Revised Epic Mediterranean Itineraries

[allthebaconandeggz]

For anyone shaking in their boots with anticipation for the cruises that were scheduled to stop in Israel, I just got the email with a revised itinerary for my Nov 8th embarkation in Rome on the Epic and confirmed disembarkation on Nov 20th in Athens. They took out Ashdod, Rhodes and Patmos as ports, added Mykonos, and added two more sea days. I expected Jerusalem to be taken out but I'm bummed we don't get to go to Rhodes or Patmos anymore. At least I've never been to Mykonos so that'll be nice to check out.

 

They're also giving a $200 non-refundable onboard credit per stateroom ($100 pp for the first and second guest) and reimbursing airline-imposed change/cancelation fees not covered by insurance or the airline up to $300pp. Unclear if that includes the actual flight fare but it doesn't sound like it.

 

I suspect the comms for the rest of the cruises to come out soon so for anyone heading to the Mediterranean soon hang tight!
 

Edited October 17, 2023 by allthebaconandeggz

[DCGuy64]

I think that's a whole lot better than the alternative, which might be a complete cancellation. I'm still a bit nervous about our upcoming sailing from Rome, since it's supposed to call in 3 Greek ports. I guess we'll see. Of course, my heart goes out to my Israeli brethren.

[CruiseMH]

I`m wondering about taking out the other two greek isles.I personally can`t find any reason why to kick out these two isles.

 

[8920]

27 minutes ago, CruiseMH said:

I`m wondering about taking out the other two greek isles.I personally can`t find any reason why to kick out these two isles.

 

I was scratching my head at that, too.  For some reason, we're going to Mykonos on Day 4 rather than Santorini.  That seems to have created a knock-on effect, which made Patmos and Rhodes unavailable.  Not privy to what happens behind the scenes for that.  I would guess it has something to do with logistics. Simply skipping the Israeli ports and going directly to Athens may have been too far to sail without visiting a port where fuel or other provisioning services are available and thus needed to rearrange what days we visit those ports.  There's no threats security-wise that would necessitate deleting any Greek ports, so for those going on future Greek Isles cruise, I wouldn't worry.  Yours will likely go as planned.  

Edited October 17, 2023 by 8920

[richmke]

20 minutes ago, 8920 said:

Simply skipping the Israeli ports and going directly to Athens may have been too far to sail without visiting a port where fuel or other provisioning services are available and thus needed to rearrange what days we visit those ports. 

The Epic can trans-atlantic for days at sea. The ship can carry enough food to last for weeks. Going from Limassol to Athens in 2 days would be a cake walk for the Epic. I doubt Ashod was a large re-provisioning port. They have all the other stops to take on extra food and fuel if they needed it. First stop at Athens, and Instanbul, in particular, since those are Embarkation/Debarkation ports where major reprovisioning occurs.

[www3traveler]

52 minutes ago, 8920 said:

I was scratching my head at that, too.  For some reason, we're going to Mykonos on Day 4 rather than Santorini.  That seems to have created a knock-on effect, which made Patmos and Rhodes unavailable.  Not privy to what happens behind the scenes for that.  I would guess it has something to do with logistics. Simply skipping the Israeli ports and going directly to Athens may have been too far to sail without visiting a port where fuel or other provisioning services are available and thus needed to rearrange what days we visit those ports.  There's no threats security-wise that would necessitate deleting any Greek ports, so for those going on future Greek Isles cruise, I wouldn't worry.  Yours will likely go as planned.  

Probably what ports have space available on a specific date and time.  Port docking schedules are determined months in advance. 

[PhilRSchultz]

Why cancel non-Israeli ports that were already scheduled?  That seems odd.  Hope that doesn’t happen on my Nov. 14th departure with Viking.  I would not be happy.  My expectations are (3) ports excursions that were supposed to be scheduled in Israel now change to (3) port excursions elsewhere at landings as close as possible in quality compared to what we’re losing in Jerusalem and The Holy Land.  To me, that means adding Ephesus, Santorini, and something else

[8920]

5 hours ago, richmke said:

The Epic can trans-atlantic for days at sea. The ship can carry enough food to last for weeks. Going from Limassol to Athens in 2 days would be a cake walk for the Epic. I doubt Ashod was a large re-provisioning port. They have all the other stops to take on extra food and fuel if they needed it. First stop at Athens, and Instanbul, in particular, since those are Embarkation/Debarkation ports where major reprovisioning occurs.

Yeah, that's true.  I don't know, I can't think of any other reason why they did it that way.  

 

4 hours ago, www3traveler said:

Probably what ports have space available on a specific date and time.  Port docking schedules are determined months in advance. 

