podgeandrodge

Don't disagree. Just thought when it was clearly going to become a wider Comms issue with websites reporting it that they would cop themselves on!

Incredible that a large corporation would allow negative publicity to get ahead of it like this without so much of a factual statement

Well in fairness, cruisemummy did just that, which shows some independence

Rumour has it that he is changing his name on here to NCLGuy

This is a discussion about the potential to get a drink (either by purchasing on board or getting from the beverage package) and you are now trying to derail it into a discussion on why people don't just go on land to get a drink because, as you see it, the point is to get off the ship in port (notwithstanding that many will be back on the ship long before it leaves port, and not be able to get a drink). """""""Back to my point, this isn't really an issue of whether or not passengers can get drinks, but the fact that they might have to pay twice (once by purchasing the beverage package and again on land, should they choose to do so).""""" ---->>>>>> NO, it's not.

Too soon for optimism yet, we need something official or confirmation from passengers on the ships. Hopefully!

They automatically assume you are kindly understanding !

I wouldn't blame standard customer service agents at this stage - they have clearly been told from "on high" not to say another word. The big question is whether NCL are desperately trying to fix the issue behind the scenes, or whether they are just hoping this will blow over. I don't think it will, and they'll have to address it, or the issue will likely become more viral in terms of Youtube blogs etc. giving them a bad name.

See article on Cruisemummy posted in the "Uk no alchol at ports" thread. https://www.cruisemummy.co.uk/cruise-ships-banning-alcohol-in-ports/

Whatever about minor inaccuracies, it's good that this site has picked up the issue, as it should hopefully help put more pressure on NCL to fix the damn problem. I see she quotes a few posters on here, enjoy your fame 🙂

Good news, sounds like something was going on behind the scenes to fix so. It was not sustainable really, and this thread was probably the fastest growing thread in quite a while, with the potential to become more viral. If you get a copy of the message please post it!

Good points. NCL are allowing the discontent from this to spread beyond even the people on the ships right now, and annoy those of us who are planning or contemplating another NCL cruise. Making that statement and refusing the elaborate (especially when the wording with the "may" is so vague!) is unacceptable. And then letting crew get screwed over by suggesting a drop in the DSC. My only disagreement with you - if I was on a ship right now in port in the UK and wanting a beer, I'd be seriously píssed! (Or NOT píssed actually as no alchol 🙂 )

Possibly down to varying interpretations of "entitled journey" and "store" etc. per above - somewhere in the above regulations must lie the facts, and the facts apply to all, not just certain lines.

I've done it. Got same response as posted earlier. Definitely a Group Wide party line on this right now. Whether that means they are trying to sort out the mess while they hold that line, or whether they are simply sticking their heads in the sand.........we shall see... but they are damaging the brand.

One things for sure - NCL have agreed in both US and EU given similar wordings to adopt the same message. hopefully they are planning how to fix things...

the answer must be in here somewhere!

I didn't post that!, also you've posted some comments without your own - possibly you are hitting wrong button.

Yes. Argument that at the very least NCL would have to say if you purchase you might get a drink or "may" 🙂

Ironically, "may be served" could also mean is "allowed to be served" rather than "might be" !

That subsequent response is shocking, but perhaps shows a 'company line' is being rapidly enforced. Hopefully means they are closing ranks with a view to addressing the issue.

Further to SouthamptonCruiseFan's post above, this link may provide some information, if someone has the time to go through it. (Apologies if I am posting irrelevant nonsense, but it looks relevant). To me it seems that this must be interpretational between the lines, or as SouthamptonCruiseFan said, a deliberate decision by NCL not to pay duty. Either way, NCL should not hide behind "UK customs rules" - it's a lie hiding behind a truth - yes, it's because of UK customs, but ONLY because NCL doesn't want to fix the issue, unlike other lines. Some screenshots below, but best to read the website. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/excise-notice-69a-duty-free-ships-stores/excise-notice-69a-duty-free-ships-stores

Doesn't explain why UK ports they are not allowing people with beverage package get a drink unfortunately

You're cheerleading the indefensible so much on here, I'm beginning to think you just like winding people up. Either that, or you're the type that could be sold sand before a visit to the Sahara, and suck it up when you got there and saw the desert.

It is quite clear, as of October 2022 anyway per lovemycruisetoo, that a SOLO traveller gets a Latitude "dinner for 2 with wine", "dinner for two". In a long thread, which I didn't want to open up again, ggTexasGal mentioned that "You, as a Solo traveler, have access to 2 Latitudes specialty dining meals during a cruise of 5 days or longer. Anyone with whom you choose to dine, is on their own for "how" their meal will be paid!" Others have contradicted this, and stated that they, as SOLO travellers, have been still able to treat another guest to the meal if they dine with them. Poster UKstages on here made the distinction that a SOLO TRAVELLER can treat another guest, it's just that Norwegian don't want a SOLO DINER having 2 meals, only one. The confusion seems to stem from the language Norweigan are using - """"""""Effective September 14, 2022, Latitudes Rewards members who reach a tier eligible for the Dinner for Two benefits will receive 2 Dinner for Two vouchers to be used at any specialty restaurant on sailings 5-days or longer." • 2 guests maximum – Dinner for Two vouchers are issued as a per stateroom benefit. • SOLO TRAVELLERS ARE ELIGIBLE FOR ONE DINNER FOR EACH VOUCHER."""""""" I think that NCL simply mean that solo travellers can't tuck into 2 meals if they are on their own at the table. But they can still treat another passenger. Love some confirmation please. EDIT - MORE CONFUSING LANGUAGE ON THE FAQ ON NCL WEBSITE, which states "solo travellers get two dinners for one" - I don't think this is what they mean, - they mean "solo diners". Can I still split the dinner for two vouchers if I am a solo traveller (two meals for one person)? No, this benefit is delivered as two dinners for two per stateroom. Solo travellers get two dinners for one. You cannot split the voucher in to two separate vouchers and redeem the dinners on two separate evenings. The benefit is only if there are two guests dining on the same visit.

So does Sapphire allow you to skip the line for entertainment shows, as well as dining? Is it up to the staff at the doorway i.e. could they refuse and mortify you as you walk back to the back of the line? 😲 In terms of the Behind the Scenes Tour, I'm currently Platinum (easy these days with the extra points I guess, but took me a lot of cruises), and I would suggest they leave the current BTS tour for Platinum, but perhaps give the "Paid" BTS tour to Saphire, thus adding value. Right now, I just don't see much value in progressing from Platinum.