Ebola Threat

[mariners]

What a different world I live in than some people posting on the board! There are so many things that I find offensive, I am obviously not thick skinned enough for message board dynamics. Still, I have to respond to this thread as it is all that I love most and dislike most about the board.

 

TC2, please do not equate "step" and "love". I understand the point that you were making, but a "step-child" should be as loved as any "gave birth" child. If I was to use your analogy, then Regent should be just as important as Oceania. Obviously, for some reason that is unknown to anyone but the "father" and his confidantes, the lack of response on the Regent board is something that is only speculation.

 

I will not be recommending any new ship, despite how beautiful she might be, if the "parent" is not providing the right direction (which is the direction that I feel is in the best interest). Although, as you know, I am not currently sailing on Regent, I still recommend Regent to those people whom I think the cruise line is best suited.

 

Regent has really dropped the ball on this cruising. They should not only have been pro-active, but should have kept all of their passengers appraised of new developments.

 

I do not think that Regent needs to respond to this thread. Regent, absolutely, needed to respond to the passengers on the sailing (which neither of us will be on so we would not receive the correspondence).

 

IMO, Regent should be contacting every passenger on this sailing and giving them not only updates, but also providing them with assurance that they are making decisions in the best interest of the passengers.

 

To all passengers who will be on this sailing, I wish you the "Regent Experience" that made me fall in love with the line. To Regent, please put your passengers first and make this an experience that is all that you have to offer.

[fizzy]

As the Ebola subject has been sidestepped in an attempt by Regent customers to clear up some service issues, the idiocy of management defies logic. Goodie Goodie for Kamlani that he popped onto the o forum for a quickie. It had occurred to me at one point that those guys might be under some sort of a gag order and unable to respond to the turmoil on this thread. That is clearly not the case and is such a blatant passive/aggressive move that it is insulting. What IS up with Cruise Critic that posts implying legal threats, more than once, have been allowed to stand? Whether one believes it or not, there are lots of CC readers who would never choose to participate on the Regent board but follow it none the less. Whether someone has ever sailed on a Regent cruise or any cruise is a question that needn't be answered. Anyone can make up anything they want and post on a public board. Can someone explain what is happening here? Actually, to be more specific, could someone with a legal background give an opinion?

[msafiri]

Although I am not minimizing the concerns that these five posters have, we are only talking about a handful of people.

 

With few exceptions, the passengers on this cruise do not seem very happy.

 

Can both of these statements be true?

[Nigella]

 

You've mentioned many times that this thread should be confined to only those on this cruise

 

 

As a potential future Regent guest, I'm very pleased that this thread was not buried in a Roll Call thread. It's been a useful insight into how Regent deals with such a scenario. And for me, that's a valuable factor for helping me to choose a cruise line in the future.

 

So thank you, Responder, for posting it here rather than Roll Call.

[Travelcat2]

Why is it that when you post something that gets challenged, you conjure up an answer that in many cases doesn't answer the question, and then you call that challenge bashing.

 

You've mentioned many times that this thread should be confined to only those on this cruise, yet you get involved in each and every post...you speak for the CEO & President, you speak for the passengers who are disturbed about the stop in Dakar, you speak for Regent with a cloak of fear that someone may post a disparaging remark, and so on.

What is this anger you refer to concerning those on this cruise or not. Since this is a public forum, anyone registered with CC can post all they want, and if they say something critical about Regent, so what?

 

 

Why can't you let Regent speak for themselves? I know you can say what you want but when you are questioned, you seem to be selective with whom you interface and when it gets hot in the kitchen, you either say you won't talk about it or you accuse us of taking your opinions/facts out of context.

 

I simply said that the views on this thread were among the highest, not the highest, and bingo, you had to find a different number that had absolutely nothing to do with the statement.

 

I speak on behalf of myself. Unfortunately, my opinions have been taken as facts. Aren't we all selective in terms of whom we choose to interface with? You are the OP on this thread and originally asked that only passengers on your cruise respond. After some thought, I agreed that it is the passengers are this cruise that are affected by whatever decision is made. Now it seems as if you are defending the posters that you preferred would not post in the first place. A bit confusing.

