gatorskin76

When I look at these threads I think of the ban on discussions about vaccines and protocols.  I am really not sure why this is different.  I am not a smoker, and don't recommend it, but Royal has their policy and well...

I think it's really the perception of a piling on when the point had already been made. 

I can tell you that I expect a response to whatever anyone states that could be seen as critical of RCI to basically be "Did you read the cruise contract, they can do anything they want".  I am never disappointed when expecting that response, and it's usually many saying the same thing.  

There should be an obligation for anyone to be an educated consumer, but the fact that a company can do something, doesn't always mean they should.

Now, I don't want to be someone piling on, and I don't know if any consideration was offered to the OP given their situation, but the $100 change fee with a NRD is clearly written in a lot of places and I imagine they were offered a FCC for the balance of the deposit.  While it's probably not typical, it would be nice if they would have offered the ability to transfer that to someone else, or eliminate the 1 year expiration to allow for recovery to be able to cruise.  

3 hours ago, twangster said:

I wore masks because of the CDC's made up unscientific SWAG at a number.  It was the presence of children who caused us to to fall under that made up number.  

If it's not that, it's something else.  Attributing blame to any one group is futile in this whole process.  If not for the rugrats, they could have found some other reason for justification. Que sera, sera....

16 hours ago, Wilson said:

The days of $39 DX packages are gone, long gone. Purchase at the price you are comfortable with and if it goes down you can cancel for a refund and repurchase at the lower price. No they will not just refund the difference.

Time will tell with pricing, but as you mentioned there is no real danger in booking since you can reprice. 

Royal is stating that cruisers are spending more on their cruises than they did pre-Covid...will that continue indefinitely?  Again, time will tell, but I suspect you have the pent up demand Disney mentality of let's make this a trip of a lifetime going on.  It will be interesting to see how the economics work moving forward, particularly with the potential that people have less discretionary funds in the future (rising prices) and all those FCC's being used up.  At some point they are going to have to increase their population of cruisers.  Maybe that happens organically with people becoming more comfortable with cruising, but again time will tell. 

I suspect pricing will have to "normalize" somewhat unless they increase their customer base.

Royal Caribbean has been back to sailing for less than a year.  The fact that they have FCC’s that cancel 12/31/2022 is absurd, imo.  I get FCC expirations in a typical situation, but to put expirations on them when they haven’t returned to cruising under any semblance of how they did when most people booked….they have been holding onto that money and now they are going to say “poof” it’s gone.  They may not be alone in the industry, but I think there is going to be a big mess at the end of this year if the explanations in this thread are accurate.

Matt….this would make a great item for clarification for all your followers that don’t meet current criteria for sailing.  Is it one year from the rebooked cruise or all expire 12/31/22, no matter what.  Some general clarification would be much appreciated.

8 hours ago, Matt said:

This is a place for reasonable discussion of cruise ship news and rumors. Not a place to discuss your personal thoughts on Covid, vaccines, masks, and/or politics.

It's a simple rule because the moment it veers in that other direction, it just devolves into name calling, personal attacks, and divisive chatter.

We try to give a little leeway since inevitably there's some blurred lines when talking about cruise ship protocols, but if it goes too far, that's the end of it.

There's plenty of places to discuss Covid on the internet, but this isn't one of them.

I can’t speak for others, but any of my posts are directly related to Covid protocols on cruise ships, not Covid in general or politics.  A lot of people have moved on and are cruising again, but there are still some of us that aren’t able to because of current protocols, or should I say choose not to jump through the hoops placed in front of us.  For those that are back to cruising…congrats.  Some who were part of this community prior to the pandemic, when shorts during formal night was the controversial discussions, are still waiting to be able to participate in this activity we all enjoy, but we aren’t able to discuss when that might become a reality.  Oh well…

This thread seems shorter than it was before.  I wish there was a place for reasonable discussion.

I wonder if anyone will ever consider natural immunity in their protocols.  Would be a breathe of fresh air, imo.

2 hours ago, CruisingNewb said:

Hmmm....

1. The Forum rules clearly prohibit political opinion, yet every time a post about protocols shows up, so do the opinions.

