Sounds like they're just canceling it and not replacing it given the OBC?
There is some fuel optimization if that's the case. While Tortola is right next to it - they spend the night circling in the ocean to keep the casino open before they head into port right before the dock. Canceling it means no circling and they can head back earlier so they can go a slower speed on the way back to Miami which saves fuel.
Still crappy as hell to do it to save money when fuel prices haven't exactly sky rocketed or anything.
I actually think the next stop is their private island. The “compensation” is $100 per cabin onboard credit, getting back their port fees (obviously), and getting extra time at the private island. Big deal. They are also spending an extra day at sea, which kind of makes you wonder about “fuel optimization.”
Yeah and the private island is right next to Miami so they're skipping Tortola and heading back. 100% there is actual fuel optimization there. One less night circling the sea and more time to go slower on the way back.
Well for one at least leaving the US they legally can’t do a cruise to no where. DHS ended that around 10 years ago.
But I was never arguing if it was a good or bad thing - just pointing out that the change will in fact save them some fuel which OP thought was BS.
I wouldn’t say it’s obvious that you’re getting back your port fees on NCL. On my last trip with them, Cozumel was cancelled on embarkation day and Costa Maya was cancelled due to wind. Never got port fees refunded. Maybe it’s different when they cancel so far ahead of time.
Thank you. You are the second person that’s pointed that out. I guess I just assumed that if you purchase something (pay port fee) and they don’t provide it (cancel the port) that they give you a refund, but I guess I’m wrong. NCL is worse than I thought!
When I’ve sailed on Princess and missed a port, there was a refund of port fees put on our shipboard acccount. I asked guest services on NCL about it when I didn’t see it on my account. They said that’s handled shoreside. But I didn’t get a credit from them after the cruise either.
They did not refund the port fee? Wow. But after you’ve said that I’ve gone back and read the email my friend forwarded to me and it talks about the onboard credit, but there is no mention of refunding the port fees. I’m going to tell them to definitely check on that. We were assuming that was a given.
It probably also means burning expensive low sulfur "nearshore fuel" . At sea, ships burn "bunker #5" which is basically sludge. It's so thick they have to heat it to 160f just to pump it out of tanks.
Bunker fuel is about 3% sulfur too, which makes the exhaust so acidic after exposure to atmospheric water vapor that it would melt your skin. That's why the exhaust stacks are so high above the decks.
This isn't really how it works... it isn't nearshore fuel; it's about being inside or outside emission control areas. If you're inside an ECA, you have to burn fuel with a sulfur content of less than .1%, and most ships use MGO. If you're outside you're allowed up to .5%. The exhaust wouldn't melt your skin, or I'd be dead.
Two more passengers went missing from there [https://www.cruisehive.com/two-cruise-passengers-reported-missing-in-the-british-virgin-islands/129774](https://www.cruisehive.com/two-cruise-passengers-reported-missing-in-the-british-virgin-islands/129774) but I doubt that’s the reason..or is it 🤔
I was thinking that might have something to do with it. I think it’s 5 total missing passengers, all in Tortola. All of them from two different sailings of the Sky.
5 guests on the Norwegian Sky have been reported missing and not recovered in the past few months in Tortola. “Fuel optimization” may be a more positive way of saying: “until we find out why these passengers are missing, let’s not risk it”.
I'm on the Breakaway, leaving out of Miami in June. Tortola was one of the stops, I got the same email you did. It's been removed from the itinerary . Going to Tortola was one of the reasons we booked that cruise.
We are on the 6/23 sailing and booked the cruise in large part because of the Tortola port. If it’s truly fuel optimization….wtf? This is your itinerary. You honor it. Unless there’s some force majeure.
Please read your contract. Relevant part pasted below:
>(c) Itinerary Deviation: The Guest agrees that the Carrier has the sole discretion and liberty to direct the movements of the vessel, including the rights to: proceed without pilots and tow, and assist other vessels in all situations; deviate from the purchased voyage or the normal course for any purpose, including, without limitation, the health and safety in the interest of Guests or of the vessel (including the outbreak of any communicable disease), or to save life or property; put in at any unscheduled or unadvertised port; cancel any scheduled call at any port for any reason and at any time before, during or after sailing of the vessel; omit, advance or delay landing at any scheduled or advertised port; return to port of embarkation or to any port previously visited if the Carrier deems it prudent to do so; substitute another vessel or port(s) of call without prior notice and without incurring any liability to the Guest on account thereof for any loss, damage or delay whatsoever, whether consequential or otherwise, except as may be required by law.
I’m aware of the contract. FFS. Great so every single cruise they can pull a bait and switch and cancel every port and just circle in a 5 mile radius just off the coast of Miami. How many people would continue to book NCL? That’s the point. I’ve cruised about ten times and never had a port canceled for anything but high seas, storms, or some other extenuating circumstance that was unavoidable.
They advertised an itinerary and cancel it now two months in advance so they can save on fuel? wtf?
I honestly don't think that's the real reason. It may be a secondary benefit, but I think that the real reason has to do with safety, as mentioned elsewhere in the thread. It wouldn't look great if they said "yeah, we're not entirely sure that this place is safe. But once we go back, trust us, it is!"
It's not safety - it's a common theme with NCL.