 

Yes - CC is a forum where all members can participate. Maybe it is simply my own sensibilities, but I cannot imagine going on to the Carnival board and posting negative things about them - how they handle certain incidents that we have all been made aware of. By the same token, I question why posters that do not know Regent have come by to criticize. I am not bashing them -- simply asking why they are taking a company to task that they are not familiar with.

 

If I recall correctly, you started this thread to get a response from Regent. We have all posted updates from the media, CDC, WHO, etc. regarding the latest information on the Ebola crisis. Regent has given a small amount of information to passengers and has indicated to at least one TA that more information will be forthcoming this coming week.

 

Why can we not simply wait until there is a response? All of us are concerned about Ebola. Once again, I ask for a cease fire and wait for either further information on the Ebola crisis and/or a response from Regent.

 

P.S. "Challenge bashing" is a very interesting term. Did I really use that?

Edited September 21, 2014 by Travelcat2

[Responder]

I speak on behalf of myself. Unfortunately, my opinions have been taken as facts. Aren't we all selective in terms of whom we choose to interface with? You are the OP on this thread and originally asked that only passengers on your cruise respond. After some thought, I agreed that it is the passengers are this cruise that are affected by whatever decision is made. Now it seems as if you are defending the posters that you preferred would not post in the first place. A bit confusing.

 

Huh? My original thought was only to get a consensus of how the people on this sailing felt about the Ebola threat in Dakar and surrounding areas of Africa.

As soon as you became involved it morphed into a rage because you couldn't tolerate any criticism of Regent and their lack of response. Then you began interpreting all the information posted by government and government related agencies..indicating which you believed or not.

 

 

Yes - CC is a forum where all members can participate. Maybe it is simply my own sensibilities, but I cannot imagine going on to the Carnival board and posting negative things about them - how they handle certain incidents that we have all been made aware of. By the same token, I question why posters that do not know Regent have come by to criticize. I am not bashing them -- simply asking why they are taking a company to task that they are not familiar with.

 

Funny, but you while reading other's comments, posted information about Seabourn while having never been on that ship. Is your intuition better than other's intuition? Where would you post your feelings about Carnival if not on their board...maybe on a Costco forum??

 

If I recall correctly, you started this thread to get a response from Regent. We have all posted updates from the media, CDC, WHO, etc. regarding the latest information on the Ebola crisis. Regent has given a small amount of information to passengers and has indicated to at least one TA that more information will be forthcoming this coming week.

 

To be specific, Regent has not directly given on stitch of worthwhile information to anyone.

 

Why can we not simply wait until there is a response? All of us are concerned about Ebola. Once again, I ask for a cease fire and wait for either further information on the Ebola crisis and/or a response from Regent.

 

Why should we have to wait...our checks cleared the banks many moons ago.

P.S. "Challenge bashing" is a very interesting term. Did I really use that?

 

PLease see my responses in bold...

[Travelcat2]

You are entitled to your opinions - whether they are accurate or not. This is going in circles and is no longer related to Ebola or the cruise.

[fizzy]

 

fizzy: Once again, there is no implied threat. And, I doubt if posters on Roll Call meant it as an implied threat when they posted that they might go to the media if Regent did not respond.

 

I have no idea what is being said on roll call. I was referring to the implied threats that Regent lawyers were monitoring CC comments. This far along and I still find that distasteful.

