mnocket

Clearly I was wrong when I said "I really don't see how anyone can defend Regent's handling of this situation."

I hope you got your date wrong (9/5) as I'm booking the 9/2 sailing Reykjavik-Montreal❔

Could have been, or it could have been that there were already some other passengers with disabilities onboard and the Captain limits the number to what his crew can assist in case of emergency, or it could have been something else entirely. We don't know. The fundamental problem is that the OP inquired, and relied upon, the opinion of someone (the Destination Services Manager) who did not have the final say as to whether or not she would be permitted to board the boat. This decision rests solely with the Captain. We have no idea what the Captain's reasoning was for denying boarding, but it's his boat, his responsibility and his decision to make - not Regent's. Now if the OP was treated disrespectfully by Regent's staff - that's certainly unacceptable. However, it seems to me that OP wants to hold Regent responsible for the Destination Services Manager offering a good faith opinion as to whether or not the excursion was appropriate for her, despite the fact that the Captain has the final say. I wonder how the OP would have felt had the Destination Services Manager said "I cannot offer an opinion as to whether or not an excursion is appropriate for any particular guest as it is the tour company's ultimate decision to make". That would be a truthful statement, but not a very helpful one. In such a situation I think people want to know what Destination Services "thinks" even though they aren't the ones who ultimately decide - and they may occasionally be wrong.

I totally agree. Subcontracting something out does not relieve a company of responsibility for the subcontractor's performance. For example... when you hire a general contractor to remodel your home, much of the actual work is done by subcontractors. Now if the flooring contractor installs a lower quality product from the one you contracted for (maybe your choice was out-of-stock) - you're going to hold the general contractor responsible - and rightly so. In this case it seems Regent is saying "hey it's not our fault the flooring guy didn't deliver what we promised you". And to make it worse, Regent is also saying "even though the flooring guy installed a cheaper product and returned some money to us, we're going to keep it and not pass it along to you as compensation". I really don't see how anyone can defend Regent's handling of this situation.

That's not how I interpret it. I read the requirement as explicitly stating there are 2 circumstances where Covid testing is necessary... "those on back-to-back sailings in Australia/New Zealand" "those aboard the April 22nd, 2023 Celebrity Eclipse..." That's it. When it goes on to say "For guests on back-to-back sailings..." I read that as applying to the two circumstances listed. I suspect the reason has something to do with government regulations for cruise ships departing Australia & New Zealand. It certainly could, and should, have been worded better, but I see this as a limited requirement that doesn't apply to B2Bs from the Caribbean or anywhere else other than the two circumstances listed. I reserve the right to be wrong🙂

Thanks. I'll check if the TA's OBC is refundable.

Thanks. That's pretty much what I was afraid of.

I got a bunch of TA provided OBC, but I'm in Yacht Club and everything is included except excursions. I'd like to book my excursions in advance, but I'm concerned that I will need to wait until I'm onboard in order to use my TA's OBC (it doesn't show on MSC's website and I'm told it won't show up until I board the ship). If I can't book in advance, do people have much luck waiting until they board before booking excursions? Thanks.

I really don't think the primary complaint is unavoidable port changes. People seem to be upset because the new green policy is resulting in a systemic reduction in port stays. In some cases, changes that aren't announced until well after final payment despite the impact of slower speeds being known well in advance. This isn't a case of things not going according to plan - this is the plan.

If Regent's included wines are deemed unacceptable, there are those who complain and those who are willing to pay extra for a better wine. If Regent's included excursions are deemed unacceptable, there are those who complain and those who are willing to pay extra for an independent tour. Neither is wrong. It's just how different people react when their expectations aren't met. I've found myself on both sides. I will admit, I'm often happier when I just bite the bullet and pay up for a solution rather than let the shortcoming impact my enjoyment. Life is short. Problems have solutions - sometimes you have to pay for them even if you feel you shouldn't. Your choice.

👏👏👏 Well said.