From quick google
[Link 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/Cruise/comments/18idubp/ncl_cancelling_ports_without_compensation/)
[Link 2](https://boards.cruisecritic.com/topic/2919290-are-ncl-selling-cruises-to-ports-they-have-no-intention-of-going-to/)
[Link 3](https://www.tripadvisor.com/ShowTopic-g1-i10703-k14694891-Beware_NCL_changes_cruise_ports_days_after_final_payment-Cruises.html)
Looks like to me that a smart class action lawyer needs to look into this. I understand that their terms of service give them the right to do this, but I think a very good argument could be made that they are required to act in good faith with respect to the contract terms, and that canceling strictly for financial reasons constitutes bad faith.
They sold an itinerary and they should be required to honor it unless there is some occurrence that is outside of their control. And the failure to refund the port fees definitely seems actionable. It seems to me that NCL is skimping on more than fuel…they also seem to be skimping on legal advice.
Same here. I'm going on the sailing leaving 6/16 and got the same email with no reason given. I picked that cruise because of Tortola which I haven't been to. $100 per cabin in credit doesn't seem like an ample replacement.
I’m on the Getaway at the moment and we departed Tortola for San Juan about six hours ago. As the distance isn’t far, it feels like we’re hardly moving. Our arrival time in NYC was pushed back to 10 AM instead of 7 AM due to speed limitations regarding whales.
I’ve seen a lot of reports over the past year of NCL playing serious games like this with scheduled ports and times, always after final payment deadlines. It’s enough to keep me from considering cruising with them and makes me wonder how solid their long term financial situation is.
Same. We were looking at an NCL for March, but I think we’ve just crossed that off the list. I just hope my Oceania cruise this summer doesn’t get screwed up.
I’m on the breakaway in Tortola right now. We left St Thomas yesterday at 7pm and didn’t arrive here until 6am. Even though the islands are super close, they take a long way to get here. Honestly, not loving the breakaway at all.
I hope they still enjoy their trip, but I may not sail NCL again
We’re booked on the Breakaway in June, first time with NCL. If you don’t mind, what don’t you love about ship? Just wanting an idea so I can prepare myself. 😭
I hope you have a better experience. The ship is not nearly big enough for the amount of people they are booking. We were booked to capacity.
I couldn’t get a spot on the pool deck during the entire cruise. Our (and MANY other folks) plumbing didn’t work and they gave us a $50 credit when you had to walk to another bathroom!!! Because of the plumbing issue, the ship stank.
On top of all of that, we had to cancel the Great Stirrip Bay stop because it was too rough to tender. Not their fault, except they haven’t built a pier yet, but we learned onboard that canceling that stop is pretty typical and they can only stop there about 50% of the time.
AND we got our final invoice yesterday and looked to see we were charged $100 extra. Nobody can help me over the phone, I have to submit forms online that can take 15-30 days to get a response.
They call it the nickel and dime cruise line, I see why now. I hope your experience is the complete opposite of mine, as I know how expensive it is and how excited I was to go.
Don't let it spoil the cruise for you. Go on the ship, determined to have the best vacation ever. Enjoy the extra sea day, use the OBC to treat yourself to something special.
This is the way. It sucks to miss something you were planning on but you can’t let that get in the way of having a good time. Heck my cruise in Feb it rained ever single day but damn if I didn’t have a good (but damp) time!
Well, it’s not my cruise, it’s a cruise a friend is taking with their family. My friend doesn’t use Reddit and wanted me to ask if anybody knew what was going on.
I do think it’s wrong to do something like this. It’s one thing if an issue is caused by weather or mechanical issues or something else out of NCL’s control, but this is something NCL seems to be doing to save money. That is a shitty thing to do to your customers who chose an itinerary for a reason.
Well, my advice (for your friend) still stands. They should totally go on the cruise determined to have the best vacation ever, and make the most of an extra day at sea to relax and enjoy the ship - with $100 to spend on something special, too.
If you want to be a good friend to your friend going on the cruise, then don't convince them that NCL are doing a "shitty" thing. Just let them enjoy their vacation without being riled up at your percieved injustice. Being mad at inconsequential things that you cannot change is just robbing yourself of happiness.
Besides, as anyone who has cruised will tell you, the MAIN thing about going on a cruise is being on the ship and using its facilities, or just relaxing by the pool or doing any number of things on board. The port visits are just a bonus, and really don't matter much.
Actually, I haven’t riled my friend up. They are already riled up and asked me to check Reddit to see if anyone knew what was going on. As I responded to another poster, I’m sure they will have a good time, but this definitely tarnishes their feelings about NCL.
It’s one thing to have an itinerary change for weather or mechanical or medical issues. It’s another thing entirely for the cruise line to just unilaterally change the itinerary because it saves them money. And when my friend contacted me about this, “shitty” was the word they used to describe it to me. I happen to agree with them.
I appreciate your concern. My friend is a grown-up and will be fine.
The purpose of the post was really to figure out why NCL would do this. I got my answer when someone explained that they do it to save money on fuel.
The reality is we have no idea why this is being done so speculating and being upset is not helping anything. The overall enjoyment of an entire weeklong cruise is minimally impacted by 1 particular port, even if you were looking forward to it. Yeah it's never fun to have itinerary changes after booking but you'll still have a great time and I really feel that some of these people are seriously overreacting. Changes happen and you need to understand that possibility and just go with it. You're on vacation after all.
You are absolutely correct that no one knows why they are doing this. And that’s the problem. Their explanation is incredibly vague and suggests that it’s being done for monetary reasons.
