PartyAllDaTyme

I seriously doubt you'd ever have a problem with your cabin steward or assistant taking anything. They'd be the first suspects in any theft, and the consequences for them would be dire. On first meeting us, a steward once requested that we be sure to use the safe for our valuables and keep the cabin door shut when we weren't around, because, in his words, "if they think I might have taken something, it's..." and he drew his finger across his throat... "for me." Not literally, of course, but he'd be out of a good job.

So can theft happen? Absolutely, but you're much more likely to be the victim of a fellow passenger. Take the usual precautions, not just for your sake, but for the sake of your friendly, helpful steward.

You do all know, I hope, that bumping like PartyAll suggests is against the forum rules?

That's why you don't "bump" it you just post some comment that has the same result.

You are both correct, technically. In the case of posting on the general forums, such as this one, it's rude and certainly against the rules, because it's distracting from other threads. On a roll call, posting an additional comment, even something like "Hey, anyone there?" may not impart more information, but it keeps the roll call thread "alive" so when someone does come looking for it, they can find it. Effectively, it's a bump, but it causes no harm.

Hi Steve,

Thanks but this takes me back to my lonely roll call that I started! ??

I was responding to Fouremco's post above, since deleted, who said that he couldn't find a roll call for Equinox on March 27, 2015.

I think they could have awarded points based on what any cruises already booked at the time of conversion would have earned in credits-- we had four cruise points, 4/5 of the way to Select, so we got 120 points, which equals 4/5 of the 150 points needed for Select. I would have preferred if the Concierge booking that would have otherwise gotten us to 6 cruise credits would have equaled 180 points instead of the 155 we will now end up with, but they do reserve the right to change the terms at any time. But maybe that's not what the basis for conversion was. In any case, it is what it is.

I've been away from Cruise Critic for a while, and don't have time to look through 74 pages of posts to see if this sentiment has already been expressed yet, but...

We're still Classic, have 4 cruise credits, would have been 6 after this cruise coming up. We would have needed 4 more week-long Veranda cruises or 2 more Concierge cruises to make Elite. My four credits translated into 120 points-- it would have been 77 points if we would be starting today under the present system. We'll be up to 155 points after this cruise, so will make the jump up to Select. Instead of 4 Veranda cruises, we'll need 7 7-day cruises to get to Elite, or 5 Concierge cruises instead of 2 7-day cruises. Three more cruises either way.

However, I support the change. It was too easy to reach Elite before. If everyone's special, then no one's special. We plan on being Celebrity cruisers for many years, so we'll get to Elite soon enough. The loyalty benefits aren't the main incentive for us to cruise, just a nice perk. Once we get to Elite, it'll be more enjoyable to attend the happy hour if it's not a herd. There's still too many Elites, including Diamonds from Crown & Anchor, but maybe in seven years the ranks will thin a bit through attrition.

Try here.

I've started roll calls that no one else posted on for a few months. I can guarantee someone else will eventually join you!:)

I see you first posted on 1/12-- just add a post every 30 days to bump it, or it will seem to disappear from the list of Equinox roll calls since most people have the boards set up to only show posts from the last 30 days.

1. Yes. You've insured the trip cost at $4500, you've actually paid $1490 for air (but $130 is refundable) plus $250 for deposit on the cruise (which is refundable). You took out a policy, then came down with a medical condition (unrelated to any pre-existing condition) for which the doctor imposes medical restrictions, so you cancel. You'd be out $1360, so you can get that back.

2. Yes. You failed to cover the additional $760, so you lose your pre-ex waiver, but that's not why you're cancelling. You get back 100% (or a better way to put it is up to 100%) of the insured trip cost, which is $4500.

Yes, you would be able to increase the trip coverage by the extra $760 concurrent with (or shortly thereafter, depending on the policy language), and you should. If you don't, if your new condition doesn't cause you to cancel but then the pre-existing condition recurs or worsens, causing you to cancel, you get nothing because the pre-ex waiver is gone.

No, there's no reason to cover the additional amount before you make final payment, except to have the peace of mind that comes with knowing that it's taken care of. With the additional trip cost comes an increase in the premium, and why pay it before you're committed to the additional amount? If you increase the trip cost, pay the additional premium, then cancel before you make the final payment, you just paid an additional premium for nothing.