2. The CDC has always had a problem with clear, concise, and meaningful written policies/protocols.  This is not new. 

3. Many of the people interpreting these CDC and RCCL rules should be attorneys!  Sadly, many should not.  Some of the comments are really helpful in analyzing the rules; however, it isn't really up to us to interpret and analyze.  It is RCCL who will, or will not, implement rules and such according to what RCCL thinks is best for its business and its customers.

4. I defer to RCCL in its own policies and procedures when it comes to Covid stuff.  First, cruises were entirely shut down for way too long because of the pandemic.  Second, RCCL expends a lot of money issuing refunds, credits, and other costs associated with people getting Covid prior to, during, and after the cruise.  I think that it is prudent business to be as accommodating to the majority of consumers yet as compliant as RCCL can be with the CDC rules in order to maintain a profitable business.  

5. Personally, I would rather mask up than have the anxiety driven requirement for testing negative 2 days prior to sailing.  This is killing me.

A lot of the opinions aren't really "political" opinions, they are just opinions.  Unfortunately just about everything has been turned into a political opinion at this point.  I have an opinion on the protocols.  It's my opinion.  I can assure you it has nothing to do with my political affiliation.

20 minutes ago, ChrisK2793 said:

Their new “rules” don’t say no vaccination requirements …… they say 95% “fully up to date” on the vaccine for an excellence rating 

 

I think this was based on Opting Out.  So if you Opt Out, and the punishment is everyone needs to wear a mask, that might not be as bad as the protocols associated with Opting In.

Welp, I didn’t read the thing, but since the CDC put it together I have some idea what it says.  Was hoping some common sense would come into play with summer and beyond, but if the CDC is calling the shots that won’t be the case.  If Royal intends to run this vaccine thing indefinitely, they should let people cash out their FCC’s that don’t want to sail under these protocols.

On 2/5/2022 at 9:20 AM, smokeybandit said:

Yes, eventually it will go away. Probably not this year though

Well hopefully they plan to extend FCC's beyond this year

Wouldn’t be a smart move given the current situation, but could be great for those that want to cruise without crowds.

Well there goes cruise #7.  I think I am done at this point.  I'll take my chips off the table at this point and stop thinking of a Royal Caribbean cruise as way for my family to vacation together.  At least they gave me advance notice, I'll give them credit for that.  Once things normalize and they have full ships, perhaps prices will normalize as well, if not, then oh well....

I don't think the cruise lines did themselves any favors in this whole process.  I understand this was a very difficult situation for everyone, but we will see how it goes moving forward.

I’m sure the folks at Pfizer wish this pandemic never happened, but man….

7 hours ago, Canadian-Cruiser said:

Unless one wants to cruise, fly or take a train in Canada. As of OCT 30 this is now required for all domestic travel. Ultimately if one wants to travel, this is how it will be so don't limit oneself based on ones own choices.

Look, these posts aren’t in the spirit of the rule to not discuss this topic.

4 hours ago, amcooper said:

I hope and believe that once the vaccine(s) is approved for ages 5-12, it will eventually be required to cruise.  Eventually schools will require it just like the other vaccine requirements for the past 150+ years.  Also in response to earlier comments about not basing their kids vaccine decision on cruising, I completely agree.  You should get your kids vaccinated for their health, your health, your family's health, and your fellow human beings health.  Cruising is just another excellent reason for people to vaccinate.  

That’s one take.

6 hours ago, UNCFanatik said:

I dont disagree with much that you are pointing out. My major sticking point with Vaccine requirements(I am vaccinated) is that they ignore natural immunity of those that have previously had Covid. I will not get into the argument over how long natural immunity vs vaccines and how long either is effective but there is enough research out there that would make a valid case for naturally acquired immunity should be included in any vaccine mandates. Just yesterday there was a major protest in NYC over vaccine mandates so it will be interesting to see how all this plays out with vaccine requirements for other sectors of travel industry when it comes to domestic travel. It seems the airline lobbyists would object to vaccine requirements to fly domestically but that matter is certainly up for debate and will play out in due time. And how willing passengers will submit to covid tests and have to pay for out of pocket. I have flown at least 20 times domestically since pandemic and that would be a hard sell to shell out covid testing costs each time vs a cruise. 

and you are right, Royal has to follow the protocols of the countries they visit and that creates the dilemma. It will be interesting to watch to see if FL follows through with fines for cruise lines and the certain court battles that will follow.

