Israel Next week Voyager

[melbox4]

27 minutes ago, Texasrocks said:

15-Oct	Istanbul, Turkey	EMBARK	7:00PM
16-Oct	Bozcaada, Turkey*	8:00AM*	6:00PM*
17-Oct	Mykonos, Greece	8:00AM	6:00PM
18-Oct	Athens (Piraeus), Greece	7:00AM	8:00PM
19-Oct	Santorini, Greece	8:00AM	6:00PM
20-Oct	Rhodes, Greece	7:00AM	4:00PM
21-Oct	Chania/Souda, Greece	7:00AM	3:00PM
22-Oct	Argostoli, Greece	8:30AM	4:00PM
23-Oct	Messina, Italy	8:00AM	6:00PM
24-Oct	Salerno, Italy	7:00AM	5:00PM
25 Oct	Rome (Civitavecchia), Italy	6:00AM	DEBARK

 

Happy to be traveling in a different direction. 

 

Edited October 13, 2023 by melbox4

[NYC-London]

While the  new cruise itinerary may be suitable for some people, others who have traveled through the  Med before may have visited them before, maybe more than once. While I found the initial itinerary interesting, I would find the current one quite boring and has been mentioned before, a cruise through the Greek isles is generally much cheaper than a cruise through Israel and Egypt.

 

For one thing, the port charges and fees are much less expensive, as is almost everything else.

 

Forget the OBC - they are hopefully issuing partial refunds but I doubt it. From a business point of view, I think Regent is in a serious financial situation and I would be interested to listen in on the next earnings call.

[giustot]

Another thought here. Everyone seems to be talking about passengers having insurance as a way to cancel if they’re unhappy with the revised itinerary. What about Regent’s insurance. Not the plan they sell you, but the policy they carry for themselves. 
 

Regent sold a Holy Land cruise to Israel and Egypt that included Jerusalem and the Pyramids. It can’t deliver that product. No substitutions would be comparable. 

 

Why can’t Regent’s insurance company take the loss for refunding any passengers who wish to cancel?

[kathy49]

4 minutes ago, NYC-London said:

While the  new cruise itinerary may be suitable for some people, others who have traveled through the  Med before may have visited them before, maybe more than once. While I found the initial itinerary interesting, I would find the current one quite boring and has been mentioned before, a cruise through the Greek isles is generally much cheaper than a cruise through Israel and Egypt.

 

For one thing, the port charges and fees are much less expensive, as is almost everything else.

 

Forget the OBC - they are hopefully issuing partial refunds but I doubt it. From a business point of view, I think Regent is in a serious financial situation and I would be interested to listen in on the next earnings call.

They will automatically get port fees refunded less cost of new.  That is quite an assortment of ports some I have to wonder what they will put together for excursions. Clearly my guess is for at least 1/2 of the travelers on the Oct. 15th voyage the highlight and reason for booking was Israel and Egypt including overnights. Outside of "cancel for any reason" insurance nothing covers itinerary no longer appealing. Maybe that should be included...over 25% of itinerary changed = refund. Never happen

[kathy49]

2 minutes ago, giustot said:

Another thought here. Everyone seems to be talking about passengers having insurance as a way to cancel if they’re unhappy with the revised itinerary. What about Regent’s insurance. Not the plan they sell you, but the policy they carry for themselves. 
 

Regent sold a Holy Land cruise to Israel and Egypt that included Jerusalem and the Pyramids. It can’t deliver that product. No substitutions would be comparable. 

 

Why can’t Regent’s insurance company take the loss for refunding any passengers who wish to cancel?

Probably would not work because each passenger has a contract with cc that says they can do it.

[kathy49]

8 minutes ago, NYC-London said:

While the  new cruise itinerary may be suitable for some people, others who have traveled through the  Med before may have visited them before, maybe more than once. While I found the initial itinerary interesting, I would find the current one quite boring and has been mentioned before, a cruise through the Greek isles is generally much cheaper than a cruise through Israel and Egypt.

 

For one thing, the port charges and fees are much less expensive, as is almost everything else.

 

Forget the OBC - they are hopefully issuing partial refunds but I doubt it. From a business point of view, I think Regent is in a serious financial situation and I would be interested to listen in on the next earnings call.

Does make one wonder about cash flow issues. Not an expert on the financials but seems like Celebrity has a much larger corporate backing (I think) and may be able to deal with this situation easier.

[HotelSnob1]

Yes … we know … luckily for us we bought this cruise onboard Voyager 18 months ago …. 

[HotelSnob1]

Pray tell … just curious … what other ports should have been considered? 