[gnomie1]

Something very interesting happened this morning:

 

I went to a meeting this morning and ran into someone who happens to be a travel agent in a very large firm, although she does not deal with cruises. She does know that I have been quite loyal to Regent in the past. Here is how the discussion went:

 

She says to me "you cannot believe how much trouble we have been having with your beloved Regent". I ask her what is she talking about, she doesn't even deal with cruises. She goes on to tell me that apparently their firm has passengers on the cruise in question and have been unable to get a straight answer regarding whether the ship will or will not stop in Africa and people are concerned about ebola (at this point, she has no idea that I have been following the situation on CC). She then made a very interesting point - apparently within her firm they are concerned as to whether the passengers will eventually think that the TA's are not doing their job with regard to not being able to get a straight and how that will affect their decision to recommend Regent in the future. She commented that the commissions offered by Regent are excellent, but at the end of the day they can only recommend vacations that they believe will not tarnish their professional reputation. When things do not go as planned or expected, people place blame on their TA.

 

I do not know if the passengers in question follow CC, but it appears to me that passengers other than those that have made themselves known on CC are concerned about ebola. She also mentioned something else, as things stand now, it is not possible to visit both ports, so the complete lack of communications from Regent is deafening.

 

I told her I had actually been following the story on CC - she had no idea that other people also had the same concern. She just mentioned to me that it was being discussed within her office. I wonder how this is playing out in other TA offices.

 

TAs are the life blood of Regent - if they do not feel comfortable recommending their cruises, it will really have a negative effect on Regent. While we know there are also people who will do things for the right amount of money (I once had a TA like that), most TA are very ethical and honest and want to do what is the best for the customer and no matter how hard they try, Regent may have a difficult time winning back TA's.

 

The only thing I can think of is with the new ownership by NCL, the commission structure will change and Regent is counting on that to retain TA loyalty.

 

Although I am not on the cruise in question, it makes me seriously wonder exactly when Regent decides to do things in the passengers favor over profits. As I had mentioned early, I was on a cruise last year in which Regent reacted VERY SLOWLY to obvious illness of board - if they had reacted sooner, it could have prevented many people from getting sick. It appears that Regent would rather be reactive than proactive.

 

gnomie :)

[Responder]

Something very interesting happened this morning:

 

I went to a meeting this morning and ran into someone who happens to be a travel agent in a very large firm, although she does not deal with cruises. She does know that I have been quite loyal to Regent in the past. Here is how the discussion went:

 

She says to me "you cannot believe how much trouble we have been having with your beloved Regent". I ask her what is she talking about, she doesn't even deal with cruises. She goes on to tell me that apparently their firm has passengers on the cruise in question and have been unable to get a straight answer regarding whether the ship will or will not stop in Africa and people are concerned about ebola (at this point, she has no idea that I have been following the situation on CC). She then made a very interesting point - apparently within her firm they are concerned as to whether the passengers will eventually think that the TA's are not doing their job with regard to not being able to get a straight and how that will affect their decision to recommend Regent in the future. She commented that the commissions offered by Regent are excellent, but at the end of the day they can only recommend vacations that they believe will not tarnish their professional reputation. When things do not go as planned or expected, people place blame on their TA.

 

I do not know if the passengers in question follow CC, but it appears to me that passengers other than those that have made themselves known on CC are concerned about ebola. She also mentioned something else, as things stand now, it is not possible to visit both ports, so the complete lack of communications from Regent is deafening.

 

I told her I had actually been following the story on CC - she had no idea that other people also had the same concern. She just mentioned to me that it was being discussed within her office. I wonder how this is playing out in other TA offices.

 

TAs are the life blood of Regent - if they do not feel comfortable recommending their cruises, it will really have a negative effect on Regent. While we know there are also people who will do things for the right amount of money (I once had a TA like that), most TA are very ethical and honest and want to do what is the best for the customer and no matter how hard they try, Regent may have a difficult time winning back TA's.

 

The only thing I can think of is with the new ownership by NCL, the commission structure will change and Regent is counting on that to retain TA loyalty.

 

Although I am not on the cruise in question, it makes me seriously wonder exactly when Regent decides to do things in the passengers favor over profits. As I had mentioned early, I was on a cruise last year in which Regent reacted VERY SLOWLY to obvious illness of board - if they had reacted sooner, it could have prevented many people from getting sick. It appears that Regent would rather be reactive than proactive.

 

gnomie :)

 

gnomie1....

