News: Is a cruise line actually charging extra for passengers to tender ashore?

[BillB48]

The "charging" for the tender seems to be similar to what happens on a partial transit of the Panama Canal. When the ship leaves Gatun Locks and starts tendering passenger ashore, you must have purchased an excursion from the ship. If you have not purchased a ship's sponsored excursion you are not permitted off the ship at this point. The ship then makes a "technical" stop in Cristobal/Colon to collect the touring passengers. Here the ship is docked and you are permitted off the ship.

[HeinBloed]

The "charging" for the tender seems to be similar to what happens on a partial transit of the Panama Canal. When the ship leaves Gatun Locks and starts tendering passenger ashore, you must have purchased an excursion from the ship. If you have not purchased a ship's sponsored excursion you are not permitted off the ship at this point. The ship then makes a "technical" stop in Cristobal/Colon to collect the touring passengers. Here the ship is docked and you are permitted off the ship.

 

There is no shore excursion in Portofino you can buy - just 13.00 EUR for the tendering if you stay on board from Genoa to Portofino and decide then to leave the ship.

[Cruzaholic41]

No, unless I'm mistaken, they stopped the ship briefly near IM, so people could debark for the excursion, before proceeding to Coz. How is this not a port of call?

 

Years ago, several of the cruise lines made a brief stop in Playa Del Carmen solely for the purpose of paid excursions. The excursion participants re-boarded the ship in Cozumel. The difference is, the ships did not remain there for the leisurly on and off of passengers. This sounds like the scenario you are explaining, but without actually tieing up.

[paulandfran]

After reading the story and seeing that Portofino, in this instance, was not a designated port of call, I don't see a problem with the charge.

 

Now, if cruise lines start charging additional tender fees for designated ports of call, that would cause me to rethink who I cruise with.

 

I agree. If a cruise offered an optional excursion on a day designated as a sea day I see no problem with charging for it. As long as you get all the port days that were promised.

[Watson's aunt]

If I pay a port fee /(charge) I should not be charged to pay for a tender even if I just rode it to get close to port (for photo's )stay on and go back to ship just for the ride

 

Mary

[Host Kewlguy]

If ANY cruise line tried to charge us for use of a tender, I would just stay on board the ship.

[HeinBloed]

I refer to the update of the news and MSC's explaination:

 

In ports like

 

George Town

 

 

When I check the picture of MSC POESIA in George Town earlier this year:

 

 

I see that all tender boats are on board and I think they did what all other's did:

 

using the local tender boat service.

 

And I see also in other ports like here in Cannes:

 

 

that other lines uses external tenders as well but I never heared that they charge the tender.

 

Regards

HeinBloed

[BruceMuzz]

Star Cruises has - on selected itineraries - charged passengers for tender service for many years.

[Ov3rride]

The more im hearing about MSC the more i am starting to detest them, and we havent even travelled yet. It seems they want to squeeze as many pennies out of you as they can and are heading along the lines of easycruise (what was). They want to be like Costa, but you get a raw deal and they are no way comparable.

 

Whats next? selling tickets for the onboard entertainment?

 

I am in no way suprised that MSC are the first ones to try and do this, I think their penny pinching will get worse. Maybe they should team up with Ryanair.

[annierie]

HAL used to charge for a transfer to St. John's when they paused there to let passengers off for excursions prior to proceeding to St. Thomas.

 

Granted, they only stopped for 30-40 minutes and you were only tendered one way, but still they offered to allow those of us with independent arrangements to leave the ship there and rejoin at St. Thomas. We used the ferry to get to St. Thomas (we needed to get to Red Hook to meet a private sailing yacht charter).

 

We did this in 2001.

 

So, MSC anchors off Portofino to wait for passengers booked on their excursions from Genoa, or for those wishing to join the ship there. They offer an "excursion", more or less, of an independent transfer to shore for people who wish to enjoy the night life of Portofino.

 

By charging and taking inventory of how many people are leaving the ship, they do have better control of knowing who is where. Particularly, since it sounds as if there isn't a regularly running all day tender like there was in Grand Cayman.

[John Bull]

The more im hearing about MSC the more i am starting to detest them, and we havent even travelled yet. It seems they want to squeeze as many pennies out of you as they can and are heading along the lines of easycruise (what was). They want to be like Costa, but you get a raw deal and they are no way comparable.

 

Whats next? selling tickets for the onboard entertainment?

 

I am in no way suprised that MSC are the first ones to try and do this, I think their penny pinching will get worse. Maybe they should team up with Ryanair.

 

Hi,

 

Ahh, give a dog a bad name ...........

 

I don't think you've read through the thread.

They haven't sold a cruise which includes Portofino - no mention of it in their sales literature - they're merely offering a take-it-or-leave-it EXTRA call at EXTRA cost because they have other pick-ups there. And a lot of other special-circumstances examples involving charging for tenders by various cruiselines have come to light on this thread.

As for penny-pinching & screwing folk once on-board they've got a lot to learn from a couple of US lines I can think of.

 

I'm no apologist for MSC, I've only had a freebie weekend with them - pros & cons but overall not my scene.

 

But this thread is a non-story. If it were about a US or UK cruiseline with a stronger loyalty, or if this were an Italian website, it'd cause an uproar about unfair reporting.

 

Like I said, give a dog a bad name...........

 

JB

[Aquahound]

Cruise ships use local tender services all the time. Grand Cayman and Belize are two examples. I'm confused as to why non-excursion guests still had to pay the fee in order to tender to shore. What's worse, was the 1.5 hour wait reported by one of the CC members. If it was a planned stop with the opportunity for guests to go ashore and wander as they pleased, and return to the ship in the same place, those guests should not have had to pay a tender fee.

