I'm looking at it from a slightly different angle here....

We all know the Tour Operators only work in accordance with the directives from the FCO which for the moment is it's still considered to be safe to travel to Sharm el Sheikh.

My personal opinion is that it's quite true it is still safe to travel bearing in mind that only a very small percentage of holidaymakers leave their hotel/resorts to take trips to Luxor or Cairo (and this is not allowed now anyway). The risks are minimal that anything will happen to them inside the confines of Sharm.
If they wanted to holiday specifically to see the sights they would base themselves in other areas of Egypt for that purpose and by now will have been offered the choice of alternative destinations. But let's face it, most holidaymakers go to Sharm for the fact it's a complete resort in itself and perfect for swimming or diving and with some fantastic pool attractions for the kids with no consideration of buying a visa and stepping foot outside to look at ancient history,,.

Going back to the question raised as to "why" the Tour Operators don't allow passengers with pre-planned travel to Sharm to change their holiday destination without cost - I would suggest it's all down to costings, not only right now, but in the future too for the following reasons:

If the Tour Operators start to allow guests to cancel willy nilly, which means effectively they are more or less indicating there is an issue and going against the FCO information - you will find a very small number of regular "Sharmies" will still want to travel but probably a greater number will choose to cancel/change their arrangements.

That leaves a bunch of very empty planes and hotels as well as a major predicament for the TO.

They then have another choice to make - do they pull out completely, again against the FCO info?

If they pull out completely without an FCO directive to do so, it will put them in a very bad position as they will have to:
a) cancel their current contracts with the hotels and
b) pay compensation to those guests who still want to travel because the FCO say it is safe to do so

This all means that when they want to renegotiate contracts in the future for rooming availability they will be at the back of the queue of bargaining power to get the best room prices. (For instance, when I worked for a UK Tour Operator I know that we were paying anywhere between £5 to £10 per room per night for many 3 star rated and some 4 star hotels in Spain (mainland, Balearic's and Canaries), Cyprus and Turkey).

Whereas, if they abide only by the FCO information the TO has legislation on their side rather than pulling out because they personally changed the goal posts.

Doe,
they are in Marsa Alam.
Doesn't mean much to me as I have never been to Egypt, so don't know much about the place.

That was the last place I went to Del, we did enjoy it, very quiet though not for party people and little outside of the hotels. It's on the Mainland rather than on Sinia like Sharm but is still a long way from Cairo and Luxor.

Chances are they are actually at Port Ghalib which is about 10 mins drive from the airport the town of Marsa Alam is about 40 Km south of the airport. Port Ghalib is a manufactured tourist resort with no real locals there all the locals are there to work in the hotels and tourist industry so its ultra safe there. There are muliple hotels further down the coast but these tend to be for other Europeans rather than the Brits but again these are built where there are no locals nearby as its pretty arid round the whole aera.

cyprus100 wrote:

I'm looking at it from a slightly different angle here....

We all know the Tour Operators only work in accordance with the directives from the FCO which for the moment is it's still considered to be safe to travel to Sharm el Sheikh.

My personal opinion is that it's quite true it is still safe to travel bearing in mind that only a very small percentage of holidaymakers leave their hotel/resorts to take trips to Luxor or Cairo (and this is not allowed now anyway). The risks are minimal that anything will happen to them inside the confines of Sharm.
If they wanted to holiday specifically to see the sights they would base themselves in other areas of Egypt for that purpose and by now will have been offered the choice of alternative destinations. But let's face it, most holidaymakers go to Sharm for the fact it's a complete resort in itself and perfect for swimming or diving and with some fantastic pool attractions for the kids with no consideration of buying a visa and stepping foot outside to look at ancient history,,.

Going back to the question raised as to "why" the Tour Operators don't allow passengers with pre-planned travel to Sharm to change their holiday destination without cost - I would suggest it's all down to costings, not only right now, but in the future too for the following reasons:

If the Tour Operators start to allow guests to cancel willy nilly, which means effectively they are more or less indicating there is an issue and going against the FCO information - you will find a very small number of regular "Sharmies" will still want to travel but probably a greater number will choose to cancel/change their arrangements.

That leaves a bunch of very empty planes and hotels as well as a major predicament for the TO.

They then have another choice to make - do they pull out completely, again against the FCO info?

If they pull out completely without an FCO directive to do so, it will put them in a very bad position as they will have to:
a) cancel their current contracts with the hotels and
b) pay compensation to those guests who still want to travel because the FCO say it is safe to do so

This all means that when they want to renegotiate contracts in the future for rooming availability they will be at the back of the queue of bargaining power to get the best room prices. (For instance, when I worked for a UK Tour Operator I know that we were paying anywhere between £5 to £10 per room per night for many 3 star rated and some 4 star hotels in Spain (mainland, Balearic's and Canaries), Cyprus and Turkey).

