NCL- charging double the port fee's for Panama Canal? (NCF?)

[mroyland]

Is it true that Norwegian charges double port charges for the Panama Canal? I got a quote from Norwegian and a quote from a private travel agent and the bottom line cost was identical. (except the break out on the travel agent fee's showed both a 300 NCF fee, plus a separate taxes, port and fee's line of 372..)

I googled it and was shocked to read posts that Norwegian double charges everyone...Is this correct?

Someone that understands this please respond and enlighten me...

[ChicagoBarb]

Gov't Taxes, Fees & Port Expenses $360.72.

This is what is shown per person for the Bliss in May 2018. Booked directly with NCL.

[SeaShark]

Is it true that Norwegian charges double port charges for the Panama Canal? I got a quote from Norwegian and a quote from a private travel agent and the bottom line cost was identical. (except the break out on the travel agent fee's showed both a 300 NCF fee, plus a separate taxes, port and fee's line of 372..)

I googled it and was shocked to read posts that Norwegian double charges everyone...Is this correct?

Someone that understands this please respond and enlighten me...

 

 

Can you reference a specific post that shows that Norwegian double charges people?

 

Did you ask your private travel agent to explain their pricing to you (after all, they do work for you and should provide you with an explanation of what you are buying)?

 

If the bottom line price is the same, then how is it that the travel agent is charging anything different than NCL?

[CastawayCruisers]

NCF means non commisionable fare. It is a portion of the cruise fare that NCL won't pay commission to your travel agent on. Encourages them to book longer/higher rate cruises. This doesn't impact your fare in any way.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[LAFFNVEGAS]

Some agencies show the NCF (they should not) but NCF stands for Non- Commission or Commissionable Fare/Fee meaning that this amount of the base fare the travel agent/agency is not paid commission on, All most all cruise lines do this. Unknown why it is just the cruise line's way of making more money. In recent years I have seen the amount go up.

Taxes are another subject but the Port Taxes for Panama canal have risen drastically over the past 8 years and it has a lot to do with the new locks amount other things.

[mroyland]

Thank you Laffnvegas for you explanation.

This was just meant to be question or an explanation on the fees.

I was on the phone with the travel agent when they called NCL (today for an explanation) and they told us the NCF is incorporated in the room fee. Maybe it was just a coincidence that both the NCF and ports fees were both $300.

[sanger727]

Yes, completely a coincidence. NCF has no relationship to the port fees.

[SeaShark]

Thank you Laffnvegas for you explanation.

This was just meant to be question or an explanation on the fees.

I was on the phone with the travel agent when they called NCL (today for an explanation) and they told us the NCF is incorporated in the room fee. Maybe it was just a coincidence that both the NCF and ports fees were both $300.

 

 

Wow. That is really strange. I can't say that I have ever run across a travel agent who would have to actually phone a cruise line to find out what an NCF is. If it were me, I would certainly be considering a more knowledgeable travel agent.

[roger001]

PC transit fees are very expensive. A few years ago, the Pearl held the record for the most paid...I believe a bit over $500,000. Since then (before the new locks) a cargo container ship broke that record.

[Turtles06]

PC transit fees are very expensive. A few years ago, the Pearl held the record for the most paid...I believe a bit over $500,000. Since then (before the new locks) a cargo container ship broke that record.

 

Pretty close on the Pearl; this site says it was $375,600. (And yes, a huge cargo ship going through the new locks smashed that number.)

 

http://panamaforbeginners.com/23-facts-know-panama-canal/

 

Cruise ships not only pay a fee per berth for the transit, but an additional fee to guarantee a daylight transit.

 

For those interested in the Canal, we returned three weeks ago from the Jewel's 16-night Panama Canal cruise. It was fabulous. My review (with photos) is here:

 

http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=2456255

[don't-use-real-name]

October of '14 transited the Canal on the NCL Star - we did not port but made the full transit and I heard unconfirmed

reports the transit fee was over $250K - broke down to something like $1K per passenger AND CREW a truly very

expensive cruise but the cost to sail around the horn would have resulted in just a much an expense in time fuel food

and other intermediate port stops.