Exactly, so why cancel ports that had already been booked nearly two years in advance?  All they had to do was skip Ashdod and Haifa and reroute to Athens.  Why change up everything else?  The return cruise has Patmos and Rhodes still on the schedule.  

[RD64]

6 hours ago, CruiseMH said:

I`m wondering about taking out the other two greek isles.I personally can`t find any reason why to kick out these two isles.

 

Logistics - a whole of logistics and itinerary juggling going on.

[RD64]

4 hours ago, PhilRSchultz said:

Why cancel non-Israeli ports that were already scheduled?  That seems odd.  Hope that doesn’t happen on my Nov. 14th departure with Viking.  I would not be happy.  My expectations are (3) ports excursions that were supposed to be scheduled in Israel now change to (3) port excursions elsewhere at landings as close as possible in quality compared to what we’re losing in Jerusalem and The Holy Land.  To me, that means adding Ephesus, Santorini, and something else

What it may mean to you may be far different than what the cruise lines are able to provide. You signed up for a cruise of XX days, and that is what you will receive - regardless of what you deem to be comparable quality.

[RD64]

12 minutes ago, 8920 said:

Yeah, that's true.  I don't know, I can't think of any other reason why they did it that way.  

 

Exactly, so why cancel ports that had already been booked nearly two years in advance?  All they had to do was skip Ashdod and Haifa and reroute to Athens.  Why change up everything else?  The return cruise has Patmos and Rhodes still on the schedule.  

Perhaps you should work for NCL in itinerary planning since you seem to think that everything can be changed at the drop of a hat.

[8920]

5 minutes ago, RD64 said:

Perhaps you should work for NCL in itinerary planning since you seem to think that everything can be changed at the drop of a hat.

No need to get snarky about it.  I was just saying that nothing in the first 10 days of the cruise needed to be changed.  The slot reservations at the ports were already booked and all logistics already planned.  So why mess with the rest of the ports?  The only changes that needed to be made were the Israeli ports on days 11 and 12.  Why create all of the extra work?

[RD64]

4 minutes ago, 8920 said:

No need to get snarky about it.  I was just saying that nothing in the first 10 days of the cruise needed to be changed.  The slot reservations at the ports were already booked and all logistics already planned.  So why mess with the rest of the ports?  The only changes that needed to be made were the Israeli ports on days 11 and 12.  Why create all of the extra work?

You are looking at in terms of the isolation of one or two ports.  NCL has to look at it in terms of the entire itinerary and the logistics that are involved. According to you nothing needs to be changed - NCL may have an entirely different view based on factors which we may know nothing about. 

Edited October 18, 2023 by RD64
Spelling

[8920]

27 minutes ago, RD64 said:

You are looking at in terms of the isolation of one or two ports.  NCL has to look at it in terms of the entire itinerary and the logistics that are involved. According to you nothing needs to be changed - NCL may have an entirely different view based on factors which we may know nothing about. 

And here we are, speculating about what those factors could possibly be.  Do you have any insight to add?

[PhilRSchultz]

1 hour ago, RD64 said:

What it may mean to you may be far different than what the cruise lines are able to provide. You signed up for a cruise of XX days, and that is what you will receive - regardless of what you deem to be comparable quality.

I didn’t realize my posts were subject to the self-appointed cruise message board police, but, foolish me, this is an internet message board so what did I expect?  Thanks for the advice……. but I think I’ll be a far better judge as the paying customer in this matter in regards to whether I’ll feel I received what I paid for.

Edited October 18, 2023 by PhilRSchultz

[IAcruising]

41 minutes ago, PhilRSchultz said:

I didn’t realize my posts were subject to the self-appointed cruise message board police, but, foolish me, this is an internet message board so what did I expect?  Thanks for the advice……. but I think I’ll be a far better judge as the paying customer in this matter in regards to whether I’ll feel I received what I paid for.

 

Welcome to CC. A post like this, so early, isn't going to get you anywhere. No one claims to be police, but they do comment on those who waltz in here with an attitude.

 

What you paid for is exactly what RD told you, a cruise of xx number of days. Your speculation, and how you feel about itinerary changes, means nothing.

 

[PhilRSchultz]

8 minutes ago, IAcruising said:

 

Welcome to CC. A post like this, so early, isn't going to get you anywhere. No one claims to be police, but they do comment on those who waltz in here with an attitude.

 

What you paid for is exactly what RD told you, a cruise of xx number of days. Your speculation, and how you feel about itinerary changes, means nothing.

 

Look!  Another one!  Like I said, as the paying customer I’ll be the judge of that.  What I purchased was access to various destinations.  The cruise ship was just the taxi.  And I fail to see how my original post that his highness, RD, responded to displayed attitude.  How did the earlier poster characterize your type?  Oh yeah, “snarky”.  Indeed

[IAcruising]

9 minutes ago, PhilRSchultz said:

What I purchased was access to various destinations.  The cruise ship was just the taxi.  And I fail to see how my original post that his highness, RD, responded to displayed attitude.

