RPen63

I have had a similar experience to the OP’s while I was on O.  I was in a specialty restaurant, probably Polo, but I don’t remember for sure.  After checking out the dessert menu and finding nothing that I felt was worth the calories, I asked if they had berries available.  The waiter said that they did not in that restaurant but told me that he would get me some from elsewhere on the ship, which he did.  I’m not sure that the end result was any different between our experiences.  

12 hours ago, happy cruzer said:

 Right now we plan to have two day in Oslo, two day in Prague, train to Vienna, 2 days in Vienna, train to Budapest, 2 days in Budapest, fly to Madrid, two days in Madrid.

 

Ideas to improve?

 

If time was not an issue, I would suggest adding at least 1 more day to each city.  Aside from that, Bratislava is a beautiful little city and it is worth spending a day there as well.  It can be reached by fast ferry from Vienna along the Danube.

Sirena had a lecturer during the crossing we were on in January.  Her lectures were essentially a summary of The Path Between the Seas, and in my opinion missed the best bits.  That being said, she was an entertaining speaker and her lectures provided excellent information to those who hadn’t read the book.  She also provided a narrative through the crossing but was difficult to hear if not close to a speaker. 

We have stayed there twice 9as recently as January this year) and enjoyed it.  

It would be worth looking into an umbrella insurance policy.  Some cover all rental-car-related risks and could be a cost effective solution especially when the other benefits are considered.  Ask your home and/or car insurance provider about the benefits and costs.

In my experience, O doesn’t link excursions with credits. The first ones bought are paid for with the SM credit.  The first one(s) cancelled are deemed to be paid by credit card or other credits.  O cancelled the first excursion we selected, and which had been covered by our SM credit, but refunded its value up to the amount we had paid for excursions via our credit card.  The balance went back into our SM excursion credit. Cancellations while onboard may be handled differently.

The credit card payment was refunded in a few days.

23 hours ago, pinotlover said:

FWIW, just got notice that Oceania had cancelled one of our few scheduled ship tours. It was the only tour they offered over 4 hours, in that port, and the only one remaining ashore until 4:00 with a currently scheduled 5:00 departure. Why do I have a feeling we’ll be notified, once aboard, of schedule changes? 😤

Reasonable conclusion based on my experience, however be happy if you are advised of the change in some fashion other than noticing a new arrival / departure times in the Currents the night before!

24 minutes ago, EJL2023 said:

Nope, didn’t notice this except for perhaps a bit smaller portions, which I think is actually good. 

+1

5 hours ago, rbtan said:

Sorry that my review was rather :scattered". We just arrived home & I decided to do the review. I was annoyed that the review section would not allow me to write it properly. I'll try again.

If it helps, I typed my review up in a word processor and then cut and pasted it into the review.  It was reasonably painless, but would be a pain (at least for me) on my phone or iPad.

Disembarked Sirena in mid January.  That cruise was on par with any of the other 5 O cruises we have taken. Better in some ways and worse in others.  Overall, it was excellent.

7 hours ago, Eloise4Ever said:

 

I don't think anybody is saying O's approach in your case was unethical. I know I'm not.

Apologies if I misinterpreted what you had said earlier about O’s approach to refunding cancelled excursions was unethical.

5 hours ago, Vallesan said:

To simplify, my reading of the situation is, if you pay ‘money’ on top of your SM tour credit allowance, if any trip is cancelled, irrespective of whether it was paid with ‘credit’ or ‘cash’, your first cancellations would be covered by cash refunds to your credit card. That would be irrespective of which trip was actually cancelled.

 

It’s probably better to look at it as a ‘package’ rather than individual tours. You have $400 SM you add more tours  at a cost of $200 cash, if any of your tours are cancelled the refunds will be applied firstly to the ‘cash’ amount you paid irrespective of the order of the tours. The excess cash will always be refunded if the overall cost of the tours is less than the SM allowance.

 

However, the SM allowance is non-refundable …. use it if lose it!

 

This is consistent with my understanding and treatment.  Tours paid on SM credits are the last to be cancelled.  Our incident happened before we boarded so it went to the credit card.  Assuming the same approach is taken on board, the refund would be a refundable on board credit.

11 hours ago, jonthomas said:

That's a very expensive way to solve this problem. Besides we are not the butler types.

You could opt for a PH or concierge level cabin to get a head start.  If you go to PH or above, you are not obligated to use your butler but may find him of some value.  Absent spending money to get an earlier booking time, you will have to be very flexible in your dining time and keep a look out for cancellations before and during your cruise.  

We tend to opt for sharing for our specialty restaurants and over the past 12 or so dinners have only had 1 that I regret but that was down to the fact that 1 couple did not really fit in.  You could try redirecting the conversation away from politics.  Don’t shut the conversation down, but let them finish their thought and then tactfully change the subject.  Talk about previous travels, their children, their jobs, their hobbies, etc.

3 minutes ago, pinotlover said:

Sounds like to me they used it on a different tour. 

Yes, we used it so did not lose it.  This all happened before boarding so working it out was fairly straightforward.  Had it happened while on board, we may have ended up with unused credits if we had been unable to find a suitable replacement.

However, nothing about the way O treated us can be considered unethical.  The cancelled tour was the first one we selected and was paid for with the SM credit, but the refund was applied to the additional monies we had paid for tours in excess of the SM credit.  Because it was paid with SM credits, Ocould have applied the refund to the SM credits, but did not.  The approach they took was more than fair and is certainly not unethical.

22 hours ago, Eloise4Ever said:

 

Thanks for that but honestly I don't think it's terribly clear. The poster does say they ended up with "excess SM credits" which may be understood as SM credits they couldn't spend.