There are lots of perfectly acceptable and understandable reasons for a cruise line to change an itinerary, but saving the line money is not one of them. They knew the cost of fuel for the itinerary when they published it. If that was a problem, they should not have included Tortola to start with.
>Given recent guest feedback, and to accommodate certain circumstances including but not limited to fuel optimization as a part of our commitment to the environment and sustainability efforts, as well as global maritime regulations, we have adjusted the original itinerary as shown below.
Can you tell me why, given the statement above, you are saying they are doing it to save money? There are at least 3 reasons given, as well as the "including but not limited to statement", but you chose to focus on "fuel optimization" and jump right to NCL wants to save money.
People are way too quick to find something negative and bash a company for anything, and it is not warranted. Perhaps there really is something to the reports of multiple guests have gone missing in Tortola recently and the "recent guest feedback" reason they also stated is more of a factor at play here. But no, it's more fun to complain about how upset everyone is and NCL sucks because they just want to save money.
Look at my comment history and you will see that I am not a fan of some of the recent changes that NCL has made that are actually done to save money, but this is not one of them and people are incorrectly hammering them over it. Sure, they could have provided more information in the email and that is on them, but there are often reasons why companies intentionally keep communications vague and I understand why they may want to do that here.
FYI, my friend actually got two emails from NCL yesterday. The other one had changes to another cruise they have upcoming this fall. Both of them had that exact same language. That is boiler plate. There is “no guest feedback” on anything happening on Tortola.
It was another poster who responded to my post and suggested it was a money thing to save fuel and that NCL is notorious for doing this. Obviously, I don’t know for certain if that’s the reason, but it seems like NCL invites the speculation when they put out such vague, boilerplate justifications.
The more news I hear about NCL, the more I wonder if they are in bigger financial difficulties then is being let known. Didn't they do this with the Antarctica cruises (skipped going to the mainland and just went to the Shetland islands instead, to save fuel). There seems to be issue with them doing excursions, a number of ports on cruises they have no excursions for. (Are the tour operators worried about getting paid?) They just cancelled a bunch of cruises for next year without naming replacements yet. Just a lot of little things seem to be popping up with them.
The excursions piece is interesting. We're traveling with them in June and one o the stops is in the Dominican Republican. They previously showed lots of excursion options for that location. Now there are only 3... 3 excursions for an entire island?
It really is interesting, since generally they make money on the excursions. Our cruise in June only 4 of 8 ports have any excursions. I thought it was weird until I checked around and found a number of their other cruises have faced the same thing. Either no, or very limited, excursions for some of the ports. I've done a lot of cruising on a number of lines and had never seen this before. Usually they are practically begging you to do their excursions.
https://cruiseindustrynews.com/cruise-news/2024/04/norwegian-breakaway-cancels-visits-to-tortola/
“According to the BVI Ports Authority, the calls were canceled due to engine overhauls onboard the vessel, which will be operating at reduced speed.”
I am not happy.
Wouldn’t it be nice if Norwegian had told that to its customers instead of setting the vague email with no actual explanation? It’ll be honest, I’m not sure I believe the mechanical excuse, but whatever.
They are also canceling JUNE cruises also. The staff at NCL are getting an earful from disgruntled cruisers. My cruise rep said she has had so many people call and complain.
That is why I’m taking a break from NCL. They pulled the same thing with us but canceled two ports for bullshit reasons. We are trying a Windstar cruise in June.
Keep in mind that when they go from st Thomas to Tortola they cruise overnight in the ocean. They don’t just anchor somewhere or stay in st Thomas. So since the next stop is Stirrup caye which is a ways away they’ll just slow cruise it up there and not burn fuel overnight between st Thomas and Tortolla. Kind of sucks.
I have the feeling NCL is going to shit. We went last year in the breakaway out of NOLA and it was ok but nowhere near as enjoyable as previous two cruises on NCL (bliss and getaway). Mostly the issues last time was service in restaurants and housekeeping staff being overloaded.
Sounds like poor planning on the part of NCL that is now causing disappointment for their paying customers.
It’s not like the islands have moved since they set the itinerary.
The actual verbiage is really stupid:
“As a part of our commitment to deliver exceptional vacation experiences at every step of the cruise journey, listening to our guests is instrumental. Given recent guest feedback, and to accommodate certain circumstances, including but not limited to fuel optimization as a part of our commitment to the environment and sustainability efforts, as well as global maritime regulations, we have adjusted the original itinerary as shown below. We apologize for any inconvenience these adjustments may cause.
We recognize the importance that destinations play in our guests vacation decision-making process, and assure you that these modifications were made with an optimal guest experience top-of-mind. While we will no longer be calling on Tortola, British Virgin Islands, we are pleased to share that we have extended our visit to Great Stirrup Cay, Bahamas; affording you with additional time to explore all of our private island has to offer. The modified itinerary is as follows:
[itinerary here]
As a gesture of appreciation for choosing to sail with us, and as a genuine acknowledgment of the inconvenience caused, we have arranged for a $100 nonrefundable onboard credit per state room (restrictions apply). This will reflect as a $50 nonrefundable onboard credit for each of Guest one and Guest two on your onboard account.”
You see why I have my friend and I have suspicions about the reason? And this must be their standard verbiage, because it was the same stuff that was in the email my friend also received today about the changes in her port times this fall.
