Mexico Itinerary changes - Sapphire Princess

[bdjam]

You might be right - people don't want to pay to go to Mexico because they don't feel it's safe. But I'm not sure how not going there save cash for the cruise line...?

I doubt very much that this has anything to do with safety and a lot more to do with cash. Earlier this year HAL stopped going to Mazatlan for a while. All of a sudden the port charges were dropped and just like that it was safe again. I've heard HAL will be back in the fall. I wonder how many people will "bite" at this new itinerary on Princess. IMO if people wanted to stay in Cabo for days they would have booked an all inclusive. To tender for 2 days is a hassle that I'm not prepared to deal with. It also seems that the locals don't welcome tourists. I get a lot more warm and fuzzies from the locals in PV and Mazatlan.

[wizard-of-roz]

Let me understand this correctly......most folks are afraid to go to Mexico because there's crime.....Yikes, I guess that means no tourists in Hollywood, Beverly Hills, L.A., Chicago and bye, bye good old New York!!!!!!

 

Heck, if we all stopped going to places that have crime......that would take care of most of Europe/Scandinavia and anyplace else where the masses may live or frequent.

 

I hope Princess keeps the cruise ships on the west coast for us folks who no longer want to be held hostage by the airlines and happen to live on the crime-ridden pacific coast.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go put on my "hoody" and attemp a run on the streets of L.A. without being molested or held-up at gun point!!! ;)

[Coral]

It can happen anywhere. There has been a lot of crime in the Carribean too. They aren't stopping cruises to the Caribbean. I doubt very much that this has anything to do with safety and a lot more to do with cash. Earlier this year HAL stopped going to Mazatlan for a while. All of a sudden the port charges were dropped and just like that it was safe again. I've heard HAL will be back in the fall. I wonder how many people will "bite" at this new itinerary on Princess. IMO if people wanted to stay in Cabo for days they would have booked an all inclusive. To tender for 2 days is a hassle that I'm not prepared to deal with. It also seems that the locals don't welcome tourists. I get a lot more warm and fuzzies from the locals in PV and Mazatlan.

 

Of course is is about safety. There have been huge articles recently (and for several months) about traveling to Mexico. We were there in December and had to make final payment 3 months earlier. If I had known how bad things were going to get, I would not have gone. So we decided to stay on the ship (as did many others for this same reason).

 

Why would it be about cash? Cabo is the most expensive of the 3 to dock at. They are going to upset people by changing itinerary - they wouldn't do this for cash. I have to say these cruises in the spring were so dang cheap because people were not wanting to go to Mexico. Of course they are getting the locals on the West coast who want to cruise with out driving but others are not flying across the country to go.

 

As far as I am concerned, those in the West Coast who want this route should be thankful that Princess didn't pull this trip all together and send the ship to Hawaii or elsewhere.

[Anubi]

I vote for Vancouver - Hawaii 10 Day Cruise. Hawaii to Vancouver - 10 Day Cruise. Vancouver to San Diego - 7 Day Cruise. San Diego to Vancouver - 7 Day Cruise... REPEAT.

 

Oh I wish they'd bring back the Vancouver - Hawaii cruise. That's our next cruise and we're either going to have to take RCL or Carnival and we'd MUCH prefer Princess. :(:(:(

 

[cruz chic]

To answer those that have asked me about my cash comment. The cruise lines want to pull out of Mexico because it's not making as much cash as they feel they could make elsewhere. They don't want to be the "bad guy" by pulling out of the area so they use crime as the reason. If it's not about money why would HAL put a ship back to Mazatlan when port fees were dropped? Cruise lines are in business to make money and fill ships. They also want people to spend a lot on board. From what I hear cruise lines do not get a lot of onboard spending from people on a Mexican Riv. cruise so they are not going to waste their time there. Safety IMO is playing a tiny roll if any in their decision. I think Princess thinks people will go on a cruise where they might feel safe so they remove the ports that are having bad press.

 

As far as being thankful to Princess for not pulling this route IMO they should have. This is not a cruise that I want to take. I'd rather take HAL any day because they stay longer in ports. To tender everyday is not my idea of a great cruise. YMMV.

[Princess Patches]

To answer those that have asked me about my cash comment. The cruise lines want to pull out of Mexico because it's not making as much cash as they feel they could make elsewhere. They don't want to be the "bad guy" by pulling out of the area so they use crime as the reason. If it's not about money why would HAL put a ship back to Mazatlan when port fees were dropped? Cruise lines are in business to make money and fill ships. They also want people to spend a lot on board. From what I hear cruise lines do not get a lot of onboard spending from people on a Mexican Riv. cruise so they are not going to waste their time there. Safety IMO is playing a tiny roll if any in their decision. I think Princess thinks people will go on a cruise where they might feel safe so they remove the ports that are having bad press.