[sfaaa]

Is it true that Norwegian charges double port charges for the Panama Canal? I got a quote from Norwegian and a quote from a private travel agent and the bottom line cost was identical. ..

 

 

Does it matter since you pay the exact same total either way?

[seashells]

I really don't know but as said above.

Cruise ships pay a premium for daylight travel. How much tankers pay will probably be different but based on weight or number of containers.

Having been through it 3 times it's still awesome.

We don't own the canal anymore.....Carter signed it over, and China came in to widen it as some ships built today are too large to use the canal....They used to build ships and called them Panamax....Now they can be twice as wide.

I can remember when they had to close it at times because of night time collisions and if you paid attention you can see debris on the shorelines.

Once you transit the canal you are a member of the Order of the Ditch.

[chengkp75]

Couple of notes.

 

As explained above, the TA's "fare" and "NCF" equals NCL's fare, or close to it. The port fees for a Canal cruise are very high, and very volatile. They may change several times before sailing.

 

The actual tariff for the old locks is $148 per passenger berth (crew are not charged or counted). This is per berth based on maximum capacity, and is charged on this capacity whether the ship sails full or not. Therefore, the $148/pp x capacity is a fixed number, and is divided between the number of passengers actually sailing, so this can vary during the booking time, though the line will set the initial fees based on historical sailing capacity and adjust from there.

 

There are also additional costs, as mentioned the daylight premium, but also tugs, services, and other things that can double the basic tariff. I don't believe the cost per passenger would reach $1000, unless the ship was nearly empty. Virtually the entire cost of the transit is passed to the passengers through the port fees and taxes.

 

China did not widen the Canal, it was paid for by bonds which are being repaid by the higher tariffs on both the old and new lock systems. China is working to build a new canal in Nicaragua to compete with the PC.

 

Neo-Panamax ships are not twice as wide. Panamax ships are 106 feet, and Neo are 161 feet. The Neo-Panamax ships are more than twice as large in deadweight tonnage (the amount of cargo that can be carried), but this is of no consequence to a cruise ship, whose cargo weighs so little in comparison to the size of the ship.

 

Most of the "debris" on the shoreline is worn out dredging equipment used to widen the canal.

[thinfool]

Couple of notes.

 

As explained above, the TA's "fare" and "NCF" equals NCL's fare, or close to it. The port fees for a Canal cruise are very high, and very volatile. They may change several times before sailing.

 

The actual tariff for the old locks is $148 per passenger berth (crew are not charged or counted). This is per berth based on maximum capacity, and is charged on this capacity whether the ship sails full or not. Therefore, the $148/pp x capacity is a fixed number, and is divided between the number of passengers actually sailing, so this can vary during the booking time, though the line will set the initial fees based on historical sailing capacity and adjust from there.

 

There are also additional costs, as mentioned the daylight premium, but also tugs, services, and other things that can double the basic tariff. I don't believe the cost per passenger would reach $1000, unless the ship was nearly empty. Virtually the entire cost of the transit is passed to the passengers through the port fees and taxes.

 

China did not widen the Canal, it was paid for by bonds which are being repaid by the higher tariffs on both the old and new lock systems. China is working to build a new canal in Nicaragua to compete with the PC.

 

Neo-Panamax ships are not twice as wide. Panamax ships are 106 feet, and Neo are 161 feet. The Neo-Panamax ships are more than twice as large in deadweight tonnage (the amount of cargo that can be carried), but this is of no consequence to a cruise ship, whose cargo weighs so little in comparison to the size of the ship.

 

Most of the "debris" on the shoreline is worn out dredging equipment used to widen the canal.

To add....

 

The US never owned the Panama Canal. It was on a 99 year lease which the US and Panama did not renew.

 

The canal is arguably in better shape now than when the US was the operator. If the US was still operating, the expansion project would likely still be locked up in political conflicts rather than complete, as it is now.

[chengkp75]

To add....

 

The US never owned the Panama Canal. It was on a 99 year lease which the US and Panama did not renew.

