GrandmaAirplane

In my experience you:
"Don't tug on Superman's cape, you don't spit into the wind, you don't pull the mask off that ol' Lone Ranger and you don't mess around with Jim".
These are the basic tenets of life.
?
Oh yes ... do not flaunt a Captain's Regulation (I wish that line flowed properly into that fantastic Jim Croce song).
Curt from Canada 

I think a lot of people know, and personally I'd been looking at possibly going to Hawaii at the end of year (changed mind and it will likely be a Caribbean resort if we go). And because many of us are not working or working from home, I think that the self-isolation period becomes less of an impediment.
But I think that many Canadians are still wary of going to the US because of the numbers there. If the numbers start going down and stay down in the US, then we'll see an upswing in southbound travel.

Not really sure. Different fleet size is definitely a factor but so is median age.  Much of Carnival's fleet is smaller and older.  
With the introduction of mega sized ships Royal grew more efficient in terms of revenue per passenger carried.  Smaller fleet but with bigger ships, Royal has been achieving better revenue performance on a relative basis.  For every mega ship Royal has at sea, Carnival needs somewhere between two to three ships to carry the same numbers, passengers and revenue.
Now remove the guests and move into a mode of maintaining and operating a fleet at reduced crew levels.  That's still a Captain per ship, a senior bridge crew per ship,  marine departments per ship, security teams per ship.  Dock fees, fuel minimums, operating certificates, etc. all on a per ship basis.  The highest paid crew positions are still required while many of the lowest paid positions have been sent home. 
The cost to maintain a smaller ship during these times may be slightly lower that the cost to maintain a mega sized ship but at absolute minimums there is a floor that is reached, a minimum operating cost that any ship requires regardless of size.  That extra two to three ships per million in passenger revenue starts to bite them very hard. 
There are also fewer brands so fewer high priced executive teams running each brand.   Royal Caribbean International, the flagship brand operates around the world.  Carnival as in the red whale tail brand that is the flagship primarily operates only in North America.  Carnival Australia is a completely different organization from a corporate structure perspective sharing only the name and whale tail, it's almost like yet another Carnival brand.  For other regions Carnival operates another brand such as P&O, AIDA, Costa for example.  Like ships there are floor costs to operate each brand using the corporate structure that Carnival uses.   For each brand there are presidents and senior vice presidents, etc. - the highest priced positions.
I also think corporate culture starts to creep in as a factor which underlie the revenue performance and revenue efficiency that was experienced during the good times in the decades leading up to this point.  That's hard to quantify in exact numbers.  During the good times the cost of Carnival's corporate culture and inefficiency was masked by the fists full of dollars coming in.  Stripped of passenger revenue and forced to operate at minimums we see it more plainly.   

I think the airlines do have some strong lobby groups. But also, when you fly there is a paper trail that leads to your theoretical end point. I think it's still a little weak, but at least there's something to go on if contact tracing is required. 
 
The land border would have far too many people  crossing to make this possible without tracking the car or something of that nature. And I'm pretty certain that this would not go over well. 

I just wanted to share some good vibrations. While I had two cruises cancelled this year (May, Oct), and I am still waiting on taxes and fees to be refunded, I have made the best of a bad situation. I gladly chose the 125% FCC and the 125% cruise planner credit. I have done all the bookings myself, mostly through email using RCI sales reps I have used in the past, because I’m in the UK and don’t really have a goto travel agent.  So the good news is I have been able to go from an 8 night sailing to a 12 night sailing (with nothing but gratuities, taxes, and fees to pay) using the 125% FCC and have amassed $1400 OBC to spend. I have lost out on about $125 OBC credit but considering the 4 extra nights and the itinerary (Canary Islands, Portugal, and Spain) I am super excited! I didn’t even have to pay a deposit, as FCC was reinstated while I was on the phone finalising the booking.  So yes, it has not been ideal, I am still looking at a much better cruise than I started out with in my opinion. The new booking is for July 2021, so hopefully 3rd time lucky.

I think the lines that aren't sailing yet are watching the ones who are testing to evaluate what works and what doesn't.   I think sailing from US will be more event driven than an arbitrary date.  Protocols to be decided upon, approved by the USG then slowly start with limited number of ships - each a work in progress.  If effective therapeutic and prophylactic treatments get rolled out, the travel industry will start leaning forward and a little more confidence will be in the air.  