If you weren't concerned about the pre-ex waiver, you still wouldn't have to insure the full cost of the cruise as you make final payment, just 50% once the penalty becomes 50%, increase it to cover 75% when the penalty reaches 75%, and 100% once the penalty reaches 100%. But to keep the pre-ex waiver, the trip cost on the policy must be increased within a certain time of its being paid, whether it's refundable in all or in part at the time. If it becomes nonrefundable, it must be covered when it's paid.

Disclaimer-- this information is based on the policies I'm familiar with. Your language may differ. I work for one of the large travel insurance providers, so I probably have a higher than average understanding of how policies work, but I have known to be wrong.:o

Depending on the language in the description of coverage, pre-existing conditions are defined as those existing prior to the initial purchase of the policy. Since questions regarding when and if you increase your trip cost are generally related to keeping the pre-ex waiver in place, it would have no bearing on the new condition-- it is not, by definition, a pre-existing condition, even if it occurs prior to increasing trip cost. If you need to cancel at any point, and assuming it meets the conditions of the "sickness, injury or death" part of the trip cancellation/interruption reasons, you should have no problem recovering what you're out, assuming you included at least that amount of your trip cost and paid any additional premium.

Of course, you may very well want to keep the pre-ex waiver in place for any pre-existing condition you (or a family member or traveling companion) may have, so if that causes you to cancel, you're covered for that. To do that, you typically need to cover all nonrefundable costs within a set number of days (same as the grace period you had to purchase the policy) of when they are incurred to keep the pre-ex waiver.

They refer to the Loyalty Desk and the Loyalty Host even in Classic benefits, so I'd say it's any Captain's Club member.

I'd also like to know where transatlantics fit in to the schedule. Thanks for posting, mac_tlc!

I can get the ball rolling on some of these--

(2) Bring aboard soda and water, no problem. I've never heard of a limit, either in quantity (most we've done is 4 12-packs) or size of bottle (never did more than 12 oz. cans myself).

(4) There are a few different priority lines-- priority for Select and above, priority for Concierge class and above, for example. Sometimes the priority lines are so busy it's faster to use the non-priority line.

I'm sure others can answer the others. Welcome to Celebrity!

I just got off the phone with Captain's Club, trying to book shore excursions. Selected one, it booted me back to the home page. Now can't find a phone number anywhere to contact the regular desk, found the one for CC. The CC CSR told me to get my booking numbers (2 reservations, DD and BF traveling with us), couldn't find them. "Click My Celebrity in the top of the screen." Uh, uh, there's just Log Out, Welcome Back Yourname Here, Already Booked and Online Checkin where it normally has My Celebrity. Maybe I need to switch browsers. "What browser are you using?" IE. "Well, that should work." Got it done over the phone, but what a glitchy website. Makes you hope the software running the ships isn't managed by the same doofusus (doofi?)

I'll try Google Chrome, thanks for the suggestion, jasbo.

On Summit

CABIN #: 7208

DECK #: 7

CLASS: C1

AREA: Aft

BED NEAR: Bath

QUIET?: Little bit of occasional noise from Sunset Bar, nothing objectionable

BALCONY VIEW: Tremendous-- wake of the ship

BALCONY SIZE: Huuuge-- 200 sq ft, 2 loungers, 2 chairs, dinner table, end table

(not my photo:o)

WIND A PROBLEM?: No

SOOT A PROBLEM?: No

PROBLEMS/COMMENTS: One of the prized aft-facing concierge cabins, just above the PH, three decks away from the Sunset Bar, as close to the center of the ship as you can get without being in the adjacent HC cabin. Canopy covers most of it but enough sun on the end, except maybe if sailing due south. Inside cabin 7210 across the hall is handy for parents traveling with children, young or adult, who want their own cabin.

It was over a year ago (:() that I was on Summit-- no charge then for the sauna. Perhaps they're referring to Persian Gardens.

I think the point being made is that many members of the board seem to hold some regulations (such as "sharing" drink packages) to an absolute, and make it seem like the worst offense in the history of cruising, when in fact there are areas of gray ... and the same posters most likely break other regulations (such as speeding or j-walking) on a regular basis, and have no problem with that. Why is it okay to "bend" the rules in some cases but not others?

 

Now if I actually "bought" a drink (say a $12 martini at the martini bar) ... can my spouse share that? I would think that if I buy a drink, I should be able to do whatever I want with it ... even if it means letting someone else try it.

True, drink sharing is not very high on my scale of cruise behavior to be concerned about. Sorry if I gave the impression that it is. It's just that it irks me when someone can't or won't see that their actions do have consequences for others.

