time in one for any other reason, but there are a multitude of reasons why those of us who would only cruise in a balcony cabin choose them. Just for starters, there’s the ever changing views, the ability to pop out on to your balcony when something catches your interest, being able to watch early port arrivals without having to get dressed and head out to public decks and the privacy of your own outdoor area to use when you wish (great when the ship is busy). Talking of times when the ship is busy (for example, sea days when the weather isn’t great and people aren’t sunbathing) we sometimes relax in the cabin during the day between meals and talks, watching the views and reading. We would much prefer to do that in our cabin than in a public area. Just as some people say they would rather do twice as many cruises in an inside cabin, we would prefer not to cruise at all than to have an inside cabin. Just a different perspective in response to your ‘why bother?’ question!

You would hope so, given that they are extra charge venues! As a point of interest, how have you found the food in the main dining rooms. A few recent reviews seem to point to it having deteriorated recently.

Funny how these changes are never communicated until after balance due dates 🤔. When it comes to our balance due dates next year, if quarantine zones are still a thing I shall be cancelling. There’s no way I’m running the risk of a last minute cabin change that doesn’t suit us when we have booked at launch and paid Select price to secure specific cabins that we want.

P&O do themselves absolutely no favours at all in how poorly they handle these situations. Many people book a cruise specifically for one or more of the ports. Places like Dubrovnik, Venice, Barcelona, Amsterdam are often the catalyst for a booking. A change of just one key port can render the cruise pointless for some people and IMHO should immediately trigger a full refund option, regardless of the cause of the itinerary change (which, after all, is irrelevant to the customer). P&O take an appalling attitude of hiding behind tenuous T’s & C’s rather than doing the right thing. The thing that I have never understood is that they will eventually back down, but only after the customer has engaged in a battle with them, during which time all good will has been lost. For an industry that has been damaged far more than most as a result of Covid (and remains the only sector of the travel industry to be subject to so many restrictions) you would think that they would be bending over backwards to engender good will amongst customers. Sadly, they seem to lack the bigger picture thinking that is required to get them back on track quickly. Arrogance and inflexibility are not sensible traits when it comes to rebuilding a business.

We visited Malta on a cruise with P&O. We did an excursion, which I can’t recall the name of, that visited a fishing village and a bit of a drive around to see some of the sights. Whilst the fishing village was attractive, we thought that the rest of the island looked quite shabby. Many of the houses looked unfinished and had tumble down walls around barren looking gardens (the guide explained that it’s all due to their lax planning laws). The city of Valletta looked much nicer but we only saw glimpses of it returning to the ship and as it took around an hour to get back on the ship due to a huge, slow moving, queue (other ships were embarking for new cruises at the same time and we got caught in it all) we didn’t bother getting off again. If we ever visited Malta again we wouldn’t bother with an excursion and we would just wander around Valletta on our own (the cruise terminal is fairly central). In fact we prefer to do that in most places now.