Nordam skips Israel

[brazilgirl]

I know you weren't speaking literally . . As I said , I was nitpicking! I , thankfully , don't know much about weapons either. I had just happened to read an article about Tomahawks , thus my comment. It is sad and sobering that I was reading about Tomahawks . It is sad and sobering that ports are cancelled due to turmoil.

 

Just want to make sure this didn't come off snarkilly ( does this word exist?) I put emoticons that didn't show up... The woes of the internet. No snarkiness at all intended!!

[sail7seas]

No problem. :)

 

I know you were just "picking nits". :D

Absolutely no issue in any way. :)

 

[brazilgirl]

No problem. :)

 

I know you were just "picking nits". :D

Absolutely no issue in any way. :)

 

Good ... I hate virtual snarkiness :) and don't want to commit it!

[chrispb]

HAL are still selling cruises which include Israel for October/November. I had an email today plus they were advertising in the press on Sunday.

[LilacCruiser]

I was listening to a commentary on the Syrian situation by a Poli Sci professor at a local university yesterday. There is common thought amongst the genre that any involvement by the US in the conflict will result in a strike on Israel by Syria, as an immediate attack on our ally is more likely than a long-distance immediate attack on the less-logistically-available US. Until it is determined what the US' involvement is going to be, it may be a wise decision to avoid the area, as sad and heartbreaking as it may be for many. Attacks don't normally come with warning. It would be a shame for any travelers to be involved were anything to happen, not too mention all civilians already sitting or potentially sitting in harm's way.

[NoobCruise]

HAL is being too cautious for my tastes. I am glad I am not on the Noordam, I would be vexed if I missed a stop in Israel this week. We have been considering three cruises this fall, but won't book a Holland America cruise to Israel if they are going to be this timid.

 

 

I can only imagine the flood of lawsuits that would follow if one of HALs ships or a shore excursion were even remotely close to a missile. People would be screaming that HAL should have done more to keep them safe and should have cancelled ports. HAL can't win on this one. Better to disappoint then take the risk of anyone getting hit by a missile. I personally wouldn't even want to be in the vicinity. Flying missiles aren't the only danger. Rebels often like to kidnap innocent tourists.

[durangoscots]

I can only imagine the flood of lawsuits that would follow if one of HALs ships or a shore excursion were even remotely close to a missile. People would be screaming that HAL should have done more to keep them safe and should have cancelled ports. HAL can't win on this one. Better to disappoint then take the risk of anyone getting hit by a missile. I personally wouldn't even want to be in the vicinity. Flying missiles aren't the only danger. Rebels often like to kidnap innocent tourists.

 

This was my thought exactly. And I for one do not want to be on a large, slow target in the area if hostilities break out.

 

Susan

[cruisemom42]

I've been cruising the Med at least once a year since 2006, and have continued doing so despite Greek economic woes, threatened Palestinian air strikes on Israel, Spanish protests, Turkish bombings, the Arab spring and last year's 9/11 attacks on the Libyan and Tunisian US embassies. :eek:

 

None of these events have put me off travel in the region. But I have noticed cruise ships are the most conservative in terms of cancelling ports (versus land trips cancelling destinations). In some ways it is not hard to understand that they do not want to put their very expensive ships at risk. However, wouldn't all kinds of trips (land-based and cruise-based) be considered to be putting their respective customers at risk?

 

FWIW, I believe it is the potential loss of their huge capital investment (e.g., the ship) that motivates cruiselines to cancel ports, not the potential danger to travelers (or risk of lawsuits). Otherwise land trips and cruises would both be cancelled with the same frequency.

[sail7seas]

I've been cruising the Med at least once a year since 2006, and have continued doing so despite Greek economic woes, threatened Palestinian air strikes on Israel, Spanish protests, Turkish bombings, the Arab spring and last year's 9/11 attacks on the Libyan and Tunisian US embassies. :eek:

 

None of these events have put me off travel in the region. But I have noticed cruise ships are the most conservative in terms of cancelling ports (versus land trips cancelling destinations). In some ways it is not hard to understand that they do not want to put their very expensive ships at risk. However, wouldn't all kinds of trips (land-based and cruise-based) be considered to be putting their respective customers at risk?

