Any issues with cancelled ports?

[stevesol6718]

3 hours ago, QuestionEverything said:

roothy123 and Hlitner - thank you very much for your posts.

Your points are well taken and speak to the many posters who have expressed dismay in the port shortened time, cancelling of ports, cancelling of excursions and no available excursions many months before departure.

Oceania has made a deliberate choice to operate this way. I note the many posters who report being ignored by guest relations and excursions desk.

This is NOT customer service Oceania. Others have posted of the lack of corporate and onboard communications as well as arrogant communication.

The point of cruising is to see ports, with a few exceptions where people make the onboard experience their #1.

I have had my fill of Oceania cancelling ports, giving no or a vague explanation and now with SM, not receiving the return of my $ for a product not delivered is frankly unethical and wrong.

Thank you for your frankness and analysis. Regards, and safe travels to you both.

 

[stevesol6718]

The reason I was so disappointed in the port change from Tokyo to Yokohama is not so obvious.  We are taking a back to back to back next March April.  Singapore to Hong Kong, Hong Kong to Tokyo and Tokyo to Tokyo.  We had planned on almost two days in Tokyo and spending time at night in the city. Now we have to take transportation to Tokyo, leave the city early enough to catch a train or pay $150 or more taxi fare.  The next day will not allow us to return to Tokyo for a second day because this is a departure day and we can not depend upon the trains.  So now the second day has to be spent in Yokohama, which is uninteresting and a waste of a day.  Now we have to "jam" in all of Tokyo in one day. which is impossible.  The whole point of taking this third cruise was to experience Tokyo and the two days was ideal.

You can say whatever you want, but, Oceania is looking to save the money in ports.  This will be our 22, 23 and 24th Oceania cruise.  Probably our last because this change has happened too frequently and missing or changing ports so often is unacceptable.  It has happened on our last two cruises.  We choose the cruises for the ports and the itinerary.  FYI, we will look at Crystal and Explora cruises in the future.

[MEFIowa]

1 hour ago, Vineyard View said:

... We were on another line years back, and walked to the Vasa museum on our own. I  hadn’t planned on spending as much time as we did there….it was fascinating. A great museum.

We're at a pier farther away. The one the farthest away if memory serves me. I'm thinking we're actually overnight in Stockholm.

[EJL2023]

3 minutes ago, MEFIowa said:

We're at a pier farther away. The one the farthest away if memory serves me. I'm thinking we're actually overnight in Stockholm.

We were in Stockholm to start a cruise. The pier was quite a distance from central city. We were there a couple days before and actually used the Hop on Hop off bus to get around…worked out well as we had a stop right in front of our hotel. We loved the Vasa Museum.  We passed on the ABBA museum….quite literally on the HOHO bus! Long story, but we ended up taking the HOHO bus to the port and the driver drove us right up to the ship instead of the usual port HOHO stop.  lol 

[Woofa]

Just a follow after many good responses and a little more research.  

Apologies if all that I am about to say is not 100% accurate, these things are too complex to do just some research but I believe from what I have read the following is basically true.

I think part of the issue is O's decision to offer the excursion credit as opposed to just a free excursion in each port, which while as I have stated is IMO a good thing, it can be confusing.  This makes some people believe that they are in fact paying for that credit.  In fact, you are paying a higher price for the cruise and getting a credit which lets you (possibly) make choices on which excursion to choose.  Having read multiple topics for other lines now including Viking, Regent, Silver sea and Seabourne, which all seem to have an included excursion per port, none of these will reimburse you (from what I have read) for any cancellation of that "included" excursion.  And to be clear, only O gives you even the possibility of choosing your included excursion Amongst any of the excursion options even if you have to pay more to make up the difference. All, including O will reimburse you for actual, out of pocket excursions you choose to pay for.

Plenty of people on the topics for those cruise lines also unhappy that they do not get anything back.  Of course if you do not have a glass of wine with dinner, you don't get that money back either.

 

Now, in regards to the missing time/cancelled ports issue, it is really difficult to discuss as no one has, as of yet been able to find industry data to support their claims that O is worse.  From what I have read, they probably are.  However, every line on CC indicates issues.

What I would say is that from what I have read, leaving ports early to support their green initiative is a real thing.  Whether it really works, I have no idea.  whether you agree it is a good thing is just one of those things where you vote with your wallet.

There was also a recent post from someone saying that O management is extremely conservative to make sure no real issues ever arise.

I would venture a guess that like the smaller ships of the luxury lines, O offers more smaller, hard to get to ports which have more tender ports and this combined with a conservative decision making captain could lead to more missed ports.

