Westerdam vs. Golden Princess

I'm thinking of going on an Alaska cruise next year, on the Pearl. It
starts in Seattle, goes to Alaska, and disembarks us at Vancouver. It
then leaves for a 5-night cruise to Los Angeles.

Sounds perfect for back-to-back, but NCL claims it is a violation of the
Jones Act (I suppose they mean the Passenger Vessel Services Act, but
the whole thing is unclear). So I can't book that cruise to LA.

But there are three other ships going down the coast from Vancouver that
same day - the HAL Westerdam going to San Francisco, the HAL Statendam
going to San Diego, and the Golden Princess going to Los Angeles.

The Westerdam would be the most convenient - I wouldn't have to fly
home. But HAL won't give cabin assignments, only guarantees, so I won't
know where my cabin will be. It also doesn't stop anywhere I've haven't
been (it doesn't stop at all).

The Statendam stops the following morning in Victoria (leaves at 2pm, so
probably no time for tea), and then goes straight to San Diego. It's 4
nights; the other two options are 3 nights. Guarantees only at this
time.

The final option is the Golden Princess, with no stops. It costs more,
but I can get a room assignment (balcony midship between two passenger
floors).

Any thoughts? I haven't been on either line before, but my impression
is that HAL aims for an age bracket a few decades above mine. Which is
going to be less formal? Which is going to have the best food and
entertainment (by "best food" I mean well-prepared food that I would
never cook myself - so good French or Italian or Chinese or Japanese,
but I don't care who makes the best hamburger)?

The winning feature on the Pride of Hawaii and the Norwegian Gem was the
spa - a large comfy area with heated seats, saunas, and spas, where I
could while away the hours watching the sea go by. Do any of those
ships have anything like that? It looks like they don't, but it's hard
to tell from the postage-stamp size pictures of the "thermal suites" on
the HAL ships. Any quiet public areas, completely lacking on the Gem?

Having flown out of both LA and San Diego, I think it's likely that San
Diego would be more convenient and less hassle. Agree?

In article , Jack Hamilton
wrote:


The Westerdam would be the most convenient - I wouldn't have to fly
home. But HAL won't give cabin assignments, only guarantees, so I won't
know where my cabin will be. It also doesn't stop anywhere I've haven't
been (it doesn't stop at all).

It is odd that you can not get a cabin assignment.

The final option is the Golden Princess, with no stops. It costs more,
but I can get a room assignment (balcony midship between two passenger
floors).

Any thoughts? I haven't been on either line before, but my impression
is that HAL aims for an age bracket a few decades above mine. Which is
going to be less formal? Which is going to have the best food and
entertainment (by "best food" I mean well-prepared food that I would
never cook myself - so good French or Italian or Chinese or Japanese,
but I don't care who makes the best hamburger)?

The food and service will be better on HAL. The entertainment will be
better on Princess. The age bracket will be about the same on HAL and
Princess, maybe slightly older on HAL. I would say Princess is less
formal.

The winning feature on the Pride of Hawaii and the Norwegian Gem was the
spa - a large comfy area with heated seats, saunas, and spas, where I
could while away the hours watching the sea go by. Do any of those
ships have anything like that? It looks like they don't, but it's hard
to tell from the postage-stamp size pictures of the "thermal suites" on
the HAL ships. Any quiet public areas, completely lacking on the Gem?

Both the Westerdam and Golden Princess have spas, saunas. You should be
able to find quiet public areas on either ship. The Westerdam is a less
crowded ship. The Golden Princess also has the Sanctuary which is a
quiet getaway associated with the spa. I think from what you say the
Sanctuary is something you would like.

Princess would probably be a better fit for you but if you live in the
Bay area I would pick the Westerdam. Avoiding flying is a no brainer.
And after all it is only a three day cruises.

--
Charles

On Sat, 18 Sep 2010 09:19:05 -0400, Charles
wrote:

In article , Jack Hamilton
wrote:


The Westerdam would be the most convenient - I wouldn't have to fly
home. But HAL won't give cabin assignments, only guarantees, so I won't
know where my cabin will be. It also doesn't stop anywhere I've haven't
been (it doesn't stop at all).

