River Cruises: Watch out for bankruptcies

By Sean O'Neill
October 3, 2012
blog_germanrivercruise_original.jpg
Courtesy <a href="http://mybt.budgettravel.com/_Mosel-River-/photo/4088530/21864.html">WendyVH/myBudgetTravel</a>

The popular German river cruise company Peter Deilmann Cruises will shut down its river cruise operation by year end due to money trouble.

[UPDATE 7/10: Its ocean cruises will continue to operate.]

Meanwhile, one of the largest European operators, Viking River Cruises, has been having a bumpy ride financially. A planned funding deal this past spring to cover expenses has fallen through. But—unsurprisingly—Viking claims it is in sound financial condition, reports The Travel Insider.

Bottom line—be careful with whom you book a river cruise with. Given the struggling economy, river cruise lines—and the travel agencies that sell them—may sink in red ink. Book with a credit card. If you never receive the cruise you paid for, write a letter to the "billing inquiries" address on your credit card statement (and keep a photocopy for your records). You should get a refund to your card within 60 days, thanks to protection under the federal Fair Credit Billing Act.

If you buy travel insurance, buy it directly from an insurer like Travel Guard or Access America rather than from a cruise line or travel agency, which may go bankrupt and charge marked-up prices for policies.

Plan Your Next Getaway
Keep reading
Cruises

Cruises: How did one reader nab $74 a day on Princess?

An amazing deal on a cruise was nabbed by Budget Travel blog reader Maureen of Mission Viejo, Calif. She scored a 30-day South American cruise from Los Angeles to Rio de Janeiro leaving on Nov. 22, 2009. Her obstructed ocean view cabin was only $1,697. After you include government taxes and mandatory gratuities, it figures out to be only $74 a day per person! That's about a third cheaper than the list price. Maureen says: Right now the current brochure for the cruise we are taking states a balcony fare from $2,979, add $197 govt.fees/taxes plus $330 tips ($11 per day added on by Princess per person). The math for this trip figures out to be $110 a day for a balcony room. Even more impressive, Maureen is paying about 59 percent less per day for her upcoming cruise than the last Princess cruise she took (staying in a comparable berth). Consider that Maureen went on a 10-day eastern Caribbean cruise with Princess this past January and paid $1,730 per person for a balcony (no fuel charges). Adding the $110 for taxes and tips that trip came to $184 a day. We asked her how she got the deal, to see if we could pick up some pointers: We got this deal from a Princess brochure mailed to us as frequent Princess cruisers (having been on Princess at least three times). We have been receiving these "exclusives-special offers just for you" frequently as well as mailers from other cruise companies. I have been monitoring the prices of all of the cruise lines for the last 4 months. This price was just reduced on Princess's website on June 10th. Maureen's tip: Use a travel agent, but negotiate I chose to book through a local travel agent I have used before. She is really good, thorough, and only deals in cruises. She makes all the phone calls to Princess regarding questions I may have. I saw the Princess eastern caribbean cruise we recently went on listed in Vacationstogo.com for the same price as the Princess website was quoting but with $100 shipboard credit and a free bottle of wine. I told her I would rather book with her and would she match that website's extra offerings? She not only met vacations freebies but added a big bottle of water to our stateroom. She also gave this same deal to my girlfriend who was traveling with us and who ended up booking through her. Maybe people do not want to go to South America??? Maybe that explains the low cost? We have never been south of Mexico. And we live an hour north from Los Angeles harbor where the cruise starts. The only major cost for us is the price of flying back from Rio where the cruise ends during the Christmas holidays. But we have found some good fares on the internet around $900-$1,000. Congrats, Maureen, on your great deal. And thanks for sharing your tips! MORE FROM BUDGET TRAVEL Real Deals in Cruises, hand-picked by our editors

Cruises

Alaska cruises: Here's a booking tip

If you've ever dreamt of taking an Alaskan cruise, this might be your year: Prices are way down. We've noticed that you can find rock-bottom prices if you book at the last minute or if you're willing to start and/or end your cruise in Alaska (instead of Seattle or another port in the lower 48 states). In a recent Kayak search, we found a seven-night cruise out of Seward for $329 per person before taxes (Holland America) departing in June. Of course, you'll have to buy the airfare to get out there, but it's still worth a look. We were also spotting cruises departing in late May out of Vancouver for $349 per person before taxes (Celebrity)&#151;an excellent price. See our recent Real Deal on Alaska cruises. And all of our current Cruise deals are here.