 

Your answers will be forthcoming shortly, as soon as she puts on her legal robes.:D

 

The TA you spoke with is correct.

 

As I mentioned earlier, my TA says they have been getting at least 10 calls a day and they can't get any response from Regent. They feel it is taking up too much time dealing with something that Regent should be dealing with.

[gnomie1]

 

As was posted by someone else, this is not something new. Most large companies monitor social media. The posts that you find distasteful were in response to something posted on Roll Call that had to do with the media (specifically local newspapers) -- not with Cruise Critic. However, Regent could have read on Cruise Critic that there was a intent/thought to take this issue to the local media. Obviously, we can post almost anything that we want to on Cruise Critic. If Regent was out to sue posters for not agreeing with them, most of us would have been sued. However, IMO, it is simply not a good idea to threaten anyone -- not a human being, not a company (and certainly not an animal). IMO, threats can involve repercussions (in all cases mentioned).

 

I have used the media before - I have a number of great connections within the media world and when necessary, reporting by the media seems to turn things around, and sometimes, rather quickly. If someone has done nothing wrong, they have nothing to worry about if the media is contacted because they can explain their story. However, by the time most people have taken the energy to contact the media, they have exhausted all other options. I can count a number of times, when all it took was an inquiry by a reporter to change the attitude of either an individual or a company. There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with threatening to report actions to the media - that is the grace of a free democracy and a free press.

 

For the majority of companies, although they say otherwise, customer service has taken a back seat to profits. Customer service and communications has never been a strong point for Regent and the only time I see that changing is when it starts to adversely affect the bottom line.

 

In six weeks time I will back on a Regent ship, and I will share this "adventure" with as many people who are interested in listening. The majority of us spend a significant amount of money with Regent and people should know the type of company they are dealing with, esp behind the glossy brochures. I have already told three other Regent families about what is going on - since I am sure Regent believes they are doing the right thing, they should have nothing to feel embarrassed about.

 

gnomie :)

[Travelcat2]

gnomie1: You actually responded to my post -- not fizzy's. She apparently does not use the "quote" feature so it doesn't work as it was meant to.

 

We will be on the Mariner in October and I, too, intend to speak with Regent guests (and have already been in contact with my Regent friends). I stand by my feelings that Regent has done nothing wrong. They could have made a decision earlier -- at this point we do not know why they decided to wait.

 

I remain steadfast in my belief that threatening anyone is not right. Do you truly feel that the people concerned on this cruise have "exhausted" all other options? I do not. I just reread the Roll Call thread (from which this thread was born). Note the dates of these incidents:

 

July 30th – first post I could find regarding Ebola and the port of Dakar

.

August 22 – started emails to Regent. Same day another posted suggested escalating email to “higher up the food chain”

 

August 25th – response from RSSC to two different posters:

just received this reply from McAndrews....

 

Thank you so much for your message of concern, Mr. xxxxxx. Your concern is very valid. The safety and well-being of our guests and crew is paramount, so we will take appropriate action should the Ebola situation persist and spread.

Peggy Hammes

Personal Travel Consultant

Regent Seven Seas Cruises

 

August 29th – a different poster receives an email from Regent

Thank you for forwarding this information. Our operations team is aware and will continue to monitor the situation very closely. If the call on Senegal for Oct 21st is deemed a safety risk, we will adjust the itinerary. At this point the call is nearly two months away, so while we try to preserve our original itineraries whenever possible. We will alert all affected guests and travel agents should a change be necessary due to safety concerns to our guests, crew, or vessels.

 

September 1st – poster suggested getting the name of local newspaper Travel Editors and to hold on to it. Another poster mentioned the Miami Herald and Sun Sentinel

 

Note: the above "bold" and "colors" were inserted by me for emphasis.

 

So, two days after receiving written communication from Regent, -- 2 months before the scheduled docking at Dakar, plans were being made to possibly go to Travel Editors of various newspapers.

 

Obviously some of you agree, others do not.

