RobInMN

I second that! That's exactly what we did!

Budapest - Like I wrote in my review, we did the Queen of the Danube. From what I could gather from our CM, the hike gave you no additional access or sights that you would not get with the regular tour, and in fact, less. I'm all for hikes when the hike will take you to a cathedral/castle/fort/ruin that you will not get on the other tours. I'm not so interested in doing hikes just for the sake of doing a hike, when it just leads you to the same place the bus does, especially if you end up seeing less. Passau - Honestly, I would not consider this a strenuous hike at all. maybe 1/3 of the vertical is steps, the rest is a gentle inclines, and at one point (depending on route), there's even an elevator you can take. AMA has both this and the Durnstein Fortress hike as '5's. In my opinion, if Durnstien is a 5, Passau is a 3. If Passau is a 5, Durnsein is a 7-8. My wife had no issue doing Passau. There's no way she would have made it at Durnstein. If I remember correctly, There's no afternoon excursions and the ship doesn't leave until later (9:45 PM?). If you do the city walk in the morning, you'll probably some of the same information you would get on the hike (hike will be more castle focused), and then if you want to hike up to the castle on your own just for the views, there should be plenty of time. There is no fee to get to the 2 highest overlook sites (Green dots), but not the confluence overlook (red dot): The only access to the confluence overlook is via the museum. The areas you can only get to via the museum is the inner/right courtyard and that one overlook area. Everything outside of the poorly drawn red line is free to roam. On our Christmas cruise in December (different operator), my sister's family, my daughter and me did the Passau Castle on our own (was not an offered tour), Museum was closed, but we were able to wander the rest of the grounds. The stairs and paths were covered in ice. It was pretty treacherous at times.

I think you are mistaken. That would be triple points, which was not the promo. I remember there was lots of discussion, but don't recall anyone claiming 7. I do recall people that were arguing (hoping) for 8 points ( (1 room + 1 solo) * 2 for suite ) * 2 for the promo). where they were trying to say that a suite was "double" (*2) when it is actually just a "+1". Granted, RC uses the term "Double" in som places, but in the fine print of the T&C, it says "Additional". Anyway, the double points promo was also applied at the end, so it would have to be an even number, no matter what your base was.

Yes ( 1 for the cabin + 1 for a suite + 1 for being booked as single in a double ) * 2 for the double points promo. So, you could get as many as 6 points per night.

We had the TA booked

Correct. If they settle, they each pay their own. I would say that most of the time, it's because the cost of defending themselves is more than what it costs to make the other party "go away". If the loser pays, and they feel strongly that they will win and willing to take that risk, then it could be worth it to not settle and go to court. It raises the threshold for the people trying to get a payout. They wouldn't. Do you think even today all attorney fees are paid for by the clients? No. Attorneys take on cases all the time with no cost to the client hoping for a large settlement or payout that they will take a cut of, no costs on the client. This is what I am getting at. Right now, unscrupulous attorneys file all kinds of lawsuits hoping for a payout. They put in little effort and hope that what they are asking for is worth being bought off for, or they are willing to gamble with a jury, because again, they aren't risking much. As long as they settle or win enough, they can afford to loose some that they just write off, not passing any of it on to the "client". Now, if loser pays, that dynamic shifts drastically. It's no longer worth it to file most of these. Sure, they aren't billing much, but the defendants are. If they had to cove that also, they will be much pickier as to which cases they take, because if it's not strong enough, and the defendant is willing to go the distance, they have to decide if they are also willing. These kind of go together, and while it should make the crap cases go away, it actually helps the stronger cases, as their settlements should actually go up. The only things that should go to court are the ones where both sides legitimately feel that they have a sold case.

"Loser" could very well mean the loser's attorney (or their law firm). How many cases does the plaintiff actually foot the bill today? Aren't a large number of them covered by the attorney for a percentage of the payout? It's no different than gambling, and playing the odds. It just shifts the payout schedule. If they had to cover the legal fees of defendant if they lost, they'd be more willing to just take the winnable cases, and decline the BS ones. They way it works today, they are only out their own costs. If they put very little into it, and theirs a 20% chance they'll win, they can file claims all day long and if they get lucky on one, the payout can more than cover the rest, and none of their clients are out anything. If they have to pay the defendant's costs also, They may only take the 70% change of winning cases, because they'll need a lot more payouts to cover the ones they loose. The actual client doesn't really enter into the equation.

Dupe

Strongly disagree. If you've got a valid claim, a competent attorney should win regardless of how much the other party has to spend on their defense. Forcing the looser to pay both sides should be a strong deterrent against filing these types of ridiculous claims.

I absolutely believe in this concept.

Back in the early 90's, my grandmother was in bad shape. Alzheimer's had long taken the person, and her body was finally giving up (but my god she had a death grip). Her 3 kids (one my dad), and their spouses went on a 5(?) week trip. Might have had a river cruise component, might have been all land, but anyway, they left instructions that if grandma passed, to just have the center put her on ice until they got back and not to bother letting them know. I think one of my cousins contacted her dad anyway, but they didn't alter their plans. I realize it's not quite the same as a parent dying unexpected.

