Wondering why NCL can advertise the drink package as "Free" when it's not

[erdoran]

10 hours ago, sverigecruiser said:

 

I know that it's not a tip but if the service charge is an important part of the staffs salary a service charge makes sense even for that "free" package, I think.

 

How else will the staff be compensated for the work they do?

Ummm....your cruise fare, since it includes UBP?  Your DSC?

 

Actually since I’ve come back to NCL cruising, I’ve seen a big improvement in the transparency of the UBP 20% surcharge.  When I booked my first cruise last year, it was shown on the booking page as “special services” and I couldn’t find information anywhere about what those “special services” were.  It wasn’t disclosed during booking that I could see, and I went to several pages and it wasn’t stated there either.  There was a page that did the asterisk thing but it was hard to find.  

 

With my more recent bookings it does show up in the “free at sea” info that you will be charged a 20% service charge.

[Nyc2tropics]

I agree with OP, it’s definitely deceptive. I recently sailed and when I booked was surprised to see how much extra the so called free at sea was. If it was really free why can’t you get it with a guranteed room? Cause it’s not free!! It’s built into the price. There’s a reason why it costs another few hundred to pick your own room to get the FAS offer. Having said that, I was still comfortable with what I paid but it’s a sales gimmick. I don’t know why some people go out of their way to be NCL apologists. 

[SeaShark]

1 hour ago, Nyc2tropics said:

I agree with OP, it’s definitely deceptive. I recently sailed and when I booked was surprised to see how much extra the so called free at sea was. If it was really free why can’t you get it with a guranteed room? Cause it’s not free!! It’s built into the price. There’s a reason why it costs another few hundred to pick your own room to get the FAS offer. Having said that, I was still comfortable with what I paid but it’s a sales gimmick. I don’t know why some people go out of their way to be NCL apologists. 

 

One...you can get it with a guaranteed room. I am sailing on the Bliss in 3 weeks and I received two (2) Free @ Sea offers with my booking....on a guarantee room. You cannot get the Free @ Sea Offer with the Sail Away rate....which is prominently displayed on the website. Remember, all Sail Away cabins are guarantees, but not all guarantees are Sail Away. Don't confuse the two.

 

Two...The reason some people go out of their way to, as you label it, "be NCL apologists" is the same reason that some people go out of their way to be NCL haters and complainers. Plus many of them are tired of seeing the cruise line take the blame for something when the real cause is people who are too lazy to bother to understand just what they are talking about. People aren't here to apologize for the cruise line, and they aren't here to coddle and become support groups for those with failures in understanding and/or self-made expectations.

 

Three...This thread stands as an example of just how people don't bother to read and understand what they are buying. Which is particularly troubling when they are booking themselves. Why would someone do their own booking when they don't have full and complete knowledge of what it is they are getting for their money. This is especially ridiculous when PCC and Travel Agents...who are educated in the process...are available TO ASSIST YOU FOR FREE. Self-booking should only be done by those who a) have a complete and total understanding of what they are booking, and b) are willing and able to accept personal responsibility for their failures under part a).

[fshagan]

14 hours ago, schildiams said:

I see that NCL is currently advertising "Free Unlimited Open Bar" on it's landing page. There is no mention anywhere, even when you click "learn more" of any charges on this "free" benefit.

 

I don't know where you hail from, but most Americans learn that an asterisk means there is more to the story in the footnote, and it is on the same page. Our advertising laws are looser here, and as long as they disclose there are additional fees, or use words such as "From ..." they can get away with it. 

 

[sverigecruiser]

4 hours ago, erdoran said:

Ummm....your cruise fare, since it includes UBP?  Your DSC?

 

 

 

I don't think that the staff working in the bars are included in the DSC.

 

I should prefer if the service charges, and DSC, was included in the cruise fare but it isn't.

[cdnsteelman]

1 hour ago, fshagan said:

 

I don't know where you hail from, but most Americans learn that an asterisk means there is more to the story in the footnote, and it is on the same page. Our advertising laws are looser here, and as long as they disclose there are additional fees, or use words such as "From ..." they can get away with it. 

 

LOL - I tried to post exactly this with red arrows and everything in the 9th post of this thread but, because I'm a first class Luddite, it appeared as a link instead of an embedded image. Guess I should stick to my typewriter 😉

[mianmike]

1 hour ago, NurseJEB said:

The short version of this is...

I start in the NCL home page and fail to read the details.
 