Edited September 21, 2014 by Travelcat2

[HanaleiSailor]

Aloha all,

 

I hope that this hasn't happened to others, but following this thread has somewhat negatively impacted my thoughts as I get prepared to take my next Regent cruise in October. I don't know exactly why, but every time that I think about our upcoming trip, I feel a bit disappointed as I think about how Regent management has treated the passengers on the Senegal itinerary.

 

So to speak to my topic: Why this thread is so long and contentious . . .

 

I see two primary reasons:

 

1. Regent management has failed to communicate with the passengers on this itinerary in a timely manner. I feel that Regent management has failed in its responsibility to these passengers (note: I am not saying Regent needs to post here on CC, but they should have contacted their customers

long before now)

 

2. One poster has continually defended Regent on this thread, perhaps beyond the point at which a reasonable person could continue to defend the company.

 

I think that TC2 is most likely a sweet person who truly likes to share her experience in order to help others. I do not think that I have ever met a customer more loyal to a company than TC is to Regent; she has helped many people over the years on CC, but in this one case, I think that she has simply got it wrong, and her emotional attachment to the company and its employees and officers has clouded her judgement here.

 

I am paraphrasing here: TC stated that she was "happy that she was not sailing on the Senegal cruise." I posted here and simply asked her why this was the case, and she replied that she was "happy to NOT be on this cruise because there would most likely be a good number of unhappy passengers on the cruise." Again, this is a paraphrase. I can't be bothered to take the time to cut and paste the exact quotes from several pages ago.

 

Then, as posted above, TC jumped into another thread on the O board to sing the praises of Regent management. This is a direct quote: It never ceases to amaze me how competent, caring and honest the top executives of Oceania and Regent area.

 

These are almost mutually exclusive statements. If Regent management were competent 100% of the time, how could they allow this situation to get to the point that the likelihood that a good many passengers on the Senegal cruise will be unhappy is so great that even one of their most loyal customers is happy to NOT be on this cruise? Simply stated: Competent management would do something before it would allow a ship full of unhappy folks to get on board.

 

Finally, TC, again, I want to say that I am not bashing you here personally, nor am I bashing Regent. There have been, who knows 30, 40, 50, or more different posters on this thread. Some of these posters are seasoned Regent cruisers, some are looking forward to a first Regent cruise, others may be thinking about sailing Regent and still others are former Regent customers or those who are just interested in cruising in general.

 

The common denominator here is that every poster on this thread (or at least every posting that I can remember) is in agreement that Regent management has really mishandled this situation. TC, you are the lone wolf here defending Regent when everyone else who has posted here finds their absolute lack of communication with their customers to be indefensible. This is why I say that I believe you are perhaps too emotionally close to the company to be objective here.

 

Just imagine if you read 50 or 60 five star reviews of Regent and one review which was a terrible review, just ripping the company to pieces. Would you give much credence to the one poor review? Probably not. That is what it seems has happened here.

 

Finally, again TC, I know that you want to be helpful and share your experiences and the information which you have gleaned over the years interacting with Regent employees and management, but if you were even to consider the possibility that Regent management has got it wrong this time, the whole tenor of this discussion could change dramatically.

 

Aloha from Hanalei,

 

Mark

[CruisetheCs]

......

In any case, Monday is approaching. No doubt passengers on this cruise will let us know what Regent has decided by the end of the week. In the meantime, it would be nice if the arguments came to an end.

.....

 

It seems to me that there is a near unanimous opinion on these pages that Regent is mishandling this situation. There appears to be only one person who thinks otherwise. Bringing the arguments to an end has a very simple solution.

[Responder]

It seems to me that there is a near unanimous opinion on these pages that Regent is mishandling this situation. There appears to be only one person who thinks otherwise. Bringing the arguments to an end has a very simple solution.

 

Good luck.. ;)

[Responder]

Aloha all,

 

I hope that this hasn't happened to others, but following this thread has somewhat negatively impacted my thoughts as I get prepared to take my next Regent cruise in October. I don't know exactly why, but every time that I think about our upcoming trip, I feel a bit disappointed as I think about how Regent management has treated the passengers on the Senegal itinerary.