[Cirdan]

I don't like paying for a tender, but 13 euros for transportation from Genoa to Portofino and the tender don't seems much (and it could be the price of bus only). But I cannot really understand paying such service: "And, on top of this, there were only 2 tenders for 800 people. We waited an hour and a half to get off the ship".

[John Bull]

I'm confused as to why non-excursion guests still had to pay the fee in order to tender to shore.

If it was a planned stop .........

 

Hi Aquahound,

 

Read thread.:rolleyes:

End confusion.:)

 

Regards, JB

[Aquahound]

Hi Aquahound,

 

Read thread.:rolleyes:

End confusion.:)

 

Regards, JB

 

Hello JB.

 

I did read the thread. My opinion is just not in line with yours.

 

Regardless of whether or not the stop is "advertised," it most certainly is still a planned stop. If the only purpose is to ferry out other passengers who are joining the ship, then perhaps that's what it should only be. The excuse of charging passengers to go ashore in order to prevent tender over-crowding is contrary to them even allowing them to tender to begin with. Either it's a port call or it isn't....and if existing passengers are allowed to tender to shore and return to the ship from the same port, that's a port call. Sorry, that's just the way I see it. Apparently I'm not the only one, or this report would not exist.

[paulandfran]

Either it's a port call or it isn't

 

It sounds like an optional port of call. Stay on the ship or pay to tender in. Sounds simple enough to me and as long as it was represented that way when I booked the cruise I'd have no problem with it.

[Aquahound]

It sounds like an optional port of call. Stay on the ship or pay to tender in. Sounds simple enough to me and as long as it was represented that way when I booked the cruise I'd have no problem with it.

 

I do agree with you, and I would not have a problem with it either if I knew about it before the cruise. I'm just puting up an argument, actually more of a discussion, about the practice in general.

[John Bull]

Hello JB.

 

I did read the thread. My opinion is just not in line with yours.

 

Regardless of whether or not the stop is "advertised," it most certainly is still a planned stop. If the only purpose is to ferry out other passengers who are joining the ship, then perhaps that's what it should only be. The excuse of charging passengers to go ashore in order to prevent tender over-crowding is contrary to them even allowing them to tender to begin with. Either it's a port call or it isn't....and if existing passengers are allowed to tender to shore and return to the ship from the same port, that's a port call. Sorry, that's just the way I see it. Apparently I'm not the only one, or this report would not exist.

 

Hi, Aqua-hound,

Mebbe I'm the one who's confused :D, but there's plenty of others on this thread who see it as plainly and obviously as I do.

An optional.

Which is available because of the circumstances.

Not something which is new, not something you've been promised or paid for in the ticket price.

 

Not something which suggests a change of policy, any more than the many similar arrangements mentioned on this thread as being offered by other cruise lines.

 

Grand Caymen & Belize were ports on your itinerary, you'd paid to get to the ports, and understandably you weren't expected to pay again - or swim ;)

 

I don't entirely see why the providers of the tender are relevant, other than that MSC are showing that they're not looking to make a buck by using their own tenders which will cost them just a few gallons of fuel.

 

Seems to me MSC are being unfairly pilloried by those who read only what they want to read & jump to conclusions.

It'd be a shame if they dispensed with the offer to go ashore, but I agree with you that if they did then no-one would have either the right or the inclination to complain.

 

Insufficient tenders and a 90 min wait (on such a brief visit) ? - well, that's another issue & I'd not side with MSC on that.

 

As I've been careful to say, I'm no fan of MSC. Just think they shouldn't be subjected to what I see as unfair criticism.

Regards, JB

[Aquahound]

As I've been careful to say, I'm no fan of MSC. Just think they shouldn't be subjected to what I see as unfair criticism.

 

Also, notice I did not ever bash MSC. I have no experience with them to pass any judgement.

 

I mentioned the providers of the tenders because it was mentioned in the article that started this thread.

 

It came up in this thread a similar option that used to be common with Caribbean cruises. Passengers were able to tender in to Playa del Carmen for excursions, then re-join the ship in Cozumel....or vice versa. I remember it being offered as an excursion before the cruise, and it was listed on the ship's itinerary. The difference was, you could not tender to shore without a booked excursion.

 

What I don't see a clear answer to is how MSC is announcing this stop. It has to be announced, or else how would people know they can join the ship in Progresso? How did the others who booked the excursions know the excursions existed? The only reasoning I can think of is the ship is avoiding paying an all-out port charge, and only extending the charge to those who choose to go ashore. Whether it's right or wrong is beyond me, but I would hope the passengers have knowledge of this prior to them arriving there.

[John Bull]

Also, notice I did not ever bash MSC. I have no experience with them to pass any judgement.

.

 

Hi again,

Sorry, my footnote about unfair criticism wasn't aimed at you, more at a fair number of posters who've seen the thread header & thought it an opportunity to poke MSC in the eye.

MSC have their faults. But this "story" isn't one of them.

Regards, JB

[AAAAmerican]

 

To Be or Not To Be ((?)) that tis the question.

 

 

Choices do abound. Being upfront about costs prior is vital to know what you may choose and plan from.

 

I doubt you would sail around the globe without charts...eh..

 

On land I am luckily born with an inbred GPS System ...lol..

 

On six of the seven continents I never have been lost yet ever.

 

On the seas star navigation is still used as well otehr instruments... charts though are vital.

 

 

So if people who cruise this line wish to take a tender may.

 

Costs as all cruisers who have been on the ships even a few decades now well know how they ( c-lines ) lets say nicely.. lessened the quality of products/services to reach a larger bottom line______XXX.

 

Just hope and pray that they do not follow the airships lead and even start charging fees and so called gratuities for the W.C. ( Water Closets ) and carry-ons eh..