Jump to content

Regent wins while customers lose?


Balloon Man
 Share

Recommended Posts

Sailing on Mariner from Montreal to Miami late October. Am already depressed by the "Questions about Mariner" thread that suggests the suites are in poor condition, food is cold, the world is coming to an end .... No doubt we will be able to make-up our own minds on those subjects after a few days on the vessel.

 

However what is annoying me BEFORE getting on-board is the fact that two ports have been cancelled and the ship will sail part of the cruise at half speed because it might hit a Right whale as they migrate North. I'm not blaming the whales and agree they need protecting, but why didn't Regent's planners make allowances for this when designing the cruise? Don't these whales make this journey every year at the same time? I have heard that officialdom stepped-in this year and Regent simply had to do as it was told, so maybe not entirely Regent's fault. The jury's out on that one.

 

That aside, Regent has offered no compensation to those who have booked the cruise; no "Sorry and you can swap to another of our cruises if you want". No "we'll give you a $1,000 credit on another cruise". Not even "$100 on-board credit this cruise".

 

Why should they do these things? (A) Because otherwise they are going to have a lot of disgruntled customers on the ship, and (B) the company will save a large amount of money with reduced fuel use, savings on port costs and the "free" shore excursions we will now miss and which they no doubt will not pay for.

 

Maybe they are saving it as a surprise for when we get on-board :confused:.

 

We cruise three times a year with companies including Seabourn, Silversea, Oceania and Crystal though this will only be our second cruise with Regent. That said it may now be our last, especially if the suites are in the poor state suggested in the other thread here on CC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The change was only announced a couple of months ago.

 

It has impacted all cruise lines.

 

I am sure that Regent along with all lines sailing this itinerary would have preferred to not be restricted in their speed so they could keep to their schedule.

 

On a related note, Regent was fined on one of the voyages for exceeding the speed.

 

Keith

Link to comment
Share on other sites

100% in agreement with other posters. Regent isn't "winning" from this (nor did they win when the hurricanes required making port changes.)

 

In terms of the Mariner, IMO, the thread is exaggerated. People that have not sailed on her this year are posting and some people (Wendy for instance) that had no problem with the condition of the Mariner hasn't posted either. Our issue was really about food - nothing else and Regent is on top of it. I'll report on the food beginning November 17th.

 

Sorry to see another inflammatory subject. I can see posting the questions that the TS has posed but, IMO, why post a subject that assumes Regent is guilty without knowing the whole story? Obviously, any of us can post what we wish but, IMO, inflammatory subjects tends to do exactly what it is intended to do...... inflame!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

100% in agreement with other posters. Regent isn't "winning" from this (nor did they win when the hurricanes required making port changes.)

 

Really? Will they not save port charges? Will they not save on fuel? Will they not save on excursions? Is anybody knowledgeable enough to provide accurate answers to these questions because so far no-one has tried.

 

If I'm wrong about these matters mea culpa, but I reserve my right to raise such issues on CC. And I would describe my post as inquisitive rather than inflammatory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually I see your tone as inflammatory but perhaps it is just me as I tried to give you a response as to the cause of the changes

 

As for receiving compensation for missed ports, you can take it up with Regent Customer Relations....I care just not that much

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hang on chaps! Does Balloon Man deserve quite such a roasting?! I am prepared to accept that his initial post just about fell into the 'inquisitive' category - don't forget we can all feel a bit exasperated when we have our mind / cash / plans all set and then it gets changed, in part. We are are soon to head to a crystal cruise where we have lost one port in Madagascar and look to lose the second on account of the plague...and have been waiting for Qatar to become a casualty too. But I must admit compensation hadn't occurred to me. I am sure cruise lines far prefer not to have their plans disturbed - but the savings on the free excursions makes for an interesting point. One would assume that the income from the paid for trips did not amount to the cost of the free ones.

But I think sometimes we forget that cruising the oceans is way different to holidaying ashore where the variables are far far fewer.

Given the per diam we pay for being on these ships perhaps an extra sea day can / should be viewed as a win as we get to enjoy what we have paid for more....? I suspect Regent will do whatever they can to pack out the extra time at sea.

We have Explorer lined up in the Spring for a crossing. Hopefully the ocean travel variables will not hinder our getting across the pond safely and in comfort..!

Balloon Man - I am sure you'll have a wonderful time, I do hope so. Go with a determination to enjoy it and don't look for reasons to be disappointed. You've still got a host of wonderful ports of call!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes - less fuel will be used because the ship will have to go slow in the area where the whales are (I am personally very happy that Canada has made the changes that they have in order to save the lives of the whales).

 

How does anyone know that Regent saves money on excursions? Can they simply book excursions for hundreds of passengers and cancel without penalty?

 

As most cruisers know, port changes/additions/deletions happen everyday. They are not done to save money or to inconvenience passengers.

 

Balloon Man - all of us give opinions. We do not know how much Regent makes or loses on each cruise. While they may make a few dollars in one area, they may lose in another. Speaking of fuel, whenever a passenger needs to be rushed to a port due to an emergency and the ship is running at full speed, they are losing money due to fuel. It likely equals out at the end.