Yes, I’m aware of that. The “loophole” is actually not a bad policy decision - it adds a layer of intent and commitment to travel. It also provides the means for the authorities to better vet, as well as more closely monitor the mandatory 14-day quarantine on arrival.
This means that if the reason to travel is important enough, you can still travel across the border, but subject to strict conditions.
We really don’t want U.S. citizens to show up in cars at our border for a “cheap & safe” vacation, or for a sort-of longer “getting out of Dodge” stay. Montreal did end up with a couple of NYC residents show up at one of our ERs early on... 
It also prevents me from doing a short hop across the border, into a hot zone, and possibly bringing it back to my home community... sure I can fly, but I’d have to seriously consider the cost and quarantine conditions on the return.
There will always be people who will think that masking, safe distancing, and travel restrictions should not apply to them... at least we’re keeping most of those from coming up here right now. We’ve got plenty of our own covidiots to deal with anyway.

The problem in Melbourne is it's impossible to manage when people can't follow the rules. Infected people are knowingly out in the community spreading the virus even though they should have been isolating at home. We had 800 infected people not at home when checked on by police. No choice but to lock everyone up before the numbers get too big to control.
The latest outbreak has been traced back to returning overseas passengers hotel quarantine. The security guards employed to make sure guests didn't leave until completing their 14 days quarantine were sleeping with some of the return passengers who turned out to be infected. The guards then passed it on the other people in the community, and now here we are. This is a true story.. I am not even joking! ?‍♂️

Here’s what a slow return to normal looks like where I live, in Ontario (Canada):
We went to a cinema to see a movie yesterday — Bought our tickets online, picked our seats in a much reduced capacity theatre, with bookable seats in pairs within acceptable social distancing requirements, wore our masks from the car to our seats, bought popcorn by snaking though the revised concession stand set-up & paid by tapping our CC on the pad, removed our masks at our seat & ate our popcorn, masks went back on with the closing credits.
Went to a restaurant for dinner — Wore our masks from the car to our table, kept masks on while ordering our food & dealing with our masked waiter, removed our masks only after our plates were placed in front of us and the waiter had moved away, remasked when we finished our plates, paid the bill at our table.
Everyone around us followed the same sanitary protocols, and we felt comfortable with our outing. As a matter of fact, I could tell that we weren’t the only ones happy to enjoy these small pleasures.
I’m hoping to visit my son and his family in Manitoba next month. That province has a mandatory 14-day quarantine for arrivals from where I live. I’m OK with that, since I really wouldn’t them or anyone else inadvertently exposed by me - especially since I will be flying in. This is what I’m prepared to do to make this happen: I will not leave my house for a week before I’m due to leave, I’ll get tested 3 days before (turn-around time for results is 24-48 hours), I will strictly self-isolate from the time of the test to leaving for the airport, I will arrange a safe pick-up from the airport to where I’ll stay quarantined for 14 days, *then* I’ll visit with my family. I’ll be self-isolating when I go home too & get re-tested a week after my return (don’t have to do that part, but I will - I value my friends & neighbours enough to do that.) I’m putting more than a month aside to make this visit happen, and it shall basically be my only in-person visit with them this year. I last saw them over the last Holidays, had to cancel my May and summer trips, and need to also cancel next Christmas’ visit (flu season in full swing each previous Holidays visits - so don’t want to deal with that too this year.)
My own family doctor also estimates a couple of years of this new normal of masking and maintaining social distancing. I’ve also resigned myself to having all sorts of risk mitigation measures interfere with domestic & int’l travel from “hot” zones to “cold” zones, as authorities play whack-a-mole with flare-ups of community transmissions and move up & down the opening phases.
I’ll be much happier when a reassuring set of treatments would be available to us, in the eventuality that a friend or family member gets sick because of being inadvertently infected. They are who I am most worried about right now.
I’d like to be able to eventually think of COVID-19 in the same way that I look at malaria or dengue when I travel - avoid getting infected in the first place (prophylactic drugs, barrier nets and bug spray), know the symptoms, get tested & seek medical help, take the treatment (malaria) and deal with the symptoms (dengue), and hope that one day that there is an effective vaccine available (not yet, for either.)