 

The canal is arguably in better shape now than when the US was the operator. If the US was still operating, the expansion project would likely still be locked up in political conflicts rather than complete, as it is now.

 

And a further note, Panama did not exist until the US had difficulty negotiating the Panama Canal with Columbia, so the US fostered and aided a movement for Panama to secede from Columbia, in exchange for the lease.

[sanger727]

Can't comment on the port fees for the Panama Canal. But on our last cruise they our TA also broke the NCF out of the fare (because they offered OBC based on the comissionable part of the fare). We did a 10 day Caribbean cruise and the NCF was significant. So I don't think it has anything to do with the panamal canal being in the cruise.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[seashells]

Couple of notes.

 

As explained above, the TA's "fare" and "NCF" equals NCL's fare, or close to it. The port fees for a Canal cruise are very high, and very volatile. They may change several times before sailing.

 

The actual tariff for the old locks is $148 per passenger berth (crew are not charged or counted). This is per berth based on maximum capacity, and is charged on this capacity whether the ship sails full or not. Therefore, the $148/pp x capacity is a fixed number, and is divided between the number of passengers actually sailing, so this can vary during the booking time, though the line will set the initial fees based on historical sailing capacity and adjust from there.

 

There are also additional costs, as mentioned the daylight premium, but also tugs, services, and other things that can double the basic tariff. I don't believe the cost per passenger would reach $1000, unless the ship was nearly empty. Virtually the entire cost of the transit is passed to the passengers through the port fees and taxes.

 

China did not widen the Canal, it was paid for by bonds which are being repaid by the higher tariffs on both the old and new lock systems. China is working to build a new canal in Nicaragua to compete with the PC.

 

Neo-Panamax ships are not twice as wide. Panamax ships are 106 feet, and Neo are 161 feet. The Neo-Panamax ships are more than twice as large in deadweight tonnage (the amount of cargo that can be carried), but this is of no consequence to a cruise ship, whose cargo weighs so little in comparison to the size of the ship.

 

Most of the "debris" on the shoreline is worn out dredging equipment used to widen the canal.

 

 

 

No on the debris we saw (2 ships) and was told to us by the personal onboard during the cruise (The one that explains) and gives you information on different sailings that the company hires. On some lines such as Alaska they did the same.

We actually had to wait until the 2 ships were cleared in the lake and were late in the traverse.

While there was a 'lease' there was also considerable debate in Congress about turning it over and it passed with just 2 votes over what was necessary.

The US has retained the right to defend the canal, preferably in support of Panama but alone, if necessary.

Rivas was ground zero for President Daniel Ortega’s ambitious $40 billion, interoceanic canal.

 

The canal promised to make Nicaragua, the second poorest nation in the Americas one of the richest countries in Central America, according to the plans published by the China Railway Siyuan Survey and Design Group Co., Ltd., and approved by the secretive Hong Kong Nicaragua Development company, or HKND, which was tasked with designing and building the canal.

 

The same company built the Three Gorges hydropower project on the Yangtze River in China. The world’s largest hydroelectric dam....(Proud member of standing on that while under construction.).....Not happy with the millions of displaced people ordered to move by China.

 

China now holds a 50 year lease, but puts pressure on the American military presence and there have been several conflicts of threatening the U.S. with it's now new found funds from the canal

Panama has a new government and frequent polls show that the majority of Panamanians support a continued U.S. military presence.

None of this reply's to the original poster but it should explain the added cost of a Panama Canal transit.

It's a treat for people and someone has to pay for the privilege to cut fuel costs of going around the horn. We also did that cruise which was thrilling.

[seashells]

By the way there are several cams that show the ships that are in the canal at certain points.

You can actually see the ships either rise or lower if you have the time and a calendar of which cruise ships are traversing the canal on which day of the month.

Some of them are down for maintenance today, but there are some that are not.

 

http://www.coolpanama.com/panama-webcams.html

http://www.kroooz-cams.com/portcams/so_america/miraflores1.php

 

http://www.seacruisechat.com/

[BillB48]

To add....

 

The US never owned the Panama Canal. It was on a 99 year lease which the US and Panama did not renew.