Regardless, you now know port time can be lowered or ports missed so make your cruising decisions accordingly.  I would never blame anyone for choosing another line which better fits their needs.

One caveat I do not necessarily agree that the majority of O cruisers cruise mainly for the ports.  I would also argue that on a Caribbean cruise like the one we have taken ( and are about to take again), an hour less here and there makes little or no difference.  

While I have no doubt certain cruises like Mediterranean or similar are different, I would guess the majority of cruisers on our cruise were back on the ship for lunch (if they even left in the first place)

 

[roothy123]

I wrote a somewhat long-winded response and then lost it.  Maybe you're all lucky.  But the previous poster has posted some very good thoughts that I agree with.  As to what line to choose, obviously it's great we have so many choices.  I've not liked some of the recent changes by O, but I know all the cruise lines are trying to recoup lost money, so I understand.  As for Simply More and the shorter port hours (which I think is a lot due to O's new green initiative) I don't particularly like those changes. But Simply More is new, so I think there may be some rough periods as O works through things and finds more vendors.  And new itineraries are probably being posted with shortened hours so surprises will be fewer.  I go off the ship a lot, but it seems many people hate shorters hours when in reality they may not even need them. 

 

When I think of all the things I don't use on a particular ship or individual cruise, I sometimes feel the "cruise only" price that I paid on Oceania (pre-SM) as well as on Viking resulted in lots of money spent on liquor, casino, spa, "free" excursions that I didn't use.  A highly customizable cruise would be great, but I know it's not workable.  So I can only decide which cruise line gives me the most of the other things I love -- unusual ports, port-intensive itineraries, great food/service, good price, easy-going, flexible cruisers on board, etc. 

 

Incidentally, I felt Viking missed ports more often than O.  But missed ports can be due to weather, port overcrowding, terrorist attacks, sea conditions, country imposed regulations, etc. So it's really hard to compare one cruise line to another in that regard. 

 

 

Edited May 19 by roothy123

[ak1004]

23 hours ago, edgee said:

For us Regent is a better and not that much more expensive an option.

Two questions:

 

1. when you say that Regent is not that much more expensive, which categories you are comparing? For the basis veranda, I was not able to find Regent sailing that was not at least 50-60% more expensive (comparing the rate less air credit).

 

2. if your main complaint against O is SM and loss of excursions credit, wouldn’t it be even worse on Regent since they include excursions in each port? 

[ORV]

2 hours ago, Woofa said:

Just a follow after many good responses and a little more research.  

Apologies if all that I am about to say is not 100% accurate, these things are too complex to do just some research but I believe from what I have read the following is basically true.

I think part of the issue is O's decision to offer the excursion credit as opposed to just a free excursion in each port, which while as I have stated is IMO a good thing, it can be confusing.  This makes some people believe that they are in fact paying for that credit.  In fact, you are paying a higher price for the cruise and getting a credit which lets you (possibly) make choices on which excursion to choose.  Having read multiple topics for other lines now including Viking, Regent, Silver sea and Seabourne, which all seem to have an included excursion per port, none of these will reimburse you (from what I have read) for any cancellation of that "included" excursion.  And to be clear, only O gives you even the possibility of choosing your included excursion Amongst any of the excursion options even if you have to pay more to make up the difference. All, including O will reimburse you for actual, out of pocket excursions you choose to pay for.

Plenty of people on the topics for those cruise lines also unhappy that they do not get anything back.  Of course if you do not have a glass of wine with dinner, you don't get that money back either.

 

Now, in regards to the missing time/cancelled ports issue, it is really difficult to discuss as no one has, as of yet been able to find industry data to support their claims that O is worse.  From what I have read, they probably are.  However, every line on CC indicates issues.

What I would say is that from what I have read, leaving ports early to support their green initiative is a real thing.  Whether it really works, I have no idea.  whether you agree it is a good thing is just one of those things where you vote with your wallet.

There was also a recent post from someone saying that O management is extremely conservative to make sure no real issues ever arise.

I would venture a guess that like the smaller ships of the luxury lines, O offers more smaller, hard to get to ports which have more tender ports and this combined with a conservative decision making captain could lead to more missed ports.

Regardless, you now know port time can be lowered or ports missed so make your cruising decisions accordingly.  I would never blame anyone for choosing another line which better fits their needs.

One caveat I do not necessarily agree that the majority of O cruisers cruise mainly for the ports.  I would also argue that on a Caribbean cruise like the one we have taken ( and are about to take again), an hour less here and there makes little or no difference.  