It is odd that you can not get a cabin assignment.

It is odd. I talked to a HAL reservations agent, who said that it's
almost always that way on their short cruises - they don't want to
bother with room assignments. Category guarantees are good enough for
most people, she said.

Based on my criteria (balcony midships between two other passenger
decks), I would want category VE, she said (or SB if I want to go
upscale and get the deluxe suite with concierge service). Not clear how
I would know that other than by studying all the deck plans and then
hoping for the best.

With no ability to pick a room in advance, I guess there's no reason to
purchase far in advance either.

Princess would probably be a better fit for you but if you live in the
Bay area I would pick the Westerdam. Avoiding flying is a no brainer.
And after all it is only a three day cruises.

You're probably right - avoiding a flight from SoCal would be enough
reason to take the Westerdam.

I looked up prices of flight vs cabins on the Westerdam. I was
surprised - an inside cabin is actually less than a coach seat, and a
regular verandah isn't much more.

Hi Jack

The PSA does not allow a cruise line to embark passengers in one US city and
disembark them in another US city, even if it is two separate cruises. I
know that HAL, for sure, links back-to-back cruises, and that's why they are
not allowed to put you on your preferred itinerary. I don't know about NCL,
but it's likely the same situation. I have asked about this, and they said
it was allowed, if you stayed one night in the first destination, then
caught a different ship for the return voyage.

If you intend to cruise back, I would suggest that you plan at least one
night in a hotel before cruising back. I don't know if Carnival (the mother
company of Carnival, HAL, Costa, etc) shares their passenger lists between
companies. If they do, you might also have a problem changing ships (on the
same day).

Good luck, and "Happy Cruising"!

Tobieon an Island in the Pacific


"Jack Hamilton" wrote in message
...
I'm thinking of going on an Alaska cruise next year, on the Pearl. It
starts in Seattle, goes to Alaska, and disembarks us at Vancouver. It
then leaves for a 5-night cruise to Los Angeles.

Sounds perfect for back-to-back, but NCL claims it is a violation of the
Jones Act (I suppose they mean the Passenger Vessel Services Act, but
the whole thing is unclear). So I can't book that cruise to LA.

But there are three other ships going down the coast from Vancouver that
same day - the HAL Westerdam going to San Francisco, the HAL Statendam
going to San Diego, and the Golden Princess going to Los Angeles.

The Westerdam would be the most convenient - I wouldn't have to fly
home. But HAL won't give cabin assignments, only guarantees, so I won't
know where my cabin will be. It also doesn't stop anywhere I've haven't
been (it doesn't stop at all).

The Statendam stops the following morning in Victoria (leaves at 2pm, so
probably no time for tea), and then goes straight to San Diego. It's 4
nights; the other two options are 3 nights. Guarantees only at this
time.

The final option is the Golden Princess, with no stops. It costs more,
but I can get a room assignment (balcony midship between two passenger
floors).

Any thoughts? I haven't been on either line before, but my impression
is that HAL aims for an age bracket a few decades above mine. Which is
going to be less formal? Which is going to have the best food and
entertainment (by "best food" I mean well-prepared food that I would
never cook myself - so good French or Italian or Chinese or Japanese,
but I don't care who makes the best hamburger)?

The winning feature on the Pride of Hawaii and the Norwegian Gem was the
spa - a large comfy area with heated seats, saunas, and spas, where I
could while away the hours watching the sea go by. Do any of those
ships have anything like that? It looks like they don't, but it's hard
to tell from the postage-stamp size pictures of the "thermal suites" on
the HAL ships. Any quiet public areas, completely lacking on the Gem?

Having flown out of both LA and San Diego, I think it's likely that San
Diego would be more convenient and less hassle. Agree?

On 9/19/10 1:32 PM, Island Grampa wrote:
Hi Jack

The PSA does not allow a cruise line to embark passengers in one US city and
disembark them in another US city, even if it is two separate cruises. I
know that HAL, for sure, links back-to-back cruises, and that's why they are
not allowed to put you on your preferred itinerary. I don't know about NCL,
but it's likely the same situation. I have asked about this, and they said
it was allowed, if you stayed one night in the first destination, then
caught a different ship for the return voyage.

