CANCELLED AZAMARA CRUISE - CROATIA INTENSIVE MAY 2020

[stevenr597]

1 hour ago, uktog said:

For me the issue is charters AFTER air can be ticketed so effectively 12 months out should be the cut off. I would like a cruise line to commit to only making changes in dates, start or end ports and significant + of - 4 hours in a port in circumstances beyond their control (eg Cuba was an example) after the 12 month cut off

 

I would also like a published table of redress that’s applied to all cruises if a nearer in change was applied. 

 

That commitment and transparency would give comfort to those creating more complex itineraries and would encourage bookings. 

Isn’t it interesting that if you try to get your deposit back from Azamara there is often a penalty.  Yet.....Azamara can cancel your cruise and as a gesture permit you to book on a less desirable cruise.

Azamara is listed as a “Premium Line” but at times there management does not seem to know what the word, Premium Mean. 

[Shawnino]

2 hours ago, uktog said:

For me the issue is charters AFTER air can be ticketed so effectively 12 months out should be the cut off. I would like a cruise line to commit to only making changes in dates, start or end ports and significant + of - 4 hours in a port in circumstances beyond their control (eg Cuba was an example) after the 12 month cut off

 

I would also like a published table of redress that’s applied to all cruises if a nearer in change was applied. 

 

That commitment and transparency would give comfort to those creating more complex itineraries and would encourage bookings. 

 

All solid points and a well-reasoned argument, but the bit I bolded at the end might be the key in a for-profit environment: it's in the line's own best interest to behave well.

[hubofhockey]

Azamara took the charter to expand revenue.  That's the only reason.  They should be willing to bear some cost to make those they screwed over whole.  This is a matter of equity.  How Azamara acts is not how truly great companies act.  

[dabear]

I Agree. A should cancel cruises for charters not less than 12 months before departure so that pax don't get stuck with  nonrefundable airfare . If the cancellation is less than 12 months out, then A should give an option for reimbursing the pax for airfare & any other nonrefundable expenses, including trip insurance. That's good business.

[Host Hattie]

On 7/5/2019 at 11:42 PM, Covepointcruiser said:

Let us know when you find a cruise line that doesn’t charter their ships or have unexpected or extended drydocks.    I think we would all be interested in that line!

I haven't heard of Cunard cancelling for a charter since I've been on Cruise Critic and the last short notice dry dock was 2012.

[lisiamc]

23 minutes ago, Host Hattie said:

I haven't heard of Cunard cancelling for a charter since I've been on Cruise Critic and the last short notice dry dock was 2012.

Oops, reading comprehension fail on my part!

Edited July 7, 2019 by lisiamc

[marinaro44]

1 hour ago, Host Hattie said:

I haven't heard of Cunard cancelling for a charter since I've been on Cruise Critic and the last short notice dry dock was 2012.

Cunard's ships have 2.5, 3 and 4 times the passenger capacity of R-ships, so less likely to be chartered.  Not trying to defend Azamara's disruptive actions.  Just pointing out it's apples to oranges.

[Shawnino]

19 hours ago, marinaro44 said:

Cunard's ships have 2.5, 3 and 4 times the passenger capacity of R-ships, so less likely to be chartered.  Not trying to defend Azamara's disruptive actions.  Just pointing out it's apples to oranges.

 

Why move the goalposts?

[marinaro44]

1 hour ago, Shawnino said:

 

Why move the goalposts?

Providing facts, not moving goalposts.  I said I wasn't defending Azamara's actions.

 

You've made your point..ad nauseam.

[Cruise Junky]

21 hours ago, marinaro44 said:

Cunard's ships have 2.5, 3 and 4 times the passenger capacity of R-ships, so less likely to be chartered.  Not trying to defend Azamara's disruptive actions.  Just pointing out it's apples to oranges.

So does celebrity, but it doesn’t stop them being chartered

[stevenr597]

22 hours ago, marinaro44 said:

Cunard's ships have 2.5, 3 and 4 times the passenger capacity of R-ships, so less likely to be chartered.  Not trying to defend Azamara's disruptive actions.  Just pointing out it's apples to oranges.

Doesn't make a difference in respect to the size of the ship.  As I said, Azamara is fairly strict in respect to deposits being a commitment.  Yet, they have shown minimal regard for the passenger when in an attempt to generate additional income they charter the ship, causing problems for people who have placed down a deposit and shown their commitment.  They have not done much better in respect to cancelling trips due to Dry Docking.

Not the way a "Premium Line" should do business.

 

[marinaro44]

1 hour ago, stevenr597 said:

Doesn't make a difference in respect to the size of the ship. 

