twangster

It gets complicated quick.  
A few senators have tried to introduce bills but they never go anywhere because it's not as simple as just allowing select ships i.e. cruise ships to do something as the act addresses all or nearly all commercial vessels that carry passengers.  On the surface it seems simple but it quickly becomes a pandora's box involving international law and maritime treaties. 
While the US can enact legislation that applies to US flagged ships, creating law that applies to foreign flagged ships isn't as straightforward.  In some cases within international law or maritime treaties there is only a concept of a vessel without distinguishing a modern cruise ship (which didn't exist in 1886) and a small boat that carries 10 people.  The US by itself can't rewrite international law or maritime treaties.    If the US was to chose to allow a foreign flagged cruise ship to carry passengers between two US ports (coastwise trade) then a foreign government could interpret that as being any vessel of any size can carry passengers between US ports because from an international legal perspective there is only the concept of a vessel.  That's overly simplifying it, but it's just one aspect of one complication.  Allow a cruise ship and you allow foreign ferries, water taxis, duck boats, etc. by the same modification.
Technically the aspect that impacts cruise passengers the most is a matter of cabotage and that is also evident with the airlines.  An Air Canada plane can fly from a city in Canada and land in a US city to drop off passengers or pick up passengers to fly back to Canada.   What Air Canada can't do is land in one US city and sell seats to reach another US city.  That is protected so that US domestic airlines compete on those routes.  That is an example of a cabotage regulation.   Just as Delta can't fly to Montreal and sell seats to carry passengers to Toronto.   There are international agreements involved.  Similar cabotage regulations are baked into the PVSA for passenger vessels but cabotage is just one small component of the PVSA.  
Once you decide to revamp such an old set of laws its difficult to just focus on only aspect of the law, i.e. cabotage.  If you are going to modernize law you need to look at the whole thing.  Cruise ship passengers probably don't care about the act and everything involved, they just focus on the cruise they want to take.  So in their minds it's just as simple as saying cruise ships should be allowed to do the cruise I want to take.  It's not that simple.
Keep in mind we are talking about a cruise industry that is comprised of foreign corporations operating foreign flagged ship.  The cruise industry has taken this approach to avoid paying US taxes.   Royal Caribbean is not an American company.  They don't own any US flagged ships.   They avoid paying substantial amounts of US taxes by registering the company in Liberia and their ships in the Bahamas.  Why should the US rewrite laws to benefit foreign corporations that don't pay US tax?  Just so less than 0.0001% of the US population can go on a cruise vacation they desire?  The number of people that want to take such a voyage is a small subset of the overall cruise industry.  It's a lot to ask when you consider that it impacts such a small group of cruisers such as "I want to cruise from Hawaii and stay on the ship for a B2B ending in Seattle".  That's maybe a couple hundred people per year.  

Crown loft yes, ATS no.

Royal has been trying to kill MTD for a few years now.  They made MTD chaotic trying to make MTD unappealing.  This appears to be the final nail.  

It gets complicated quick.  
A few senators have tried to introduce bills but they never go anywhere because it's not as simple as just allowing select ships i.e. cruise ships to do something as the act addresses all or nearly all commercial vessels that carry passengers.  On the surface it seems simple but it quickly becomes a pandora's box involving international law and maritime treaties. 
While the US can enact legislation that applies to US flagged ships, creating law that applies to foreign flagged ships isn't as straightforward.  In some cases within international law or maritime treaties there is only a concept of a vessel without distinguishing a modern cruise ship (which didn't exist in 1886) and a small boat that carries 10 people.  The US by itself can't rewrite international law or maritime treaties.    If the US was to chose to allow a foreign flagged cruise ship to carry passengers between two US ports (coastwise trade) then a foreign government could interpret that as being any vessel of any size can carry passengers between US ports because from an international legal perspective there is only the concept of a vessel.  That's overly simplifying it, but it's just one aspect of one complication.  Allow a cruise ship and you allow foreign ferries, water taxis, duck boats, etc. by the same modification.
Technically the aspect that impacts cruise passengers the most is a matter of cabotage and that is also evident with the airlines.  An Air Canada plane can fly from a city in Canada and land in a US city to drop off passengers or pick up passengers to fly back to Canada.   What Air Canada can't do is land in one US city and sell seats to reach another US city.  That is protected so that US domestic airlines compete on those routes.  That is an example of a cabotage regulation.   Just as Delta can't fly to Montreal and sell seats to carry passengers to Toronto.   There are international agreements involved.  Similar cabotage regulations are baked into the PVSA for passenger vessels but cabotage is just one small component of the PVSA.  
Once you decide to revamp such an old set of laws its difficult to just focus on only aspect of the law, i.e. cabotage.  If you are going to modernize law you need to look at the whole thing.  Cruise ship passengers probably don't care about the act and everything involved, they just focus on the cruise they want to take.  So in their minds it's just as simple as saying cruise ships should be allowed to do the cruise I want to take.  It's not that simple.
Keep in mind we are talking about a cruise industry that is comprised of foreign corporations operating foreign flagged ship.  The cruise industry has taken this approach to avoid paying US taxes.   Royal Caribbean is not an American company.  They don't own any US flagged ships.   They avoid paying substantial amounts of US taxes by registering the company in Liberia and their ships in the Bahamas.  Why should the US rewrite laws to benefit foreign corporations that don't pay US tax?  Just so less than 0.0001% of the US population can go on a cruise vacation they desire?  The number of people that want to take such a voyage is a small subset of the overall cruise industry.  It's a lot to ask when you consider that it impacts such a small group of cruisers such as "I want to cruise from Hawaii and stay on the ship for a B2B ending in Seattle".  That's maybe a couple hundred people per year.  

