Cruise Reviews Forums

Cruise Reviews Forums (
-   Carnival Cruise Line (
-   -   Carnival takes care of passengers, RCI doesn't (

penny3333 08-25-2011 10:50 AM

Carnival takes care of passengers, RCI doesn't
Kudos to Carnival for trying to take care of all it's passengers: Carnival leaves 300 passengers in San Juan, but offers hotel and transport to next port -

Dwayne 08-25-2011 12:44 PM

Yes, I mentioned this in an earlier post and on facebook.

Here is another article.

Carnival did the right thing. Royal didn't. Unfortunately some of the Carnival guests could not fly to Barbados because they didn't have Passports. We have been preaching for years on here the importance of having a Passport. This is yet another example.


Cruise Fanatic 08-25-2011 01:40 PM

In defense of RCI they truthfully are under no obligation when the passenger books the cruise only and nothing else through RCI. Here again; it can't be stressed enough the importance of buying travel insurance and as mentioned, having a passport. However; It really says a lot when a company takes care of their people such a Carnival did. They really stepped up to the plate on this one.

Jim C. 08-25-2011 02:09 PM

I agree with that Jan. I think Carnival learned a lot from the way they were treated by the press for the great way they took care of their passengers during the Splendor fire. The money they made in the good publicity probably paid for the extra money spent to make their customers happy. If I was one of the 300 folks that missed the ship I know that having Carnival take care of me like that would make me a very loyal customer... (not that I am not already)

Dave 08-25-2011 02:41 PM

There is a lot of unknown information in this event, as well as some variables. The RCI ship was set to leave at 8:30pm and the Carnival ship not until 10pm. The RCI ship left 3 hours early and the Carnival ship 4 hours early. Given that passengers are required to be checked in 90 minutes prior to scheduled departure, this means there was a 90 minute change for RCI passengers and a 2.5 hour change for Carnival.

So - were people actually flying to SJU with windows that tight? Or were some of them already checked in and had then left the ship to explore San Juan? Or were others already on the island but had not checked in at their respective ships? Only a fool would be flying down to SJU in the late afternoon when the requirement is to be onboard the ship at 7pm for RCI and 8:30pm for Carnival.

We'll never know the specific breakdown, but I'd like to know how many had checked in but were stranded when the ships left early. The news story makes it sound like everyone was still flying in and I don't think that is the case.

Cruise Fanatic 08-25-2011 03:38 PM

That's a good question Dave. It would seem since the hurricane had been predicted that there's a chance the flights from the USA that day (or later that day) were cancelled. Which means it would have been people that flew in on pre-cruise or very early that morning. We never know all the facts in these types of stories. The newspapers are only interested in sensational stories though.

Sonny V 08-25-2011 09:40 PM

I don't think we've heard the last of this.

Casanova frankenstein 08-27-2011 09:58 PM

Hi guys

what I am going to say is just an more no less

Well let me give you an idea of what happen:

the condition of the waether change so bad and so fast, that some of the airlines adjust their arriving time even a few canceled the trip to Puerto Rico so many of the cruiser probably never arrive either on the time expected or did not arrive at all.

Also our port autorities told them "If you don't leave by 6 pm you will have to stay on port" by that time port autorities already have issue a warning for small ship to stay on port, the cruise-liners were next on the they leave

as You can see hurricanes are not a joke and here in the island we take them with great caution just in case they get a little "dangerous" for our taste. OK cat 1 like Irene in our Island is nothing for Puertorricans but we usually get this monsters every now or then so we are familiar of how we prepare for them that is not the case for tourist or ships under heavy weather. I think that leaving port at 6 pm was a wise decision by RCCL in order to protect the cruisers.

Saying that,

I don't justify the RCCL actions with the passenger left behind
they were expected to leave at 8:30 pm and this situation is no act of God since they knew, like us, that this storm was gona hit the island on sunday at least 5 days before sunday, so they could have inform the cruiser by mail of the situation in order to them to make adjustments.

One thing is canceling a port of call because a storm or other situation that are not expected to happen but leaving early on departure well in my opinion is not considered an act of God since they knew this was gone happen days before the embarking of the ship.
We live on a Planet Earth That have doppler radars and weather channel you know...