Looking at this suggestion from Regent's perspective I can kind of understand why they may not want to do it. Gathering customer reviews of excursions would obviously be of value to Regent. Customer feedback is always helpful to a business that wishes to improve their offerings. However, publishing customer reviews could very well cause problems for Regent. I would imagine that everyone would flock to the best reviewed excursions. The result would likely be a bunch of disgruntled customers who aren't able to book these excursions because they are already full (I imagine snapped up by the upper tier suites). The ability to increase availability of these top rated excursions is limited by the operator's capacity. From Regent's perspective, I suspect they prefer customers relying solely on the excursion descriptions rather than customer ratings.

Why not call Guest Services and ask to move to another cabin?

Why does it seem everything degrades over time? Why can't a perfectly good product/service seem to endure time?

Also if the speedo wearer was male or female☺️

Sorry I confused you with another poster.

Agreed. But again, this is exactly how things started in the US.

This is exactly how things started off in US. Then the expectation became 15% and now it's becoming 22%. It's a slippery slope and if people in the UK are now routinely tipping for good service - even if a lower amount - all I can say is "Welcome Aboard"... and condolences🥴

Wow! If I got downgraded on a 10hr flight I'd be furious. As a new Regent customer (1st cruise in Dec) It's really disappointing to hear this. If it happened to me, I'd immediately be on the phone with Regent and expect them to rebook me on another flight with BC - even if it meant I had to stay in a hotel overnight. However, it sounds like I'd be disappointed by Regent's response😕

I agree you were not treated well. My point was that for the most part Destination Services does not meet with and assess each passenger for their fitness for a particular tour - and as your experience demonstrates even if a passenger meets with Destination Services they are not particularly knowledgeable about the tour specifics. I doubt they know more than what the tour description says - if that. So the Captain can not rely on prescreening by Regent and must make his own judgement as to who is allowed to board. He may very well have made an uninformed decision in your case and that's on him. Regent's failure, as I have said, is how they treated you. I was not disagreeing with you. I was disagreeing with the notion that all guests arrive at the tour operator prescreened and deemed fit for the particular activity.

Should? Yes they should. Are they? Not entirely. The difference between your examples is that in the first case the "shirts at the table" rule is strictly enforced by the mother - and therefore strictly obeyed. In the case of cruise line dress codes, the rules are not strictly enforced and therefore are not strictly obeyed. Should cruise lines follow the mother's example and insist that the rules are strictly adhered to? imho, yes. However, for whatever reason many cruise lines seem to disagree - at least in practice. If strict adherence to the rules is important to someone, they really should look beyond the rules themselves and consider whether there is strict enforcement. If there is not strict enforcement, they should not expect there to be strict adherence - and more importantly, they should not let it disrupt their enjoyment of the cruise.

How so? Does Destination Services meet with each customer to assess their fitness for the tour? No, in fact as has been pointed out, Destination Services doesn't even seem very knowledgeable about the specifics of many tours. The ultimate decision regarding permission to board is the Captain's. Period. Regent has no control over that - nor should they. What Regent does have control over is how they treat their customers. After having a disappointing experience does Regent respond with compassion and empathy? In this case it seems they did not and the OP's response to this failure is understandable imho.

I'd probably modify #2 to be... 2. Don't expect everyone to follow the rules or for all rules to be enforced. To expect otherwise will just lead to disappointment. I sometimes see people post about how someone behaving counter to the rules so upset them that it wound up ruining their cruise.

I was going to post, but then I saw your post and it was pretty much exactly what I was going to say. Definitely skip the flatbread or else you will be too full to enjoy the main event. Also asking for a couple of lamb chops along with your steak (ribeye of course) is a pro move👍

While I agree with this sentiment, it seems that cruise line "rules" are nowadays treated more as guidelines - by both passengers and crew. Recall the recent discussion about the new chair hog rule and its enforcement. It seems OP's husband is in a bit of a quandary since he believes rules are to be followed yet would also like to wear jeans. One way he could look at it is that if a rule isn't enforced - it's not really a rule and he can join the jeans gang guilt-free. The reality is that there are "written" rules and there are the "real" rules. For example... a 60mph speed limit is a "written" rule, but we all know that the "real" rule (the enforced one) is 5-7 mph higher. If dress code is important to someone, they need to seek out a cruise line where the "written" and "real" rule is the same. Perhaps Cunard or Silversea?