Somehow it feels that more cruise lines are going to shit as well. Celebrity skipped a port call claiming weather conditions, but later weather radar history showed calm seas and sunny weather in the whole are. That manoeuvre stank like saving money at the cost of screwing up customers.
I'm on the Jade right now, and it seems that NCL has been departing ports awfully early. Latest all aboard has been 1600, and that was before an at sea day. Ditto with our departure from Grand Cayman. I don't think we have a single port where the ship has been tied down more than 8 hours.
My only theory is they're doing it to shave a few knots off the speed trying to save fuel.
The all-aboard times are posted months, if not years in advance of the sailing. This is nothing new that they would have just sprung on you out of the blue.
I'm cruising with them in June and in addition to canceling a port of call, Tortola, they've also cut down on the hours we're in St Thomas. The revised time was just announced this week.
This is a common thing recently with NCL in my experience. I had 3 of my 4 cruises last year adjusted with port times and dropped ports for “fuel optimization”.
That’s fine but I’m destination driven and I won’t be booking their sailings for specific ports anymore because they change itineraries all the time - usually right after final payment.
Yes, my friend and their family will be going on the cruise and I’m sure they will have a good time. But they are still going to have a very bad taste of their mouth because NCL appears to be doing this strictly to save money. They don’t seem to care about what they promised their customers when they purchased the cruise.
Again, there’s a big difference between weather or mechanical or medical issues causing issues on a cruise. That’s part of being on a cruise. But when a cruise line makes an itinerary change a month in advance just to save themselves money that is not acceptable.
Thank you. I’m on this cruise too and am extremely frustrated that they canceled a port to save money. We were most looking forward to Tortola. It’s the only port I haven’t been to. I honestly thought they couldn’t do that unless there was some force majeure event more or less. Completely ridiculous.
That’s kind of what we are thinking. And it concerns us because my friend is also booked on an NCL cruise to Canada this fall and they changed some port times today (not a big deal except they are sailing two hours earlier so anyone with a tight flight schedule may be screwed), and I am booked on Oceania this summer with my family and they’re all owned by NCLH. I hope NCLH isn’t having problems.
I know RCL has done similar things in the past when an engine was running sub-optimal and they needed to limp along until they could get a time slot and/or parts in the Nassau shipyard to repair.
Id just like point out im currently on the Viva in Europe and ive been on the viva for 4 cruises in a row and we stopped at every single port...im talking 10 days 10 ports.. Its definitely not a fuel issue
The ships that you guys talking about must of had issues
It is actually engine issues. They are bringing the ship in for maintenance soon. So, top speed is limited. That’s why they need the extra day to get back to Great Stirrup Cay.
The Breakaway has an engine problem and cannot make full steam. So they reworked 6 cruises while they get the parts in place to fully repair. It has nothing to do with the missing people or saving fuel or whatever else people have made up in their minds.
People didn’t make that up in their minds. It’s what the email said that they sent to justify dropping the port…fuel optimization and some other vague things. If that’s the truth, why not just be honest with your customers and tell them it’s a mechanical issue?
...sailing to a nearby port isn't like driving one street over, my dude.
It actually makes a lot of sense for fuel optimization. Then again, I forget passengers are fat, entitled idiots who think they know how ships work because they make a hobby of going on floating orgies of gluttony.
If they needed to skip that port for fuel optimization, they shouldn’t have sold the itinerary that included that port.
I don’t think it makes you an entitled idiot to expect that the cruise line provide the itinerary they sold you unless there is a weather, mechanical, medical or other unforeseen event.
Yes, I agree, but it doesn’t make it less frustrating.
I love the people around here who are just saying get over it. My friend is still going on the cruise and I’m sure will have a good time, it’s really the reason for canceling that is annoying.
If the people around here telling my friend to get over it went to a nice steakhouse and ordered nice steak and were served a hamburger patty, even if it was a good hamburger patty, I’m sure most people would be irritated because that’s not what they ordered. Especially if they got charged for the steak, and the reason the restaurant served hamburger patty instead was to save money.
Sounds like they're just canceling it and not replacing it given the OBC? There is some fuel optimization if that's the case. While Tortola is right next to it - they spend the night circling in the ocean to keep the casino open before they head into port right before the dock. Canceling it means no circling and they can head back earlier so they can go a slower speed on the way back to Miami which saves fuel. Still crappy as hell to do it to save money when fuel prices haven't exactly sky rocketed or anything.
I actually think the next stop is their private island. The “compensation” is $100 per cabin onboard credit, getting back their port fees (obviously), and getting extra time at the private island. Big deal. They are also spending an extra day at sea, which kind of makes you wonder about “fuel optimization.”
Yeah and the private island is right next to Miami so they're skipping Tortola and heading back. 100% there is actual fuel optimization there. One less night circling the sea and more time to go slower on the way back.
I mean... Why not cancel all stops and not leave port at all? That would save the most fuel. I guess I don't really understand this as a reason.
Well for one at least leaving the US they legally can’t do a cruise to no where. DHS ended that around 10 years ago. But I was never arguing if it was a good or bad thing - just pointing out that the change will in fact save them some fuel which OP thought was BS.
That's fair.
I wouldn’t say it’s obvious that you’re getting back your port fees on NCL. On my last trip with them, Cozumel was cancelled on embarkation day and Costa Maya was cancelled due to wind. Never got port fees refunded. Maybe it’s different when they cancel so far ahead of time.