[kathy49]

7 minutes ago, HotelSnob1 said:

Pray tell … just curious … what other ports should have been considered? 

I don't think they had a big choice...no complaint about what is now the itinerary other than it is very different and for many not that exciting. It is a chance you take booking any cruise that this can happen...they did what they had to do to avoid cancelling the cruise. Given the cancel/change policy I assume most will be onboard despite the changes.

[CrushIt]

22 minutes ago, kathy49 said:

They will automatically get port fees refunded less cost of new.  That is quite an assortment of ports some I have to wonder what they will put together for excursions. Clearly my guess is for at least 1/2 of the travelers on the Oct. 15th voyage the highlight and reason for booking was Israel and Egypt including overnights. Outside of "cancel for any reason" insurance nothing covers itinerary no longer appealing. Maybe that should be included...over 25% of itinerary changed = refund. Never happen

Greek Islands? Been there - Done that and was not really impressed. When you add up the number of hours of land excursions in Israel and Egypt, it’s really half or more of the excursions that we had opted for. Pompei was the only other port of call we were excited about. For those posting about the itinerary, I have yet to read where anyone would have chosen the cruise without Israel and Egypt. 

[HotelSnob1]

And we will see if the level of service, quality of food, and general atmosphere onboard has diminished with Regent in light of these prior posts … we’ve been sailing with Regent for the better part of 15 years, so we shall see … all of these lines took a big hit during COVID … and, yes, since then … times have changed. 

[HotelSnob1]

3 minutes ago, CrushIt said:

Greek Islands? Been there - Done that and was not really impressed. When you add up the number of hours of land excursions in Israel and Egypt, it’s really half or more of the excursions that we had opted for. Pompei was the only other port of call we were excited about. For those posting about the itinerary, I have yet to read where anyone would have chosen the cruise without Israel and Egypt. 

 

[GMIAC]

30 minutes ago, kathy49 said:

Probably would not work because each passenger has a contract with cc that says they can do it.

...and insurance companies make money by saying, "no," so they're going to do everything in their power legally to be able to do just that. People act as if these businesses should act out of the goodness of their hearts, when they're just fulfilling the terms of a bi-lateral contract. These same people, dare I say, aren't used to being told "no."

[CrushIt]

26 minutes ago, kathy49 said:

Does make one wonder about cash flow issues. Not an expert on the financials but seems like Celebrity has a much larger corporate backing (I think) and may be able to deal with this situation easier.

Regent is part of Norwegian Cruise Lines. So, plenty of backing there. Let’s face it; RSS and NCL are now run by the bean counters and attorneys. They are probably under strict orders from their insurance carrier regarding claims and premiums. So, don’t expect any relief there. Now that we learn that spending thousands of $s on cruise insurance wouldn’t have mattered, it just gets down to “Is RSS going to do the right thing by the passengers who decided not to go into harms way or had no interest in the new itinerary?”

[cwn]

2 minutes ago, CrushIt said:

Greek Islands? Been there - Done that and was not really impressed. When you add up the number of hours of land excursions in Israel and Egypt, it’s really half or more of the excursions that we had opted for. Pompei was the only other port of call we were excited about. For those posting about the itinerary, I have yet to read where anyone would have chosen the cruise without Israel and Egypt. 

But that is the risk you willing assumed. You booked a cruise that you didn’t or couldn’t take out cancel for any reason insurance. You willing  assumed the risk that it may not be the cruise you signed up for. Right or wrong that it the current bossiness model. Granted this is an extreme case. 

[HotelSnob1]

I agree with CrushIt.  We have been to all of the other ports, except Santorini & Mykonos … and we booked this 18 months ago based pretty much on Egypt.  We have been to Israel on RSSC 7 years ago, got shut out of Nile, Suez, and Egyptian ports in 2020 with Covid (full refund), and here we are again.  We have the Suez booked again booked for 2025. Sort of running out of ports with RSSC to actually book. 
Readying ourselves for other adventures! 
See everyone on board! 

[CrushIt]

1 minute ago, GMIAC said:

...and insurance companies make money by saying, "no," so they're going to do everything in their power legally to be able to do just that. People act as if these businesses should act out of the goodness of their hearts, when they're just fulfilling the terms of a bi-lateral contract. These same people, dare I say, aren't used to being told "no."

I own a monthly fee based service business and I have lots of “fine print” that would allow me to keep every dollar that comes in. However, my employees know that we have a higher moral and ethical duty to take care of our customers and “make things right” even though issues may come up that were certainly not in our control. A real hero is someone who does the right thing, even when no one is looking.