Regarding the drink purchased separately, outside of the package, you're free to do whatever you want with it. Drink it, give it away, pour it down the drain if you want. (Well, don't give it to a child, toss it overboard, or anything else illegal.) If it's obtained with the package, it comes with the condition that it will not be shared.

I recall the post that this post was started in response to. It concerned someone letting a spouse have a sip of a drink to see how they liked it before purchasing one separately for themselves, and what to do if a person ordered a drink that they had never tried, decided they didn't like it, and gave it to their spouse to finish. The only reason I dredge this up is that some may be referring to drink sharing as ordering a completely separate drink, intended for the consumption by someone who is not on the package and would have to otherwise pay separately for their drink, and some may be thinking about sharing an individual drink by letting their spouse have a sip to sample it.

I propose the following solution to all this. Next cruise, tell the barman what your intentions are, and see if it's okay. If you think what you're doing is acceptable, you shouldn't be afraid to practice it out in the open. If you think it unwise to be open and honest about your intentions, I think you have your answer.

A very good point - I would also like to know how some of the "critics" feel about this. Its okay to eat enough food for 3-4 people, but if I share an occasional drink with my spouse (that I paid for), I should be thrown off the ship?

So how much did you pay for your spouse?:D Just kidding, I thought we could all use a laugh at this point, sorry.

The point is that you did not, in fact, pay for your spouse's drink.

I just reread your post. In fairness, maybe you're referring to you getting a drink on your package and splitting it with your spouse. Okay, you did not pay for your spouse's half of the drink. And I don't think anyone's saying you should be thrown off the ship, just saying your beverage package should be revoked for violating its terms.

Do people who order multiple appetizers, entrees and deserts increase the cost of food for everyone else? How do you feel about that?

 

Do you snitch on people breaking the speed limit all the while doing so yourself? What if a police officer is nice enough to let you off with a warning? Do you report that to his or her superiors.

Of course, people who order multiple appetizers and so on add to the cost of the cruise. It's not the way I would run things, but, for whatever reason, that's the way Celebrity does. The difference is it's not okay with them to share drink packages. Their ship, their rules, and if we don't like the rules, no one's forcing us to cruise with them.

The old argument about "What about speeders?" is not analogous. Not really a good way to report a speeder without using your cellphone, and now you're driving distracted or causing a hazard by pulling onto the shoulder to call. By the time you get to an exit ramp, it's probably too late. And if everyone did their civic duty and reported every traffic violation they saw, the police would be inundated and would not be able to sort out the important stuff. Imagine if you were on hold for ten minutes, waiting to report a driver going the wrong way on the interstate, because there were ten people ahead of you reporting someone going two miles over the limit.

I have used my CB (back in my trucking days) to alert the state patrol if I saw what appeared to be a drunk driver ("Charley Weaver" in CB talk, good buddy). Similarly, they don't want the emergency channel (Channel 9) tied up with routine crap, so you don't report every little thing. And the bears are not out to prevent thievery, they're trying to keep everyone safe. If, in their estimation, they can accomplish that with a warning, it's their call.

These kinds of threads (dress code ones, too) are a reminder of just how god-awful some people can be.

I thought this was a test on three ships sailing out of the UK, I could be wrong.

My info regarding RCI's practice was from memory of other posts. I called RCI and was told that, no, both parties in the cabin do not have to purchase the package. I apologize for the misinformation. But they no longer offer alcoholic drink packages on all ships. So there's another way to combat the problem of people sharing the drink packages-- discontinue them.

So if Celebrity follows suit, eliminates the drink packages, and everyone has to pay per drink, that will effectively raise the price of drinks, at least for those of us who managed to (legitimately) get our money's worth out of the packages. Nobody else's business, huh? Yeah, right. Thanks a lot, all you sharers.:mad:

this has to be the craziest thread it ever seen. Almost approaches the chair hog and dress code discussions of th past. IMHO, some of you need to worry about yourselves and not others. If some guests want to grab a few extra drinks for their companions, so be it. Why should you be concerned?? BTW, I have never cruised with a drink package. I would almost be afraid to if I had to worry about some of you

"drink police" would ruin my cruise by confronting me about a an extra drink that would have no effect whatsoever on you.

A little drink sharing is like being a little pregnant. Either it's wrong or it's not. I'm not saying it's wrong to be pregnant, of course, just it's just either you are or you aren't.

