Panama Canal - Is Crystal Cancelling Panama Canal in December?

[BWIVince]

8 hours ago, Yankeeclipper1 said:

As of today - Crystal Reservations Supervisor - "Crystal not giving refunds."  This is unsatisfactory for the reasons I previously mentioned - a total switch out of the cruise not reflecting anything of the original - this is being elevated to Senior Crystal Management.  Not a good way to build new customers and keep old ones. 

Again, travel agent 101, sales grants exceptions, not reservations.  I remain critical about what the policy is, but if the goal is to get the refund, expecting a reservations supervisor to break the rules is just wasting everyones time given there are other avenues that are customary.  They neither have the authority to change the policy nor break it, but your agent has access to the team that does.

 

Vince

Edited August 26, 2023 by BWIVince

[Yankeeclipper1]

Update - A full refund will be provided.  Evidently since this was their first major glitch, communications to the sales staff was not complete (they are continuing to train).  It was management's intent to provide refunds - if requested - along with the other options - that was not communicated down the line.  The sales staff should have had that information but did not. 

 

My TA sorted this out at the management levels - while I was talking with reservations/sales personal - which BWIVince pointed out is futile if something is off the script. 

 

With that explanation provided and resolution, I have booked a future cruise that fits our schedule. 

[Worldtraveler22]

 

 

On 8/26/2023 at 1:36 AM, Keith1010 said:

It is for the reasons that are being posted that I recommended to Crystal yesterday before reading most of them that they provide more information on why the itineraries changed.  I have no idea why but realize that the fewer the details the more speculation there is (right or wrong).  As I mentioned earlier, I suggested that they get something out to those on WC 2024 that the Miami to San Diego cruise will go as planned.  My view is transparency is good on some things and this is one of them.  With that said over the years I have seen changes to itineraries by a range of cruise lines sometimes with an explanation and other times without one.

 

In terms of what they will do for those impacted let's see what happens.I have also leaned that sometimes these things change.

 

Keith

I wonder how they know for sure about the WC being a go as is currently planned.  Perhaps they may need to move the WC to Symphony since it is not effected by this at this juncture.

[Keith1010]

4 minutes ago, Worldtraveler22 said:

 

 

I wonder how they know for sure about the WC being a go as is currently planned.  Perhaps they may need to move the WC to Symphony since it is not effected by this at this juncture.

I didn't ask nor did I ask why the change took place. 

Let's speculate for a moment and say it was a problem.  I don't see Symphony being the savior.

 

What happens to those who start in Miami?

 

What happens to those who start in San Diego.

 

What about the room assignments?

 

What about the Symphony itineraries?

I could list more items.

 

Anyway I don't see it being a problem.

 

Keith

 

[Worldtraveler22]

Keith, I was just saying there is always another option if Serenity is not able to get to the West Coast.  Of course it would be a logistical issue but nothing is impossible.  

[Roland4]

50 minutes ago, Worldtraveler22 said:

Keith, I was just saying there is always another option if Serenity is not able to get to the West Coast.  Of course it would be a logistical issue but nothing is impossible.  

I suspect, and it is nothing more, that ships that are repositioning, like the ones that will soon be returning to the Caribbean from Alaska, or Serenity before the WC starts in San Diego will not be restricted. They HAVE to get from one side to the other and around South America is not an option. Cruises like the ones Crystal has cancelled, that are essentially "site-seeing" cruises are the ones being restricted as they don't HAVE to get through the Canal. 

 

One thing I am curious about, and have not seen anything on it, are both canal channels (Old and New) dealing with these restrictions? As I understand it, the "new" canal recycles most of its water use. 

[ryndam]

10 minutes ago, Roland4 said:

One thing I am curious about, and have not seen anything on it, are both canal channels (Old and New) dealing with these restrictions? As I understand it, the "new" canal recycles most of its water use. 

 

This article is an interesting read and describes the differences between the original canal locks and the newer Neopanamax locks.

 

https://splash247.com/the-panama-canal-setting-the-record-straight/

[Roland4]

11 minutes ago, ryndam said:

 

This article is an interesting read and describes the differences between the original canal locks and the newer Neopanamax locks.

 

https://splash247.com/the-panama-canal-setting-the-record-straight/

Interesting. Thanks for sharing.

[KenzSailing]

14 minutes ago, Roland4 said:

I suspect, and it is nothing more, that ships that are repositioning, like the ones that will soon be returning to the Caribbean from Alaska, or Serenity before the WC starts in San Diego will not be restricted. They HAVE to get from one side to the other and around South America is not an option. Cruises like the ones Crystal has cancelled, that are essentially "site-seeing" cruises are the ones being restricted as they don't HAVE to get through the Canal. 

