Luckybee

Thanks to both the OP for a great topic, and to those who answered my side enquiry. We'll make sure to see Cats next year when we're onboard.

For those of you who have seen Cats elsewhere can you please advise as to whether you think some of the poor reviews are because of this particular version of Cats or just personal taste ?

We've booked for next Nov and I was thrilled to see Cats available since I'm a huge fan. We do a fair number of shows generally and Cats is still one of , if not my all time favorite. I've seen it twice in Toronto, and once on Broadway, and dh has seen it twice in Toronto as well. We both have loved it, but we don't wish to waste the time if this version is not so great.

Funny though in terms of personal taste....when we were originally booked on Allure which we cancelled and saw that it was MammaMia we had already decided that was a non starter because we definitely did not enjoy that show in Toronto. Although the music was ok we found the storyline to be sooooo boring and predictable yet that seems to be more popular on here.

Dh and I are booked on Oasis for Nov of 2018 in a Royal Loft and following the cruise we will be flying to Aruba. According to our itinerary we will dock at 6:00 am . In the last few years Southwest has been the only carrier with decent flights from Orlando to Aruba and the flight is generally at the same time which is somewhere between 10 am and 11 am. Our alternative would be to drive to Miami after debark and take their evening flight.

Of course we have to wait and see whether the schedules vary for next year but Im not anticipating significant changes.

So my question is this....with Star debarkation likely/not likely we could be in a cab by 7 am to get to the Orlando airport and checked in by 8 am(assuming a 10 am flight) ?

Thats funny, when I went to book the upcoming cruise, Oasis was half the price of Allure and Oasis was for a eastern itinerary...

This was our recent experience as well. We had booked Allure for Nov 2018 in a Royal Loft Suite and ended up cancelling and booking with HAL for a myriad of reasons. I expected to write off our non refundable deposit but last week saw that the Oasis was available for the same week at a price point that was $6000 less than the Allure. Although the itinerary isn't as good as what we had booked with HAL the suite is a heck of a lot nicer for not much more than what we were paying with HAL for a Neptune suite(which could probably fit in the bathroom of the RLS).

Quite frankly I was shocked at the price differential between the Allure and Oasis, and the price drop for this suite on Oasis.

Most people and common sense would say that - RCI doesn't see it that way.

Thank you for saying in 1 line what many of us have been trying to say in far too many paragraphs for days now. The ability to be succinct is a skill you obviously possess :)

I wonder if any of the posters affected by this situation have considered contacting the Elliott dot org folks? They've taken on cruiselines before and had some pretty decent results so it might be worth a try.

Call me a snob if you like; I enjoy mini-suites for the larger balcony, large shower, and a little more space in the cabin. If I decide to use the pool, I get annoyed when there's 10 people in the pool and almost every lounge chair has a towel on it. It's annoying that cruise lines will not enforce their own rules and remove the towels. It's because the walk-in closet class feels they're entitled to an unlimited reservation for lounge chairs. They're also the first ones to complain when they can't get something for nothing. If you're going cheap, you should expect that level of amenities. If I want something I'm willing to pay a fair price for it. Not buying travel insurance is either stupid or cheap; take your choice.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

And in our few cruises we only sail in the big suites. On RCCL, or NCL one has special sections with fewer chair hogs. Since you seem to think you are superior to those who sail in what you seem to be suggesting is "closet class" perhaps you should try a real suite.

Seriously please don't. At least not on a cruise we're on !

To suggest a class action suit is pure stupidity. Attorneys avoid cruise line suits because (1) they operate under special rules, and (2) they are registered outside the USA. If you're too cheap to buy travel insurance, you're probably one of those inside cabin (walk-in closet class) people who run up to the pool deck before the sun rises to put a towel on a lounge chair you may use two hours during the day but tie up for the entire day. You probably want free bottled water too. Buy the insurance next time and you can skip your pity party.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

So speechless I wouldn't know where to start !

If anyone knows...how has lowsidr the OP for this thread made out from the storm in florida ? I have to believe he is without power or I expect he'd be back here on this thread.

That is because there hasn't been a kayak built that can float a 737.

Lol....my dh would have groaned at this but it just broke me up :)

DO SOMETHING NICE FOR OTHERS AND IT MIGHT HELP YOU FEEL BETTER.

 

On the Royal Caribbean Homepage there is an icon to click that will lead you to a page to contribute to Hurricane Irma relief.

 

They are matching donations up to $1million.

