mnocket

If you're open to other cruise lines, you might take a look at Windstar. I recently completed their final 7-day circumnavigation of Iceland for the season (Sept 2-9). There were no midges at that time of year. We did a b2b that then continued on to Greenland, Nova Scotia & Montreal (no midges there either). On the first 3 nights of that segment we got to experience the Northern Lights. It's right on the cusp of the season, but there's always the chance that you might get to see them on the final circumnavigation cruise. Just something to consider.

This is a real concern for me as I've just recently booked a cruise that includes South Georgia for Jan 2025. Could this be the beginning of the end for exploration cruises to Antarctica?

Picture looks about right. 100% of lounges have towels to "reserve" them, but only about 10% actually have people in them.

It's not clear to me what difference an "auxiliary bar" makes when it comes to the GC law. Maybe you're referring to getting around something else?

My workaround is to order Malibu rum with pineapple juice (assuming they have real pineapple juice available).

OMG! Not Santa too??😮

We really enjoyed spending a few days at the Avenida Palace hotel. We will definitely stay there again next time we are in Barcelona.

Another holiday fantasy smashed to bits. I always thought gingerbread houses were made from gingerbread cookie dough. I don't want to peek behind the curtain. I want to believe it's all real🤩 I'll be on the Mariner this Xmas and the gingerbread houses just won't look the same to me☹️

I've found the Pina Colada and Margarita mixes to be terrible. For me, undrinkable. If they're going to use mixes, they should at least spend a bit more for decent ones.

I've found this attitude to be prevalent throughout CC. Every board has its cheerleaders whose knee-jerk reaction to most any complaint is to defend the cruise line. In cases like yours, they are quick to point out that, by the letter of the cruise contract, they are allowed to make almost any change they want to the itinerary. In my opinion, these people miss the distinction between what the cruise line can legally do per the contract, and what is the right thing to do for their customers. Whenever I reply that there is often a difference between what is legal and what is right, they seem unable to fathom the concept.

One wonders.... What exactly is the point of the expiration date on passports, if in practice the passport becomes unusable 6 months earlier?

WOW My first Regent cruise is next month. Maybe my expectations are set too high.

THIS was exactly my thought. It seemed very clear to me that the primary issue people were raising was a decrease in the quality of the food. All she spoke about was variety. Not the same thing.

Yes and no. Starlink satellites are low earth orbit not geosynchronous. That means the same satellites that cross over land continue on to cross over the oceans as well. Unlike geosynchronous, there are not more satellites positioned over land than over the oceans. That said, only the newer Starlink satellites that have laser communications are effective over the oceans. That's because when over the oceans, the satellites must bounce the signal, via laser, from satellite to satellite until a ground station can be reached. Because not all of the planned laser-capable satellites have been launched, there can be short periods when no appropriate satellite is overhead and there will be a blackout until the next satellite comes into view. There are already enough satellites available that these blackouts are not a major problem unless one is in the polar regions.

Unfortunately, just having Starlink does not guarantee fast internet. So much depends on how each cruise line/ship implements it. For example, has the onboard infrastructure been upgraded to deliver higher speeds? How does the cruise line choose to throttle individual users? How much Starlink bandwidth has the ship bought? Like most things, the devil is in the details. I'm boarding the Mariner in December and I hope RSSC has straightened out any issues with their Starlink implementation.

I've given up on trying to predict where the cruise line stocks are going. The reaction to earnings have been very muted. One thing that concerns me long-term is that we're in a period of high occupancy despite significant price increases and cost cutting. Other than high debt, which is a persistent issue, this should be the best of times for the cruise industry. What is going to happen when the tide turns, as it always does? If this is how the stocks behave when things are going great, do they have any resiliency to withstand a downturn?

It's a high-risk gamble. You might make it, but you also might miss it. Personally I don't like to end my vacation feeling anxious, so I never plan short connections. I'd rather stay the night in a hotel and leisurely make my way to the airport the next day.

I think some people are comparing Starlink on ships to internet at home rather than internet on ships pre-Starlink. Even 2Mbps is considerably faster than previous onboard internet and is sufficient to meet most typical user needs. Obviously Starlink is capable of much faster internet, but what is delivered to users is determined by how the cruise line implements it - i.e. throttling, shipboard infrastructure, etc. I will take shipboard Starlink over legacy internet any day. People just like to complain.

Tremendously! Thanks. I will be following this closely. So far it seems the draught hasn't affected the cruise. I'm hoping this holds true for the duration and on through our cruise in December/January.

Sorry, I must be dense, but I can't find and "writeup" on the current Amazon voyage. Can you provide a direct link?

It makes me wonder, if this is how the stocks perform when things are going well, what's going to happen when there is a downturn in vacation spending?

Please read the OP's original post.

From the OPs original post... "Not surprisingly, we missed our connection and the cruise. By the time our delayed Detroit-Chicago flight returned from the tarmac, there were no alternative flight arrangements to get us to our cruise."

No, I said they were not compensated by Regent. They were lucky they had travel insurance. The burden for Regent's poor flight arrangements should have been born by Regent, not the insurance company. I'm fine if you believe this is appropriate, I do not. People see things differently.

In this case they no-showed because the connecting flight booked by Regent was missed due to an unacceptably short connection - one the customer complained about and tried fruitlessly to get Regent to change. Regent then refused any compensation for the missed cruise. Surely, you don't think this is acceptable?