 

The canal is arguably in better shape now than when the US was the operator. If the US was still operating, the expansion project would likely still be locked up in political conflicts rather than complete, as it is now.

 

Saw this thread a while ago and responded... the wonders of computer sent it all to somewhere in cyber space:(... so i gave up and just now came back to it. Hopefully it is not too late to resurrect this thread.

 

There is a lot of urban legends, myths, scuttlebutt that has provided a great deal of not so accurate info on the Canal. I have even been treated to some real bum dope by the destination lecturers on a couple of Canal transit cruises... that can be another whole thread!

 

While not trying to be argumentative or peeling one layer of the onion away, for practical and legal purposes the US owned the Canal and was never under any lease agreement. The US certainly did encourage the Panamanians to seek independence from Colombia when the Colombian government rejected a treaty giving the US the right to build a canal in Panama. Had the US not been amenable to a renegotiation of the original 1903 treaty Panama would not have much of a legal leg to stand on to change the terms.

 

Panama declared its independence on Nov 3, 1903 and the Hay Bunau-Varilla Treaty of Nov. 18, 1903 provided the frame work for the creation of a Canal "zone", you can see from the dates this was not a long protracted affair and one civilian and one donkey paid the ultimate price when Colombia attempted to stop it.

 

 

From Article II the following... The Republic of Panama grants to the United States in perpetuity the use, occupation and control of a zone of land and land under water for the construction maintenance, operation, sanitation and protection of said Canal of the width of ten miles extending to the distance of five miles on each side of the center line... (bolding mine)

 

and from Article III the following...

The Republic of Panama grants to the United States all the rights, power and authority within the zone... which the United States would possess and exercise if it were the sovereign of the territory...

 

The US did pay Panama compensation of $10 million (IIRC) as well a sum to what was left of the French Canal Company. Later on the US did compensate Colombia for its loss of Panama. There was not any other payment to Panama for the use of the land. Now what was often misinterpreted as a "rent" or "lease" payment the US did agree to pay Panama $250,000 per year as compensation for the loss of tax revenue of the Panama Railroad. The US assumed ownership and operation of the railroad as part of the overall agreement.

 

The Carter-Torrijos Treaty of 1977 (went into effect 1979) we can deduce that perpetuity lasts 76 years;)!

 

During the 20 year turnover of the Canal to Panama (1999, transfer complete) the US continued to maintain the Canal and to improve the infrastructure. New towing towing locomotives were added, as well as tug boats and other floating equipment. Work continued to widen Gaillard Cut. The US did not hand over a smoldering, dilapidated enterprise that was on the verge of collapse.

 

Without a doubt Panama has done a great job running the Canal since the turn over. One of their big efforts was the addition of the the third locks project. This is sure to keep the Canal competitive with other forms of transportation for the foreseeable future. However, let's not forget that the original thirds locks project was begun in 1939 and was only halted because of the onset of WW2. The need for the third locks was not as critical after the War as improvements to increase capacity of the present system was sufficient. The third locks project that was opened last year was started by Panama in 2007 is constructed using much of the original excavation from 1939. I think it is key to point out that the new third locks are only marginally larger than what was envisioned back in 1939. Most of the increase in lock size is due to the different procedures adopted by Panama for ships using the new locks.

 

Here's to cruising....

[Arubabeachtime]

I suspect, as some have mentioned, the NCF fee matches the transit tax which I have read is in the 140-150 range per passenger is because this is not cruise ship revenue.  Why would they pay a travel agent a commission for a large fee outside of their control that does not contribute to their bottom line.  

[newmexicoNita]

10 hours ago, Arubabeachtime said:

I suspect, as some have mentioned, the NCF fee matches the transit tax which I have read is in the 140-150 range per passenger is because this is not cruise ship revenue.  Why would they pay a travel agent a commission for a large fee outside of their control that does not contribute to their bottom line.  

You are right but I am a bit surprised you dug up a post that is over 2 years old. 

[Arubabeachtime]

It just matched a search I made, was looking for information.  Actually found what I was looking for in the search BTW.