Used to be. It no longer holds that title. However, it can still claim to be the largest church organ in the world. Even under renovation, the church is beautiful and amazing.

At least it's implied that they are a parent the other weeks. That's more than I can say for a large portion of the population.

Actually, it's laid out pretty clear, you just have to look at the right pages in the FAQ As noted in this link from before: https://www.royalcaribbean.com/faq/questions/what-is-royal-suite-class Certain ship classes use "Royal Suite Class". These are the newer classes: Oasis, Quantum, and Icon class ships. This is the benefit guide to the Royal Suites Class program: https://www.royalcaribbean.com/faq/questions/what-are-the-benefits-of-royal-suite-class And here is the room guide as to which room is which class: https://www.royalcaribbean.com/faq/questions/what-rooms-are-included-in-the-royal-suite-class All the remaining ship classes: Freedom, Voyager, Radiance, and Vision classes use the original suite perk guide that I posted previously: https://www.royalcaribbean.com/faq/questions/what-are-the-benefits-of-the-suites-program

https://www.royalcaribbean.com/faq/questions/what-are-the-benefits-of-the-suites-program

That's what I have to do during college football season. I'm a BigTen fan, and from my 2 experiences sailing on a game day, if it wasn't on ESPN (which includes the ESPN SEC channel), then it's not available. Nothing on any of the FOX networks or affiliated channels, which includes the BigTen Network. Very unfortunate. I just put in my earbuds and found a corner in a lounge and streamed the Iowa Hawkeye game on my phone.

Wonder should have the same system as Odyssey. Unless they've physically blocked or eliminated the HDMI ports, you can still use it. On the newer ships with the more interactive custom menu, you have to unplug the network cable as well, and then unplug the TV and plug it back in/ When the network port is connected when the TV boots up, it automatically downloads and launches their custom software first, which does prevent you from using the Source button on the remote.

We can always dream....🤣

I do agree with that part. But this whole conversation is purely hypothetical.

RCI sold Azamara in January '21. In July '20, they had purchased the outstanding portion of Silversea (which they purchased the majority of in '18). Arguably a larger operation for luxury (and expedition) cruises, and during COVID, I assume they decided that they didn't need both. At the time, Azamara had 3 ships, and Silversea 9(?). Azamara has since added 1, and Silversea has 11 with 2 more on order. So, it has nothing to do with not wanting a luxury component. With their purchase of Silverseas, river cruising is about the only portion of their portfolio not covered.

That is a great post to let this thread die on!

We don't really like crowds either, and don't do the big party things or hang out at the pool. But even though an Oasis ship might have a maximum of 6600 passengers plus 2200 crew, there's just that much more space to put everyone. If you divide out the airconditioned space (which eliminates the pool decks and outside areas), by the maximum occupancy, it's about 183 sq ft. per person. I believe that's more than a river cruise ship. I've never had a problem finding a quite place when I wanted to.

They all have their place, and we enjoy them all for various reasons. We love the Oasis class Royal Caribbean ships. We've done them a couple times in the Caribbean and will do another one this fall. We've also done Western Mediterranean on one (spending a week in Rome before hand). We will also likely do Icon once she's not that new and the prices are a bit more reasonable. Yes, these can be more about the ship than the ports, especially in the Caribbean. We also like the older Voyager classes, which were the largest before the Oasis class. These are branching out beyond the Caribbean. Their Quantum class (contemporary to the Oasis) is also designed to go more places, and we will be doing Greece and Israel (2 stops) Fall '24. We also enjoy Royal's smaller & older Radiance class. These ships go to far more ports and places larger ships would never go. These are obviously much more about the ports than the ship, but the ships are still very nice, with amenities that we enjoy. We've done Norway (all the way up to Honnigsvag), Iceland, and will be doing Panama Canal next spring on one. But, we also really enjoy river cruising. Just because we like large ocean ships with lots of entertainment and dining options, doesn't mean that we can't like river cruise ships also. River cruising is obviously going to get us places that an ocean cruise ship will never be able to get us. It's absolutely ports over ship. Yes, if you expect to go on a river cruise and expect the amenities and extras of an ocean cruise, especially from one of the big Caribbean companies, you are delusional and will be very disappointed. But if you go into it knowing what you are getting, there's no reason you can't enjoy it for what it is also. We've done 5 now, and looking at doing Amsterdam to Basel (or reverse) Spring of '25. I think at some point, we'll probably settle into doing both each year. Both ocean and river cruising have the very important aspect that you unpack once, and your hotel goes with you. (pre & post extensions aside)

I agree. I've kind of wondered this myself. I could see Royal Caribbean being a good fit for Ama if the owners ever want to retire/sell. If they ever did, I'd love it if they merged the loyalty program, but they won't even merge RC's & Celebrity, so I doubt it. We found AMA in 2019 specifically because (at that time anyway) we were looking for a 3 generation family vacation. My parents had done many river cruises and we'd done one with them years ago. They were interested in taking the grand kids, but the companies the usually used didn't allow kids (10, 13, & 19), so we were looking around at other companies and ran across a cruises through Disney Vacations. After looking into that, we realized that they chartered Ama cruises. So we skipped the Disney mark up and booked directly (or via a TA) with Ama.