 

One thing I am curious about, and have not seen anything on it, are both canal channels (Old and New) dealing with these restrictions? As I understand it, the "new" canal recycles most of its water use. 

 

Your last point about the channels is an interesting one.

 

Question:  were the reworked Crystal cruises full transits or of the  "thru the Gatun locks, bob around the lake then back out again" variety?  I could see those being ripe for cancellation.  Also, is there clarity as to whether Crystal cancelled the canal portion, or did the canal authority actually pull their slots?  Not that it matters in the end, I just find the Crystal cancellations to be uniquely motivated.

 

I'm puzzled because our scheduled December transit on Regent is still on(knock on wood.)  It also seems to have some exposure to losing its slot because, while it's a full transit, its not exactly a repositioning cruise.  That is, the cruise after ours is the same itinerary in reverse.  So there's no need to get to the Pacific, we're going thru the canal just to go thru the canal.   Regent is highly incentivized to keep those itineraries intact as it's their brand new ship(in service for four weeks before we board) and both cruises are sold out.

 

TWT. 

[Roland4]

8 minutes ago, KenzSailing said:

 

Your last point about the channels is an interesting one.

 

Question:  were the reworked Crystal cruises full transits or of the  "thru the Gatun locks, bob around the lake then back out again" variety?  I could see those being ripe for cancellation.  Also, is there clarity as to whether Crystal cancelled the canal portion, or did the canal authority actually pull their slots?  Not that it matters in the end, I just find the Crystal cancellations to be uniquely motivated.

 

I'm puzzled because our scheduled December transit on Regent is still on(knock on wood.)  It also seems to have some exposure to losing its slot because, while it's a full transit, its not exactly a repositioning cruise.  That is, the cruise after ours is the same itinerary in reverse.  So there's no need to get to the Pacific, we're going thru the canal just to go thru the canal.   Regent is highly incentivized to keep those itineraries intact as it's their brand new ship(in service for four weeks before we board) and both cruises are sold out.

 

TWT. 

Speculation again on my part.

 

I recall looking at one of those cancelled cruises, and it was a full transit, same as your Regent Cruise. I would think Regent has had those slots booked as far in advance as they can be booked, while Crystal was obviously "late to the game". Maybe in cancelling the sailings, Crystal "jumped before they got pushed" by the Canal authority. We will likely never know. 

[skybluewaters]

2 hours ago, Roland4 said:

I suspect, and it is nothing more, that ships that are repositioning, like the ones that will soon be returning to the Caribbean from Alaska, or Serenity before the WC starts in San Diego will not be restricted. They HAVE to get from one side to the other and around South America is not an option. Cruises like the ones Crystal has cancelled, that are essentially "site-seeing" cruises are the ones being restricted as they don't HAVE to get through the Canal.

 

Although you make a good point, does the Panama Canal Authority care about the needs of cruise lines?

[Roland4]

35 minutes ago, skybluewaters said:

 

Although you make a good point, does the Panama Canal Authority care about the needs of cruise lines?

All the Authority cares about is moving ships and getting paid. These crossings are booked probably as much as a year, or two years, in advance. I have no idea how far in advance they are paid for.

[BWIVince]

50 minutes ago, skybluewaters said:

 

Although you make a good point, does the Panama Canal Authority care about the needs of cruise lines?

 

They do only so much as to Larry's point about jumping before they're pushed.  They ASK the cruise lines to prioritize their needs to help them get the number reduction they need, but if they don't get what they need they absolutely have the authority to just cancel the reservations under force majeure...  And then the cruise lines will lose the flexibility of cancelling/changing what causes the least impact to them (roundtrips vs. repositioning, holidays vs. off-peaks, etc.).  So it's in the cruise lines collective best interest to give back the slots they can voluntarily that cause the lowest impact, because the next step is the Authority taking them back -- usually starting with the lines that didn't play ball voluntarily, to catch them back up.

 

Vince

[Critically Cruising]

When dependent on the good graces of a singular supplier, a wise business doesn't tick them off.  Memories last a long time.

 

 

 

[Azulann]

3 hours ago, skybluewaters said:

 

Although you make a good point, does the Panama Canal Authority care about the needs of cruise lines?

Panama Authority get big money from cruise lines. They pay up front a big premium to go through the full canal in daylight. Those who work for the Panama Canal are the best paid  folks in Panama. They do make a very fine wage.

Maybe this new Crystal line could not find an opening  for a price , so  they cancelled.