CruisesBudget Travel Lists

Best value in river cruising (Budget Travel's pick for 2009)

There's a reason river-cruise bookings have spiked by more than 20 percent each year since 2001: Unlike on mega ships, you typically won't find surprise fees tacked onto your bill when you sail on these small vessels. Riding this wave of popularity, Avalon Waterways is adding four ships&mdash;Affinity, Creativity, Luminary, and Felicity&mdash;to its European fleet. On May 9, the Affinity starts its maiden voyage in Holland. avalonwaterways.com, six-day trips from $1,699. &mdash;Geraldine Campbell, from the May 2009 issue of Budget Travel

Cruises

Cruisegoing: A scientist talks about "freaque" waves

Back in 2005, the Norwegian Dawn was cruising off the coast of Georgia when it was hit with a shock. A 70-foot wave crashed into the bow of the ship, flooding about 60 cabins and injuring about four passengers. The damage "was not extensive and the ship was quickly repaired," according to Wikipedia. Five years earlier, a 70-foot wave slammed into the cruise ship Oriana, destroying windows. Dangerous waves like those aren't common, thankfully. A study of radar data from oil platforms estimated that merely 10 waves more than 75-feet-high appeared around the globe during one recent three-week period. The bad news is that there's almost nothing that a cruise ship captain can do to either predict or avoid these waves, which rise up to five times as high as the waves around them. These rogue, or freak, waves appear to come from an angle that's out of sync with the wind and other sea waves. You'll occasionally find these waves out in the sea but also in near-beach areas, both in sandy and rocky shores. Lots of tragedies occur yearly all around the world. To learn more about these waves, I did an e-mail interview with Paul C. Liu, who retired last year from his post as research physical oceanographer for NOAA and who blogs at Freaque Waves. What should cruise passengers know about the frequency of dangerous waves, and exactly what type of waves are likely on the open seas? I guess all kinds of waves are likely on the open seas, including freaque waves. They are not always happening. Most of the time they are not! But we just cannot rule out the fact that freaque waves can happen at any time and at any place. Cruise passengers should just be mindful that the possibility is there and continue to enjoy the cruise. Even if an encounter does happen, the damage will likely to be not extensive. The kind of fiction as shown in the movie Poseidon will not ever happen in real life! What is a "freaque wave", what is its most typical origin or cause, and why do you use that nomenclature of "freaque" instead of using the term "rogue" or something more scientific sounding? Freaque is a portmanteau word formed by the two frequently and synonymously used words of rogue and freak in describing the kind of unexpected and unpredictable waves. Many people in the scientific literature are fond of using the expression "freak or rogue waves." I choose to use "freaque waves" instead. Are there any particular waters in particular regions that are known to be prone to freaque waves? The short answer is no. Because of the conjecture that when ocean waves propagating into oncoming strong ocean current field might lead to the forming of large waves, regions along the Gulf stream in the North Atlantic, along the Agulhas currents in South Indian Ocean, and along the Kuroshio in Northwest Pacific, are thought to be prone of freaque waves. But areas that don't have strong ocean currents, such as the North Sea, can also have frequent freaque waves. So the talk of regional proneness is at most covering a part of the story. What's the essential dispute about freaque waves in the scientific community? And is there something that makes scientists groan when they read accounts of waves striking cruise ships because the statements are misleading or hyperbolic or inaccurate? Because the study of freaque waves is still relatively new, I don't think there is as yet any "essential dispute" per se in the scientific community. Lack of general consensus, maybe! Different scientists may have different concept of what "rare" or "frequent" means or using relatively different definitions for freaque waves. And there are may be different approaches to the problem. Some treats freaque waves as a part of the study of extreme waves whereas some others do not. (Freaque waves are always extreme waves, but not all the extreme waves are freaque waves!) What's the most typical misunderstanding of the freaque wave issue, as you've encountered it when reading media reports or talking with others? Oh yes, the media! I don't have much respect for the present day, so called, "main-stream" media. Here's an example&mdash;a paragraph from a New York Times article about freaque waves a couple of years ago: Enormous waves that sweep the ocean are traditionally called rogue waves, implying that they have a kind of freakish rarity. Over the decades, skeptical oceanographers have doubted their existence and tended to lump them together with sightings of mermaids and sea monsters. Rogue waves are known to happen momentarily. They appear out of nowhere. A wave takes place, and then disappears like nothing has happened. Waves like that never, yes, never, "sweep" the ocean. There is no such thing as "traditionally called rogue waves." Rogue wave is a fairly recent term. The use of the term "freak wave" was started by U.K. scientist Laurence Draper in 1964. There was no firmly established term before 1964. The existence of unusually large, great waves was nevertheless very much on the minds of every seagoing oceanographer. I don't think anyone in their right mind would "lump them together with sightings of mermaids and sea monsters." I just hope your readers beware of this kind of irresponsibility!