While I have no doubt certain cruises like Mediterranean or similar are different, I would guess the majority of cruisers on our cruise were back on the ship for lunch (if they even left in the first place)

 

What's this? A post that makes sense and is not self centered? We can't have that. This is the bashing thread. 

[Woofa]

3 minutes ago, ORV said:

What's this? A post that makes sense and is not self centered? We can't have that. This is the bashing thread. 

😀

[EJL2023]

1 minute ago, ORV said:

What's this? A post that makes sense and is not self centered? We can't have that. This is the bashing thread. 

The bashing thread……or the bashing website??? I’m going mostly with the latter. I’m truly amazed at the things people worry about…not sure how they could possibly enjoy a cruise…..or anything……

[taiwan_girl]

5 hours ago, stevesol6718 said:

....and we can not depend upon the trains. 

Having spent a fair amount of time in Japan, I would not be at all concerned about the train schedules.  The odds are very very very good that if the train schedule says it will leave at X time, it will leave at X time.

 

(Having said that, I can understand the concern.  There would be nothing worse than missing a departure on the boat!)

[edgee]

1 hour ago, ak1004 said:

Two questions:

 

1. when you say that Regent is not that much more expensive, which categories you are comparing? For the basis veranda, I was not able to find Regent sailing that was not at least 50-60% more expensive (comparing the rate less air credit).

 

2. if your main complaint against O is SM and loss of excursions credit, wouldn’t it be even worse on Regent since they include excursions in each port? 

I object to SM because it provides a finite amount of funds that is advertised as "yours" but limitations on its use make the message disingenuous. You have a point re: Regent, but we may differ from others in that we do not mind taking included tours on Regent. We find the selection of ship tours far more extensive than those offered for a fee on Oceania and tour groups smaller and better run. Also, we are at the point where we compare O PH pricing to Regent, so that makes it closer in the price comparison we do. Also, the degree of individual service, and quality, especially in non specialty dining and in most every way on Regent exceeds Oceania in our opinion. We do find that on O Waves menu and efficiency of service exceeds comparable venue on Regent and we do like the informal Terrace dining option some evenings for which there is currently nothing comparable on Regent.

[Vineyard View]

5 hours ago, Woofa said:

Just a follow after many good responses and a little more research.  

Apologies if all that I am about to say is not 100% accurate, these things are too complex to do just some research but I believe from what I have read the following is basically true.

I think part of the issue is O's decision to offer the excursion credit as opposed to just a free excursion in each port, which while as I have stated is IMO a good thing, it can be confusing.  This makes some people believe that they are in fact paying for that credit.  In fact, you are paying a higher price for the cruise and getting a credit which lets you (possibly) make choices on which excursion to choose.  Having read multiple topics for other lines now including Viking, Regent, Silver sea and Seabourne, which all seem to have an included excursion per port, none of these will reimburse you (from what I have read) for any cancellation of that "included" excursion.  And to be clear, only O gives you even the possibility of choosing your included excursion Amongst any of the excursion options even if you have to pay more to make up the difference. All, including O will reimburse you for actual, out of pocket excursions you choose to pay for.

Plenty of people on the topics for those cruise lines also unhappy that they do not get anything back.  Of course if you do not have a glass of wine with dinner, you don't get that money back either.

 

Now, in regards to the missing time/cancelled ports issue, it is really difficult to discuss as no one has, as of yet been able to find industry data to support their claims that O is worse.  From what I have read, they probably are.  However, every line on CC indicates issues.

What I would say is that from what I have read, leaving ports early to support their green initiative is a real thing.  Whether it really works, I have no idea.  whether you agree it is a good thing is just one of those things where you vote with your wallet.

There was also a recent post from someone saying that O management is extremely conservative to make sure no real issues ever arise.

I would venture a guess that like the smaller ships of the luxury lines, O offers more smaller, hard to get to ports which have more tender ports and this combined with a conservative decision making captain could lead to more missed ports.

Regardless, you now know port time can be lowered or ports missed so make your cruising decisions accordingly.  I would never blame anyone for choosing another line which better fits their needs.

One caveat I do not necessarily agree that the majority of O cruisers cruise mainly for the ports.  I would also argue that on a Caribbean cruise like the one we have taken ( and are about to take again), an hour less here and there makes little or no difference.  

