Stockholder Benefit

[lele100]

I applied for the stockholder benefit and received the $100, however they split it between the 2 guests in the cabin.  This is strange to me because other cruise lines give it to the stockholder named on the statement.  Is there anyway to get them to put it only on my account.  We both have different accounts set up for onboard expenses.  Thanks

[davencl]

1 hour ago, lele100 said:

I applied for the stockholder benefit and received the $100, however they split it between the 2 guests in the cabin.  This is strange to me because other cruise lines give it to the stockholder named on the statement.  Is there anyway to get them to put it only on my account.  We both have different accounts set up for onboard expenses.  Thanks

No

[ontheweb]

I would have rather had it done this way by other lines when the stock is in both our names.

 

If it really matters to you, have the other person give you $50. Now you have the equivalent of what you want.

[lele100]

27 minutes ago, ontheweb said:

I would have rather had it done this way by other lines when the stock is in both our names.

 

If it really matters to you, have the other person give you $50. Now you have the equivalent of what you want.

Exactly if it is in both our names, but it is not, it is in my name,  So I would like the obc.  makes sense, why give the obc to someone who does not own stock?

[PATRLR]

2 minutes ago, lele100 said:

Exactly if it is in both our names, but it is not, it is in my name,  So I would like the obc.  makes sense, why give the obc to someone who does not own stock?

Why the do it that way, I don't know.  But, I'll bet they assume that the two people in the cabin are familiar with each other enough to be able to work it out.

[SeaShark]

The benefit is a "per stateroom" benefit, not a "per shareholder" benefit. This is plainly spelled out in the offer details. As for why "they" do it that way, I'd normally suggest asking "them" why, but when you are a stockholder you are "they".

[Rick&Jeannie]

1 minute ago, SeaShark said:

The benefit is a "per stateroom" benefit, not a "per shareholder" benefit. This is plainly spelled out in the offer details. As for why "they" do it that way, I'd normally suggest asking "them" why, but when you are a stockholder you are "they".

"They" are giving me a headache...

[julig22]

1 hour ago, lele100 said:

Exactly if it is in both our names, but it is not, it is in my name,  So I would like the obc.  makes sense, why give the obc to someone who does not own stock?

No personal experience but I believe people have been able to have it adjusted at guest services once you are onboard.

[ontheweb]

1 hour ago, lele100 said:

Exactly if it is in both our names, but it is not, it is in my name,  So I would like the obc.  makes sense, why give the obc to someone who does not own stock?

One should also ask why other cruise lines when the stock is in both names, do not split it.

[luv2kroooz]

54 minutes ago, ontheweb said:

One should also ask why other cruise lines when the stock is in both names, do not split it.

All you have to do is ask and other lines will gladly split it if it is held in both names. Which brings us back to the question of why NCL insists on allocating it between two people even if the second person does not own the stock and has no claim to the benefit.

[lele100]

1 hour ago, SeaShark said:

The benefit is a "per stateroom" benefit, not a "per shareholder" benefit. This is plainly spelled out in the offer details. As for why "they" do it that way, I'd normally suggest asking "them" why, but when you are a stockholder you are "they".

"They" never asked for my vote to do it this way, so in this case I get to say "They".  I tell you what, go ahead and go with a friend to a cruise that gives you $250 obc for the stock holder benefit, and have them give your friend $125,  you might be ok with that but I am not.  In my case it is $100 but still I do not want to give it to my friend, and it feels awkward to ask for my $50 

[SeaShark]

1 minute ago, lele100 said:

"They" never asked for my vote to do it this way, so in this case I get to say "They".  I tell you what, go ahead and go with a friend to a cruise that gives you $250 obc for the stock holder benefit, and have them give your friend $125,  you might be ok with that but I am not.  In my case it is $100 but still I do not want to give it to my friend, and it feels awkward to ask for my $50 

 

Then don't ask, but you are still an owner of the company (whether you vote or not) and thus you are "they". Don't like it? Bring it up at the next stockholder meeting. But, IMHO, you can't complain about the benefit when it is clearly a "per stateroom" and not a "per shareholer" benefit. Perhaps you could or should have checked into that before you purchased shares of the company. I'd think you'd want to know exactly what it is that you're buying.

 

Funny thing is that if both you and your friend owned the stock, the benefit would still be the same...you wouldn't both get it. Also funny is that if you owned 50 shares and your friend owned 50 shares, you wouldn't be able to combine them to get the benefit.

[ontheweb]

6 hours ago, luv2kroooz said:

All you have to do is ask and other lines will gladly split it if it is held in both names. Which brings us back to the question of why NCL insists on allocating it between two people even if the second person does not own the stock and has no claim to the benefit.

That is not always true. Back in 2020 when booking an excursion pre-cruise (for a cruise that unfortunately never happened due to Covid), the Princess rep I spoke to refused to do that.

[luv2kroooz]

4 minutes ago, ontheweb said:

That is not always true. Back in 2020 when booking an excursion pre-cruise (for a cruise that unfortunately never happened due to Covid), the Princess rep I spoke to refused to do that.

Hmm. I guess they've come a long way since then. We had no problems in November 2023. We made our request onboard, though. Princess has foolishly outsourced customer service to a foreign country post Corona. Contacting them pre-cruise can be futile.

Edited January 4 by luv2kroooz

[ontheweb]

1 minute ago, luv2kroooz said:

Hmm. I guess they've come a long way since then. We had no problems in November 2023. We made our request onboard, though.