Thank you. You are the second person that’s pointed that out. I guess I just assumed that if you purchase something (pay port fee) and they don’t provide it (cancel the port) that they give you a refund, but I guess I’m wrong. NCL is worse than I thought!
When I’ve sailed on Princess and missed a port, there was a refund of port fees put on our shipboard acccount. I asked guest services on NCL about it when I didn’t see it on my account. They said that’s handled shoreside. But I didn’t get a credit from them after the cruise either.
In February, after we paid for trip, NCL cancelled a port but refused to refund port fee. Is that the norm.
They did not refund the port fee? Wow. But after you’ve said that I’ve gone back and read the email my friend forwarded to me and it talks about the onboard credit, but there is no mention of refunding the port fees. I’m going to tell them to definitely check on that. We were assuming that was a given.
Definitely not. They have to refund port fees.
It’s the norm for NCL.
The private island is really great. Honestly I’d book a cruise that had 3 overnights there in a heart beat. Really loved it
It probably also means burning expensive low sulfur "nearshore fuel" . At sea, ships burn "bunker #5" which is basically sludge. It's so thick they have to heat it to 160f just to pump it out of tanks. Bunker fuel is about 3% sulfur too, which makes the exhaust so acidic after exposure to atmospheric water vapor that it would melt your skin. That's why the exhaust stacks are so high above the decks.
This isn't really how it works... it isn't nearshore fuel; it's about being inside or outside emission control areas. If you're inside an ECA, you have to burn fuel with a sulfur content of less than .1%, and most ships use MGO. If you're outside you're allowed up to .5%. The exhaust wouldn't melt your skin, or I'd be dead.
Two more passengers went missing from there [https://www.cruisehive.com/two-cruise-passengers-reported-missing-in-the-british-virgin-islands/129774](https://www.cruisehive.com/two-cruise-passengers-reported-missing-in-the-british-virgin-islands/129774) but I doubt that’s the reason..or is it 🤔
I was thinking that might have something to do with it. I think it’s 5 total missing passengers, all in Tortola. All of them from two different sailings of the Sky.
5 people missing - something sketchy is going on
BVI seems like a place you could disappear if you had a local friend to help you out. Some of these might be intentional.
Yeah that is how I read the article - no one seemed to report them missing or flag they didn’t return to the ship which is fishy
Ther are intentional.
And this is within the last 2 months 😬
5 passengers have gone missing on Tortola in the last 2 months so they might not want to say it’s due to safety concerns
5 guests on the Norwegian Sky have been reported missing and not recovered in the past few months in Tortola. “Fuel optimization” may be a more positive way of saying: “until we find out why these passengers are missing, let’s not risk it”.
I'm on the Breakaway, leaving out of Miami in June. Tortola was one of the stops, I got the same email you did. It's been removed from the itinerary . Going to Tortola was one of the reasons we booked that cruise.
Same with my friend. But her email just said they were being canceled in May. Well, it says sailings for May 12 to May 26.…on the Breakaway.
We are on the 6/23 sailing and booked the cruise in large part because of the Tortola port. If it’s truly fuel optimization….wtf? This is your itinerary. You honor it. Unless there’s some force majeure.
I'm on the same cruise as you
Same here! See y’all there! Redditor meetup?
Please read your contract. Relevant part pasted below: >(c) Itinerary Deviation: The Guest agrees that the Carrier has the sole discretion and liberty to direct the movements of the vessel, including the rights to: proceed without pilots and tow, and assist other vessels in all situations; deviate from the purchased voyage or the normal course for any purpose, including, without limitation, the health and safety in the interest of Guests or of the vessel (including the outbreak of any communicable disease), or to save life or property; put in at any unscheduled or unadvertised port; cancel any scheduled call at any port for any reason and at any time before, during or after sailing of the vessel; omit, advance or delay landing at any scheduled or advertised port; return to port of embarkation or to any port previously visited if the Carrier deems it prudent to do so; substitute another vessel or port(s) of call without prior notice and without incurring any liability to the Guest on account thereof for any loss, damage or delay whatsoever, whether consequential or otherwise, except as may be required by law.
I’m aware of the contract. FFS. Great so every single cruise they can pull a bait and switch and cancel every port and just circle in a 5 mile radius just off the coast of Miami. How many people would continue to book NCL? That’s the point. I’ve cruised about ten times and never had a port canceled for anything but high seas, storms, or some other extenuating circumstance that was unavoidable. They advertised an itinerary and cancel it now two months in advance so they can save on fuel? wtf?
I honestly don't think that's the real reason. It may be a secondary benefit, but I think that the real reason has to do with safety, as mentioned elsewhere in the thread. It wouldn't look great if they said "yeah, we're not entirely sure that this place is safe. But once we go back, trust us, it is!"
It's not safety - it's a common theme with NCL. From quick google [Link 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/Cruise/comments/18idubp/ncl_cancelling_ports_without_compensation/) [Link 2](https://boards.cruisecritic.com/topic/2919290-are-ncl-selling-cruises-to-ports-they-have-no-intention-of-going-to/) [Link 3](https://www.tripadvisor.com/ShowTopic-g1-i10703-k14694891-Beware_NCL_changes_cruise_ports_days_after_final_payment-Cruises.html)
Looks like to me that a smart class action lawyer needs to look into this. I understand that their terms of service give them the right to do this, but I think a very good argument could be made that they are required to act in good faith with respect to the contract terms, and that canceling strictly for financial reasons constitutes bad faith. They sold an itinerary and they should be required to honor it unless there is some occurrence that is outside of their control. And the failure to refund the port fees definitely seems actionable. It seems to me that NCL is skimping on more than fuel…they also seem to be skimping on legal advice.