For purposes of illustration, let's take it to the extreme and say that, out of 3,000 adults on board, they sell 1,500 drink packages and those they sell them to share drinks with the other 1,500, who consume as much as those who legitimately have the package. If the cruise line was expecting to make X (no pun intended:p) amount of revenue based on typical consumption of 3,000 people, they have to charge double the amount they would if everyone played by the rules. In reality, the losses are not 50%, but they do factor in a certain amount of loss from drink pilfering into the cost of the package, same as a store figures a certain amount of loss from shoplifting and passes those costs on to the customers, one of which is me. So everybody, please stop saying that your sharing drinks does not affect me. It may not be a huge amount, but it's money out of my pocket to pay for your drink. And it's precisely why it's now mandatory on RCI that if one person in the cabin buys a drink package, the other person must purchase it, as well.

I predict that when (not if) Celebrity decides to initiate the same policy, there will be a great cry of outrage from those who feel that they are being taken advantage of by the big, bad cruiseline. If you don't like their product under the terms they're offering, don't buy it.

I see absolutely nothing wrong if I share a drink with my spouse & actually it would be nobody's business but ours. Also, if I want to get 2 drinks for me on my package & my spouse drinks one -- this is not theft ---- I paid big bucks for the package..... & don't tell me that 100% of you would not do the same ---

LOL

Sorry, I'm telling you that I would not do the same. The big bucks you paid for was for one package that is not to be shared. If the terms are not acceptable to you, don't buy the package. Since drink pilfering affects the price of the package that I purchase, that makes it my business. And just saying "this is not theft" does not mean it's not theft.

If I had a Celebrity crewmember tell me it's okay to share a drink package, I'd ask to get it in writing, since it contradicts the written policy. Then again, I know what the policy is. If I didn't, why would I think that there's a reason to question it?

Unfortunately, the bottom line is that sometimes incorrect information is given out, either inadvertently or advertently, but it's still incorrect information. Where I work, I run into customers all the time that say another agent told them something that just ain't so. Unless they can somehow verify, we can't honor what they say was said. If we did, anyone could claim anything on the grounds that "someone said so."

Even if one was to be a little dodgy and sneak their partner an occasional drink, it is still equated in to the price of the package. X are not actually losing out as they purchase in huge volumes and get very good price breaks. Much cheaper than you or I would pay .... combined. In a 2 week package they make a huge profit so the odd free drink that you pass to your partner is not really an issue. Yeah its breaking the rules but again not actually causing a loss.

Yes, and stores factor in losses from shoplifting when pricing their merchandise. I work for an online retailer where we have to put up with a certain amount of fraud from customers who claim not to have received their package-- overall, it's cheaper to take the customer's word for it and take the loss than it is to ship packages insured or with a signature required. Sad, but true. Who ultimately pays? The honest customers.

If they allow the "odd drink" and chalk it up to the cost of doing business, where do they draw the line? Eventually, everybody figures out that two people only have to pay for one beverage package. That "odd drink" multiplied by a couple of thousand passengers adds up quickly. It's why RCCL now requires both people in a cabin to purchase the package if one does. Since alcohol sales are one of the biggest profit centers on the ship, if even just 5% of the drinks that should be paid for are not, that has a major effect on revenue. What their markup is on the booze is immaterial.

I can't believe I got sucked into this topic again. Oh, well.:p

If the issue is cruise line liability, wouldn’t there be less carrier liability if the passenger drank what they brought onboard and got drunk rather than purchasing it from the bar and getting drunk, which seems to put the responsibility on the bartender rather than the passenger, hence the increased liability.

My guess would be that the issue is that, since the cruise line is allowing alcohol to be brought aboard in unlimited quantities, they are giving their tacit approval for consumption of said liquor, and might be considered to be a party to any unfortunate consequences. "They knew I was bringing an ungodly amount of liquor on board, they had to know I was going to drink it. They should make those railings on the balcony high enough so someone in my condition can't be tempted to climb up and try to walk it like a tightrope. It's their fault I fell off the ship." Maybe the argument won't hold up in court, but banning carryon liquor at least eliminates that basis for a frivolous lawsuit, which was what BruceMuzz was referring to.

HAL does allow you to bring on as much wine, champagne, bottled water, sodas and mixers as you want. And we have seen people take 2 and 3 cases of wine onto a ship.

Now there's a point to consider, in light of BruceMuzz's post. Are wine drinkers less inclined to rowdy and inebriated behavior than beer or hard liquor drinkers? I think that's the stereotype. If so, there should be no issue with unlimited wine and champers.