Whereas, if they abide only by the FCO information the TO has legislation on their side rather than pulling out because they personally changed the goal posts.

It's good to hear an explanation from a former travel agent Shell.

I can now see the point that if the Travel Agents let people change to other destinations they could have the problem if only the Die Hards want to still go to the Red Sea and all the others switch to other destinations so could be flying planes that are only a third full, which must be really uneconomic on such a long flight.

I'm pretty sure Thomson have cancelled their programme to Taba Heights from the autumn already which must be a cost thing, and I think they were the last main stream operator going there, I was thinking that would be the next place we went to in the Red Sea when (if) things calm down.

the hotel shows as being Marsa Alam rather than port Gahib.
The Reste Reef, if that means anything to anyone.
I understand that this hotel has been dropped for next year but don't know if it is becuase of its quality or just the general cut back in hols to Egypt.

Incidentally, never been to Egypt because almost everyone I know who has been has been affected by food poisoning or similar, does this affect people on here also?
or is it some kind of urban myth?

I think it does affect a lot of people Del, there are a huge amount of running buffets, lots of guests and it is a place of high temperatures, the three of which can sometimes lead to problems.

We may have been lucky as six visits and not really suffered. We are very careful though, if there is show cooking going on we eat the food cooked fresh in front of us. I leave trays alone that look like they have been out a while and turned over by people a few times. So far so good but who knows, could go another time and cop it.

We stayed at the Coraya Beach hotel in Coraya Bay in Marsa Alam last November for a week.

I think the Resta Reef was pretty close as I saw the sign for it. There are approx 7 hotels there, 5 in the bay itself and then the Resta Reef and Resta Grand round the corner from the bay on I think a flat stretch of beach. Like the resort mentioned by Colin, there isn't really any local community just the staff who go and work in the hotels.

They come in from Cairo work 30 days on the trot, then go back to Cairo for 7 or 10 days depending on how busy the hotels are. At least that's what the few we made friends with in the Coraya said they did.

We just got back from a fortnight at the Coral Sea Aqua Club in Nabq Bay, Sharm (review just submitted).

Me and my 9 yr old were both fine for the whole holiday, but my other half had a poorly stomach for a day or two during the first week, but she isn't sure if it was caused by food or heat, or something else. I bought some medication from the pharmacy next door (advised by Thomson rep), which seemed to help.

As far as the political situation goes, apart from the nationwide curfew which came into force following the security forces clearing those protesters from Cairo, we would not have known there were any issues. The curfew only lasted one night, and was lifted for the red sea resorts the following day.

We had planned an excursion to Cairo or Luxor, but Thomson had already cancelled their trips before we went out there, and while we may have been able to do them with a local company, we didn't feel it was a risk worth taking.

MJ

Looking at it from a customers point of view it doesn't sit well with me that both parent companies of TUI and Thomas Cook have cancelled their holidays from other countries to all of Egypt, what is different with their costings? the simple answer is nothing they have the same hotel, fuel costs etc.
TUI and Thomas Cook should do the same here giving customers the option to rebook a different destination or cancel.

This 'Sharmy' for one would wish to cancel and rebook a different destination but I don't see why I should be made to pay an extra charge to cancel a holiday going to a destination that is on the verge of a civil war and having restrictions put in place on my activities.

Any booking I make for a new destination now will be much higher than when my holiday was originally booked and I am willing to pay that however to be charged twice is not on.

del949. The Hotel is actually north of Port Ghalib which makes it even furter from Marsa Alam which means its further from a population centre so its a no problem area. If you had any worries.

Thanks Colin, not really worried as daughter is keeping in touch and son in law is very savvy and has plenty of experience of hostile environments, albeit armed!

Kiltman HT Mod wrote:

Looking at it from a customers point of view it doesn't sit well with me that both parent companies of TUI and Thomas Cook have cancelled their holidays from other countries to all of Egypt, what is different with their costings? the simple answer is nothing they have the same hotel, fuel costs etc.
TUI and Thomas Cook should do the same here giving customers the option to rebook a different destination or cancel.

This 'Sharmy' for one would wish to cancel and rebook a different destination but I don't see why I should be made to pay an extra charge to cancel a holiday going to a destination that is on the verge of a civil war and having restrictions put in place on my activities.

Any booking I make for a new destination now will be much higher than when my holiday was originally booked and I am willing to pay that however to be charged twice is not on.

I do think Thomas Cook UK and TUI UK are going to lose some goodwill over this hard line stance. There will be people who are within 3 months of travel fully paid up and trapped into holidays that they just don't want to go on anymore, regardless of the reality of if its safe in resort or unsafe.