Strange times indeed and will be fascinating to watch to see how all this plays out 

your natural immunity point is spot on.  it makes it hard to accept the whole premise when you ignore such a significant factor in the discussion.

11 minutes ago, KWofPerth said:

You are correct about this. A couple of surveys show a roughly even split between three outlooks - 1/3 of parents will vaccinate their kids immediately, 1/3 will 'wait and see', and the final 1/3 are entirely opposed.

Good luck with this one, Royal! 

My guess is it will remain optional with restrictions to remain in place for unvaxxed kids. (Unless the CDC comes over the top and mandates it somehow).

I doubt it will be optional, unless all vaccines become optional.  They have had “eligible” individuals in the vaccine wording and doubt they would treat 5-11 different.  They had a chance to do that with 12-15 year olds or 16-17 year olds, and didn’t.  A 12 year old gets the same dose as an adult.  An 11 year old would get one third the dose.  An argument could be made that it’s more palatable to vaccinate an 11 year old than a 12 year old.

12 minutes ago, MrMarc said:

None of us know, unless there is some crew following this.  If I were on the ship, those issues would bother me, because of coming into contact with so many different people increases their chance of getting it greatly.  So anything that would reduce those odds would be better.  They have more risk and exposure than the passengers do.  I don't think a lot of us, me included, had thought of the crew, and have been imposing our own views on them.    I wonder if they have a union or other group looking out for their interests, rather than having their situation be dictated by the comfort or discomfort and/or political views of the passengers. 

None of us know….enough said

7 hours ago, Matt said:

I expect whatever decision is reached, it takes to the last minute to be announced.

This lack of a decision yet by the CDC is partly to blame why Royal Caribbean hasn't released November protocols

It’s really ridiculous that they haven’t released them IMO.  I have a Nov 21 sailing booked and I don’t know the protocols and can’t get a refund until they tell me what is 99.9% likely going to be the case.  They can hide behind it’s out of their control, but if it’s not extended are they really going to drop vaccine requirements?  So what are we really talking about some mask nuances.  Silly.

2 hours ago, dswallow said:

Sure, but we're talking about how to deal with large numbers of visitors; you try to get the most bang for the buck and minimize entry of infectious people; you may not get them all, of course, but this approach likely gets more than not having this approach does, with pretty minimal impact, even. Just because a few problems could still get through doesn't mean you just toss your hands in the air, close your eyes, and let them all through.

 

Pretty minimal impact, not sure how you draw that conclusion.  Perhaps the Bahamas will just print extra money like the US.

58 minutes ago, CruiseGus said:

to be honest, I can't understand why anyone would want to take their un-vacinated child on a cruise ship or to Disney, or any other crowded public unregulated place right now with the surge of the Delta variant.  It is enough of a concern getting them back to face to face school right now.

Before the end of the year the Vaccine will be approved for children and NCL will gladly welcome them back to a much safer environment.

I do not mean to offend anyone with my comments, and apologize to you if I do, they are solely my own opinion. Hopefully we can both still enjoy cruising as that's what we have in common.

Cruise ships are pretty “regulated” with their protocols.

17 minutes ago, Matt said:

Florida's law violates NCLH's rights under the First Amendment. Explanation begins on page 16

Unchecked legislature = bad

Legislating from the bench = bad

Perhaps she made a good decision based on the facts, I don't have the patience to read it (thank you for the summary so I didn't have to), so I guess I'll step back and read the comments. 

15 minutes ago, Unsuspecting Cruiser said:

It's for the best. Banning unvaccinated cruisers reduces the likelihood of cruise interruptions from COVID cases, and possibly remove mask mandate onboard which will greatly improve experiences of passengers.

If the goal is to reduce the likelihood, then might as well keep the masks too, right?