Sigh.  I agree it's not a good way to do business. 

 

The point I was making is that it's much more of a risk for a cruise agent to commit to filling a chartered 2800 passenger Cunard ship than a 700 passenger Azamara ship.  So Cunard is much less likely to get whole ship charter requests than Azamara, and maybe that's why Cunard hasn't made charters a  major part of their business plan.

[Covepointcruiser]

On 7/7/2019 at 10:54 AM, Host Hattie said:

I haven't heard of Cunard cancelling for a charter since I've been on Cruise Critic and the last short notice dry dock was 2012.

 

How correct, Cunard does not cancel!   We have had to skip ports because of Severe Weather, but our wonderful trips have gone as scheduled.   It’s also the only line where we have been visited by the complementary upgrade fairy.   We were once upgraded from a regular balcony to the Queens Grill.    Cunard is smart because once you try the Queens Grill experience if hard to go back to Britannia.    

[BBQ Lover]

It's been over two years since I have cruised with Azamara and visited these boards.
I'm not surprised to see that Bonnie is still here telling people how it's totally normal and okay for Azamara to cancel and/or change your vacation whenever they feel it to be more profitable for them. What I am surprised to see is that a lot of the same people are still here and lodging the same complaints about the cancellations. We said no to Azamara's self centered policies and moved on to other cruise lines.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A5010 using Tapatalk

[TXU2]

Some of us have moved on, but hope for better days at Azamara as they try to build their brand with additional ships. The large number of posts, compared to earlier Azanara cancellations suggests a perception that things are getting worse (e.g. later cancellations with limited response by Azamara to the issues). The posts also suggest how Azamara could better address the issues. While posts tend to exaggerate the negatives, the embedded FACTS do help to understanding how a company like Azamara is doing. Draw your own conclusions as some of us book early b2b itineraries and others wait for cruises offered at fire sale prices.

[sailco]

19 minutes ago, TXU2 said:

Some of us have moved on, but hope for better days at Azamara as they try to build their brand with additional ships. The large number of posts, compared to earlier Azanara cancellations suggests a perception that things are getting worse (e.g. later cancellations with limited response by Azamara to the issues). The posts also suggest how Azamara could better address the issues. While posts tend to exaggerate the negatives, the embedded FACTS do help to understanding how a company like Azamara is doing. Draw your own conclusions as some of us book early b2b itineraries and others wait for cruises offered at fire sale prices.

And we've just chosen to cancel for the second time. We cancelled for the first time because Azamara changed the ports so much the cruise no longer resembled the original or held any appeal for us.

 

This time we cancelled because we're more knowledgeable. You here on CC have convinced us that Azamara are not the luxury cruise line we were led to believe, the ships are old and badly in need of modernisation and the onboard experience is definitely not all inclusive. We're not so wealthy we're prepared to throw money away on a second rate experience but we're also cancelling because we're not prepared to go through the stress of having Azamara cancel the desired ports or the entire cruise after we have prebooked the associated flights and accommodation.

[excitedofharpenden]

21 minutes ago, sailco said:

This time we cancelled because we're more knowledgeable. You here on CC have convinced us that Azamara are not the luxury cruise line we were led to believe, the ships are old and badly in need of modernisation and the onboard experience is definitely not all inclusive. 

That is an interesting conclusion you've come to. Not sure it's one that is generally put around here, but the messing around with booked cruises would put me off if I was new to Azamara. 

 

Phil 

[lisiamc]

22 minutes ago, sailco said:

And we've just chosen to cancel for the second time. We cancelled for the first time because Azamara changed the ports so much the cruise no longer resembled the original or held any appeal for us.

 

This time we cancelled because we're more knowledgeable. You here on CC have convinced us that Azamara are not the luxury cruise line we were led to believe, the ships are old and badly in need of modernisation and the onboard experience is definitely not all inclusive. We're not so wealthy we're prepared to throw money away on a second rate experience but we're also cancelling because we're not prepared to go through the stress of having Azamara cancel the desired ports or the entire cruise after we have prebooked the associated flights and accommodation.

 

I don’t mean to sound like a cheerleader, but there’s a good reason why many of us have had changes and cancellations and still cruise with Azamara anyway.  The ships are older, but beautifully maintained.  The showers are small, but that’s not a secret.  I can’t think of any other modernisation needed.  The onboard experience is what keeps DH and I coming back.  The few tweaks I’d like to make, like better tonic all the time, more pink wines on the list, and some better whites, are not dealbreakers   I think you’re making a hasty decision, but if your mind is made up, you might not have a good time anyway.  Best of luck on your future cruises, whatever the line.