Exactly.  People need to understand NCL uses sleight of hand when promoting their products.  If you think you are too busy to read all of NCL's fine print, you need to have your attorney or accountant pour over the terms and conditions.  Otherwise you'll be in for a surprise.  For instance, if you have never cruised NCL and come over from MSC cruise line, you're used to "free" meaning free.  When MSC says "free," they really mean it's free.  NCL's "Free" is "Free***".  Don't assume every company is on the up and up and discloses everything upfront.  Many companies use a shell game to hide the total cost in the fine print.  And it's all legal.  The shiny objects ("Free" at Sea perks) are used to distract from the overall cost.  Buyer beware.   

[newmexicoNita]

20 hours ago, schildiams said:

I see that NCL is currently advertising "Free Unlimited Open Bar" on it's landing page. There is no mention anywhere, even when you click "learn more" of any charges on this "free" benefit. It is only when you get through booking and see the final fare, does NCL assess a service charge on the "free" benefit. I know that this topic has been beaten to death, but I am still left to wonder how this is to considered to be misleading or false advertising? How can a benefit be considered "free" if it actually costs $300 per room? And if an open bar is truly "free" then a 20% fee on zero is zero. I get that NCL wants to make money on this, and I'm not opposed to paying a service charge. But, my point is, if it costs $300 per cabin, it should be advertised as such and not as "free." Anyone think that if this practice were legally challenged that the working would change?

 

You are right the topic has been beaten to death: did you expect to learn something new by posting on the topic again and it is free!!! What you are paying $300 for is the service charge for delivering your drinks, not the drinks themselves. 

[newmexicoNita]

11 hours ago, ano said:

I also don't think we would be at 42 posts in a rather short time if nobody felt deceived.

of course you realize of those posts almost everyone disagrees with you and the OP. Plus of the 42, how many are simply your response to the OP? Normally you are charged the gratuities on your final statement when you make your final payment. Did you not notice that?  

[DirtyDawg]

So, the "Free at Sea" promotion is not really free? It is built into the price AND you have to pay gratuities on it!

 

Next you'll be telling me that the Art Auction paintings aren't  painted by Picasso!

 

And those Spa treatments...........

 

 

[beerman2]

4 hours ago, mianmike said:

Exactly.  People need to understand NCL uses sleight of hand when promoting their products.  If you think you are too busy to read all of NCL's fine print, you need to have your attorney or accountant pour over the terms and conditions.  Otherwise you'll be in for a surprise.  For instance, if you have never cruised NCL and come over from MSC cruise line, you're used to "free" meaning free.  When MSC says "free," they really mean it's free.  NCL's "Free" is "Free***".  Don't assume every company is on the up and up and discloses everything upfront.  Many companies use a shell game to hide the total cost in the fine print.  And it's all legal.  The shiny objects ("Free" at Sea perks) are used to distract from the overall cost.  Buyer beware.   

And on MSC don't you pay more to get the Better brands of Alcohol.

If you book basic and get free drinks it's "shelf brand liquor", unless you upgrade ( pay more) to get a " better brand".

 

It's all in the wording , and I'm pretty sure the LAW firm for NCL has their $ss covered.

 

Carnival does it by charging more for higher decks, you want a balcony on deck 7 great, you pay xxx. You want a balcony on deck 11 it's going to cost you xxx per day per person more.

 

Most all cruiselines do something " deceptive", if a pax doesn't understand all the fine print.

 

There is nothing free, the cost is going to be built in somewhere.

Edited October 30, 2018 by beerman2

[NCTribeFan]

Oh, goody!  A "deceptive practices" thread!  I haven't contributed to one on this board before!

 

I took my first NCL cruise in April (Star TA).  I booked through a TA and when he sent me the pending invoice, I saw the service charge for the "free" drink package.  I then went to NCL's website and read the rules.  Sure seemed like a good deal to me, even with the service charge.  I'm booked on the Jade TA next spring and happily accepted the drinks as one of my perks.

 

I'll be on my first MSC cruise in December and the fare included the free basic drink package.  Unlike NCL, I will be charged the service charge with each drink.  So, the drink itself is still free and I'm still charged a service charge, so is it really that different?  Not in my eyes.

[schildiams]

29 minutes ago, NCTribeFan said:

Oh, goody!  A "deceptive practices" thread!  I haven't contributed to one on this board before!

 

I took my first NCL cruise in April (Star TA).  I booked through a TA and when he sent me the pending invoice, I saw the service charge for the "free" drink package.  I then went to NCL's website and read the rules.  Sure seemed like a good deal to me, even with the service charge.  I'm booked on the Jade TA next spring and happily accepted the drinks as one of my perks.

 

I'll be on my first MSC cruise in December and the fare included the free basic drink package.  Unlike NCL, I will be charged the service charge with each drink.  So, the drink itself is still free and I'm still charged a service charge, so is it really that different?  Not in my eyes.