 

If you want different answers than you are receiving on this thread, suggest that you call Regent and discuss it with them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, with more people staying onboard on a sea day, it likely costs Regent more in food and drink

 

When you go on a cruise it clearly states that itineraries may change

 

As has been said above, the OP should take this issue up with Regent directly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the very least port charges should be refunded, Why should Regent pocket it?

 

As you may recall, port and fuel charges used to be separate items (and they still are on some luxury cruise lines). Keeping track of changing prices (especially fuel but port fees also change) Regent apparently decided to bundle and include them. Personally, I would not want to pay extra in my fare for Regent to keep track of every change. For instance, all visits to Puerto Rico sadly had to be cancelled and in most cases Regent will be calling into different ports. Perhaps the port fees for Puerto Rico is higher (or lower) than the new port that we will be visiting (St. Kitts) but I don't expect Regent to figure out the difference and either charge us more or refund us. After all, it works both ways.

 

Hope that your family is is okay. Our hearts all go out to the people in Puerto Rico and other islands damaged by the hurricanes. We were planning to have lunch there on our cruise that begins next month. Sadly, that won't be happening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tallship: If questioning Regent is inflammatory then I plead guilty. But I did suggest government intervention might be the cause of the problem.

 

Of course I will take it up with Regent, but here I'm seeking the views of other CC members with far more experience of cruising than I have. It seems to me that Regent COULD save a considerable amount of money in port charges, fuel and excursions they don't have to buy. If so some of this should be passed to their customers who are not getting the cruise they signed-up for. QED.

 

I've spoken with a lawyer friend involved in Canadian mercantile (but not the East coast) who advises that if government "interference" is the cause then cancelled port charges cannot be levied which will result in savings of tens of thousands of dollars to Regent.

 

Anybody know how much a cruise ship burns in oil at 10 knots rather than 20?

 

Anybody think the tour operators are going to take Regent to court because of cancellations this year while they hope for business next year?

 

And let's avoid comparing with hurricanes ... unless somebody thinks they were also government inspired.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Firstly, it is the Canadian government that put these much needed laws into place - not the U.S. and Regent is a U.S. company. Second, as mentioned above, if Regent reinstated the policy whereby port and fuel fees were paid separately, you may in fact be due money back, but, on the other hand, if fuel costs or port fees go up, you should have to pay more. Some of remember when fuel costs were a separate line item on our invoice and speaking for myself only, I would not want to go back to those days - especially with the continually changing fuel costs (which BTW, just went up due to the hurricanes that you would prefer not discussing). So, under the old rules, you may be owed money back for the missed port but may owe money for any increases in the fuel costs that occurred since you booked the cruise.

 

tallship also brought up an excellent point. When 600 (approximately) passengers have to stay on the ship, the food and alcohol costs increase.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FYI

 

New speed limits force cruise lines to revise Canada sailings

 

 

New speed restrictions on ships sailing waters in eastern Canada where North Atlantic right whales have been congregating have forced cruise lines to shorten port stays and drop some calls.

 

For example, Cunard Line's Queen Mary 2 will call at Sept-Iles on Oct. 2 due to speed limits implemented for the west section of the Gulf of St. Lawrence. The 151,000-gross-ton liner is one of the largest ships to visit the fishing and mining town of 26,000 people.

 

Emergency rules adopted in mid-August limit all ships over 20 meters long to speeds of 10 mph or less in a vast swath stretching from the northern shore of the St. Lawrence River south to near Prince Edward Island.

 

Cruise ships, which typically motor at 17 or 18 mph in the area, now face fines of up to $25,000 for exceeding 10 mph in the restricted zone.

 

Canadian minister of transport Marc Garneau said the slowdown will stay in place until the endangered whales migrate out of the region, which could be sometime in September or October.

 

But a half-dozen cruise lines have already adapted their schedules to the slower cruising speeds, shaving hours off of stays in ports to make up the difference or moving their ships to spend more time out of the restricted zone.

 

"The problem is twofold," said Donna Spalding, director of administration, CLIA Northwest and Canada. "We recognize the speed restrictions were put in to protect the species at risk. The short notice is an issue for cruise lines, because they have guests who were expecting a certain product, but it's also a significant liability for the small communities on the East Coast that rely very heavily on the fall season. For those communities that were geared up for the business, it is a huge blow."

 

One port that has been impacted is the small Canadian town of Gaspe on the western shore of the Gulf of St. Lawrence. Cruise lines that have dropped calls there include Norwegian Cruise Line and Regent Seven Seas Cruises. Gaspe mayor Daniel Cote estimated that the town of 15,000 will lose about $2.5 million as a result.

 

Also affected has been the Port of Charlottetown on Prince Edward Island, which will lose an estimated 8,000 cruise passengers this season as a result of 10 canceled calls from several cruise lines.