While I have no doubt certain cruises like Mediterranean or similar are different, I would guess the majority of cruisers on our cruise were back on the ship for lunch (if they even left in the first place)

 

A lot of what you say makes good sense. Thank you for your logic. 
I  would argue tho that Seabourn does not include excursions and have traditionally been lower cost than other luxury lines as a result, for balcony cabins, PP/PD, that Regent or SS as a result. 
I can see where a shortened port in the  Caribbean vs Europe would have a different impact. When I am concerned about the issue of shortened ports - or maybe (maybe not) cancelled ports, I am not factoring in Caribbean itineraries. 
I also think that the caveat that most Oceania cruisers do not sail mainly for the ports could also easily be itinerary driven - ie: Caribbean vs Europe. 
Finding the perfect fit isn’t possible, but finding the best is important based on individual goals, geographies, expectations. 

[ak1004]

4 hours ago, EJL2023 said:

The bashing thread……or the bashing website??? I’m going mostly with the latter. I’m truly amazed at the things people worry about…not sure how they could possibly enjoy a cruise…..or anything……

 

Well, this is CC. 99% of the cruisers probably are not even aware of CC and would be amazed about some of the things discussed here.. Sometimes we lose proportions and forget how lucky we are to be able to sail of those wonderful ships. Oceania, Silversea, Seabourn - who cares? Sail on what suits you.

[Vallesan]

Just to throw one more piece of information into the mix: Silversea put their prices up a few months ago to a level that I considered, and I’m sure others too,  was just plain ‘silly’. Yesterday I was checking a cruise I’ve been watching and low and behold they have introduced yet another category ‘Essentials’ which is cruise only. So you can have the whole exclusive ‘Door to Door’, the ‘Port to Port’, no air/ transfers but includes tours, and now,  ‘Essentials’ everything on the ship but no air/transfers/tours. Looks like there’s a very strict cancellation policy with ‘Essentials’. 
 

Obviously bookings must have dropped when they put up prices and it would seem to me that the ‘Essentials’ are at  a similar price level to those of the original a’Port to Port’. Anyway, the new non-inclusive trips may just appeal to those who don’t like ships tours but sorry you will still be paying for alcohol and caviar!

[ak1004]

7 hours ago, Vallesan said:

Just to throw one more piece of information into the mix: Silversea put their prices up a few months ago to a level that I considered, and I’m sure others too,  was just plain ‘silly’. Yesterday I was checking a cruise I’ve been watching and low and behold they have introduced yet another category ‘Essentials’ which is cruise only. So you can have the whole exclusive ‘Door to Door’, the ‘Port to Port’, no air/ transfers but includes tours, and now,  ‘Essentials’ everything on the ship but no air/transfers/tours. Looks like there’s a very strict cancellation policy with ‘Essentials’. 
 

Obviously bookings must have dropped when they put up prices and it would seem to me that the ‘Essentials’ are at  a similar price level to those of the original a’Port to Port’. Anyway, the new non-inclusive trips may just appeal to those who don’t like ships tours but sorry you will still be paying for alcohol and caviar!

 

P2P was typically more expensive than comparable sailing on SB - which made sense since it included excursions.

 

But as you mentioned, now Essentials costs around the same as previously P2P (so still more expensive than SB), but now it excludes excursions, requires 100% payment with the reservation and is 100% non refundable.

 

Makes zero sense to me, and while we enjoyed our last SS cruise, it will be probably our last.

 

So when discussing O cancelled ports and other shortcomings, it's important to remember what are the alternatives. For people like us who are perfectly fine with the basic veranda on the newer O ships (in fact, we are even fine with OV, or FV on the Vista), the current pricing on most "luxury" lines just doesn't make sense (SB might be the only exception at this point).

 

And yes, we are travelling for the ports too as the main reason.

[thebsinmiss]

There seems to be a lot of issue/anger with regards to SM shore excursion credits and not being able to use them if a port gets canceled and there are no suitable/available excursions in the next ports (assuming you aren't all fully booked or at the last port of call).  Some say this is just another way of O raising the price 

 

My question, If I don't see any excursions to reuse canceled port credits on and don't want to just "gift" O with the unused credits, if I book a tour of no interest but choose not to go on it doesn't O still have to pay the vendor for that trip ?   Just saying (would be a bit petty!)

 

We prefer smaller private tours or self touring.  Booked our O trip based on the price we saw and assuming none/few of the excursions would meet our needs.  The price was acceptable. If we can use some/all of the shore X credits thats a bonus.

 

In the end we found 2 excursions that are of interest and used up almost all of our SM credits. If the port gets canceled so be it.

Edited May 20 by thebsinmiss

[Vallesan]

8 minutes ago, thebsinmiss said:

There seems to be a lot of issue/anger with regards to SM shore excursion credits and not being able to use them if a port gets canceled and there are no suitable/available excursions in the next ports (assuming you aren't all fully booked or at the last port of call).  Some say this is just another way of O raising the price 

 

My question, If I don't see any excursions to reuse canceled port credits on and don't want to just "gift" O with the unused credits, if I book a tour of no interest but choose not to go on it doesn't O still have to pay the vendor for that trip ?   Just saying (would be a bit petty!)