I think they were splitting it back then and even earlier. I just got a bad rep who in fact thought using OBC pre-cruise to buy excursions was a brand new policy (her words) thought it was not. I ended up having to put IIRC, $35 on my credit card, but would have that $35 still in OBC once we boarded. It wasn't really enough to be worth arguing about especially since I would have it later. I could have called and tried to get a better rep, but it just did not seem to be worth the hassle for such a small amount that in fact I would still have in the future.

[IAcruising]

If I had to make a realistic guess, it would be to ensure that two unrelated individuals, with two separate brokerage accounts do not both get the credit.  Sure, they could have a system in place to catch this, but that would be way too much to ask of their IT department.

 

[ChiefMateJRK]

On one of my recent cruises, the Shorex folks told me that I couldn't use OBC for Shorex.  I walked exactly 15.75 feet to my left and asked the nice girl at the onboard account desk to educate her friends over on the Shorex desk.  It took about five minutes and everybody was on the same page.

[cruiser2015]

11 hours ago, SeaShark said:

 

Then don't ask, but you are still an owner of the company (whether you vote or not) and thus you are "they". Don't like it? Bring it up at the next stockholder meeting. But, IMHO, you can't complain about the benefit when it is clearly a "per stateroom" and not a "per shareholer" benefit. Perhaps you could or should have checked into that before you purchased shares of the company. I'd think you'd want to know exactly what it is that you're buying.

 

Funny thing is that if both you and your friend owned the stock, the benefit would still be the same...you wouldn't both get it. Also funny is that if you owned 50 shares and your friend owned 50 shares, you wouldn't be able to combine them to get the benefit.

Perhaps you were being sarcastic, but just in case you were not, that's not an appropriate issue for a stockholder's meeting.

[SeaShark]

5 hours ago, cruiser2015 said:

Perhaps you were being sarcastic, but just in case you were not, that's not an appropriate issue for a stockholder's meeting.

 

It is if it is addressed in a shareholder proposal (a formal recommendation, request, or requirement for the board of directors to take action on a specific issue). Proposals are usually presented at the annual shareholder meeting.

[cruiser2015]

27 minutes ago, SeaShark said:

 

It is if it is addressed in a shareholder proposal (a formal recommendation, request, or requirement for the board of directors to take action on a specific issue). Proposals are usually presented at the annual shareholder meeting.

I am well aware of how this works.

Although I did not state this specifically before, my intent was to say that suggestions for a minor change in routine operations of a business are not going to be presented at a shareholders meeting. Not appropriate and would never happen.

[macewank]

So anyway it sounds like the solution here is to call ncl or speak to guest services onboard and explain the situation and have the credit moved. 

[SeaShark]

1 hour ago, cruiser2015 said:

I am well aware of how this works.

Although I did not state this specifically before, my intent was to say that suggestions for a minor change in routine operations of a business are not going to be presented at a shareholders meeting. Not appropriate and would never happen.

 

I'm well aware of your intent. My intent was to point out the fallacy of a company owner compaining about the company in which they hold ownership as being something they are not a part of...IOW, when you own the stock, you are "they". 

 

Not to mention how foolish it is when you complain about something that was properly done. 

[cruiser2015]

1 hour ago, SeaShark said:

 

I'm well aware of your intent. My intent was to point out the fallacy of a company owner compaining about the company in which they hold ownership as being something they are not a part of...IOW, when you own the stock, you are "they". 

 

Not to mention how foolish it is when you complain about something that was properly done. 

While I respect your view, when you talk about someone who owns an insignificant portion of a major company as an "owner", while technically true, for all practicable purposes, is a poor description. Functionally, they hold no power or influence over the company's policies..

[schmoopie17]

On our upcoming cruise, Mrs. Schmoopie was credited with $50 and I was credited with $50.

No problem, because all of our investments are jointly owned.

 

However, in the case where two friends (one being a stockholder) may be sharing a cabin and the $100 is split equally, what happens when the stockholder buys something onboard for over $50? My assumption is that their credit card would eventually be charged for the excess. If the friend buys nothing, their $50 OBC vanishes. In that case you couldn't "get the extra $50 from the friend" because the friend would be out $50...and so is the stockholder, due to the loss of $50 OBC.

 

 

Edited January 4 by schmoopie17

[SeaShark]

1 hour ago, schmoopie17 said:

On our upcoming cruise, Mrs. Schmoopie was credited with $50 and I was credited with $50.

No problem, because all of our investments are jointly owned.

 

However, in the case where two friends (one being a stockholder) may be sharing a cabin and the $100 is split equally, what happens when the stockholder buys something onboard for over $50? My assumption is that their credit card would eventually be charged for the excess. If the friend buys nothing, their $50 OBC vanishes. In that case you couldn't "get the extra $50 from the friend" because the friend would be out $50...and so is the stockholder, due to the loss of $50 OBC.

 

 

 

When the two friends book the cabin, there is only one invoice created for the cruise. They don't each get an invoice for half of the money due. It is up to the fwo friends to work it out between themselves. 

 

Same can apply for the onboard expense account. Once account can be made and the two friends can work together to each pay their fair share. It is only an issue when the two friends can't/won't work together and insist on separate accounts. 

 

While interesting, your scenario is flawed in that each occupant is entitled to a $50 OBC as the benefit goes to the cabin, not to the shareholder. Since it isn't a shareholder benefit, it doesn't all "belong" to the shareholder unless the shareholder travels as a solo paying full fare.