I feel for you.  I know a teacher who has taught special needs classes.  We've talked about the special needs students and their parents several times as various approaches to reopening have been tabled.  
Some special needs students can't understand the concept of personal space or maintaining distance.  Remote learning isn't ideal for any student but for some special need students it just doesn't work at all.    It can be more difficult applying pandemic protocols to special needs students for in person learning, the same protocols that have many challenges in general terms in public schools before considering special needs.   
Some teachers are at risk or have at risk family members at home and are seriously concerned what they might bring home.  It's one thing to reopen schools, should at risk teachers or those with at risk family members be forced to work in school during a pandemic or be terminated?
Teachers in the U.S. already face a shortage of school supplies.  Will school boards supplying PPE?  Not going to happen, at least not here.  One proposal a month or so ago would have given a teacher one new mask every week, that was the best they could do. 
There is no good solution with a highly spreadable and potentially deadly virus in play.
The current situation is extra hard on the parents of some special needs students.   

Here’s what a slow return to normal looks like where I live, in Ontario (Canada):
We went to a cinema to see a movie yesterday — Bought our tickets online, picked our seats in a much reduced capacity theatre, with bookable seats in pairs within acceptable social distancing requirements, wore our masks from the car to our seats, bought popcorn by snaking though the revised concession stand set-up & paid by tapping our CC on the pad, removed our masks at our seat & ate our popcorn, masks went back on with the closing credits.
Went to a restaurant for dinner — Wore our masks from the car to our table, kept masks on while ordering our food & dealing with our masked waiter, removed our masks only after our plates were placed in front of us and the waiter had moved away, remasked when we finished our plates, paid the bill at our table.
Everyone around us followed the same sanitary protocols, and we felt comfortable with our outing. As a matter of fact, I could tell that we weren’t the only ones happy to enjoy these small pleasures.
I’m hoping to visit my son and his family in Manitoba next month. That province has a mandatory 14-day quarantine for arrivals from where I live. I’m OK with that, since I really wouldn’t them or anyone else inadvertently exposed by me - especially since I will be flying in. This is what I’m prepared to do to make this happen: I will not leave my house for a week before I’m due to leave, I’ll get tested 3 days before (turn-around time for results is 24-48 hours), I will strictly self-isolate from the time of the test to leaving for the airport, I will arrange a safe pick-up from the airport to where I’ll stay quarantined for 14 days, *then* I’ll visit with my family. I’ll be self-isolating when I go home too & get re-tested a week after my return (don’t have to do that part, but I will - I value my friends & neighbours enough to do that.) I’m putting more than a month aside to make this visit happen, and it shall basically be my only in-person visit with them this year. I last saw them over the last Holidays, had to cancel my May and summer trips, and need to also cancel next Christmas’ visit (flu season in full swing each previous Holidays visits - so don’t want to deal with that too this year.)
My own family doctor also estimates a couple of years of this new normal of masking and maintaining social distancing. I’ve also resigned myself to having all sorts of risk mitigation measures interfere with domestic & int’l travel from “hot” zones to “cold” zones, as authorities play whack-a-mole with flare-ups of community transmissions and move up & down the opening phases.
I’ll be much happier when a reassuring set of treatments would be available to us, in the eventuality that a friend or family member gets sick because of being inadvertently infected. They are who I am most worried about right now.
I’d like to be able to eventually think of COVID-19 in the same way that I look at malaria or dengue when I travel - avoid getting infected in the first place (prophylactic drugs, barrier nets and bug spray), know the symptoms, get tested & seek medical help, take the treatment (malaria) and deal with the symptoms (dengue), and hope that one day that there is an effective vaccine available (not yet, for either.)