They can't sail with passengers between two US cities without having to deal with the PVSA (Passenger Vessel Services Act - Federal Law).
Seattle to San Pedro would require sailing to an allowed "distant" foreign country such as South America or Asia along the itinerary to satisfy the PVSA.  For the purposes of the PVSA, Canada is not a "distant" foreign port so it can't be used to satisfy the PVSA for open jaw cruises between different US cities.
Consequently they have a choice.  End the last Alaska cruise in Vancouver and sail from Vancouver to San Pedro with passengers or sail without passengers from Seattle to San Pedro.  Ending the last Seattle based cruise to Alaska in Vancouver is massively disruptive to all the folks on board who would now have to deal with flying home from Vancouver in another country.   It appears they chose the second option, an empty "deadhead" repo cruise from Seattle to San Pedro.

It gets complicated quick.  
A few senators have tried to introduce bills but they never go anywhere because it's not as simple as just allowing select ships i.e. cruise ships to do something as the act addresses all or nearly all commercial vessels that carry passengers.  On the surface it seems simple but it quickly becomes a pandora's box involving international law and maritime treaties. 
While the US can enact legislation that applies to US flagged ships, creating law that applies to foreign flagged ships isn't as straightforward.  In some cases within international law or maritime treaties there is only a concept of a vessel without distinguishing a modern cruise ship (which didn't exist in 1886) and a small boat that carries 10 people.  The US by itself can't rewrite international law or maritime treaties.    If the US was to chose to allow a foreign flagged cruise ship to carry passengers between two US ports (coastwise trade) then a foreign government could interpret that as being any vessel of any size can carry passengers between US ports because from an international legal perspective there is only the concept of a vessel.  That's overly simplifying it, but it's just one aspect of one complication.  Allow a cruise ship and you allow foreign ferries, water taxis, duck boats, etc. by the same modification.
Technically the aspect that impacts cruise passengers the most is a matter of cabotage and that is also evident with the airlines.  An Air Canada plane can fly from a city in Canada and land in a US city to drop off passengers or pick up passengers to fly back to Canada.   What Air Canada can't do is land in one US city and sell seats to reach another US city.  That is protected so that US domestic airlines compete on those routes.  That is an example of a cabotage regulation.   Just as Delta can't fly to Montreal and sell seats to carry passengers to Toronto.   There are international agreements involved.  Similar cabotage regulations are baked into the PVSA for passenger vessels but cabotage is just one small component of the PVSA.  
Once you decide to revamp such an old set of laws its difficult to just focus on only aspect of the law, i.e. cabotage.  If you are going to modernize law you need to look at the whole thing.  Cruise ship passengers probably don't care about the act and everything involved, they just focus on the cruise they want to take.  So in their minds it's just as simple as saying cruise ships should be allowed to do the cruise I want to take.  It's not that simple.
Keep in mind we are talking about a cruise industry that is comprised of foreign corporations operating foreign flagged ship.  The cruise industry has taken this approach to avoid paying US taxes.   Royal Caribbean is not an American company.  They don't own any US flagged ships.   They avoid paying substantial amounts of US taxes by registering the company in Liberia and their ships in the Bahamas.  Why should the US rewrite laws to benefit foreign corporations that don't pay US tax?  Just so less than 0.0001% of the US population can go on a cruise vacation they desire?  The number of people that want to take such a voyage is a small subset of the overall cruise industry.  It's a lot to ask when you consider that it impacts such a small group of cruisers such as "I want to cruise from Hawaii and stay on the ship for a B2B ending in Seattle".  That's maybe a couple hundred people per year.  

Royal has been trying to kill MTD for a few years now.  They made MTD chaotic trying to make MTD unappealing.  This appears to be the final nail.  

Bring a copy of the invoice showing gratuities are prepaid when you board the ship.  If the ship charges daily service fees (gratuity) then go to guest services with your invoice showing they are pre-paid.  

I cash tip water.  Not much different than a beer from a bartenders level of effort.  Since I cash tip a beer, I cash tip water.