 

(I'm sure some of the negative Nellies are eager to type a rebuttal to this post.):cool:

If im one of the "negative nellies", I think it is great that they are doing this, and what NCL and Royal are doing in terms of those who are stranded on the various islands are doing is also terrific.

One can choose to not like certain policies and like others. Each person for themselves can decide what policies will help them determine who to sail with in the future

My preferred example is the law regarding being on board an airplane for X amount of time.

 

A widely publicized case, brought this on, even when the industry pointed out it only happens a few times a year, out of thousands of flights per DAY.

 

But no, everyone yelled and screamed, so Congress passed a law, requiring the airline to all sorts of things if this were to happen.

 

So the result is, it doesn't happen now. HOORAY. Except that now, if the airline thinks the flight will push anywhere close to that limit due to weather, they CANCEL THE FLIGHT.

 

Oh, and since it was canceled due to weather, they owe you NOTHING, except a later flight. NO meals, NO lodging, NOTHING.

 

That is what regulation does.

 

And many of those having an issue with how the cruise lines are handling Irma, have NO clue as to their lack of rights in airline travel due to weather delays and cancellations.

I guess really it comes down to personal preference. I have been in this situation both pre and post the regulation change and after spending far more time sitting on the tarmac than it would have taken to my destination, only to have the flight attendants over hours, then a further delay arriving 9 hours late for a 2 hour flight....compared to the very civilized rebooking for the next am that we just experienced. I'll take paying for my overnight and meals(although haven't had to in the past). As an aside AC now offers a sort of insurance for this now called "On my Way". Plus if you book with various credit cards such as our Amex then your travel insurance automatically covers the kind of expenses you refer to.

No, that one line lowered their fares and charged for bags. The consumers voted with their dollars by picking the cheapest fare. And then paid as much when they checked bags.

 

So the other airlines followed suit.

 

Except SouthWest, which I have found to be more expensive than the others much of the time. Remember, SW has their own law, requiring quoted fares in advertising to include all taxes and fees. They used to quote just the airfare portion, which seemed low. Also, there is a REASON SW is not on Kayak, Priceline, etc. :)

That is interesting....I think it must depend on where you fly out of. Dh and I are in Canada between Toronto and Buffalo. If we are doing domestic or Caribbean always without any exception Southwest is by far our best bet compared to any of the other carriers both in terms of price, and policies. As an example just last week was booking flights to Orlando for April. We have a ton of points with Aeroplan( Air Canada's frequent flyer program) and we have a credit with JetBlue which I had intended to use. The cost for our trip on SWA at $109 usd ea way was less expensive than the cost of taxes and fees if we were to use our points out of Toronto. On a cash basis, they were far less than every other carrier by at least $150 per person usd each way, and using the credit on jet blue (which is only $200) would have left us paying and extra $159 ea so not a smart proposition out of Buffalo, and out of Toronto there was no reasonable comparison at all.

Can you point to any cruise contract with any cruise line that says the ship will be sea worthy?

 

The choice is thus not to find a cruise line that promises a sea worthy vessel, but to decide if you want a cruise vacation at all.

 

 

I have not looked at them, but I suspect hotels on land do not have contracts with customers that provide for habitable rooms, free from mold, vermin, insects, etc.

No the choice is to look at past performance and ask yourself whether you are prepared to take a chance with a company who does not have a proven positive track record in these situations versus another who does. If you are satisfied with the way Royal had handled this you should have no concerns, and if you are not there are at least 2 companies that handled this differently. So we all have future choices to make :)

And regarding your hotel example.....we once received a room at a 5* resort that had some pretty serious issues ( Merv Griffins paradise island before Atlantis took over) and they refunded our stay, and brought us back for 4 nights at the Ocean Club on them.

Again, that is what insurance if for. I would check your insurance policy. If it is 2 separate policies, then you might be screwed. I know the policy I bought for my family of four for next year has provisions that if any one of us is unable to make it for covered reasons (flights cancelled would count), we can get our full fares back.

Im going to try not to beat a dead horse, but if you've been reading these threads you realize that not everyone has insurance, and of those who do some are finding that not everything is covered(including at least one poster on this thread), and finally and imho to me it shouldn't matter. The bottom line is the cruiseline is not providing the product that the consumer purchased. In that equation whether one does or does not have insurance doesn't/shouldn't matter .

If Mr. and Mrs. Smith have that many complications involved in scheduling a vacation they should probably avoid planning cruises in hurricane season in the first place.