If you intend to cruise back, I would suggest that you plan at least one
night in a hotel before cruising back. I don't know if Carnival (the mother
company of Carnival, HAL, Costa, etc) shares their passenger lists between
companies. If they do, you might also have a problem changing ships (on the
same day).

Good luck, and "Happy Cruising"!

Tobieon an Island in the Pacific



But Tobie,

If a summer NYC Bermuda ships repositions to Florida in the fall, they
would do a sailing that starts in NYC and goes to a Foreign Port (like
Bermuda or Nassau)... and then you could disembark in Florida (and fly
home). Can't Vancouver or Victoria be used as a foreign port?

--Tom

On Sep 19, 10:50*am, Tom K wrote:

But Tobie,

If a summer NYC Bermuda ships repositions to Florida in the fall, they
would do a sailing that starts in NYC and goes to a Foreign Port (like
Bermuda or Nassau)... and then you could disembark in Florida (and fly
home). *Can't Vancouver or Victoria be used as a foreign port?

--Tom

Tom, are you sure they disembark in the US?

My understanding of the PSA is that if it's a round-trip voyage, any
foreign port will do, but if you're disembarking in a different US
city than which you boarded, the ship must visit a "far foreign port"
- specifically not in North or Central America or the Caribbean (The
ABC islands are defined as part of S. America for this purpose).
Neither Vancouver nor Victoria would qualify.

Mark

In article , Island Grampa
wrote:

If you intend to cruise back, I would suggest that you plan at least one
night in a hotel before cruising back. I don't know if Carnival (the mother
company of Carnival, HAL, Costa, etc) shares their passenger lists between
companies. If they do, you might also have a problem changing ships (on the
same day).

You think they would share passenger lists with NCL which is not a
Carnival company? I don't think they could. I think the governments get
a passenger list.

--
Charles

In article
, SF
wrote:

On Sep 19, 10:50*am, Tom K wrote:

But Tobie,

If a summer NYC Bermuda ships repositions to Florida in the fall, they
would do a sailing that starts in NYC and goes to a Foreign Port (like
Bermuda or Nassau)... and then you could disembark in Florida (and fly
home). *Can't Vancouver or Victoria be used as a foreign port?

--Tom

Tom, are you sure they disembark in the US?

My understanding of the PSA is that if it's a round-trip voyage, any
foreign port will do, but if you're disembarking in a different US
city than which you boarded, the ship must visit a "far foreign port"
- specifically not in North or Central America or the Caribbean (The
ABC islands are defined as part of S. America for this purpose).
Neither Vancouver nor Victoria would qualify.

Mark


It has to be a "distant foreign port". Neither Vancouver or Victoria
qualify. I did a New York to Miami repositioning cruise last October.
We had to call at one of the ABC islands like you say. Aruba was the
distant port that made the itinerary legal.

--
Charles

On Sep 19, 11:57*am, Charles wrote:
In article , Island Grampa

wrote:
If you intend to cruise back, I would suggest that you plan at least one
night in a hotel before cruising back. *I don't know if Carnival (the mother
company of Carnival, HAL, Costa, etc) shares their passenger lists between
companies. *If they do, you might also have a problem changing ships (on the
same day).

You think they would share passenger lists with NCL which is not a
Carnival company? I don't think they could. I think the governments get
a passenger list.

--
Charles

More fundamentally, if you're using two different foreign-flagged
lines, neither one is providing transportation between US ports and
neither is in violation.
If you're doing a B2B on the same line, that line is still providing
the prohibited transportation connection (regardless of how they may
ticket it).

Mark

In article
, SF
wrote:

More fundamentally, if you're using two different foreign-flagged
lines, neither one is providing transportation between US ports and
neither is in violation.
If you're doing a B2B on the same line, that line is still providing
the prohibited transportation connection (regardless of how they may
ticket it).

Yes, but actually it is ship specific not cruise line. You can't do it
on the same ship but you could for example get off one NCL ship and on
another NCL ship and not be in violation.

--
Charles