 

FWIW, I believe it is the potential loss of their huge capital investment (e.g., the ship) that motivates cruiselines to cancel ports, not the potential danger to travelers (or risk of lawsuits). Otherwise land trips and cruises would both be cancelled with the same frequency.

 

 

Wishing you safe travels.

Some of us are higher risk takers than others and that is just fine.

We all get to decide for ourselves...... Unless it is the cruise line that is

making the decision.

 

Hope everyone travels safely wherever your feet, train, plane, ship, car or bus takes you.

 

[rafinmd]

I've been cruising the Med at least once a year since 2006, and have continued doing so despite Greek economic woes, threatened Palestinian air strikes on Israel, Spanish protests, Turkish bombings, the Arab spring and last year's 9/11 attacks on the Libyan and Tunisian US embassies. :eek:

 

None of these events have put me off travel in the region. But I have noticed cruise ships are the most conservative in terms of cancelling ports (versus land trips cancelling destinations). In some ways it is not hard to understand that they do not want to put their very expensive ships at risk. However, wouldn't all kinds of trips (land-based and cruise-based) be considered to be putting their respective customers at risk?

 

FWIW, I believe it is the potential loss of their huge capital investment (e.g., the ship) that motivates cruiselines to cancel ports, not the potential danger to travelers (or risk of lawsuits). Otherwise land trips and cruises would both be cancelled with the same frequency.

 

I tend to disagree with the premise. While some land providers may have some flexibility, I think most are in a position of do the tour or cancel. If a cruise line's options were to run a cruise as originally planned or cancel the cruise and dock the ship for 7 or 14 days, they might be more likely to run some cruises they now modify, but the ability to pretty easily substitute a different port dramatically changes the risk-reward equation. Most land tour companies do not have that flexibility and are pretty much limited to a yes-no decision.

 

Roy

[buggins0402]

I tend to disagree with the premise. While some land providers may have some flexibility, I think most are in a position of do the tour or cancel. If a cruise line's options were to run a cruise as originally planned or cancel the cruise and dock the ship for 7 or 14 days, they might be more likely to run some cruises they now modify, but the ability to pretty easily substitute a different port dramatically changes the risk-reward equation. Most land tour companies do not have that flexibility and are pretty much limited to a yes-no decision.

 

Roy

 

 

Agree. We were on a Holylands last year (NCL) November. As we were heading into Haifa, the rockets started flying. I have no doubt that NCL, at that point thought it was safe just to stay in Haifa and not move down to Ashdod for second night. Many cruises had done this in the past. But, unfortunately this rocket exchange turned into a true "conflict". And, some of the rockets actually did reach areas where cruisers might tour (Jerusalem and Tel Aviv). All other cruises scheduled to come in a few days later did cancel Israel and NCL most likely would have, if the conflict had started just a day earlier.

 

That said - the only evidence of what was going on was many UN vehicles, very visible army presence around the Old City and some Palestinian protests. I did have a sleepless night in our Jerusalem hotel that night however - every time the air-conditioner came on I thought it was an "incoming" rocket. And, since we had DIY'd our trip to Jerusalem, we had to assess the best way to get back to Haifa (what if a rocket disrupted the trains from Tel Aviv to Haifa?). We ended up sticking with the train.

[cruisemom42]

I tend to disagree with the premise. While some land providers may have some flexibility, I think most are in a position of do the tour or cancel. If a cruise line's options were to run a cruise as originally planned or cancel the cruise and dock the ship for 7 or 14 days, they might be more likely to run some cruises they now modify, but the ability to pretty easily substitute a different port dramatically changes the risk-reward equation. Most land tour companies do not have that flexibility and are pretty much limited to a yes-no decision.

 

Roy

 

You make a good point. Hadn't thought of it that way.