Edited August 30, 2023 by Azulann

[BWIVince]

36 minutes ago, Azulann said:

Panama Authority get big money from cruise lines. They pay up front a big premium to go through the full canal in daylight. Those who work for the Panama Canal are the best paid  folks in Panama. They do make a very fine wage.

Maybe this new Crystal line could not find an opening  for a price , so  they cancelled.

 

Cruise lines across the board are turning back their slots at the authority's request..  It's not a scam by the authority to get more money, they legitimately need cruise lines as a community to use fewer slots because the capacity has been incredibly constrained.  Cruises are an important source of revenue for the Authority, but in terms of priority, whether someone sails back and forth for leisure through the canal has one of the lowest impacts on the global supply chain and economies of the world than any other traffic through the canal, so you an see the issue.  

 

Crystal is not the only line impacted, though some lines have a better case than others based on date of bookings and purpose of voyage (repositioning, etc.).  Other lines doing sequential transit sailings are also turning back their slots.

 

Vince

[Azulann]

2 minutes ago, BWIVince said:

 

Cruise lines across the board are turning back their slots at the authority's request..  It's not a scam by the authority to get more money, they legitimately need cruise lines as a community to use fewer slots because the capacity has been incredibly constrained.  Cruises are an important source of revenue for the Authority, but in terms of priority, whether someone sails back and forth for leisure through the canal has one of the lowest impacts on the global supply chain and economies of the world than any other traffic through the canal, so you an see the issue.  

 

Crystal is not the only line impacted, though some lines have a better case than others based on date of bookings and purpose of voyage (repositioning, etc.).  Other lines doing sequential transit sailings are also turning back their slots.

 

Vince

None of Viking Ocean,  full transits have been cancelled for 2023 or 2024.

All the fresh water used in the canal is from the river and mountains of Panama. Climate change can certainly impact the canal  and various other places on our planet.

[Azulann]

To add to the  discussion: an expert from Viking Ocean forum.:

chengkp75
 25.7k
February 19, 2013
Retired to Maine
#9  
Posted Monday at 04:56 AM (edited)
Under the new Canal tariff schedule, a Viking ocean ship will pay about $195,000 just for the transit (various required services are extra), and since the new schedule does not charge passenger ships on the basis of total berths, but on PC tonnage, this is also about what a container ship of the same size would pay.  Then, to get a guaranteed slot, in daylight, the cruise ship pays another $70,000, or a 35% surcharge.
 
Backlogs of ships awaiting transit during dry spells have happened many times in the past.
Edited Monday at 04:57 AM by chengkp75

 

Edited August 30, 2023 by Azulann

[BWIVince]

24 minutes ago, Azulann said:

To add to the  discussion: an expert from Viking Ocean forum.:

chengkp75
 25.7k
February 19, 2013
Retired to Maine
#9  
Posted Monday at 04:56 AM (edited)
Under the new Canal tariff schedule, a Viking ocean ship will pay about $195,000 just for the transit (various required services are extra), and since the new schedule does not charge passenger ships on the basis of total berths, but on PC tonnage, this is also about what a container ship of the same size would pay.  Then, to get a guaranteed slot, in daylight, the cruise ship pays another $70,000, or a 35% surcharge.
 
Backlogs of ships awaiting transit during dry spells have happened many times in the past.
Edited Monday at 04:57 AM by chengkp75

 

 

To the point of the discussion earlier, the drought is young...  It's all fun and games for a cruise line to say they refuse to turn any inventory back, but at the end of the day, them paying a premium doesn't solve the constraint problem -- it only helps prioritize the requests.  If enough cruise companies don't actually cancel enough slots, the Authority will have to take further action one way or another.  (Either cancelling the slots at their priority, or up the surcharges until more companies give...  Remember these companies had existing contracts that were voided/amended the same way.)

 

I hope it's not the case, but I seriously doubt the transit schedule across the industry in a couple months look like it does today...  But maybe the conditions will ease quickly and capacity will improve. 

 

Vince

[KenzSailing]

53 minutes ago, BWIVince said:

 

To the point of the discussion earlier, the drought is young...  It's all fun and games for a cruise line to say they refuse to turn any inventory back, but at the end of the day, them paying a premium doesn't solve the constraint problem -- it only helps prioritize the requests.  If enough cruise companies don't actually cancel enough slots, the Authority will have to take further action one way or another.  (Either cancelling the slots at their priority, or up the surcharges until more companies give...  Remember these companies had existing contracts that were voided/amended the same way.)

 

I hope it's not the case, but I seriously doubt the transit schedule across the industry in a couple months look like it does today...  But maybe the conditions will ease quickly and capacity will improve. 

