Is it fair then, to have Holland America charge the fuel surcharges, and yet reduce vessel speeds thus reducing port times?

I think this is unfair and perhaps even a sleezy business practice! Either give back the money collected in fuel surcharges and face an altered itinerary due to reduced speed, or collect and keep the thousands of dollars and maintain the speed necessary to live up to the published itinerary.
Westerdam is arriving several hours late into Victoria owing to cut backs in speed, yet large fuel surcharges are in place. On the other hand, Princess, Celebrity and Norwegian are arrving on time, with Norwegian having left later and passing Westerdam enroute!!!! There are many HAL complaints over this, and it has made it to the media as well.

[ 08-21-2008: Message edited by: Grant ]

The danger is that these end up being quasi permanent and the cruises lines in effect coluding over their abolishment.

"YOU CAN'T CRUISE AWAY FROM FUEL COSTS"

"Thinking of getting away from the energy crisis be taking a cruise in warm crystal waters around exotic islands?
You will probably find the fuel crunch pursues you even there.
Nearly all cruise lines have added or are adding a surcharge to their rates. Varying with length of cruise from $3 to $8 a day per passenger, it helps the shipowners pay for fuel which has quadrupled
in price in recent months.
Many cruise ships have slightly altered their itineraries, either to save fuel or to go to ports better able to supply their fuel needs.
Chandris America Line's ship AMERIKANIS, for example, has dropped Barbados from its West Indies cruise and substituted Curacao where
there is a massive refinery complex and refueling is more certain.
Some ships are slowing down as well as skipping occasional ports, all to save expensive fuel. Cunard's QUEEN ELIZABETH II [sic], for
instance, no longer stops at St. Martin (one of half a dozen ports previously visited) but cruises the Caribbean at reduced speed instead.
Cancellations of cruises for reasons of fuel scarcity alone are rare. But a combination of low bookings and high fuel prices has prompted at least one cancellation--that of a Holland-America Line
cruise from New York to the South Pacific.
Although ship-fuel supplies in some areas are critically scarce, the main blow to the cruise industry is the rocketing fuel price. It has gone up from around $20-$25 a ton six months ago to $90-$100 a ton today.
The effects of the price hike vary from ship to ship, depending on length of cruise, speed, number of ports, engine type, and other factors. But some shippers reckon that it is costing them something
on the order of $16 per passenger per day. Hence, they say, the $8 per day surcharge covers only half their increased costs and they themselves absorb the rest.
In the words of William Armstrong, executive officer of the International Passenger Ship Association, to which about half the major lines belong, the extra costs 'have been somewhat allayed by levying a surcharge.'
He adds that it is too soon to know whether higher passenger prices will result in a falloff in bookings. But he would not be surprised at a temporary falloff, at least until the public recognizes that the surcharges are an 'ordinary, understandable fact of life'--just like waiting in line at gas stations to buy higher-priced gas, perhaps.
Most changes in cruise ship itineraries have been made to economize in face of these high fuel prices, rather than because fuel was simply unobtainable.
But shippers have often been able to combine fuel economies with minimal inconvenience to passengers.
The Holland-America Line has altered many of its port arriving and leaving times so its ships can cruise more slowly and economically between ports--down from around 21 knots to 16-18 knots. Leaving St.Thomas at 6 in the evening rather than 2 the following morning makes little difference to most passengers, who are usually on board
by then anyway.
Cunard's San Juan-based ship, the CUNARD ADVENTURER, no longer visits Grenada, a change which saves more fuel than woudl cutting out
any other of the ship's usual stopovers. At the same time, Cunard spokesmen point out, Grenada is losing its popularity with cruise liners because of political unrest there.
So, you can still go a-cruising in the Caribbean. But you'll probably have to pay more for this luxurious privilege--and you may cut through the waves a little slower and make one or two fewer
landings on those balmy islands."

quote:

---

Originally posted by Grant:
I think this is unfair and perhaps even a sleezy business practice! Either give back the money collected in fuel surcharges and face an altered itinerary due to reduced speed, or collect and keep the thousands of dollars and maintain the speed necessary to live up to the published itinerary.

---

What the cruise lines are doing is defraying part of the fuel problem by collecting a fuel surcharge, and dealing with a further part of the problem by reducing the operating cost.

quote:

---

Originally posted by PamM:
This would have been the aftermath of the '73 Arab/Israeli war. I recall the day oil hit the $10 a barrel mark for the first time.

Pam

---

Yes, it was, and a real eye-opener for lots of us used to cheap fuel. I had just gotten my driver's license, bought my first car, and gas went up from 48 cents a gallon to over $1.00! I think in real dollars, it was a much bigger price hike than we've experienced in 2008.

quote:

---

Originally posted by PamM:
I expect it was.. didn't affect us as living where we did, petrol was free

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thad:
On my cruise a few weeks ago we (Golden Princess) left prior to Oosterdam on the way from Ketchikan to Victoria, and yet the Oosterdam got in a good hour or so before us. So not sure HAL is always slowing down.

---