[jresn02]

Americans or Anyone for that matter are MUCH safer in Israel today then Turkey today regardless of the Syria situation. HAL WAY over did it here.

[soldham]

Americans or Anyone for that matter are MUCH safer in Israel today then Turkey today regardless of the Syria situation. HAL WAY over did it here.

 

And what do you base that comment on? Having been to both I would say I felt much more comfortable in Turkey - at least the parts cruise ships call on.

[whogo]

I wonder what the mood onboard the Noordam is. Were people upset that Holland America cancelled the ports or were they relieved? Did those that were relieved change their opinion when they realized that nothing happened in Israel on September 3 and 4? Has anyone heard from the ship?

[chrispb]

Americans or Anyone for that matter are MUCH safer in Israel today then Turkey today regardless of the Syria situation. HAL WAY over did it here.

 

Can you explain what you mean? There are currently many European tourists in Turkey, including people I know.

 

I know that if the FO had advised people not to travel then the large holiday companies would stop selling packages and flights to Turkey as travel insurance would be invalid and the last thing they want to do is arrange mass evacuation.:confused:

[P&OMAN]

And what do you base that comment on? Having been to both I would say I felt much more comfortable in Turkey - at least the parts cruise ships call on.

 

 

I could not have said it better myself. You are spot on.

[YXU AC*SE]

I wonder what the mood onboard the Noordam is. Were people upset that Holland America cancelled the ports or were they relieved? Did those that were relieved change their opinion when they realized that nothing happened in Israel on September 3 and 4? Has anyone heard from the ship?

 

Can't speak to the mood specifically, but given that Haifa and Ashdod were substitute ports for Alexandria and Port Said (which were cancelled by HAL on 15 July) I can't imagine too many people would have felt 'bait and switched' having made an itinerary purchasing decision anticipating going to Israel - because until mid-July, they weren't. Scott.

[EDLOS]

Can't speak to the mood specifically, but given that Haifa and Ashdod were substitute ports for Alexandria and Port Said (which were cancelled by HAL on 15 July) I can't imagine too many people would have felt 'bait and switched' having made an itinerary purchasing decision anticipating going to Israel - because until mid-July, they weren't. Scott.

 

I was not booked on the original cruise to Egypt and chose this cruise because of the Haifa and Limassol ports. All the rest of the ports I have been to at least once.....Mid-July til now a lot of people including me have booked.

They were very surprised when I inquired about changing to a Black Sea Cruise with HAL that I knew that HAL was already bypassing Israel's ports and are continuing to book Holy Land cruises which to me is grossly misleading and morally wrong and could lead to a lawsuite

[Jade13]

HAL is being too cautious for my tastes. I am glad I am not on the Noordam, I would be vexed if I missed a stop in Israel this week. We have been considering three cruises this fall, but won't book a Holland America cruise to Israel if they are going to be this timid.

 

HAL has been less cautious in the past compared to Celebrity and Azamara. In October2011 Azamara and Celebrity skipped Egypt when I recall HAL went there. All the ships skipped Ashdod for a period when there was bombing in the Gaza strip so the port was closed, but all the ships ended up in Haifa (we saw Prinsendam there).

[buggins0402]

Can't speak to the mood specifically, but given that Haifa and Ashdod were substitute ports for Alexandria and Port Said (which were cancelled by HAL on 15 July) I can't imagine too many people would have felt 'bait and switched' having made an itinerary purchasing decision anticipating going to Israel - because until mid-July, they weren't. Scott.

 

Good catch! And anyone booking a cruise in this region should KNOW that there is a more than remote probability that the itinerary will change. If these are bucket list areas you want to see, look at maps and guess what will be substituted, and be happy with it, because these itineraries get changed much more frequently than most others.

 

Trust the cruise lines to keep you safe, but to do so you they might not be able to give you the original itinerary.

[sail7seas]

If you must visit a particular place for your vacation to be 'successful', plan a land trip. When we choose to cruise, we know the itinerary can and sometimes does change.