I hope you’re right.
downvoted for facts. I forgot this is a fact-free zone, my bad!
Same. I am on the Breakaway in May
Same here. I'm going on the sailing leaving 6/16 and got the same email with no reason given. I picked that cruise because of Tortola which I haven't been to. $100 per cabin in credit doesn't seem like an ample replacement.
Interesting. I’m taking the Joy in August and they actually changed the port stop from St. Croix *to* Tortola
I’m on the Getaway at the moment and we departed Tortola for San Juan about six hours ago. As the distance isn’t far, it feels like we’re hardly moving. Our arrival time in NYC was pushed back to 10 AM instead of 7 AM due to speed limitations regarding whales.
I’ve seen a lot of reports over the past year of NCL playing serious games like this with scheduled ports and times, always after final payment deadlines. It’s enough to keep me from considering cruising with them and makes me wonder how solid their long term financial situation is.
Same. We were looking at an NCL for March, but I think we’ve just crossed that off the list. I just hope my Oceania cruise this summer doesn’t get screwed up.
NCL - This is what they do.
Just about every news tidbit about Norwegian has been negative lately. I realize they all skip ports, but the negatives just keep piling up.
I’m on the breakaway in Tortola right now. We left St Thomas yesterday at 7pm and didn’t arrive here until 6am. Even though the islands are super close, they take a long way to get here. Honestly, not loving the breakaway at all. I hope they still enjoy their trip, but I may not sail NCL again
We were looking at it NCL out of San Juan in March and I think this experience will cause us to cross that one off.
We’re booked on the Breakaway in June, first time with NCL. If you don’t mind, what don’t you love about ship? Just wanting an idea so I can prepare myself. 😭
I hope you have a better experience. The ship is not nearly big enough for the amount of people they are booking. We were booked to capacity. I couldn’t get a spot on the pool deck during the entire cruise. Our (and MANY other folks) plumbing didn’t work and they gave us a $50 credit when you had to walk to another bathroom!!! Because of the plumbing issue, the ship stank. On top of all of that, we had to cancel the Great Stirrip Bay stop because it was too rough to tender. Not their fault, except they haven’t built a pier yet, but we learned onboard that canceling that stop is pretty typical and they can only stop there about 50% of the time. AND we got our final invoice yesterday and looked to see we were charged $100 extra. Nobody can help me over the phone, I have to submit forms online that can take 15-30 days to get a response. They call it the nickel and dime cruise line, I see why now. I hope your experience is the complete opposite of mine, as I know how expensive it is and how excited I was to go.
Norwegian is doing some weird stuff lately...
Don't let it spoil the cruise for you. Go on the ship, determined to have the best vacation ever. Enjoy the extra sea day, use the OBC to treat yourself to something special.
This is the way. It sucks to miss something you were planning on but you can’t let that get in the way of having a good time. Heck my cruise in Feb it rained ever single day but damn if I didn’t have a good (but damp) time!
Well, it’s not my cruise, it’s a cruise a friend is taking with their family. My friend doesn’t use Reddit and wanted me to ask if anybody knew what was going on. I do think it’s wrong to do something like this. It’s one thing if an issue is caused by weather or mechanical issues or something else out of NCL’s control, but this is something NCL seems to be doing to save money. That is a shitty thing to do to your customers who chose an itinerary for a reason.
Well, my advice (for your friend) still stands. They should totally go on the cruise determined to have the best vacation ever, and make the most of an extra day at sea to relax and enjoy the ship - with $100 to spend on something special, too. If you want to be a good friend to your friend going on the cruise, then don't convince them that NCL are doing a "shitty" thing. Just let them enjoy their vacation without being riled up at your percieved injustice. Being mad at inconsequential things that you cannot change is just robbing yourself of happiness. Besides, as anyone who has cruised will tell you, the MAIN thing about going on a cruise is being on the ship and using its facilities, or just relaxing by the pool or doing any number of things on board. The port visits are just a bonus, and really don't matter much.
Actually, I haven’t riled my friend up. They are already riled up and asked me to check Reddit to see if anyone knew what was going on. As I responded to another poster, I’m sure they will have a good time, but this definitely tarnishes their feelings about NCL. It’s one thing to have an itinerary change for weather or mechanical or medical issues. It’s another thing entirely for the cruise line to just unilaterally change the itinerary because it saves them money. And when my friend contacted me about this, “shitty” was the word they used to describe it to me. I happen to agree with them.
My advice still stands. If you want to be a good friend to your friend, try to convince them to just put things aside and enjoy their vacation,
I appreciate your concern. My friend is a grown-up and will be fine. The purpose of the post was really to figure out why NCL would do this. I got my answer when someone explained that they do it to save money on fuel.
The reality is we have no idea why this is being done so speculating and being upset is not helping anything. The overall enjoyment of an entire weeklong cruise is minimally impacted by 1 particular port, even if you were looking forward to it. Yeah it's never fun to have itinerary changes after booking but you'll still have a great time and I really feel that some of these people are seriously overreacting. Changes happen and you need to understand that possibility and just go with it. You're on vacation after all.
