Toulon stop cancelled in Irresistible Med cruise

[corona_gorda]

Hi I've just been notified by email that the Toulon, France stop on Irresistible Med has been replaced by a day at sea. They cite past sailor comments for the change.... Any others received this or have further insights about this ?

 

It is a tender port so there are more delays getting off-board but was there bad feedback about that town recently? We had a walking tour organized (by ourselves) and have been to Toulon before so not a big loss but cutting this time in port, won't the ship sail at a snail's pace ?

 

Finally, is this for the entire Med cruising season or just for our June 30th sailing from Barcelona ?

 

Thx

[VVhater]

They just did that on the May 19 departure, too. What a ripoff. I never would have booked a 1-week cruise with just 3 port calls and 2 days at sea. 

Edited March 28 by VVhater

[CineGraphic]

It's very common for itineraries to be changed.

Every cruise line has a clause in their terms stating they can change an itinerary for any reason.

Enjoy your cruise.

[VVhater]

This isn’t due to circumstances beyond the carrier’s control. It’s a money-saving change that Virgin delayed announcing until it was too late to cancel a booking. And the fact that they also canceled a nearby port on other itineraries strongly suggests bad faith. Yes, they may be legally protected, but it’s a disgraceful way to treat people. 

[CineGraphic]

3 minutes ago, VVhater said:

This isn’t due to circumstances beyond the carrier’s control.

 

They clearly stated that the change was based on past-passenger feedback/preference.

Anything is else pure conjecture by someone who clearly hates the brand for reasons unknown.

[richele]

I understand ports may be changed or canceled but the excuse they give does not seem credible. They are trying to make us feel they are doing us a favor by canceling the port stop and substituting a sea day.

Agree, we never would have booked either if we knew this.

[VVhater]

I hate the brand because they are acting dishonorably. If you believe that this change is just based on passenger feedback, I have a bridge to sell you. Passengers always had the option of staying on board that day. 

[hotsauce126]

59 minutes ago, CineGraphic said:

 

They clearly stated that the change was based on past-passenger feedback/preference.

Anything is else pure conjecture by someone who clearly hates the brand for reasons unknown.

They said that but that reasoning wouldn’t make any sense unless it was replaced with a different port

[richele]

I agree. If they were so concerned about their passengers they would have substituted another port. In the Mediterranean the ports are close together.

[CineGraphic]

1 hour ago, hotsauce126 said:

They said that but that reasoning wouldn’t make any sense unless it was replaced with a different port

 

1 hour ago, richele said:

I agree. If they were so concerned about their passengers they would have substituted another port. In the Mediterranean the ports are close together.

 

The feedback was that sailors wanted more time at sea, not another port.

[hotsauce126]

12 minutes ago, CineGraphic said:

 

 

The feedback was that sailors wanted more time at sea, not another port.

They can make more time at sea by not getting off the ship

[CineGraphic]

1 minute ago, hotsauce126 said:

They can make more time at sea by not getting off the ship

 

Being docked at a port, is not at sea.

[hotsauce126]

Just now, CineGraphic said:

 

Being docked at a port, is not at sea.

Right but functionally it’s the same thing

[CineGraphic]

1 minute ago, hotsauce126 said:

Right but functionally it’s the same thing

 

Hardly.

 

[hotsauce126]

2 minutes ago, CineGraphic said:

 

Hardly.

 

You’re right in one scenario the ship is moving and the other the ship is not moving 🙄

[BrianB1964]

Just got the email today for the June 30th cruise.  I am a bit pissed about this.   My wife and I had just booked an excursion to St. Tropez!  We were both looking forward to that.  Had we known this prior, we would have not booked the cruise!  We loved the itinerary.   Spent even more money to fly to Barcelona.    Virgin should give us more than the port taxes back for this!  This is a huge disappointment! 