[stevenr597]

3 hours ago, TXU2 said:

Some of us have moved on, but hope for better days at Azamara as they try to build their brand with additional ships. The large number of posts, compared to earlier Azanara cancellations suggests a perception that things are getting worse (e.g. later cancellations with limited response by Azamara to the issues). The posts also suggest how Azamara could better address the issues. While posts tend to exaggerate the negatives, the embedded FACTS do help to understanding how a company like Azamara is doing. Draw your own conclusions as some of us book early b2b itineraries and others wait for cruises offered at fire sale prices.

Azamara seems determined to build their line on the old, and we must face facts, old "R" Class Ships.

I keep hearing that they are beautifully maintained. 

But just like owning an older automobile and calling it a classic, one can put on a fresh coat of paint, new furniture etc, but the inner workings of the ship, its engines and propulsion system, its air conditioning, its piping, its electronics are old and dated. Azamara will find it ever harder to find new parts, and they will have to spend even greater amounts of time on maintence.

Certainly I believe that the ships were a good value, and Azamara should keep them as long as possible.  But the future of Azamara is not with old "R" Class ships. They have to either make a commitment to invest in new ships or......

The fact that its parent line RCCL is indeed spending large amounts on new construction, but for some reason won't commit to Azamara tells us something about where RCCL believes that this line is.

[lisiamc]

19 minutes ago, stevenr597 said:

Azamara seems determined to build their line on the old, and we must face facts, old "R" Class Ships.

I keep hearing that they are beautifully maintained. 

But just like owning an older automobile and calling it a classic, one can put on a fresh coat of paint, new furniture etc, but the inner workings of the ship, its engines and propulsion system, its air conditioning, its piping, its electronics are old and dated. Azamara will find it ever harder to find new parts, and they will have to spend even greater amounts of time on maintence.

Certainly I believe that the ships were a good value, and Azamara should keep them as long as possible.  But the future of Azamara is not with old "R" Class ships. They have to either make a commitment to invest in new ships or......

The fact that its parent line RCCL is indeed spending large amounts on new construction, but for some reason won't commit to Azamara tells us something about where RCCL believes that this line is.

 

Having seen RCCL’s idea of what a new build should be, I’m pleased that they are not pushing Azamara in the same direction as Edge, Apex, and the newest Excrescences of the Seas.

[rallydave]

3 hours ago, lisiamc said:

 

I don’t mean to sound like a cheerleader, but there’s a good reason why many of us have had changes and cancellations and still cruise with Azamara anyway.  The ships are older, but beautifully maintained.  The showers are small, but that’s not a secret.  I can’t think of any other modernisation needed.  The onboard experience is what keeps DH and I coming back.  The few tweaks I’d like to make, like better tonic all the time, more pink wines on the list, and some better whites, are not dealbreakers   I think you’re making a hasty decision, but if your mind is made up, you might not have a good time anyway.  Best of luck on your future cruises, whatever the line.

Yes, we greatly enjoyed the onboard experience but, how long can azamara last with a home office that refuses to lean from their earlier ill advised decisions, refuses to bring their IT system into the 20th Century (not a typo) take care of their customers, stop living only on the onboard experience stop cancelling cruises after flights are available (subject to regularity issues),  and finding new executives who know how to run a for profit company while still taking care of their customers.

 

They don't even seem to care that the least expensive way to get new bookings is to get the word out to people on the email list while they have failed to fix the decrepit email list for many years now and still choose to fix people one at a time but, only letting CC people know about that while ignoring the other 90% of the people who don't get the marketing emails.

[Host Jazzbeau]

Azamara must be a very special cruise line, because so many disgruntled ex-passengers keep coming back here.  In over 20 cruises spread over several cruise lines, we have had a couple that were unacceptable – so we will never go back to NCL, and I don't read the NCL forum on Cruise Critic.  Our Azamara cruises were among the very best, and that experience IMHO is worth putting up with the home office issues [which I also read about on almost every cruise line forum here].

[Shawnino]

40 minutes ago, marinaro44 said:

Are all of your postings this uninformed and speculative?

 

Instead of ad hominem attacks why not refute his points... if you can?

[stevenr597]

1 hour ago, marinaro44 said:

Are all of your postings this uninformed and speculative?

Sorry that you cannot tolerate an individual who has a difference of opinion with yours. 

[stevenr597]

23 minutes ago, Shawnino said:

 

Instead of ad hominem attacks why not refute his points... if you can?

The point is to have a "discussion"  Personally I would like to hear from an individual with a different viewpoint.  Maybe I am wrong and missed something. But I do believe that a difference should still be respectful.

  Unfortunately, a few individuals take opinions which differ from theirs as a personal attack.