I've been told this before. 
Some of the money goes into a crew fund that pays for crew parties off the ship on select port days.  Not everyone can go to all such events but over the course of a contract there is opportunity to participate in many such events.  Crew beyond bar staff are invited.  Some of the money goes into an employee assistance fund of some sort although that is an interpretation based on a concept I was told about.  Almost like a hardship fund is what it sounded like, administered by management.  

I've done the reverse, from Miami to Port Canaveral before moving to Florida. 
Car rental was easy, least expensive option and it provided an opportunity to swing by a Target at my own pace to pick up more sunscreen.

Summer of 2025... Tokyo anyone?

Bring a copy of the invoice showing gratuities are prepaid when you board the ship.  If the ship charges daily service fees (gratuity) then go to guest services with your invoice showing they are pre-paid.  

Yesterday was an uneventful day as it was a sea day. Willie met us in the Seaplex where we took a turn on the bumper cars. This is always fun, especially when you don’t have to wait in the queue.
during our walk around the ship I found this animated art which a really love.

They draw pictures over themselves then erase it.

We had lunch at Izumi which was very nice. Typically just before lunch, a whole of food was delivered to our cabin which will largely go to waste. We have told Willie we don’t need the extra food delivered as it is just too much.

After lunch it was back to the cabin but once the sun is on the deck, it is too hot to sit out there so we had a sleep instead. The aft cabins like ours do not get any breeze so when the sun is directly on them they feel like a sauna and the deck is too hot to walk on in bare feet.
Before dinner, we took the long walk to the suite. Much like it was like on Quantum last year, it was not very busy.

Dinner tonight was at 7:30pm in Chops. There were around 20 people there for dinner tonight. The meal was fine but I wish they would change the menu a bit as after 10 years of going there it would be nice to see a few different options on the menu, and I don’t mean pay extra items like icon.


After dinner we visited the casino which was busy but not too busy. The casino is non smoking when sailing in this part of the world which is great. It will be strange going on Harmony where they allow smoking as it will be the first time I have seen smoking in the casino.

After the casino we popped into the silent disco in Cafe Two70 which was fun to watch.
Then it was off to bed as the clocks go forward as we get closer to Noumea, but tomorrow is another sea day so it is okay to sleep in.

Bring a copy of the invoice showing gratuities are prepaid when you board the ship.  If the ship charges daily service fees (gratuity) then go to guest services with your invoice showing they are pre-paid.  

ArriveCAN was always matched to my passport and not shown to CBSA.  I crossed a number of times when ArriveCAN was required, driving and flying, and ArriveCAN compliance was noted on screen to the CBSA agent when they swiped my passport.   It's only when you didn't complete ArriveCAN would you really find out that it mattered.  Visitors would get a slap on the wrist, Canadian residents faced the possibility of crazy high fines.  

I've done the reverse, from Miami to Port Canaveral before moving to Florida. 
Car rental was easy, least expensive option and it provided an opportunity to swing by a Target at my own pace to pick up more sunscreen.

Bring a copy of the invoice showing gratuities are prepaid when you board the ship.  If the ship charges daily service fees (gratuity) then go to guest services with your invoice showing they are pre-paid.  

I've done the reverse, from Miami to Port Canaveral before moving to Florida. 
Car rental was easy, least expensive option and it provided an opportunity to swing by a Target at my own pace to pick up more sunscreen.

Royal has been trying to kill MTD for a few years now.  They made MTD chaotic trying to make MTD unappealing.  This appears to be the final nail.  

Here are the tidbits of information from the Top Tier Event.

The captain is not sure but said that the 3rd Icon class ship may be called Aura of the Seas, but we will have to wait and see. They may also reuse an older name so I guess we will just have to be patient.
He said they were looking at building a smaller ship similar to Voyager class in size around 2029 to cater for ports like those in Australia.
Possibly 2026 for Lelepa, but if it is that soon I am guessing it will be more like the original CocoCay and that amenities will be added over time.

The C&A numbers for this cruise are:
604 gold,
182 platinum,
84 emerald,
174 diamond,
124 Diamond+
24 Pinnacle
The top 3 cruises are all from Brisbane with 1304, 1532 and 1925 respectively.

I have to mention the Queen Mary as a candidate hotel.  From Long Beach it's a 10-15 minute Uber ride away from the port and I'm a big fan of the QM.  Such amazing history.  

Odd since your screenshot was Anchorage to Seward.  

Apparently both of our times has been wasted.
 

And so they tried.  

Yup. That was my main issue. As a mexican citizen, the rules for entering Canada just changed yesterday. Now because the ship stops in Victoria (even if it departs from Vancouver), I need a visa instead of a simple eTA. With 2 months until I leave, the timing to request for a visa was probably not enough. And I had to make a call today in order to not lose 50% of the total of my 4 person cruise. Sadly for my sanity's sake, I ended up cancelling 😞