Reduced port stays

[ak1004]

6 minutes ago, Eloise4Ever said:

 

 

These are all fair points. The issue was raised by folks who couldn't use their SM shore excursion credit because O cancelled or shortened time in ports. All other excursions were sold out. I think in these cases the cruise line could see that the guest had "spent" the OBC before boarding and refund them accordingly if a port was cancelled.

 

With the luxury lines the excursion costs don't stand out so much as everything is included in the fare. With O they are saying "pay the fare and we will give you x amount of money to spend on excursions". Which may be why folks are feeling hard done by. 

 

 

 

But this only psychological. The luxury lines are also more expensive, and part of the reason is that some of them include excursions. And many excursions on our next SS cruise are already sold out, 3-4 months before the cruise even started.  

Edited January 31 by ak1004

[Cape Hernlopen]

Dear R17:

We were on the Bangkok to Tokyo cruise in June 2023.  Prior to the cruise several port times were reduced but nothing drastic (maximum of one hour).  During the cruise we had only one port time reduced because of problem with "no power to the elevators".  It took three plus hours to rectify the problem, but we made up some of the time in transit and only had a two-hour shorter stay in Hiroshima.

Joel Barry

[Larrylv]

Thank you.

[RPen63]

22 hours ago, Eloise4Ever said:

 

Thanks for that but honestly I don't think it's terribly clear. The poster does say they ended up with "excess SM credits" which may be understood as SM credits they couldn't spend.

 

I personally haven't experience losing SM credits but for me, unethical business practices are a red flag. Please note, I didn't dream this scenario up. It has been mentioned a few times on this thread that the SM excursion credit is "use it or lose it".

We “spent” the surplus credits on a different excursion but they would not have been refundable if we had not been able to find one that was available and of interest to us.  The lesson is that if one spends more than the SM credit on excursions, the risk of having surplus SM credit at the end of the cruise is lower and only you can decide if taking those additional excursions is a reasonable risk premium.  IMHO, the “game’ is fairly easy to understand and the risk can be hedged if you see value in doing so.  The fact that refunds are deemed to accrue first to non-SM excursions irrespective of how they were originally allocated seems fair to me, and is certainly not unethical.

[pinotlover]

Another strategy is to strategize your credit use, and never use SM credits to book tender ports! Use up all your credits on standard ports, then pay for tender ports tours making them reimbursable if missed or shortened. Play the odds. 

[Eloise4Ever]

18 minutes ago, RPen63 said:

The fact that refunds are deemed to accrue first to non-SM excursions irrespective of how they were originally allocated seems fair to me, and is certainly not unethical.

 

Agree 100%. The issue under discussion was around the "use it or lose it" nature of SM shore excursion credits. Your post was quoted as an example of someone receiving a refund of unused SM credits so thank you for confirming that was not the case.

[pinotlover]

8 minutes ago, Eloise4Ever said:

 

Agree 100%. The issue under discussion was around the "use it or lose it" nature of SM shore excursion credits. Your post was quoted as an example of someone receiving a refund of unused SM credits so thank you for confirming that was not the case.

Sounds like to me they used it on a different tour. 

[RPen63]

3 minutes ago, pinotlover said:

Sounds like to me they used it on a different tour. 

Yes, we used it so did not lose it.  This all happened before boarding so working it out was fairly straightforward.  Had it happened while on board, we may have ended up with unused credits if we had been unable to find a suitable replacement.

 

However, nothing about the way O treated us can be considered unethical.  The cancelled tour was the first one we selected and was paid for with the SM credit, but the refund was applied to the additional monies we had paid for tours in excess of the SM credit.  Because it was paid with SM credits, Ocould have applied the refund to the SM credits, but did not.  The approach they took was more than fair and is certainly not unethical.

[ak1004]

So just to clarify using some real numbers.

 

Lets say you have $400 SM credit per person.

 

If you used only $400 for excursions, and one of the excursions was cancelled, you get the credit back to SM and have to use it for another excursion, otherwise it's lost.

 

But if you booked $600 worth of excursions, they apply the $400 SM first, then charge your credit card for the $200 difference. If an excursion is cancelled, and it was say $150, you get a $150 refund, or a refundable credit that if not used is refunded back to the credit card? 

[Eloise4Ever]

1 hour ago, RPen63 said:

The approach they took was more than fair and is certainly not unethical.

 

I don't think anybody is saying O's approach in your case was unethical. I know I'm not.

[Tranquility Base]

2 hours ago, RPen63 said:

However, nothing about the way O treated us can be considered unethical.  The cancelled tour was the first one we selected and was paid for with the SM credit, but the refund was applied to the additional monies we had paid for tours in excess of the SM credit.  Because it was paid with SM credits, Ocould have applied the refund to the SM credits, but did not.  The approach they took was more than fair and is certainly not unethical.

Thanks for taking the time on this.

I think I understand, but just want to check with you using a hypothetical example.

 

A cruise as follows:

1....have $600 SM credits;

2....have $400 other 'normal' non-refundable credits;

3....book before the cruise 4 excursions to a total price of $1,000;

4....during this booking process the first excursion you book online is at the final port on the cruise;

5....that first excursion obviously uses SM credits then others use SM and other credits,

6....during the cruise all ports / excursions happen, except the final port is missed due weather;

7......the credits for that final port excursion will be returned to your account as 'normal' non-refundable credits because you have, during the other ports, used in excess of your original SM credits ?????