Well I partly agree with you if you are only talking about booking with Royal....unlike Mr and Mrs Smith in my example dh and I book our holidays at least a year in advance since we are self employed and logistics require us to do so. As I said in another thread I can pretty much tell you where we will be and when right up to the first quarter of 2019. Would I book a cruise in Hurricane season....not with Royal, but I'd have no qualms booking with the cruise lines that I think have treated their customers in a manner that I think is fair...matter of fact we're booked with HAL for November 11th of next year which albeit later is still in hurricane season( mind you we have Royal to thank for that booking but that is another story :) .

Maybe Mr and Mrs Smith can only take holidays in the summer because they have 2 school age children. My point was there are so many variables in each individuals life and I try ( not always successfully to consider that not everyone may be in the situation as we are, or have the same finances etc.)

And your insurance should cover that, plain and simple. That is what insurance is for. If you decided to not buy an insurance policy, then you are still having your insurance cover it, but you are self insured, so you are covering it.

 

Additional cost for a different flight is part of the risk you took to cruise during this time of year.

I think you missed the part about how there was only 1 seat available out of 3 different carriers and 2 different airports .

I guess if it were me....I could go and leave dh at home (but it wouldn't make for a happy hubby....lol)

Right now, most people are simply speculating they will not be able to get there and don't want to accept the current offer. That is different than people being physically unable to get there.

It isn't speculation....out of curiosity (and wanting to have a vague idea of what Im talking about) I took a look at Southwest and Delta (admittedly just 2 of the more popular carriers) and from what Im seeing good luck finding a flight. From our location availability out of Buffalo....I then looked out of Toronto....could get flights for one person only (at a cost of $1100) per ticket when normally it is less than half.

It is easy for those of us, from the comfort of our homes, or offices to talk about how one "could" get there, but not so easy for those who cant find flights, or hotels, or cant afford the much higher costs involved.

If you signed a contract that said you were paying 12$ for a dozen eggs, and if we cannot give you 12, we will discount the cost to cover the difference (say a bumpy road made 6 of the crack on the way to deliver, and they then refunded $6). While you did not get the full $12, you are getting refunded the portion you were missing.

But they are not refunding the difference, they are providing a credit of the difference to those who take the shortened cruise, and for those who don't a credit for what they spent. Already there are some on the boards who have said they cannot find cruises to fit there schedules, costs etc with those credits.

Let me give you examples....lets say Mr and Mrs Smith booked one of the affected cruises. They both had to get time off work and to do so they need to request same 6-12 months in advance. Then it takes a month for the employers to ok their time off and by the time they go back and forth they cant book within the 60 days needed. Or lets say they saved and saved to be able to afford this cruise and now the price for the same cruise next year is more than they can afford. Or this cruise was a special occasion, like a honeymoon or anniversary and they cant get another cruise now with Royal but instead they want to fly to Jamaica or Aruba because they want a 7 day holiday not a 4 day one, which after all is what they booked in the first place.

Isn't the cruise line delivering their product? If you choose the shortened product, you are being refunded for a portion of your cruise. If you are not able to make it, you are receiving a full refund to use on a future cruise.

 

And yes, the cruise line chose to offer the cruise during hurricane season, but no one made the consumer book it.

 

Take some responsibility. You booked a cruise during the height of hurricane season. And you're surprised when a hurricane disrupts your vacation? The strongest hurricane to ever be in the Atlantic just demolished plenty of places and people are upset they're not getting whatever they think they should get. It amazes me how much some people complain when there are people who lost their lives, and all of their possessions and people are upset because the cruise line is doing more than they have to but people want more (direct quote from someone here). You're either getting a refund, or you're getting a discount and FCC. No one is cheating you out of anything.

No all these cruisers are not getting a refund....nowhere in any definition of refund does it include a credit. Big difference between the two....sort of like , as an example, the difference between virtually every other cruise lines handling of this situation and Harvey's as compared to Royal !

definition of refund :

re·fund1

verb

verb: refund; 3rd person present: refunds; past tense: refunded; past participle: refunded; gerund or present participle: refunding

rəˈfənd,ˈrēˌfənd/

1. 1.
   pay back (money), typically to a customer who is not satisfied with goods or services bought.
   "if you're not delighted with your purchase, we guarantee to refund your money in full"
   synonyms:repay, give back, return, pay back More"we will refund your money if you're not satisfied"
    
    
    
   reimburse, compensate, recompense, remunerate, indemnify
   "they refunded the subscribers"
    
    
    
    
    
   
   • pay back money to (someone).
     "I'll refund you for the apples and any other damage"
      
      
     

noun

noun: refund; plural noun: refunds

ˈrēˌfənd/

1. 1.
   a repayment of a sum of money, typically to a dissatisfied customer.
   "you are entitled to reject it and insist on a refund"
   synonyms:repayment, reimbursement, rebate "a full refund
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
   

All three lines showed how they will handle this situation if/when it happens again. It appears Royal will stick to what the contract says while Carnival and NCL will not. Consumers can now add those decisions to their "pros/cons" list when they decide on their next choice of cruise lines.