You have made my  point - you weren't aware of the service charge until you had an invoice in hand. And then you had to go find the rules. That's the whole issue in a nutshell. Why not just post the rules right there upfront? And yes the MSC example IS different bc you are charged at time of service - the charge is not in any way hidden in the fine print. 

[schildiams]

8 hours ago, fshagan said:

 

I don't know where you hail from, but most Americans learn that an asterisk means there is more to the story in the footnote, and it is on the same page. Our advertising laws are looser here, and as long as they disclose there are additional fees, or use words such as "From ..." they can get away with it. 

 

Too bad that big red arrow that you realized was necessary to point out the tiny italicized print at the bottom isn't actually on the NCL website - maybe then people would actually be able to easily find it 🙂

Edited October 30, 2018 by schildiams

[mizLORInj]

to the OP:  Simply put, I also feel it is misleading to see FREE unlimited bar.   Yes, we know to read the fine print for the details. 

 NCL obviously does not intend to change their advertising scheme since it is currently working for them.

 

I would rather they skip the so-called free perks and have a lower cruise fare, but we all know that's not going to happen anytime soon.

 

[rtkenmore]

19 minutes ago, schildiams said:

Too bad that big red arrow that you realized was necessary to point out the tiny italicized print at the bottom isn't actually on the NCL website - maybe then people would actually be able to easily find it 🙂

 

I think the red arrow was for your benefit.. Everyone else on this thread has been able to find it with no issues because they can understand the concept of terms and conditions and scrolling.  

[schildiams]

2 minutes ago, rtkenmore said:

 

I think the red arrow was for your benefit.. Everyone else on this thread has been able to find it with no issues because they can understand the concept of terms and conditions and scrolling.  

No, everyone on this thread has not been able to find it. And most people cursing on NCL are not on this thread. And if it was so obvious, you could have just posted a screenshot and said "look it's right there."  PS here's what a lawsuit determined when three computer companies advertised "free" computers that actually had fees associated with the "free" item: In addition, if the companies advertise a price or rebate that is conditioned on the purchase of any other product or service (including Internet service), the proposed orders require the companies to disclose both that requirement and the price of the other product and service. The disclosures must be clear and conspicuous, and in close proximity to the price claim. The BUY.COM and Value America orders also require clear and conspicuous disclosures, whenever an after-rebate price is advertised, of the amounts of the rebates and the before-rebate price. These disclosures are critical to consumers in understanding their obligations under the offer and what their out-of-pocket costs will be. 

 

In NCL's case, I think that a successful argument could be made that neither the fees or the cost of it is posted clear and conspicuously in the ad. And like any other case, it could also go the other way. I can see both sides. But its not an open/shut case, for sure. Again, if not trying to hide it, why not just post it and the price of it right there? 

[rtkenmore]

1 minute ago, schildiams said:

No, everyone on this thread has not been able to find it. And most people cursing on NCL are not on this thread. And if it was so obvious, you could have just posted a screenshot and said "look it's right there."  PS here's what a lawsuit determined when three computer companies advertised "free" computers that actually had fees associated with the "free" item: In addition, if the companies advertise a price or rebate that is conditioned on the purchase of any other product or service (including Internet service), the proposed orders require the companies to disclose both that requirement and the price of the other product and service. The disclosures must be clear and conspicuous, and in close proximity to the price claim. The BUY.COM and Value America orders also require clear and conspicuous disclosures, whenever an after-rebate price is advertised, of the amounts of the rebates and the before-rebate price. These disclosures are critical to consumers in understanding their obligations under the offer and what their out-of-pocket costs will be. 

 

In NCL's case, I think that a successful argument could be made that neither the fees or the cost of it is posted clear and conspicuously in the ad. And like any other case, it could also go the other way. I can see both sides. But its not an open/shut case, for sure. Again, if not trying to hide it, why not just post it and the price of it right there? 

 

If you have such an issue with NCL, why are you even here.  Go cruise with someone else.  I can assure you that NCL will not miss you one bit and us other cruisers will sure not miss you arguing with guest services onboard our next cruise either.

[fshagan]

28 minutes ago, schildiams said:

Too bad that big red arrow that you realized was necessary to point out the tiny italicized print at the bottom isn't actually on the NCL website - maybe then people would actually be able to easily find it 🙂

 

I agree that it is a sneaky way to do things. I was just pointing out the use of the asterisk in American advertising that others in countries with stricter consumer laws might not understand. 

 

It is also sneaky to post a price and then say it's really only half the price, because you have to pay double that price ("based on double occupancy"). It is also sneaky to have a never ending "sale" when you have never actually sold the item at the list price, or very rarely do. My understanding is that saying something is on sale when it hasn't been offered at the higher price for a longer period of time is illegal in some countries. But not in the USA.