Yes I think it might be just ‘petty’ but also may deprive somebody else of doing a trip they might really want to do.

 

My thought is that SM is a ‘price increase’ plain and simple. I accept that so continue to sail with Oceania at the new prices. The tours and drinks are a bonus if I want to use them. If I don’t then I don’t get disappointed. 

[ak1004]

32 minutes ago, thebsinmiss said:

 

My question, If I don't see any excursions to reuse canceled port credits on and don't want to just "gift" O with the unused credits, if I book a tour of no interest but choose not to go on it doesn't O still have to pay the vendor for that trip ?   Just saying (would be a bit petty!)

 

 

What are you going to achieve by doing it, except for potentially preventing someone else to go on the tour? Also, I assume O pays vendors per trip, not per guest, with some maximum number of guests.

 

19 minutes ago, Vallesan said:

Yes I think it might be just ‘petty’ but also may deprive somebody else of doing a trip they might really want to do.

 

My thought is that SM is a ‘price increase’ plain and simple. I accept that so continue to sail with Oceania at the new prices. The tours and drinks are a bonus if I want to use them. If I don’t then I don’t get disappointed. 

 

Agree 100%. What matters of the overall price and the overall package, not what is exactly included and if you are using it or not. And currently the only option to pay "as you go" is the mass market lines like Celebrity/HAL etc.

[MEFIowa]

17 hours ago, roothy123 said:

... When I think of all the things I don't use on a particular ship or individual cruise, I sometimes feel the "cruise only" price that I paid on Oceania (pre-SM) as well as on Viking resulted in lots of money spent on liquor, casino, spa, "free" excursions that I didn't use....

I'd suggest "cruise only" with purchase impulse control.

 

- Liquor: You can bring as much beer, hard liquor and wine on board at embarkation and in ports. I can enjoy them in my cabin. Haven't spent a penny on O's alcohol. And we get to drink for free on the Repeater Party and Captain's Party. Two nights each cruise.

 

- Casino: Just don't go. (But then gambling isn't included in SM either.)

 

- Spa: What a waste of money given their horrific mark ups. Get one before the cruise or after the cruise back home. You'll probably pay less for two back home than one on ship.

 

We've done 40 nights off "cruise only" cruises on Riviera & Sirena since 12/2021 and have 12- nights on a SM cruise followed by 10-nights on a "cruise only" cruise on Sirena as a B2B starting 8/28/24. The SM cruise is "simply more expensive" on a per-day basis, with the add ons being worth pennies on the dollar (a beer at lunch I can't have when I'm off in port during that time is of no value). And for the most important excursions to the most fascinating places, we book our own (e.g., Ephesus & Rome) or use dirt cheap public transportation (Athens, Barcelona, Istanbul & Venice).

[iowananny]

Are we able to book without SM?   We've booked two cruises since SM came into effect and we were not given the option to opt out.  For future cruises please let us know what we need to do to opt out.  We always booked the beverage package on previous cruises but the excursion package is not really something we want.  We were given the impression that we didn't have an option.

[ORV]

7 minutes ago, iowananny said:

Are we able to book without SM?

No, 

[Jim_Iain]

I normally only book private tours through agencies that have a force majeure clause.   I have had to use it more than once and been fully refunded. 

 

Tours by Locals for example have the following clause -

 

If any tour, not just shore excursions, is cancelled because of a ‘force majeure’ event, you will receive a full refund. For shore excursions, this typically means such things weather conditions preventing your ship from docking, or if your ship arrives late or otherwise does not dock.

 

We won’t cover you if the reason for missing your ship is caused by your own actions or personal situation, for example if you deviate from the agreed-upon itinerary, become ill, get arrested etc.

[clo]

On 5/19/2024 at 10:16 AM, EJL2023 said:

We were in Stockholm to start a cruise. The pier was quite a distance from central city. We were there a couple days before and actually used the Hop on Hop off bus to get around…worked out well as we had a stop right in front of our hotel. We loved the Vasa Museum.  We passed on the ABBA museum….quite literally on the HOHO bus! Long story, but we ended up taking the HOHO bus to the port and the driver drove us right up to the ship instead of the usual port HOHO stop.  lol 

Hey, great info. We're ending a cruise in Stockholm so that gives me some ideas. Thanks.

[NeilWM]

Current cruise on Sirena cancelled both Monte Carlo and Portafino, stuck with 2 days in Genoa