 

So to speak to my topic: Why this thread is so long and contentious . . .

 

I see two primary reasons:

 

1. Regent management has failed to communicate with the passengers on this itinerary in a timely manner. I feel that Regent management has failed in its responsibility to these passengers (note: I am not saying Regent needs to post here on CC, but they should have contacted their customers

long before now)

 

2. One poster has continually defended Regent on this thread, perhaps beyond the point at which a reasonable person could continue to defend the company.

 

I think that TC2 is most likely a sweet person who truly likes to share her experience in order to help others. I do not think that I have ever met a customer more loyal to a company than TC is to Regent; she has helped many people over the years on CC, but in this one case, I think that she has simply got it wrong, and her emotional attachment to the company and its employees and officers has clouded her judgement here.

 

I am paraphrasing here: TC stated that she was "happy that she was not sailing on the Senegal cruise." I posted here and simply asked her why this was the case, and she replied that she was "happy to NOT be on this cruise because there would most likely be a good number of unhappy passengers on the cruise." Again, this is a paraphrase. I can't be bothered to take the time to cut and paste the exact quotes from several pages ago.

 

Then, as posted above, TC jumped into another thread on the O board to sing the praises of Regent management. This is a direct quote: It never ceases to amaze me how competent, caring and honest the top executives of Oceania and Regent area.

 

These are almost mutually exclusive statements. If Regent management were competent 100% of the time, how could they allow this situation to get to the point that the likelihood that a good many passengers on the Senegal cruise will be unhappy is so great that even one of their most loyal customers is happy to NOT be on this cruise? Simply stated: Competent management would do something before it would allow a ship full of unhappy folks to get on board.

 

Finally, TC, again, I want to say that I am not bashing you here personally, nor am I bashing Regent. There have been, who knows 30, 40, 50, or more different posters on this thread. Some of these posters are seasoned Regent cruisers, some are looking forward to a first Regent cruise, others may be thinking about sailing Regent and still others are former Regent customers or those who are just interested in cruising in general.

 

The common denominator here is that every poster on this thread (or at least every posting that I can remember) is in agreement that Regent management has really mishandled this situation. TC, you are the lone wolf here defending Regent when everyone else who has posted here finds their absolute lack of communication with their customers to be indefensible. This is why I say that I believe you are perhaps too emotionally close to the company to be objective here.

 

Just imagine if you read 50 or 60 five star reviews of Regent and one review which was a terrible review, just ripping the company to pieces. Would you give much credence to the one poor review? Probably not. That is what it seems has happened here.

 

Finally, again TC, I know that you want to be helpful and share your experiences and the information which you have gleaned over the years interacting with Regent employees and management, but if you were even to consider the possibility that Regent management has got it wrong this time, the whole tenor of this discussion could change dramatically.

 

Aloha from Hanalei,

 

Mark

 

Mark....

 

Excellent..well crafted, literate summary of the entire situation.

 

Unfortunately, I don't think it will hit home, and if and when Regent does decide to honor us with some sort of reply, the response you will read will be..."See, I told you they would come through."

[Travelcat2]

Aloha all,

 

I hope that this hasn't happened to others, but following this thread has somewhat negatively impacted my thoughts as I get prepared to take my next Regent cruise in October. I don't know exactly why, but every time that I think about our upcoming trip, I feel a bit disappointed as I think about how Regent management has treated the passengers on the Senegal itinerary.

 

So to speak to my topic: Why this thread is so long and contentious . . .

 

I see two primary reasons:

 

1. Regent management has failed to communicate with the passengers on this itinerary in a timely manner. I feel that Regent management has failed in its responsibility to these passengers (note: I am not saying Regent needs to post here on CC, but they should have contacted their customers

long before now)

 

2. One poster has continually defended Regent on this thread, perhaps beyond the point at which a reasonable person could continue to defend the company.