 

[YXU AC*SE]

I knew that HAL was already bypassing Israel's ports and are continuing to book Holy Land cruises which to me is grossly misleading and morally wrong and could lead to a lawsuite

 

Interesting. I don't recall HAL issuing a travel advisory stating that Israel was now a no go -- which is what they did in the case of Egypt on 15 July - and then officially / permanently amended itineraries and supporting shorex. So absent that formal decision having taken place, I'm pretty sure that any reasonable person might agree that HAL is relying on para 5(b) of their cruise contract which [seemingly] indemnifies them.

 

5. Change in Itinerary/Cancellation/Cabotage Laws:

(b) Your safety is very important to us. For safety or other reasons that we believe qualify as good cause, we may, without notice, substitute any suitable ship, ships or other means of transportation, change any date of sailing or travel or cancel any sailing, Cruisetour segment, port of call, Cruisetour or Land Trip destination or stopover, or the entire Land Trip, Cruise or Cruisetour.

 

Surprisingly, I think it is pretty hard to find fault w/ Holland America for the way they handled this in the case of the current sailing ... three replacement ports for the two substituted ones, and a 15% FCC based on pax fare paid. FYI, the Noordam's intineraries for the record are entitled 'Ancient Mysteries' (Aug 15 and 26) and 'Roman Empire' (October 20) - no mention of Holy Land - unlike the Rotterdam's two 'Holy Land Sojourns', upon one of which I am booked. Having already toured Israel previously, I'd have no problems forsaking Ashdod and Haifa, for say Mykonos, Santorini and Izmir and 15% - so I say bring on the itin amendments. :-) I realize that doesn't help you w/ your quandary - but these things regretfully are clearly spelled out in the contract arrangement you enter w/ your chosen carrier.

 

Scott.

[tacrum43]

I wonder what the mood onboard the Noordam is. Were people upset that Holland America cancelled the ports or were they relieved? Did those that were relieved change their opinion when they realized that nothing happened in Israel on September 3 and 4? Has anyone heard from the ship?

 

I know this was a while ago now, but I'm just finishing this cruise (as a 22 day collectors). They only announced the change onboard the day before we were supposed to start sailing towards Israel. Instead, we were in Bodrum, Turkey the next day. I think the major feeling on board was resigned disappointment. We passengers certainly had no say in the matter, and the captain made a statement to the effect that the decision came from the head office in Seattle, not him.

 

If it were myself traveling alone to Israel, I would have likely still gone at that time (and been fine), but the ship did send a note mentioning that the Israeli government was distributing gas masks to their citizens. It's hard to argue with that, I suppose.

 

And yes, we got a 15% future cruise credit. It came out to a whopping $200/person. I would have preferred a ship board credit for the current cruise. But I guess it's nice to get something. It totally gutted that 11 day cruise, as Israel (and before that Egypt) was the highlight.

[sail7seas]

I know this was a while ago now, but I'm just finishing this cruise (as a 22 day collectors). They only announced the change onboard the day before we were supposed to start sailing towards Israel. Instead, we were in Bodrum, Turkey the next day. I think the major feeling on board was resigned disappointment. We passengers certainly had no say in the matter, and the captain made a statement to the effect that the decision came from the head office in Seattle, not him.

 

If it were myself traveling alone to Israel, I would have likely still gone at that time (and been fine), but the ship did send a note mentioning that the Israeli government was distributing gas masks to their citizens. It's hard to argue with that, I suppose.

 

And yes, we got a 15% future cruise credit. It came out to a whopping $200/person. I would have preferred a ship board credit for the current cruise. But I guess it's nice to get something. It totally gutted that 11 day cruise, as Israel (and before that Egypt) was the highlight.

 

 

Sorry for your disappointment. I, too, would be let down but safety is primary.

 

The 15% likely was calculated predicated on the fare you paid, wasn't it?

Accordingly, some people would get more/less.

 

Hope your cruise has been wonderful.