 

But some communities are benefitting. As cruise lines revised their itineraries, Sydney, Nova Scotia, gained two calls from the Norwegian Dawn, two from the Seven Seas Mariner and one from the Silver Whisper, said Nicole MacAulay, acting manager of cruise marketing for the Port of Sydney. "We're well outside of the [slow-speed] zone," MacAulay said.

Last year, Sept-Iles had a total of four cruise ship calls. Cunard's first call there was scheduled to happen in 2018, but the line requested to go there at the last minute to limit the impact of speed restictions.

 

Most cruise lines say their primary response has been to shorten port calls to gain added cruising time. Holland America Line, for example, has shifted departure or arrival times by about an hour on either end of stops for its four ships that sail itineraries between Quebec City and Charlottetown.

Transport Canada and the Canadian Department of Oceans and Fisheries announced the reduced-speed zone on Aug. 11 after 10 whale deaths in the gulf since June 7. Fishing gear entanglements and ship strikes were the apparent causes.

Spalding said the migratory pattern for the whales appears to be changing. Previously, they spent more time off the coast of Maine, where there is a defined sanctuary and detection buoys with hydrophones provide real-time information to ship captains about the presence of whales, she said.

Ships slowed down when whales were detected. "Once sounds confirm the whales have moved, the restrictions are lifted," Spalding said.

 

If the migration pattern has changed permanently, a high number of whales in the Gulf of St. Lawrence pose problems for future cruise seasons there, Spalding said. CLIA is working with the Canadian government to address the issue.

"We believe there are other ways to be sure ships have better information about where the whales are," she said.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't we all just get along and allow each other to voice our opinions without recriminations? "If you have the choice between being right and being kind, choose kind."

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

 

Agree with you on many levels but the TS is asking for opinions and then is not satisfied with the responses. This is rather unique.

 

For years I have suggested that posters agree or disagree with posts rather than belittling/bashing posters. Interestingly, I sent a friend (active on CC) a link to a thread on another board. It make the Regent board look like we were all best friends. It was so bad that I was shocked. I have learned over the years that some people are "different" when they are anonymous.

 

On one hand, we cannot just take a poster's point of view which may or may not be valid without questioning or asking for further information. On the other, we need to do so with respect. IMO, the boards today have been fairly calm and, from my point of view, this is a good thing.

 

Appreciate your post and your comments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh my, soon there will be a surcharge for remaining on the ship when it is in port!

 

Of course ports often change for very legitimate reasons...but if you have a few deletions I do not find the question about credits completely irrelevant when port taxes and included tours are factored into your basic fare. People can entertain differing opinions about this...but being lectured to is not attractive to me. Grammy has it right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"........... we cannot just take a poster's point of view which may or may not be valid without questioning or asking for further information........"

 

Why Not?

 

I think that the answer is obvious. As Keith says, the 80% rule tends to work best and this is what I use when I read TripAdvisor. If 80% of posters agree that something is right or wrong with a hotel, then it likely is the case. Unfortunately, things are different on Cruise Critic because some posters either haven't cruised on Regent yet or were not on the particular cruise that the poster was on and still give opinions (which is fine but this should be taken into consideration).

 

A perfect example is the thread regarding the condition of the Mariner (current thread). Opinions differed wildly and it didn't really make sense, I thought that it was different perceptions but was wrong. Well into the thread a poster reminded us that upper suites were refurbished more recently than lower category suites and this made the different opinions make sense, We only got to that point by asking questions and not simply accepting one posters view when some of us knew that it didn't sound right.

 

IMO, it is the same with most things on CC. I think that the Explorer is the best ship of the fleet by far and do not care for the Navigator. Other posters feel differently. It behooves us to ask questions - especially when we are considering a cruise on a cruise line or ship that we haven't sailed before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Keith re: the 80% rule but feel that it is our job to decide the 80% for ourselves. The TS's view is his view. I feel that this board has swung too far in the direction of interrogator and jury and it is becoming unpleasant to read. JMO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I simply do not understand why this thread is being labeled "inflammatory". Balloon Man stated what was going on with his itinerary and asked some valid questions about being compensated. Did it occur to anyone that he just feels he's paying for something he's not getting and needs to vent about it? Maybe I'm sympathetic to him since I'm having my own issues with Regent selling something and not delivering but come on, give him a break. Maybe he's questioning the status quo like a poster on another thread said: "Perhaps I would like to shake up the status quo and not be that mouse that keeps happily running through the maze and never questioning anything."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some felt that it was inflammatory - others did not - not a big deal IMO - just people voicing their opinions. My opinion is that it makes the assumption that Regent is wrong about something.

 

OTOH, opening up a discussion about whether or not Regent makes money when ports are changed is an interesting one (one that isn't discussed often).

 

Paula, discussions, debates, differences of opinion can certainly come across as the two sides of the issue debating strongly because that it what it is sometimes, however, I don't see this as "interrogator and jury" (lots of interrogators but no jury - it is up to the reader to decide which side makes the most sense to them).

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Welcome to Cruise Critic
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • Canadian Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...