[Travel_Lover28]

Agree (hotsauce126)! When I booked this cruise, I knew where it was stopping. If I didn’t like the ports then I would not book it but if I wanted to sail anyways then I would stay on board at port. I have not heard of a cruise brand that would change an itinerary because of the passengers. It’s less than 60 days and Virgin would do this?☹️ It leaves a bad taste specially for first time Virgin cruisers like me. I know people will defend Virgin no matter because they’re enamored with the brand but I bet they would not be happy if this was their first time. I have never been to Toulon and wether it is, or not a good port, I would have liked to have experienced going there.

[DCGuy64]

12 minutes ago, Travel_Lover28 said:

I have not heard of a cruise brand that would change an itinerary because of the passengers.

Somewhat of a curious comment, since Cruise Critic is very often littered with posts saying the cruise lines should take passenger input into account.

[BrianB1964]

First timer here as well.  And I have a very bad taste now!  We were not enamored with Toulon but booked an excursion to St. Tropez!  We were both stoked to go there.  I was hoping they would book us into another port at least!!   Not happy at all!! 

 

Edited March 28 by BrianB1964

[Travel_Lover28]

14 minutes ago, DCGuy64 said:

the cruise lines should take passenger input

Yes “should” but how many cruise lines have? Why not make an itinerary based on passengers input instead of changing it after people have already booked? And to wait 50 days before sailing and/ or after people have already booked excursions or when you can no longer cancel and get a full refund. Do you really think this is good business process?

[capecodmommy]

It is amazing how many people are complaining about a cancelled port. I understand if you are not a seasoned traveler to be disappointed but in all reality, if a port is cancelled all the way into the future (I am booked for August and also got the notice of change) then something happened and I would rather be a little disgruntled, safely on the ship, with what I am sure will be a fun filled sea day than having an issue in the port. I am sure it wasn't a snap decision. 

 

I was in Africa last month on tour and our days in Johannesburg got so scary and sketchy that our tour director called to tell the tour company what had happened and it was immediately removed from any of the future tours effecting even the people who were coming right behind us. The travel industry does not tell you everything but a company that puts the travelers safety first is the type of company I will always choose.

 

Edited March 28 by capecodmommy

[Morechampagne]

Cancelled on the 5th May sailing. We are disappointed and don't really buy their reason to cancel it. Plenty of other ports to replace it with in the Med and don’t need a sea day. It is what it is - but leaves a bad taste for our first VV. 

[DCGuy64]

9 minutes ago, Travel_Lover28 said:

Yes “should” but how many cruise lines have? Why not make an itinerary based on passengers input instead of changing it after people have already booked? And to wait 50 days before sailing and/ or after people have already booked excursions or when you can no longer cancel and get a full refund. Do you really think this is good business process?

Quite a few people on CC mention they have cruises booked one, two, even 3 years ahead of time. What would be your suggestion in terms of the right time to change things? At the very least, there are often people who book less than 50 days ahead of sailing date, so that's enough time for them to decide whether to book or not. I take itinerary changes as just one of the many things that can happen. Earlier today I found out that my cruise was cancelled altogether (ship is changing to a charter for our sailing). I'd certainly prefer a changed/missed port to a full cancellation.

[capecodmommy]

4 minutes ago, Morechampagne said:

Cancelled on the 5th May sailing. We are disappointed and don't really buy their reason to cancel it. Plenty of other ports to replace it with in the Med and don’t need a sea day. It is what it is - but leaves a bad taste for our first VV. 

It is cancelled all the way into the foreseeable future. There is a reason. Trust it. 

 

I, personally, thought the itinerary looked exhausting and I am thrilled for an addition sea day. And, yes, I am booked for August 11th (final payment isn't even due until April 13th) and I am traveling with 65 of my friends and family so, yes the cancellation effected me also.

[DCGuy64]

7 minutes ago, Morechampagne said:

Plenty of other ports to replace it with in the Med and don’t need a sea day.

It sounds from the earlier post like sailors wanted another sea day, NOT a stop at a different Med port.