 

However, I'm guessing in about a month most people will forget about this decision. Even those it directly affected (like the OP) are likely to decide based on all the other differences (cost, itinerary, amenities, etc). RCI will probably lose a couple customers over this, but I think they'll be readily replaced.

I agree...and we as consumers can may the choice. Knowing what I know now and seeing the options we would never now book with Royal anytime from June until November, and the rest of the time it would have to be very enticing to consider them for a cruise at all. By enticing I don't mean simply financially but rather I mean getting something we cant get somewhere else. I hate their new policy on non refundable suite deposits too but unfortunately I do like their ships.

But generally you might be right as well that many will simply forget and it will have no effect. The difference is because we are not regular "cruisers" in the sense that we travel more land based we are not "tied" to one particular cruiseline so we are not perhaps the market Royal most wants.

For us it means we've booked two other cruises now (including 1 today....) and neither will be with RCCL.

I am in my 50s... and I have done two river cruises, and I loved both of them. I guess I am just a bit more open minded....

 

I have to agree with you we need to rewrite maritime law, and make it so, that if the cruise lines ever do something like this again, that we put them on the rack... those medieval monks had it so figured out.

 

Lower expectations are sucky... yet RCI has flowriders and Ifly and bumper cars, and all sorts of things that no other cruiseline offers. We need to go back to the days of the Titantic, where most people were in the bowels and the upper crust could dine in style.... we need to equalize the experience we all live in the bowels....

 

JC

LOL...I don't know that I would go that far.....maybe just stoning at dawn ;)

Seriously though, for me I really don't car about bumper cars, flow riders and the like (not that Im getting older, which I am but this kind of stuff was never my thing) but I do love having a great variety of restaurants on board. I personally would be willing to pay for better cs though Im not so naïve to believe that most would agree.

Ever been to a restaurant and have the waiter come back and say "I'm sorry but we're out of the dinner you ordered?" Do you get up and leave or do you order something else?

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

That depends ! Are they offering me a different main course, or appetizer, or are they suggesting I have tapas instead ? If I went expecting to have dinner and was told I could only have a snack I wouldn't be staying.

But to take it one step further...there is a pizza place near where I live that offers a package that one can purchase in advance for x number of pizzas over a year. If I bought the package and then ordered my first pizza and they said sorry we only have chicken wings now, darn right I'd expect my money back.

I've actually been in that situation once in FLL. I don't recall which hurricane it was, but FLL was trashed the week before departure - hotels weren't open but flights had resumed on Friday, the day before our cruise. Delta let us change our flight at no charge to come in the on day of the cruise. If hotels aren't open in FlLL I would imagine the airlines will allow changes.

With what will likely be some pretty inconsistent scheduling that would be pretty risky no? As an example using Delta they say on their website that they expect impact to flights and cancellations until September 17th.

Ok, but sometime the ship will be sailing and a lot of people will want to be on board, and I bet the sooner the better for most of them.

 

I don't really know of any similar industry to a giant cruise ship, but ok.... O, I tthought of one. The dirigible industry which pretty much died with the Hindenburg.

 

You might want to check out the river cruise forum. It might give you a different opinion of RCI and the ocean cruise industry in general. Look for cruises with low water, and in particular Viking cruises, where instead of a lovely river cruise you get a bus trip in Europe and get to sleep on stationary river cruise boats... Happens routinely.... when the water is low or high....

 

JC

Happening routinely doesn't make it right .

And ty for telling me. I'll have to make sure I never ever book a river cruise :)

It may be an age thing. I honestly believe we get the customer service we deserve and are willing to pay for. Im in my 50's and can actually recall when we had real customer service not just cruise specific. Part of the problem is that many today really don't know what cs used to be like and have much lower expectations and imho it's sad. The more people accept mediocre the more it will happen but I guess if one doesn't understand the difference it may seem perfectly acceptable.