 

Vince

 

RCI cancelled all their spring transits.  Two things, I'm guessing, 1)it's the dry season and things will probably get worse before they get better and 2) as I understand it, the canal has already tightened their max draft requirements, more could be coming.   Probably some concern there.

[Roland4]

1 hour ago, KenzSailing said:

 

RCI cancelled all their spring transits.  Two things, I'm guessing, 1)it's the dry season and things will probably get worse before they get better and 2) as I understand it, the canal has already tightened their max draft requirements, more could be coming.   Probably some concern there.

For those comong late to this discussion, see Ryndam's post #65 above for draft changes already made.

[Funatabi]

Here is just the tip of what Crystal sent to me about the Panama transit cruises in Dec.

(In the first part I rant. In the second part I explain what was told to me today by my TA)

 

From Crystal:

----------------------------------------

"Dear Valued Guest and Travel Partners,

RE: Mr .......

 

Thank you and your client for choosing Crystal for their upcoming voyage. For operational reasons, we have made the decision to change our Panama Canal winter deployment for the below sailings. To compensate for this, we would like to propose several alternatives:

 

(Details of 3 alternatives omitted here)

 

With Gratitude,

Crystal Guest Relations"

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

The 3 alternatives were: (1) stay with what we are planning, (2) choose other canal transit cruises early next year, or (3) go on an LA to NYC cruise via canal in late 2024. Verbiage about onboard credit, same fare, etc. was mentioned, but NO mention or offer of a refund.

 

Furthermore, no explanation of the reason for this change. Only "operational reasons".  WHAT STUPIDITY and poor marketing and customer relations!

 

 If anyone at Crystal had a brain, they would have been honest and explained that the reason is the water crisis at the Panama Canal. (I had to do my own homework to find this out.)

 

Plus, on this notice, the revised itinerary dates were a total MESS!

What was supposed to be 2 cruises: MIA/Puerto Caldera and Puerto Caldera/MIA for a total of 21 days, was shown as either 14 days or 28 days. Couldn't make sense of what Crystal was offering.

 

After reading this garbage message that made no sense, I was extremely upset, having made plane and hotel reservations to make the Dec. 2 departure.

 

If Crystal is reading here, KNOW what you are doing, and what the solutions are, BEFORE you start announcing changes due to "operational reasons".  Don't only advise customers that you are changing the itinerary but also advise the reason why and what the new itinerary is. You left us in the dark and very upset. Like, "Huh? what?".

 

So, today I got a notice from my TA that the dept date and return to MIA dates are the same as the original canal transit dates. (Dec. 2/Dec. 23) So I can and will go, as scheduled.

 

The itinerary, as mentioned in another thread, is Mia/San Juan, San Juan/San Juan, and San Juan to Mia. Lots and lots of Caribbean ports, many I haven't visited, so not a total loss. Plus I will be on a cruise. 

 

While I am really disappointed about this, I understand the situation.

I am more disappointed for my travel partner who has never transited the Panama Canal.

 

Also, I am disappointed that Crystal wasn't more open about the reason and I am disappointed that Crystal made this announcement prematurely BEFORE they had a clue as to what the new schedule/itinerary was. Very amaturish. 

 

That said, I am glad Crystal at least figured out what to do, finally. Too bad from a customer-relations standpoint they ruffled a lot of feathers before they did. 

 

I am still looking forward to cruising again, albeit not what I had originally planned. 

 

[ryndam]

For those debarking and/or embarking in Miami on 2 December 2023, there are 8 cruise ships with a combined total of 22,000+/- passengers scheduled to arrive/depart that day. Plan your port arrival and transportation accordingly.

 

Rob 

Miami Departures 2 Dec 2023.pdf

[wearesiamese]

15 minutes ago, ryndam said:

For those debarking and/or embarking in Miami on 2 December 2023, there are 8 cruise ships with a combined total of 22,000+/- passengers scheduled to arrive/depart that day. Plan your port arrival and transportation accordingly.

 

Rob 

Miami Departures 2 Dec 2023.pdf 398.67 kB · 2 downloads

aak!!! Ill come as late as possible  then. Thanks for the heads up! But isnt it going to be Ft Lauderdale? TG I have not made my transpo plans yet

[ryndam]

7 minutes ago, wearesiamese said:

aak!!! Ill come as late as possible  then. Thanks for the heads up! But isnt it going to be Ft Lauderdale? TG I have not made my transpo plans yet

Based on current sailing schedules, Serenity is sailing from Miami until it returns from the World Cruise in June 2024. FLL sailings later.

 

FWIW, FLL has 8 cruise ships with 28,000+/- arrivals/departures on 9 December 2023, so congestion isn't much better in FLL than in MIA.

Edited September 3, 2023 by ryndam
Additional info