 

As far as being thankful to Princess for not pulling this route IMO they should have. This is not a cruise that I want to take. I'd rather take HAL any day because they stay longer in ports. To tender everyday is not my idea of a great cruise. YMMV.

 

 

I don't know the reason why Princess is eliminating Mazatlan and Puerto Vallarta from the Mexicon Riviera cruise. However, if the reason is not safety concerns but financial concerns as you suggest, why wouldn't Princess be pulling out of Mexico entirely? How does substituting Cabo and Ensenada for PV and Mazatlan save Princess money?

[cruz chic]

I don't know the reason why Princess is eliminating Mazatlan and Puerto Vallarta from the Mexicon Riviera cruise. However, if the reason is not safety concerns but financial concerns as you suggest, why wouldn't Princess be pulling out of Mexico entirely? How does substituting Cabo and Ensenada for PV and Mazatlan save Princess money?

That's not my point. They are not SAVING money by doing that. They want to limit their cruises to the Mexican Riv. They are likely trying this route to see if it will be more sucessful then the MR. It may well be. It's just not for me. If they can get more people on the ship spending more money without having to give the cruise away then it's making more money for them. If not, I think they will pull out like so many other cruise lines. I hope I'm getting my point across. It's not about saving them money. Looks like I'm having a hard time getting that point across. I don't think I said that in my post but it seems like I made that impression. That's not what I meant.

[RickEk]

Yes, from what I understand, the yields are low on the Mexican Riviera cruises. They are discounting the fares and folks don't spend that much onboard. At least they are still cruising to the area... HAL and RCI are pulling out completely.

[cruzgryphon]

I think there's a lot of healthy discussion about the reasons for the change. The unsettling thing for me is (as far as I can tell) - the public website (i.e. you don't log into my princess) and other online websites still show the original itinerary with PV and Mazatlan. I can understand if a single port was changed, but to me this is a significant change.

 

I would think Princess would change their find a cruise website and inform other distributors of the change in itinerary, so people know what they are booking for (or are they trying to test the waters (pardon the pun) and see what happens when people book and then find out about the change).

 

It just has me second guessing Princess' posted itinerary's and rates.

CG

[Princess Patches]

It's not about saving them money. Looks like I'm having a hard time getting that point across. I don't think I said that in my post but it seems like I made that impression. That's not what I meant.

 

It was not an impression. You stated it here:

 

The cruise lines want to pull out of Mexico because it's not making as much cash as they feel they could make elsewhere ... Cruise lines are in business to make money and fill ships. They also want people to spend a lot on board. From what I hear cruise lines do not get a lot of onboard spending from people on a Mexican Riv. cruise so they are not going to waste their time there.

 

Again, I don't understand how substituting one port for another will get passengers to spend more money onboard. Coral's explanation of security concerns makes much more sense to me.

[RickEk]

I think there's a lot of healthy discussion about the reasons for the change. The unsettling thing for me is (as far as I can tell) - the public website (i.e. you don't log into my princess) and other online websites still show the original itinerary with PV and Mazatlan. I can understand if a single port was changed, but to me this is a significant change.

 

I would think Princess would change their find a cruise website and inform other distributors of the change in itinerary, so people know what they are booking for (or are they trying to test the waters (pardon the pun) and see what happens when people book and then find out about the change).

 

It just has me second guessing Princess' posted itinerary's and rates.

CG

 

I agree... the website should be updated as well. But, from what I understand, the itinerary decision was made late in the day on Friday. It's possible that the web folks didn't get the news, so it'll probably change on Monday morning... but you'd think they'd be better prepared for something like that. :rolleyes:

[cruz chic]

It was not an impression. You stated it here:

 

 

 

Again, I don't understand how substituting one port for another will get passengers to spend more money onboard. Coral's explanation of security concerns makes much more sense to me.

OK, I'll try one more time. I'm talking about moving the ship to Europe, Caribbean or Australia. I'm not trying to change your mind or make you believe me. I've heard this from several sources so that's what I believe. I don't defend any cruise lines like I gave birth to it or married to it. It's up to you to form your own decision and I have the same right.

[cruz chic]

Yes, from what I understand, the yields are low on the Mexican Riviera cruises. They are discounting the fares and folks don't spend that much onboard. At least they are still cruising to the area... HAL and RCI are pulling out completely.

 

Hal is still doing Mexican Riv. cruises:confused:.

[6pack]

I vote for Vancouver - Hawaii 10 Day Cruise. Hawaii to Vancouver - 10 Day Cruise. Vancouver to San Diego - 7 Day Cruise. San Diego to Vancouver - 7 Day Cruise... REPEAT.