 

One solution would be to make the drink packages illegal, like they are in the state of Hawai'i (they are not offered on the POA, for example). Or to make the fare "all inclusive" like NCL has done in the UK, and other lines have done in Australia. And quote the minimum cabin price, like Disney does, instead of the sneaky "price per person, double occupancy required" fine print. But I don't favor more regulations. I do favor consumer education and consumers voting with their money.

 

My observation is that the most sophisticated people fall for the phony sale most often; just look at the Oceania ads. They are always "half off". Have they ever sold one of those cruises at the brochure price?

[agrimm01]

Oh, it is definitely misleading and sneaky.  But, when I put up the $3000 for a cruise that includes a FREE unlimited beverage package I then made the choice to pay the $300 for the gratuity/svc charge.  Still deceptive on NCL's part but I made the decision to complete the purchase.

[fshagan]

17 minutes ago, rtkenmore said:

 

I think the red arrow was for your benefit.. Everyone else on this thread has been able to find it with no issues because they can understand the concept of terms and conditions and scrolling.  

 

Yep, the OP said it was nowhere on the page, and indeed it was. Albeit in tiny print at the very bottom of the page, the proverbial "fine print" we learn about in grade school. 

[schildiams]

35 minutes ago, rtkenmore said:

 

If you have such an issue with NCL, why are you even here.  Go cruise with someone else.  I can assure you that NCL will not miss you one bit and us other cruisers will sure not miss you arguing with guest services onboard our next cruise either.

I think it's laughable that serial posters on this board always seem to resort to "don't cruise, we won't miss you," when someone raises any concern. It's seems like NCL must be rewarding  people to scan posts and jump on anyone who has any question that is not pro-NCL. Most of these poster can never see the other side of an issue, or just flat out refuse to even try. They are often mean-spirited with a bully mentality (i.e. "Go cruise with someone else. We will not miss you one bit and us (sic) other cruisers..." blah blah blah. Seriously? You're like a gang now, sticking together, everyone else on the whole cruise, shaming the person who has any gripe, even if it has merit? The best part is that I ENJOY NCL. I have sailed with them enough times to become a PLATINUM cruiser and have already stated that I generally LIKE the ships, food, shows and service. You would probably actually even LIKE ME if you weren't so single-minded about the fact that even good companies sometimes do things that are false or misleading at worst. At best, even if it's NOT done with bad intentions, it could be DONE BETTER. Why are you so averse to allowing yourself to understand that there are many people who would agree that it would, in the very least, be better for most consumers (if not all) if the info was not hidden in fine print and just shared right on the landing page? Can you at least admit that it would be MORE clear and conspicuous if it was? Or are you so set in blindly defending NCL (no matter what) that you will not even give an inch? Here's what the Australian authorities have to say about ads for "free" items - it suggests that any ad where an item is advertised as "free" but places a fee elsewhere in fine print is "Likely misleading." Are they wrong, too? 

False or misleading advertising

These are some of the most common types of false or misleading advertising reported to the ACCC.

Fine print and qualifications

It is common practice for advertisements to include some information in fine print. This information must not contradict the overall message of the advertisement. For example, if an advertisement states that a product is ‘free’ but the fine print indicates some payment must be made, the advertisement is likely to be misleading.

Edited October 30, 2018 by schildiams

[schildiams]

15 hours ago, DMH15 said:

If ya don't like the terms and conditions nobody is twisting your arm.  

Totally agree. Except that the whole point is that the terms and conditions are NOT POSTED clearly or conspicuously on the landing page where the "free" is advertised or in the "learn more" link that NCL provides right under the "free" item.  If you don't know what the terms are, how can you agree or disagree with them? Why not post the link to the terms and condition right there or in the learn more link? And I don't even mind the conditions. I personally think it's a bargain. I have repeatedly stated that my issue is not with the terms. It with the advertisement not making those terms clear up front.

 

[ColeThornton]

2 minutes ago, schildiams said:

Totally agree. Except that the whole point is that the terms and conditions are NOT POSTED clearly or conspicuously on the landing page where the "free" is advertised or in the "learn more" link that NCL provides right under the "free" item.  If you don't know what the terms are, how can you agree or disagree with them? Why not post the link to the terms and condition right there or in the learn more link? And I don't even mind the conditions. I personally think it's a bargain. I have repeatedly stated that my issue is not with the terms. It with the advertisement not making those terms clear up front.

 

 

Well, now you know where to look so let's all move along to the next major issue affecting humanity.

[schildiams]

Just now, ColeThornton said:

 

Well, now you know where to look so let's all move along to the next major issue affecting humanity.

Yes, now that you were able to get in your last snark, time to move on.