 

I personally haven't experience losing SM credits but for me, unethical business practices are a red flag. Please note, I didn't dream this scenario up. It has been mentioned a few times on this thread that the SM excursion credit is "use it or lose it".

We “spent” the surplus credits on a different excursion but they would not have been refundable if we had not been able to find one that was available and of interest to us.  The lesson is that if one spends more than the SM credit on excursions, the risk of having surplus SM credit at the end of the cruise is lower and only you can decide if taking those additional excursions is a reasonable risk premium.  IMHO, the “game’ is fairly easy to understand and the risk can be hedged if you see value in doing so.  The fact that refunds are deemed to accrue first to non-SM excursions irrespective of how they were originally allocated seems fair to me, and is certainly not unethical.

8 hours ago, shepherd really said:

Interesting, but it raises a question, in my case I have an upcoming cruise with $600pp SM excursion credit but spent closer to $1000pp on excursions. 

 

So, if they cancel a couple of excursions are they going to claim that "those were the ones paid by the SM credit" based on order of booking (or some other criteria) or will they refund up to the amount I paid in cold hard cash (by credit card obviously) since that portion has nothing to do with the SM credit?

 

 

 

 

If you prefer experience over conjecture, you can read the following, otherwise “question” away.

we had a situation recently where O reduced port time and we found out through an updated invoice and prepurchase summary where the first tour (full day)  we had bought was cancelled.  After the dust settled, we were refunded for the value of that excursion as if we had booked it in excess of the SM entitlement.  We ended up with excess SM credits to spend.  Although communication was lacking, we were treated fairly.

Review of recent Sirena cruise:  https://www.cruisecritic.com/memberreviews/memberreview.cfm?EntryID=711238

2 hours ago, Rebels82 said:

I am on the Vista with you and totally agree with it being a problem. We both wrote it on our Mid Cruise Survey. Our Concierge called and said “ we don’t have a policy about saving chairs. People should know to not do it.” She also said she has had several complaints and has sent info shoreside. I think people should complain, in writing, with their Mid Cruise and End Cruise surveys. Talking about it doesn’t get anything done. If Oceania doesn’t have a Policy, that is a problem, in my opinion. It tells me they don’t think it is a problem and/or don’t want to deal with it. 

Interesting, but colour me surprised.  I recall seeing a blurb in Currents during a Caribbean cruise in 2022 stating that items left on loungers would be removed after a specified period of time.  I think it was 30 minutes but it may have been longer.  Maybe they eliminated the policy of are not willing to implement it.  The only solution is to keep bringing it up on the surveys!

My travel health insurance requires me or a representative to contact them as soon as possible after receiving emergency care and before if possible.  These type of incidents seem to be common when dealing with ships’ medical facilities and suggest that paying for a very expensive satellite phone call to your insurer upfront is money well spent especially if your provider has expertise available to challenge the medical necessity of proposed treatments and can get the changes reversed.  

4 hours ago, Alabamapenman said:

Thank you, Med1968.  That sounds authoritative.  

Book early if you need one.  Eligibility was recently expanded and the gov’t did not account for the increased demand resulting in a crashed website and no sympathy for those who were unable to secure the ETA as a result.

It never hurts to ask.  We cancelled a cruise earlier this year and our TA was able to convert the admin fee into an FCC.  We have 5 cruises under our belt and we missed the cutoff by 2 or 3 days, both of which may have  helped.

31 minutes ago, GarthK said:

I agree, the higher fare story is a cop out. Fares are increased to offset rising costs, not to cover additional perks. They're clearly offering this to try to fill empty cabins. They want you to book early, and especially take your money sooner, but then they give extras to those who book late. That's what frustrates me. The higher fares are just a convenient excuse.

An old marketing trick:  make something appear to be free while charging for it.  Pricing models are very complicated but in general a cruise line will target a net price that covers their costs and generates sales.  The perks are part of the cost equation and structured to provide value to the customer with minimal impact on cashflow.  By booking early, you have paid a lower net price than that currently being offered for new bookings, which is your inducement / reward to do so.  If the cruise line gets more cash per booking from late bookings, i cannot see that you are being disadvantaged.

Oceania has an opaque pricing model (I’m being charitable here).  We as customers have a choice to either live with it or vote with our wallets.  This model seems to be successful for them.  Could it change?  Yes if enough customers vote with their wallets and Oceania suffers.  I would not count on it happening though.

6 hours ago, NeedToChill said:

 

The old layout had that: https://www.cruisecritic.com/photos/ships/riviera-607/penthouse-suite-311074/penthouse-suite--v14123587/

 

The new layout post refurbishment feels much more spacious, in my opinion, never having actually been inside the previous layout, just judging by the pictures.

--Julian

The curtain was just for show.

I booked the cruise last week.  Interestingly, I was able to add excursions to the shopping cart for the first leg to Panama City but was unable to even see the excursions for the second part.  It could jyst be another example of Oceania’s glitchy website.

I have read in this and other threads that excursions can be booked up to a year in advance.  I have a January 3, 2024, cruise — Serena, Miami to Panama City and return — and was checking my online account to see what excursions are available.  I noticed that excursions are not currently available for me to book.  I could see excursions for the first but not the second leg of the cruise.  It was not a weekend so cannot assume a nonfunctional website.
 

I then looked at the shore excursion pdf provided by my TA and noticed the following sentence in the preamble, “Guests in Suites and Concierge Level staterooms enjoy a 60-day priority booking period, prior to the 120-day online booking window.”  I surmise that excursions are no longer available to book as early as other posters have indicated in the past and higher level staterooms have been granted another perk.

I provide this for information, but was also wondering if I am missing something.  Does anyone know when the change was made?