 

Yes, but not guaranteed destinations. Read your contract. Also, if you can't see the incredible entitlement attitude in your posts in this thread, well, no amount of rational discussion will change that. Good luck on CC.

 

[RD64]

9 hours ago, PhilRSchultz said:

I didn’t realize my posts were subject to the self-appointed cruise message board police, but, foolish me, this is an internet message board so what did I expect?  Thanks for the advice……. but I think I’ll be a far better judge as the paying customer in this matter in regards to whether I’ll feel I received what I paid for.

And what recourse do you have at this point in deciding what ports NCL will eventually assign?

[RD64]

10 hours ago, 8920 said:

And here we are, speculating about what those factors could possibly be.  Do you have any insight to add?

Provisioning, distance to be travelled, fuel costs, bunkering, shore excursion availability,  port scheduling and facilities,  limited ports without repeating, many ships from other cruise lines also scrambling to adjust their itineraries at very short notice, airlift where necessary, safety concerns, 

 

It is not just a simple fix of taking out an eraser and writing in a new port - one has to take the logistics into account. Unless the cruise is outright cancelled, NCL must still “create” an adjusted cruise of XX number of days. There are only so many ports available in this geographic area. 
 

And truly as we can see from some of these posts, the entitled (those who have paid their $$) feel that the schedule should be changed to accommodate their wishes. There are probably 2000 other people on board that have their own different ideas about what an appropriate revised itinerary would be. It is impossible to please everyone.

Edited October 18, 2023 by RD64
Additional

[8920]

1 minute ago, RD64 said:

Provisioning, distance to be travelled, fuel costs, bunkering, shore excursion availability,  port scheduling and facilities,  many ships from other cruise lines also scrambling to adjust their itineraries at very short notice, airlift where necessary, safety concerns,….

I agree, they're all factors.  What is less clear is if all of those factors were already scheduled for every port for this cruise prior to the 10th day of the 12 day cruise, and had been for at least two years prior, what would have changed with those arrangements that would necessitate changing the ports?  The only obvious change that had to be made was deleting Ashdod and changing the disembarkation port. The rest of the schedule disruption has no obvious reason, although there must have been some reason if NCL added that much work to an already overworked staff.  It's a fair question to ask what that was, although we'll probably never know.

[KeithJenner]

11 hours ago, RD64 said:

Perhaps you should work for NCL in itinerary planning since you seem to think that everything can be changed at the drop of a hat.

They actually seem to be suggesting not changing things.

[8920]

46 minutes ago, RD64 said:

It is not just a simple fix of taking out an eraser and writing in a new port - one has to take the logistics into account. Unless the cruise is outright cancelled, NCL must still “create” an adjusted cruise of XX number of days. There are only so many ports available in this geographic area. 
 

And truly as we can see from some of these posts, the entitled (those who have paid their $$) feel that the schedule should be changed to accommodate their wishes. There are probably 2000 other people on board that have their own different ideas about what an appropriate revised itinerary would be. It is impossible to please everyone.

Sorry, you must have added this while I was typing.  

 

I understand what you're saying, but again, why would they have to create an entire new itinerary when the one they had was fully reserved and arranged except for the last two ports?  If we already had a slot reservation for Rhodes and Patmos on specific days, why give up those slots for someone else to take? 

 

And from the posts - and I'll grant you, there are some entitled people there - nobody suggested skipping even more ports than we already are or adding Mykonos.  Most, if not all, had already come to a their go/no go decision based on losing the Israeli ports and changing disembark to Athens and were way more pissed off at losing two additional ports.  If NCL was changing the ports to appease some of them, they really missed the mark.

 

None of it makes sense, which means NCL must have had one hell of a reason for doing it.  Curious what that was.  Maybe I'll ask onboard, maybe I'll just order another drink and sit on my balcony. Either way, I'm still going.

[sailingships]

For those complaining about losing 2 more ports, the passengers on the Gem for Nov 1st, 11th and 22nd could lose up to 7 POC. 2 in Israel, 2 in Egypt and 3 in Turkey. What would NCL do about almost totally gutted cruises ? Those would be very long cruises to nowhere. 

Edited October 18, 2023 by sailingships

[GirlWriter]

Maybe the changes are required because of other cruises -- for example, another cruise that overlaps with yours had a stop in Jerusalem that now has to be changed to another port, and so it got moved to one of the ports you already had, which then is overbooked and exceeding the maximum ships allowed in port, which requires NCL to move yours to yet another port. So, in other words, other moving parts collided with your itinerary and created a domino effect.