Valdez

[aheisl]

On my Northern Europe cruise last September, we were offered shuttles in three ports: Hamburg, Gothenburg, and Aarhus.  NCL charged for the shuttles in Hamburg and Gothenburg, but we were able to take public transportation for a fraction of the cost.  In Aarhus, the dock was also a container port and walking through it was prohibited.  Therefore, NCL offered the shuttle for free.  Why couldn't this be the case here, too?

[wolfie11]

9 hours ago, GTJ said:

Agreed. The port regulations have no such restrictions, and so NCL should be arguing (in court, if need be) for the port to follow its own regulations. The assertion that "walking from the pier to town is not safe" is simply wrong: the existence of a pedestrian and bicycle path is evidence to the contrary. Besides, none of the roads are limited access highways, everyone has a right to travel upon the roads, and it is up to the individual, not NCL, to decide if the road is safe enough. If need be, the port and NCL should arrange for safe passage of passengers within the port property itself (whether it be personally escorting passengers, shuttle service to the gate, or otherwise), and not just shrug their shoulders. To demand a predatory bus fare just for alighting is simply wrong. I would not be happy.

The problem is not walking to town.  There’s no restrictions on that.  The problem is from the ship through the container dock to the exit on the road.  Random people cannot just stroll through a port with container ships and tankers being loaded and unloaded.  It would be like letting 2000 people wander around a major construction zone.  Since passengers would be upset if a bus took them from the ship and dropped them outside the port gate (what they legally have to do) with a 3 1/2 mile walk to town, they need a shuttle into Valdez.

 

NCL tried charging for the shuttle at Ward Cove when they started docking there as well.

[wolfie11]

8 hours ago, aheisl said:

On my Northern Europe cruise last September, we were offered shuttles in three ports: Hamburg, Gothenburg, and Aarhus.  NCL charged for the shuttles in Hamburg and Gothenburg, but we were able to take public transportation for a fraction of the cost.  In Aarhus, the dock was also a container port and walking through it was prohibited.  Therefore, NCL offered the shuttle for free.  Why couldn't this be the case here, too?

Because NCL never passes up a chance to make a buck off their passengers.

[quack2]

Do ships not dock at the Kelsey Dock?  That appears to be a short walk to town.  What am I missing?

[aheisl]

@quack2 see comment #22 about the Kelsey Dock

[quack2]

1 minute ago, aheisl said:

@quack2 see comment #22 about the Kelsey Dock

Thanks.  Missed it.

[Northern Aurora]

16 hours ago, wolfie11 said:

The problem is not walking to town.  There’s no restrictions on that.  The problem is from the ship through the container dock to the exit on the road.  Random people cannot just stroll through a port with container ships and tankers being loaded and unloaded.  It would be like letting 2000 people wander around a major construction zone.  Since passengers would be upset if a bus took them from the ship and dropped them outside the port gate (what they legally have to do) with a 3 1/2 mile walk to town, they need a shuttle into Valdez.

 

NCL tried charging for the shuttle at Ward Cove when they started docking there as well.

This is SO true.  There is no way anyone who understands risk management could ever allow folks to simply walk through an industrial port where oil tankers being bing loaded.  And for those who are not residents of Alaska please understand that folks who worry about such things view the Alaska pipeline as a potential terrorist target.

[aheisl]

I hope I haven't given the impression that I'm opposed to taking the shuttle in to town.  What I oppose is NCL charging for it when in other ports that are in industrial/commercial areas, NCL has not charged (ie Aarhus Denmark).  I definitely understand that 2000 people should not be wandering through the container port.

[wolfie11]

3 hours ago, aheisl said:

I hope I haven't given the impression that I'm opposed to taking the shuttle in to town.  What I oppose is NCL charging for it when in other ports that are in industrial/commercial areas, NCL has not charged (ie Aarhus Denmark).  I definitely understand that 2000 people should not be wandering through the container port.

My sentiments exactly.  Because a shuttle is required by regulations it should be free.  

[Northern Aurora]

4 hours ago, aheisl said:

I hope I haven't given the impression that I'm opposed to taking the shuttle in to town.  What I oppose is NCL charging for it when in other ports that are in industrial/commercial areas, NCL has not charged (ie Aarhus Denmark).  I definitely understand that 2000 people should not be wandering through the container port.

 

Actually I was left with the impression from your post #3 that you are opposed to taking a fee based shuttle into Valdez.  

 

Your complaint needs to be made directly to your cruise line.  Believe me -- as someone who lives in Alaska -- the "powers that be" in Valdez will not be quaking in their boots because a NCL cruiser says they will not take the shuttle into Valdez but remain on the ship.  Valdez has a number of solid non cruise ship based jobs and the "powers that be" are not interested in folks who will leave the ship to purchase made overseas shot glasses.

[aheisl]

1 hour ago, Northern Aurora said:

 

Actually I was left with the impression from your post #3 that you are opposed to taking a fee based shuttle into Valdez.  

 

Your complaint needs to be made directly to your cruise line.  Believe me -- as someone who lives in Alaska -- the "powers that be" in Valdez will not be quaking in their boots because a NCL cruiser says they will not take the shuttle into Valdez but remain on the ship.  Valdez has a number of solid non cruise ship based jobs and the "powers that be" are not interested in folks who will leave the ship to purchase made overseas shot glasses.

I apologize for giving you the impression that it was the "powers that be" in Valdez that were the cause of my frustration.  It was directed at NCL. 

 

From your comments, it sounds like the people of Valdez have similar opinions as those in Oslo (from what we were told).  They would rather not have cruise ships in their town.

 

No worries about me buying any shot glasses (made locally or overseas).

[GTJ]

13 hours ago, wolfie11 said:

My sentiments exactly. Because a shuttle is required by regulations it should be free.  

When a cruise line advertises an itinerary with a set of ports to be visited, the ability of passengers to alight from the vessel and go ashore, without being charged additional fees, is certainly implied. Anything extra, such as a tour or even basic transportation when one has the free alternative of walking, is certainly legitimate for an extra charge. But charging extra as a condition for alighting is just not right.