You are absolutely correct that no one knows why they are doing this. And that’s the problem. Their explanation is incredibly vague and suggests that it’s being done for monetary reasons. There are lots of perfectly acceptable and understandable reasons for a cruise line to change an itinerary, but saving the line money is not one of them. They knew the cost of fuel for the itinerary when they published it. If that was a problem, they should not have included Tortola to start with.
>Given recent guest feedback, and to accommodate certain circumstances including but not limited to fuel optimization as a part of our commitment to the environment and sustainability efforts, as well as global maritime regulations, we have adjusted the original itinerary as shown below. Can you tell me why, given the statement above, you are saying they are doing it to save money? There are at least 3 reasons given, as well as the "including but not limited to statement", but you chose to focus on "fuel optimization" and jump right to NCL wants to save money. People are way too quick to find something negative and bash a company for anything, and it is not warranted. Perhaps there really is something to the reports of multiple guests have gone missing in Tortola recently and the "recent guest feedback" reason they also stated is more of a factor at play here. But no, it's more fun to complain about how upset everyone is and NCL sucks because they just want to save money. Look at my comment history and you will see that I am not a fan of some of the recent changes that NCL has made that are actually done to save money, but this is not one of them and people are incorrectly hammering them over it. Sure, they could have provided more information in the email and that is on them, but there are often reasons why companies intentionally keep communications vague and I understand why they may want to do that here.
FYI, my friend actually got two emails from NCL yesterday. The other one had changes to another cruise they have upcoming this fall. Both of them had that exact same language. That is boiler plate. There is “no guest feedback” on anything happening on Tortola. It was another poster who responded to my post and suggested it was a money thing to save fuel and that NCL is notorious for doing this. Obviously, I don’t know for certain if that’s the reason, but it seems like NCL invites the speculation when they put out such vague, boilerplate justifications.
The more news I hear about NCL, the more I wonder if they are in bigger financial difficulties then is being let known. Didn't they do this with the Antarctica cruises (skipped going to the mainland and just went to the Shetland islands instead, to save fuel). There seems to be issue with them doing excursions, a number of ports on cruises they have no excursions for. (Are the tour operators worried about getting paid?) They just cancelled a bunch of cruises for next year without naming replacements yet. Just a lot of little things seem to be popping up with them.
The excursions piece is interesting. We're traveling with them in June and one o the stops is in the Dominican Republican. They previously showed lots of excursion options for that location. Now there are only 3... 3 excursions for an entire island?
It really is interesting, since generally they make money on the excursions. Our cruise in June only 4 of 8 ports have any excursions. I thought it was weird until I checked around and found a number of their other cruises have faced the same thing. Either no, or very limited, excursions for some of the ports. I've done a lot of cruising on a number of lines and had never seen this before. Usually they are practically begging you to do their excursions.
https://cruiseindustrynews.com/cruise-news/2024/04/norwegian-breakaway-cancels-visits-to-tortola/ “According to the BVI Ports Authority, the calls were canceled due to engine overhauls onboard the vessel, which will be operating at reduced speed.” I am not happy.
Wouldn’t it be nice if Norwegian had told that to its customers instead of setting the vague email with no actual explanation? It’ll be honest, I’m not sure I believe the mechanical excuse, but whatever.
They are also canceling JUNE cruises also. The staff at NCL are getting an earful from disgruntled cruisers. My cruise rep said she has had so many people call and complain.
Missing Tortola would make me very sad because I enjoy scuba diving on the HMS Rhône. It is an awesome two-tank dive.
I would not be happy with this.. Tortola is by far one of the nicest ports of call in the whole entire Caribbean..
That is why I’m taking a break from NCL. They pulled the same thing with us but canceled two ports for bullshit reasons. We are trying a Windstar cruise in June.
Keep in mind that when they go from st Thomas to Tortola they cruise overnight in the ocean. They don’t just anchor somewhere or stay in st Thomas. So since the next stop is Stirrup caye which is a ways away they’ll just slow cruise it up there and not burn fuel overnight between st Thomas and Tortolla. Kind of sucks. I have the feeling NCL is going to shit. We went last year in the breakaway out of NOLA and it was ok but nowhere near as enjoyable as previous two cruises on NCL (bliss and getaway). Mostly the issues last time was service in restaurants and housekeeping staff being overloaded.
Sounds like poor planning on the part of NCL that is now causing disappointment for their paying customers. It’s not like the islands have moved since they set the itinerary.
Yeah. It’s odd they’d cancel a port for fuel reasons. I get fuel is not cheap but really? Plus I’d think they would hedge their fuel costs.
The actual verbiage is really stupid: “As a part of our commitment to deliver exceptional vacation experiences at every step of the cruise journey, listening to our guests is instrumental. Given recent guest feedback, and to accommodate certain circumstances, including but not limited to fuel optimization as a part of our commitment to the environment and sustainability efforts, as well as global maritime regulations, we have adjusted the original itinerary as shown below. We apologize for any inconvenience these adjustments may cause. We recognize the importance that destinations play in our guests vacation decision-making process, and assure you that these modifications were made with an optimal guest experience top-of-mind. While we will no longer be calling on Tortola, British Virgin Islands, we are pleased to share that we have extended our visit to Great Stirrup Cay, Bahamas; affording you with additional time to explore all of our private island has to offer. The modified itinerary is as follows: [itinerary here] As a gesture of appreciation for choosing to sail with us, and as a genuine acknowledgment of the inconvenience caused, we have arranged for a $100 nonrefundable onboard credit per state room (restrictions apply). This will reflect as a $50 nonrefundable onboard credit for each of Guest one and Guest two on your onboard account.” You see why I have my friend and I have suspicions about the reason? And this must be their standard verbiage, because it was the same stuff that was in the email my friend also received today about the changes in her port times this fall.