Here’s what a slow return to normal looks like where I live, in Ontario (Canada):
We went to a cinema to see a movie yesterday — Bought our tickets online, picked our seats in a much reduced capacity theatre, with bookable seats in pairs within acceptable social distancing requirements, wore our masks from the car to our seats, bought popcorn by snaking though the revised concession stand set-up & paid by tapping our CC on the pad, removed our masks at our seat & ate our popcorn, masks went back on with the closing credits.
Went to a restaurant for dinner — Wore our masks from the car to our table, kept masks on while ordering our food & dealing with our masked waiter, removed our masks only after our plates were placed in front of us and the waiter had moved away, remasked when we finished our plates, paid the bill at our table.
Everyone around us followed the same sanitary protocols, and we felt comfortable with our outing. As a matter of fact, I could tell that we weren’t the only ones happy to enjoy these small pleasures.
I’m hoping to visit my son and his family in Manitoba next month. That province has a mandatory 14-day quarantine for arrivals from where I live. I’m OK with that, since I really wouldn’t them or anyone else inadvertently exposed by me - especially since I will be flying in. This is what I’m prepared to do to make this happen: I will not leave my house for a week before I’m due to leave, I’ll get tested 3 days before (turn-around time for results is 24-48 hours), I will strictly self-isolate from the time of the test to leaving for the airport, I will arrange a safe pick-up from the airport to where I’ll stay quarantined for 14 days, *then* I’ll visit with my family. I’ll be self-isolating when I go home too & get re-tested a week after my return (don’t have to do that part, but I will - I value my friends & neighbours enough to do that.) I’m putting more than a month aside to make this visit happen, and it shall basically be my only in-person visit with them this year. I last saw them over the last Holidays, had to cancel my May and summer trips, and need to also cancel next Christmas’ visit (flu season in full swing each previous Holidays visits - so don’t want to deal with that too this year.)
My own family doctor also estimates a couple of years of this new normal of masking and maintaining social distancing. I’ve also resigned myself to having all sorts of risk mitigation measures interfere with domestic & int’l travel from “hot” zones to “cold” zones, as authorities play whack-a-mole with flare-ups of community transmissions and move up & down the opening phases.
I’ll be much happier when a reassuring set of treatments would be available to us, in the eventuality that a friend or family member gets sick because of being inadvertently infected. They are who I am most worried about right now.
I’d like to be able to eventually think of COVID-19 in the same way that I look at malaria or dengue when I travel - avoid getting infected in the first place (prophylactic drugs, barrier nets and bug spray), know the symptoms, get tested & seek medical help, take the treatment (malaria) and deal with the symptoms (dengue), and hope that one day that there is an effective vaccine available (not yet, for either.)

Well, crud. This is just not good news. Testing protocols were followed. 
https://www.adn.com/alaska-news/2020/08/04/alaskas-first-cruise-ship-of-2020-returns-to-port-early-after-passenger-tests-positive-for-covid-19/

An update on the Paul Gauguin:
More detailed (and well balanced) info is now available in local media:
https://www.radio1.pf/paul-gauguin-les-passagers-en-septaine-a-terre-le-protocole-sanitaire-renforce/
https://www.tahiti-infos.com/Les-passagers-du-Gauguin-debarques-et-confines_a193190.html
None of the other passengers and crew tested positive from Sunday’s testing, and they have been allowed to start to disembark the Gauguin Monday night. Here, IMO, are the salient facts to note:
The infected passenger is a 22-year-old travelling with her mother. They arrived from the States last Sunday, before boarding on Thursday. They’d been diligently following the mandatory masking and social distancing protocols, and were also diligent about doing the required self-test and dropping it off as instructed. They 100% complied with all of the conditions that were imposed on their travel and their cruise -- they did their part to mitigate risk.
The requirement for a test to be done 72 hours before boarding the departure flight is not perfect - but we all knew that already. It’s acknowledged that she could have easily been infected in the interval, or had a first false-negative. The required self-test done 4 days after arrival did its job. However, it did not prevent her from embarking the ship. Because of this, a 3rd test on the eve of embarkation is now going to be required, administered by the authorities.
The sanitary protocols onboard ship were strictly adhered to, and worked. Tracing identified 24 ‘at risk’ crew and passengers that had been in contact with the pair (out of 340.) The pair’s shoreside day on Bora-Bora, with the use of a rental car and a stop at a restaurant, as well as their time in Tahiti could reliably be contact-traced as well.
The authorities expressed confidence in their testing, tracing and isolating policy. They feel that the E.T.I.S. system (https://www.etis.pf/en/), that they have put in place to manage the health screening and monitoring of the tourists on the islands, functioned as intended. They felt that the risk of exposure had been minimal (not zero.)
All passengers and crew that tested negative must now adhere to a 7-day quarantine, to end with retesting to be redone at the end of this period. The monitored ‘confinement’ must be done at home for the residents, or in designated accommodation for the other passengers. All had to sign an ‘honour-bound’ quarantine compliance agreement. Passengers who live on Tahiti were the first to be allowed to disembark and go directly home on Monday night. Residents of the other islands are expected to disembark to return home today. The crew shall remain onboard. 
The mother-daughter pair will be closely monitored during their quarantine on Tahiti, for any sign of illness.
The interesting thing about all of this is that this incident has happened in a “closed environment” of sorts - with French Polynesia being essentially free of community transmission. What remains to be watched, especially in the next 7-10 days, is if the islands remain cluster-free, and if none of the passengers and crew return a positive result when retested in 7 days.
The French Polynesian authorities did state that they do not want situations like this one to repeat, where a ship carrying passengers has to return to port and deal with a quarantine situation again.
The main take-away here is the importance of compliance with the sanitary protocols.