 

I second your vote!!:)

[RickEk]

Hal is still doing Mexican Riv. cruises:confused:.

 

My mistake. But I thought I heard that Oosterdam was being sent elsewhere in 2012... It does appear that they are keeping a small ship there.

[Coral]

Hal is still doing Mexican Riv. cruises:confused:.

 

Or - maybe they haven't implemented possible itinerary changes yet??

 

I don't think anything is set in stone with Mexico right now.

[cruz chic]

My mistake. But I thought I heard that Oosterdam was being sent elsewhere in 2012... It does appear that they are keeping a small ship there.

They are still doing them for the first 1/2 of 2012. HAL takes forever to get their itineraries out and has pretty much nothing out past mid 2012. I think the O might be going to Australia but who knows. I do hope they have at least limited sailings.

[cruz chic]

Or - maybe they haven't implemented possible itinerary changes yet??

 

I don't think anything is set in stone with Mexico right now.

That's true and they will follow the money just like any other cruise line. Just to make myself perfectly clear that would mean positioning the ship to other parts of the world.

[Coral]

That's true and they will follow the money just like any other cruise line. Just to make myself perfectly clear that would mean positioning the ship to other parts of the world.

 

Well - if there continues to be travel warnings and people afraid/reluctant to go to Mexico due to violence, of course they are going to reduce sailings to Mexico and reposition them elsewhere.

[KilroyWasHere]

Here's a traveller safety map for Mexico from May:

 

http://www.travelweekly.com/uploadedFiles/MEXICOMAP4.pdf

 

Cabo San Lucas & Puerto Vallarta are listed as "Presumed Safe".

 

Mazatlan is listed as "Visit during daylight hours; exercise caution during late-night and early-morning hours."

[treasure4two]

Hal is still doing Mexican Riv. cruises:confused:.

Carnival is still doing MR also and all three are in the Carnival family of cruise lines. I can not imagine one part of the family will cancel cruises to PV and Matzalan and others not do the same. This will be a wait and see situation.

[captainron]

I absolutely love Puerto Vallarta and was planning on a Princess Mexican Riviera cruise next year but probably not if they cancel PV. I have not heard of any issues there, did something change?? I am not a huge fan of Cabo -- don't get me wrong, it's ok just not PV. And Mazatlan is right up there with Acapulco in the disgusting ick factor. But really, Ensenada ...that's better than PV? NO it is not. What a shame. Might be looking for a different itinerary...

 

PS -- kind of like Manzanillo and Ixtapa -- would be nice if they could add those.

 

PVR...just another big city with tacky souvenirs. At least there are more options of things to do ashore in Cabo than PVR.

 

Agree MZT dock is in the trashier part of town, however ACA's dock is clean, well managed, close to the fort and always has taxis available for trips into town or the environs. CONS...crime ridden so don't want any overnighters even tho' La Quebrada is beautiful at sunset.

 

Huatulco's pier can take two large ships or one large and two babies, the beach next to the dock is close and clean (but overpriced beer is more expensive than onboard ship) and there is lots of rea to tour around and things to do.

 

ZLO was (don't know if they've ever finished the new cruise terminal) a dumpy port of call with the dock adjacent to the Navy base and freight shipping terminals. Hopefully the new terminal is completed by now, so can someone tell us? ZIH/Ixtapa would be a great port and would allow cruise expansion to yet another section of the west coast with lengthened and more diverse itineraries from LA, Frisco and San Diego.

 

I think that North Americans are getting tired of the same ports of call on the west coast and new ports of call would freshen up the west coast cruise business.

 

Ciao for now!!!

[kath00]

PVR...just another big city with tacky souvenirs. At least there are more options of things to do ashore in Cabo than PVR.

 

 

A bit offensive, no? It's just YOUR opinion. Don't state it as a fact. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

[wizard-of-roz]

Here's a traveller safety map for Mexico from May:

 

http://www.travelweekly.com/uploadedFiles/MEXICOMAP4.pdf

 

Cabo San Lucas & Puerto Vallarta are listed as "Presumed Safe".

 

Mazatlan is listed as "Visit during daylight hours; exercise caution during late-night and early-morning hours."

 

This reads more like any big city anywhere in the world!!!!! Fill in the blanks with any place in the USA not just a foreign port! :rolleyes:

[mesamary]

Just last week booked on the Dec 10th sailing - - had checked the itinerary and PV, MZ, Cabo, were all listed - - - - few days later checked our reservations using the confirmed booking # - - - ports of call were changed now the listed stops are En with a 7 hour stop and Cabo as an overnight stop - - - am pretty sure we will be canx. this cruise today - - -