 

I think that TC2 is most likely a sweet person who truly likes to share her experience in order to help others. I do not think that I have ever met a customer more loyal to a company than TC is to Regent; she has helped many people over the years on CC, but in this one case, I think that she has simply got it wrong, and her emotional attachment to the company and its employees and officers has clouded her judgement here.

 

I am paraphrasing here: TC stated that she was "happy that she was not sailing on the Senegal cruise." I posted here and simply asked her why this was the case, and she replied that she was "happy to NOT be on this cruise because there would most likely be a good number of unhappy passengers on the cruise." Again, this is a paraphrase. I can't be bothered to take the time to cut and paste the exact quotes from several pages ago.

 

Then, as posted above, TC jumped into another thread on the O board to sing the praises of Regent management. This is a direct quote: It never ceases to amaze me how competent, caring and honest the top executives of Oceania and Regent area.

 

These are almost mutually exclusive statements. If Regent management were competent 100% of the time, how could they allow this situation to get to the point that the likelihood that a good many passengers on the Senegal cruise will be unhappy is so great that even one of their most loyal customers is happy to NOT be on this cruise? Simply stated: Competent management would do something before it would allow a ship full of unhappy folks to get on board.

 

Finally, TC, again, I want to say that I am not bashing you here personally, nor am I bashing Regent. There have been, who knows 30, 40, 50, or more different posters on this thread. Some of these posters are seasoned Regent cruisers, some are looking forward to a first Regent cruise, others may be thinking about sailing Regent and still others are former Regent customers or those who are just interested in cruising in general.

 

The common denominator here is that every poster on this thread (or at least every posting that I can remember) is in agreement that Regent management has really mishandled this situation. TC, you are the lone wolf here defending Regent when everyone else who has posted here finds their absolute lack of communication with their customers to be indefensible. This is why I say that I believe you are perhaps too emotionally close to the company to be objective here.

 

Just imagine if you read 50 or 60 five star reviews of Regent and one review which was a terrible review, just ripping the company to pieces. Would you give much credence to the one poor review? Probably not. That is what it seems has happened here.

 

Finally, again TC, I know that you want to be helpful and share your experiences and the information which you have gleaned over the years interacting with Regent employees and management, but if you were even to consider the possibility that Regent management has got it wrong this time, the whole tenor of this discussion could change dramatically.

 

Aloha from Hanalei,

 

Mark

 

I read your post thoroughly and understand why you feel the way that you do. One thing that you did not consider are the posters that are on the cruise and also on Roll Call that do not share the feelings of the majority of the posters on this thread (or, if they do, they have not voiced it). The posters I speak of are not on this thread but are easy to find on the Roll Call thread.

 

As I believe that you know, my loyalty does have limits. In this case, however, I do not see wrongdoing. What I do see a company that is very slow in their communication. One cannot say that they have not communicated as they have. It may not be what passengers want to hear -- they wanted answers weeks ago. I am not saying that their slow response is a good thing .... nor am I saying that it is wrong. Sometimes I simply want to say..... how dare we judge them (or anyone), lest we be judged. Okay, so I said it. Also, how dare anyone threaten them?

 

Why can't the facts speak for themselves? Regent cannot go to Cape Verde if they go to Dakar. So, either they choose another port or assign a sea day. Hopefully this decision will be made this week. Do I wish it had been sooner? Absolutely! Do I think Regent is perfect? Absolutely not. But I must admit that I do not understand the inner workings of any large company.

 

I do understand how my statement on the Oceania board could be confusing. On one hand I am complimenting Mr. Kamlani and Regent for their caring, yet on this thread people are waiting for answers. IMO, the question on the Oceania thread was easy to answer. Mr. Kamlani was able to give a fast and accurate answer. Also, the question was one that all Oceania passengers may wonder about (for those who do not read the Oceania board, it was about how much of the tips go to the crew). The question being asked here is much more complex.