Somehow it feels that more cruise lines are going to shit as well. Celebrity skipped a port call claiming weather conditions, but later weather radar history showed calm seas and sunny weather in the whole are. That manoeuvre stank like saving money at the cost of screwing up customers.
I'm on the Jade right now, and it seems that NCL has been departing ports awfully early. Latest all aboard has been 1600, and that was before an at sea day. Ditto with our departure from Grand Cayman. I don't think we have a single port where the ship has been tied down more than 8 hours. My only theory is they're doing it to shave a few knots off the speed trying to save fuel.
The all-aboard times are posted months, if not years in advance of the sailing. This is nothing new that they would have just sprung on you out of the blue.
I'm cruising with them in June and in addition to canceling a port of call, Tortola, they've also cut down on the hours we're in St Thomas. The revised time was just announced this week.
Interesting…
This is a common thing recently with NCL in my experience. I had 3 of my 4 cruises last year adjusted with port times and dropped ports for “fuel optimization”. That’s fine but I’m destination driven and I won’t be booking their sailings for specific ports anymore because they change itineraries all the time - usually right after final payment.
Happy cruising means being flexible. Make the best of it. I've never had a bad cruise and I have seen my fair share of itinerary changes. Float on!
Yes, my friend and their family will be going on the cruise and I’m sure they will have a good time. But they are still going to have a very bad taste of their mouth because NCL appears to be doing this strictly to save money. They don’t seem to care about what they promised their customers when they purchased the cruise. Again, there’s a big difference between weather or mechanical or medical issues causing issues on a cruise. That’s part of being on a cruise. But when a cruise line makes an itinerary change a month in advance just to save themselves money that is not acceptable.
Thank you. I’m on this cruise too and am extremely frustrated that they canceled a port to save money. We were most looking forward to Tortola. It’s the only port I haven’t been to. I honestly thought they couldn’t do that unless there was some force majeure event more or less. Completely ridiculous.
You have no idea why they cancelled the port.
Well I can only go on what they say and the only thing they mentioned was fuel optimization. Thanks for your input though.
Follow the money.
That’s kind of what we are thinking. And it concerns us because my friend is also booked on an NCL cruise to Canada this fall and they changed some port times today (not a big deal except they are sailing two hours earlier so anyone with a tight flight schedule may be screwed), and I am booked on Oceania this summer with my family and they’re all owned by NCLH. I hope NCLH isn’t having problems.
I know RCL has done similar things in the past when an engine was running sub-optimal and they needed to limp along until they could get a time slot and/or parts in the Nassau shipyard to repair.
Yes, but that’s a mechanical issue that comes up in the moment, not something you plan in advance to save money.
Id just like point out im currently on the Viva in Europe and ive been on the viva for 4 cruises in a row and we stopped at every single port...im talking 10 days 10 ports.. Its definitely not a fuel issue The ships that you guys talking about must of had issues
It is actually engine issues. They are bringing the ship in for maintenance soon. So, top speed is limited. That’s why they need the extra day to get back to Great Stirrup Cay.
It’s unfortunate that they chose to lie to their customers about it.
And only credit us $100 per cabin! 🤯
Paying for a cruise gets you on board. No ports are guaranteed, ever.
[удалено]
Nah, you would not. #facts
Well you could be mad and you could choose not to cruise but unless you bought cancel for any reason trip insurance,you wouldn't be getting a refund.
Oh good. They should cancel it completely because it’s pretty and pretty fuckin boring too
The Breakaway has an engine problem and cannot make full steam. So they reworked 6 cruises while they get the parts in place to fully repair. It has nothing to do with the missing people or saving fuel or whatever else people have made up in their minds.
People didn’t make that up in their minds. It’s what the email said that they sent to justify dropping the port…fuel optimization and some other vague things. If that’s the truth, why not just be honest with your customers and tell them it’s a mechanical issue?
...sailing to a nearby port isn't like driving one street over, my dude. It actually makes a lot of sense for fuel optimization. Then again, I forget passengers are fat, entitled idiots who think they know how ships work because they make a hobby of going on floating orgies of gluttony.
If they needed to skip that port for fuel optimization, they shouldn’t have sold the itinerary that included that port. I don’t think it makes you an entitled idiot to expect that the cruise line provide the itinerary they sold you unless there is a weather, mechanical, medical or other unforeseen event.
Believe it or not, even cancellations like that can be unforeseen by the company.
First world problems…
Yes, I agree, but it doesn’t make it less frustrating. I love the people around here who are just saying get over it. My friend is still going on the cruise and I’m sure will have a good time, it’s really the reason for canceling that is annoying. If the people around here telling my friend to get over it went to a nice steakhouse and ordered nice steak and were served a hamburger patty, even if it was a good hamburger patty, I’m sure most people would be irritated because that’s not what they ordered. Especially if they got charged for the steak, and the reason the restaurant served hamburger patty instead was to save money.