[forgap]

2 minutes ago, CrushIt said:

I own a monthly fee based service business and I have lots of “fine print” that would allow me to keep every dollar that comes in. However, my employees know that we have a higher moral and ethical duty to take care of our customers and “make things right” even though issues may come up that were certainly not in our control. A real hero is someone who does the right thing, even when no one is looking.

Admirable and I wish more businesses added the “long game” to their business model.  When you value relationships, have pride in your product, make it right when things go awry, you gain a customer (and their friends) for life.  

[cwn]

3 minutes ago, CrushIt said:

Regent is part of Norwegian Cruise Lines. So, plenty of backing there. Let’s face it; RSS and NCL are now run by the bean counters and attorneys. They are probably under strict orders from their insurance carrier regarding claims and premiums. So, don’t expect any relief there. Now that we learn that spending thousands of $s on cruise insurance wouldn’t have mattered, it just gets down to “Is RSS going to do the right thing by the passengers who decided not to go into harms way or had no interest in the new itinerary?”

Regent is doing the cruise….. there was never a guarantee that you would get to any port  per the contract you agreed to. Regent is providing a cruise it is now your choice to go are lo go or forfeit  your money. Time will tell whether Regent made the right choice but they had the right.  

 

 

 

 

[HotelSnob1]

The bottom line:  If customer service in the travel & hospitality business starts to diminish with a hotel chain or a cruise line, loyal customers will FLEE.  Word gets out and if enough normal people FLEE, the company either takes stock and changes “course” - no pun intended - or becomes a “goner.”  Does anyone agree? 

[roninman]

6 minutes ago, cwn said:

But that is the risk you willing assumed. You booked a cruise that you didn’t or couldn’t take out cancel for any reason insurance.

Correct, the cruise company has passed the business risk to the consumer, and as consumers, for some reason, we have willingly accepted this somewhat asymmetrical assignment of risk- without of course being able to write off the loss as an expense of doing business.

 

Unfortunately, cancel for any reason insurance isn't a panacea.  Assuming it is even offered in every geography, it typically covers a percentage of the paid fare- say 75%... so if we say are paying $23,000 in fare, and $5000 in insurance premium, at 75% coverage we are still out $11,000 if canceling for any reason.    So the Hobson's choice is, do I just eat the 11k, or do I unwillingly go on the cruise- hopefully not encountering other disgruntled customers at dinner, and only reinforcing and energizing our disgruntlements!

 

[CrushIt]

1 minute ago, cwn said:

Regent is doing the cruise….. there was never a guarantee that you would get to any port  per the contract you agreed to. Regent is providing a cruise it is now your choice to go are lo go or forfeit  your money. Time will tell whether Regent made the right choice but they had the right.  

 

 

 

 

True enough. We walked away from this cruise, knowing that we probably would get nothing for it. So be it. It is in the rear view mirror. I’m just the type of person who likes to explore people’s motivations for doing things. You’re right - time will tell. Our TA books a lot of cruises. I’ve known her for  twenty years. I can see her steering people away from RSS now. Plenty of competition.

[kathy49]

13 minutes ago, forgap said:

Admirable and I wish more businesses added the “long game” to their business model.  When you value relationships, have pride in your product, make it right when things go awry, you gain a customer (and their friends) for life.  

It goes a long way for sure. Just had to cancel a short trip and hotel that had a substantial deposit and per contract could have just kept it but chose   to refund in full and asked me to keep them in mind for my next trip   to the area. I sure will. Another local tour company again within the contract chose to keep my money and at the same time admiting they could easily book more clients with that guide given prime fall foliage season. I filed an insurance claim on that one due to medical situation but will not use them when I go back...they were within their rights but inflexible to even keep the money to be used in the future a FCC of sorts for land tour.

Edited October 13, 2023 by kathy49
spelling

[mrlevin]

1 minute ago, HotelSnob1 said:

The bottom line:  If customer service in the travel & hospitality business starts to diminish with a hotel chain or a cruise line, loyal customers will FLEE.  Word gets out and if enough normal people FLEE, the company either takes stock and changes “course” - no pun intended - or becomes a “goner.”  Does anyone agree? 

I have seen a lot of words here but have people reported to their consumer affairs department of local TV stations?  I have yet to see a Special Report on ABC regarding this lack of customer service.

 

 We had an issue with Silversea  Expedition six years ago and the front office handled the situation horribly; we have refused to travel Silversea again.  I don't think they miss us; however, if. it. had made local. or national news we might have gotten what we requested.

[HotelSnob1]

Good to know.