 

I am not defending Regent but I am suggesting that threats and bashing (not by you, Mark) is not going to make the decision come any faster. There is a term that I wish I could use but is not appropriate on CC. I'll try to phrase it in a way that is acceptable. If you feel so strongly that Regent has done something wrong -- go to whatever source you want to and complain. In other words - do it or get off of the pot.

 

Finally, I simply do not understand personal slams - never have and never will. You and I disagree in a civil manner. The Regent board would be a much friendlier place to visit if everyone did the same.

 

P.S. Just noticed the "new" format for reviews. This would make an amazing thread - especially when Carnival rates higher than Silversea and Regent (very skewed results however:-)

[msafiri]

Thanks Mark for your usual calm & intelligent post.

Regent has lost significant credibility on this issue. As you know as a businessperson, once a business loses credibility, it is very hard to recover. In the end, I am sure they will do the right thing, but their handling of this situation will have a long term cost that would have been so easy to prevent.

The poster you reference has also lost significant credibility & seemingly with each post, digs her hole deeper. She too may return to reasonable & helpful posts but may never recover her previous credibility (which in some eyes was already very low.)

[Responder]

Hopefully this post will not be deleted as a number of previousl posts have.

 

Hard to believe but I just got off the phone with Regent.

 

The rep I just spoke with said she already got 15 calls this morning asking the same question as I was asking.

Her answer was that Regent says the ship will stop there and they have nothing to tell us.. She said they were in touch with their ground reps and they say there is nothing wrong.

 

Of course the ground reps only get paid when the ships come to their ports.

[Jerry1934]

Her answer was that Regent says the ship will stop there and they have nothing to tell us.. She said they were in touch with their ground reps and they say there is nothing wrong

 

Does that mean we will not stop at Cape Verde?

If "nothing is wrong" maybe we should tell the US government not to send those 3000 people over to help manage the Global Epidemic.

Jerry

Edited September 22, 2014 by Jerry1934

[TrulyBlonde]

[/quote Her answer was that Regent says the ship will stop there and they have nothing to tell us.. She said they were in touch with their ground reps and they say there is nothing wrong]

Does that mean we will not stop at Cape Verde?

If "nothing is wrong" maybe we should tell the US government not to send those 3000 people over to help manage the Global Epidemic.

Jerry

 

CDC just issued new guidelines for US Airlines and Ebola (nothing for you to worry about??)

[Responder]

Her answer was that Regent says the ship will stop there and they have nothing to tell us.. She said they were in touch with their ground reps and they say there is nothing wrong

 

Does that mean we will not stop at Cape Verde?

If "nothing is wrong" maybe we should tell the US government not to send those 3000 people over to help manage the Global Epidemic.

Jerry

 

I forgot....She said that Cape Verde made an exception for cruise ships.

 

After all....business is business.

[Travelcat2]

Does that mean we will not stop at Cape Verde?

If "nothing is wrong" maybe we should tell the US government not to send those 3000 people over to help manage the Global Epidemic.

Jerry

 

CDC just issued new guidelines for US Airlines and Ebola (nothing for you to worry about??)

 

Could you provide a link to the new guidelines? Just found this link - is this what you are referring to? http://www.cdc.gov/quarantine/air/managing-sick-travelers/ebola-guidance-airlines.html

Edited September 22, 2014 by Travelcat2

[mariners]

Our friends have contacted Cape Verde direct (not sure if it was the government or an embassy located in Cape Verde) and were informed that if the ship stops in Senegal, it cannot stop in Cape Verde. There has been no change in the governments decision in this regard.

 

IMO, which really doesn't matter as the only opinion that counts is of those who are sailing on this itinerary, Regent is also going to need to follow the guidelines provided to airlines if they stop in Senegal, or have passengers who have transited or travelled to one of the other countries affected by Ebola. Although the risk is minimal, it still exists, and, as such, will need to be addressed.

 

Of course, all of this information could be irrelevant if Regent chooses to cancel Senegal and any other port where Ebola has been diagnosed in someone before their arrival.

[LHT28]

I wonder how many on the cruise will be taking the excursions??

 

 

Lyn