In a legal case:

Our local justice system will see it the same, since we legally have the DACO agency in the island, this agency looks for situations like this on daily bases and has the needed experience to work in situations like this or worse against big companies,
if just one of the cruisers acused them of leaving early, file a claim and, like I think it will happen, wins the DACO case. well RCCL will have to pay more in penalties than just giving them a credit for a future cruise.

The way I see it there is no reason for the cruiser to have the fly-trip money refound back if they don't buy it FROM RCCL system in the first place, but I think they should at least, give them back the cruise money as a future cruise credit or something even that is going to be less that the money they will have to pay in panalties.

Also the Image of RCCL is over the floor right now because of this, is this a good comapany image desicion??
RCCL did you really need to do this???
The economy is so Bad that you need to take this actions and the $$$ from cruiser??
Do you really believe this is going to add more cruisers to your cruiseline in the future because of this actions??

I think the anwswer is a BIG NO!!!

So why doing this???

As a cruiser I can tell you this:

Well at the moment I am working on my next cruise and I was considering RCCL as an option, after all they are a great family cruise option but after this...well I will stay with the company that looks for me, I will stay with CARNIVAL IN THE FUTURE!!! and will not travel with RCCL in a near future...but that is just me and maybe just a few more cruisers
nothing to worry about.

As for Carnival I can Only say:

see you in the future...since I'll be cruising in a fun ship next time...

Wheels87 08-28-2011 05:32 AM most of you may know, I am a huge fan of Royal Caribbean and have always defended them against unfair posts by disgruntled passengers. This, however, is an entirely different story.

I am all about personal responsibility and completely understand that by the cruise contract, the passengers should be on the hook for the cost of hotels/airfare. However, if one simply does the math, it is not difficult to figure out that Royal Caribbean has made a miscalculation of gargantuan proportions.

Follow me here:

130 passengers x $300 per night per passenger hotel expense x 2 = $78,000

130 passengers x $800 last minute airfare = $104,000

130 passengers x $20 per meal x 6 meals = $15,600

Total outlay to completely save face against you're top competitor = PRICELESS (or $197,600 for you purists who want to do the math).

Now, those estimates are all at the high end when you consider that the cruise line gets special fares, etc. and couples/families having multiple people to a hotel room. So it is quite possible that RC could have done all this for less than $100,000.

Consider how much RC spends on advertising each year and you will know that $100,000 is miniscule in comparison, however, the positive press that they would have received would have paid them back fifty times over! Also, now, the negative press, even if they do the right thing in the end, will cost them at least 100 times over!

What on earth were they thinking? I can't believe that a business executive for the second largest cruise company in the world would make such a fool-hearted decision. Mark my words...heads will roll over this decision. Meaning that the folks that made that decision will likely be heavily penalized by RC. If not, they are clueless about how to deal with their customers.

Personally, this will not really have an impact on me, because I really like RC's ships, but there will be many people who will not cruise with them anymore.

Take care everyone!


LisaP 08-28-2011 07:15 AM


Originally Posted by Dave
We'll never know the specific breakdown, but I'd like to know how many had checked in but were stranded when the ships left early. The news story makes it sound like everyone was still flying in and I don't think that is the case.

I agree, Dave. Even on our last cruise, we checked in and then left the ship for a couple of hours to explore Montreal. And, we've done the same in the past when sailing from San Juan... the location of the cruise terminal makes this easy to do.

My question is what, if anything, Royal Caribbean did to alert the pax that there may be an early departure. According to the timeline, the ship ended up leaving at 5:30 pm. Say someone boarded at 2:30, then went ashore. Certainly, as Cas mentioned, there was widespread knowledge that the storm was on its way. Did they prevent pax from leaving? Did they let them know somehow (such as handing out a piece of paper upon boarding) that this was a possibility? Did they do anything like blast the ship's whistles to announce an all-aboard, and communicate this to pax?

As some have said, there are a lot of unanswered questions. Yet, if there is one thing I have learned, it's to have my passport on me, just in case.

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:33 PM.

SEO by vBSEO 3.5.2