 

Is point #7 the way it works?

 

Thanks again.

[Vallesan]

49 minutes ago, Tranquility Base said:

Thanks for taking the time on this.

I think I understand, but just want to check with you using a hypothetical example.

 

A cruise as follows:

1....have $600 SM credits;

2....have $400 other 'normal' non-refundable credits;

3....book before the cruise 4 excursions to a total price of $1,000;

4....during this booking process the first excursion you book online is at the final port on the cruise;

5....that first excursion obviously uses SM credits then others use SM and other credits,

6....during the cruise all ports / excursions happen, except the final port is missed due weather;

7......the credits for that final port excursion will be returned to your account as 'normal' non-refundable credits because you have, during the other ports, used in excess of your original SM credits ?????

 

Is point #7 the way it works?

 

Thanks again.

To simplify, my reading of the situation is, if you pay ‘money’ on top of your SM tour credit allowance, if any trip is cancelled, irrespective of whether it was paid with ‘credit’ or ‘cash’, your first cancellations would be covered by cash refunds to your credit card. That would be irrespective of which trip was actually cancelled.

 

It’s probably better to look at it as a ‘package’ rather than individual tours. You have $400 SM you add more tours  at a cost of $200 cash, if any of your tours are cancelled the refunds will be applied firstly to the ‘cash’ amount you paid irrespective of the order of the tours. The excess cash will always be refunded if the overall cost of the tours is less than the SM allowance.

 

However, the SM allowance is non-refundable …. use it if lose it!

 

Edited February 1 by Vallesan

[Tranquility Base]

24 minutes ago, Vallesan said:

To simplify, my reading of the situation is, if you pay ‘money’ on top of your SM tour credit allowance, if any trip is cancelled, irrespective of whether it was paid with ‘credit’ or ‘cash’, your first cancellations would be covered by cash refunds to your credit card. That would be irrespective of which trip was actually cancelled.

Thanks.....however, no cash involved.

All excursions booked purely with SM and other non-refundable credits.

[RPen63]

5 hours ago, Vallesan said:

To simplify, my reading of the situation is, if you pay ‘money’ on top of your SM tour credit allowance, if any trip is cancelled, irrespective of whether it was paid with ‘credit’ or ‘cash’, your first cancellations would be covered by cash refunds to your credit card. That would be irrespective of which trip was actually cancelled.

 

It’s probably better to look at it as a ‘package’ rather than individual tours. You have $400 SM you add more tours  at a cost of $200 cash, if any of your tours are cancelled the refunds will be applied firstly to the ‘cash’ amount you paid irrespective of the order of the tours. The excess cash will always be refunded if the overall cost of the tours is less than the SM allowance.

 

However, the SM allowance is non-refundable …. use it if lose it!

 

This is consistent with my understanding and treatment.  Tours paid on SM credits are the last to be cancelled.  Our incident happened before we boarded so it went to the credit card.  Assuming the same approach is taken on board, the refund would be a refundable on board credit.

[RPen63]

7 hours ago, Eloise4Ever said:

 

I don't think anybody is saying O's approach in your case was unethical. I know I'm not.

Apologies if I misinterpreted what you had said earlier about O’s approach to refunding cancelled excursions was unethical.

[EJL2023]

9 hours ago, Vallesan said:

To simplify, my reading of the situation is, if you pay ‘money’ on top of your SM tour credit allowance, if any trip is cancelled, irrespective of whether it was paid with ‘credit’ or ‘cash’, your first cancellations would be covered by cash refunds to your credit card. That would be irrespective of which trip was actually cancelled.

 

It’s probably better to look at it as a ‘package’ rather than individual tours. You have $400 SM you add more tours  at a cost of $200 cash, if any of your tours are cancelled the refunds will be applied firstly to the ‘cash’ amount you paid irrespective of the order of the tours. The excess cash will always be refunded if the overall cost of the tours is less than the SM allowance.

 

However, the SM allowance is non-refundable …. use it if lose it!

 

Not always directly back to credit card. In our situation it was credited back to our on board account which is refundable at end of cruise. 

[Tranquility Base]

34 minutes ago, EJL2023 said:

 In our situation it was credited back to our on board account which is refundable at end of cruise. 

As cash ?

[osandomir]

2 minutes ago, Tranquility Base said:

As cash ?

It used to be possible to request cash for unused refundable credit at the end of the cruise. Another option is the refund to the credit card on file.

[Vallesan]

2 hours ago, EJL2023 said:

Not always directly back to credit card. In our situation it was credited back to our on board account which is refundable at end of cruise. 

More or less the same … you end up with ‘money’!

[EJL2023]

9 hours ago, Tranquility Base said:

As cash ?

Yes, they placed it in the Account Balance portion of the onboard account, which is refundable as cash at the end of cruise. Again, as noted my situation is where we purchased some excursions in excess of the SM credit. We missed a port due to weather and within 30 minutes of the announcement of missed port, which was quite obvious due to the weather, the CD made an announcement that all who had missed an excursion would have their account credited. It was all seamless and quick for us. 

[EJL2023]

7 hours ago, Vallesan said:

More or less the same … you end up with ‘money’!

Yea, but this way if running low on cash for tips at end you may be in a better position. But as noted, one way or the other it works out.