I'm may affect their view on who they book with in the future.

Ironically those who have DIYed with Easy-jet as their airline are allowing them to swap flights to any other destination where there Is availability. Although i'm not sure how that will affect the hotel part of their booking, but with some hotels you pay on checking out. It could be one of those rare times when a DIY booking was better than a package.

Doe

Kiltman HT Mod wrote:

Looking at it from a customers point of view it doesn't sit well with me that both parent companies of TUI and Thomas Cook have cancelled their holidays from other countries to all of Egypt, what is different with their costings?

They've been cancelled because the FCO equivalent in those resident countries have warned against all travel to Egypt for their citizens. So the same applies as I mentioned in my previous post. It also means they can now redirect those flights to different resorts on a "need to" basis depending on what is being offered to those passengers who have had to re-jig their holiday plans.

Until the FCO (in UK) say it's not safe for UK citizens to travel - the Tour Operators will not pull the plug.

cyprus100 wrote:

Kiltman HT Mod wrote:

Looking at it from a customers point of view it doesn't sit well with me that both parent companies of TUI and Thomas Cook have cancelled their holidays from other countries to all of Egypt, what is different with their costings?

They've been cancelled because the FCO equivalent in those resident countries have warned against all travel to Egypt for their citizens. So the same applies as I mentioned in my previous post. It also means they can now redirect those flights to different resorts on a "need to" basis depending on what is being offered to those passengers who have had to re-jig their holiday plans.

Until the FCO (in UK) say it's not safe for UK citizens to travel - the Tour Operators will not pull the plug.

There's a problem with the operators' approach as far as I can see.....if a French, Irish or German citizen living in the UK, has booked to travel to Egypt what is the position for them ?? Their government has told them not to travel, but, as the flight is departing from the UK would they be able to cancel / change penalty free ??

I would imagine that the contract that they signed and agreed to would stipulate UK terms and conditions.
As such I imagine that the same rules would apply...... as indeed they should, unless of course they were prepared to pay a premium for different treatment.
edited to add.
To be honest I can't see what is wrong with the companies stance on this.It's hardly their fault that the situation is as it is.If they allowed people to cancel or change without charge then the flights would be uneconomic and would therefore need to be cancelled, opening the door for those who were prepared to continue with their holiday to make a claim for breach of contract etc etc.
Also, would they in fact be able to relocate all the cancelled holidays at other suitable places and suitable times/ dates etc. Would they also be liable for losses to the hotels they had a contract with?
I agree it is unfortunate for those affected but believe that the companies are acting within the terms and conditions of the bookings... and to a certain extent within the spirit of the rules
As for losing goodwill for the future, i doubt that this will have much affect as there are not many alternatives to the big 2 when it comes to package holidays, unless you want to do DIY or flight plus etc.

I'm not suggesting the tour operators are acting outside their T&C's and would agree that their approach is probably the only option given the present set of circumstances . In fact I would have every sympathy with the Thomas Cook sales rep who answers the phone to a U.K. resident, non British E.U. national who has been advised by their government not to travel to Egypt. Their questions regarding the validity of their travel insurance and repatriation in the event of a 'worst case scenario' may require some guesswork. Basically, what I'm trying to say is the tried and trusted way of Tour Operators waiting for the FCO to declare a destination a 'no go' area for British Citizens before cancelling trips may no longer provide the complete solution it once did, given that not all of their customers are British.

I imagine that if, for instance, Thomas Cook or Tui treated citizens of different EU countries in a different way, although they booked and paid on equal terms, then the company could be facing some severe law suits and possibly legal sanctions from the EU itself.
Presumably they are able, at present, to offer different terms to other countries simply because the government of that country has issued warnings etc.
In the same way, British nationals who have booked with the other countrys' arm of these comapanies will be able to take advantage of that governments warnings
Equality works both ways.
Perhaps a fairer way of doing things is for the EU to issue the warnings rather than the individual country.

As I said in one of my earlier posts - life in the sunny "bubble" that is Sharm is still going on very nicely.

Someone has just returned and you can see from their post that other than trips to Cairo and Luxor being cancelled, little else has changed to interrupt a sun, sea and sand AI holiday:

http://www.holidaytruths.co.uk/forum/just-booked-for-aug-2013-coral-sea-aqua-club-t156683.html#p1610737

I have mixed feelings on this. On the one hand it's good that not only are people still able to have their holidays but also that at least some of the Egyptians are able to earn a living. On the other hand it seems almost obscene that life is going on almost as normal in the area whilst elsewhere in Egypt people are dying in their thousands.