An update on the Paul Gauguin:
More detailed (and well balanced) info is now available in local media:
https://www.radio1.pf/paul-gauguin-les-passagers-en-septaine-a-terre-le-protocole-sanitaire-renforce/
https://www.tahiti-infos.com/Les-passagers-du-Gauguin-debarques-et-confines_a193190.html
None of the other passengers and crew tested positive from Sunday’s testing, and they have been allowed to start to disembark the Gauguin Monday night. Here, IMO, are the salient facts to note:
The infected passenger is a 22-year-old travelling with her mother. They arrived from the States last Sunday, before boarding on Thursday. They’d been diligently following the mandatory masking and social distancing protocols, and were also diligent about doing the required self-test and dropping it off as instructed. They 100% complied with all of the conditions that were imposed on their travel and their cruise -- they did their part to mitigate risk.
The requirement for a test to be done 72 hours before boarding the departure flight is not perfect - but we all knew that already. It’s acknowledged that she could have easily been infected in the interval, or had a first false-negative. The required self-test done 4 days after arrival did its job. However, it did not prevent her from embarking the ship. Because of this, a 3rd test on the eve of embarkation is now going to be required, administered by the authorities.
The sanitary protocols onboard ship were strictly adhered to, and worked. Tracing identified 24 ‘at risk’ crew and passengers that had been in contact with the pair (out of 340.) The pair’s shoreside day on Bora-Bora, with the use of a rental car and a stop at a restaurant, as well as their time in Tahiti could reliably be contact-traced as well.
The authorities expressed confidence in their testing, tracing and isolating policy. They feel that the E.T.I.S. system (https://www.etis.pf/en/), that they have put in place to manage the health screening and monitoring of the tourists on the islands, functioned as intended. They felt that the risk of exposure had been minimal (not zero.)
All passengers and crew that tested negative must now adhere to a 7-day quarantine, to end with retesting to be redone at the end of this period. The monitored ‘confinement’ must be done at home for the residents, or in designated accommodation for the other passengers. All had to sign an ‘honour-bound’ quarantine compliance agreement. Passengers who live on Tahiti were the first to be allowed to disembark and go directly home on Monday night. Residents of the other islands are expected to disembark to return home today. The crew shall remain onboard. 
The mother-daughter pair will be closely monitored during their quarantine on Tahiti, for any sign of illness.
The interesting thing about all of this is that this incident has happened in a “closed environment” of sorts - with French Polynesia being essentially free of community transmission. What remains to be watched, especially in the next 7-10 days, is if the islands remain cluster-free, and if none of the passengers and crew return a positive result when retested in 7 days.
The French Polynesian authorities did state that they do not want situations like this one to repeat, where a ship carrying passengers has to return to port and deal with a quarantine situation again.
The main take-away here is the importance of compliance with the sanitary protocols.

For the time being, they seem to be looking at tightening up testing and screening, as a means of preventing infected persons to board in the first place, rather than stop cruising altogether. The problem is not only PG, but also the cargo/passenger ships that combine “cruising” with a vital service between the islands.

One can properly ask that question but the question can't be asked and motivated by emotion.
In your view, what is the data based "risk to other countries" (French Polynesia in this case)? Can the risks one assigns to C-19 community spread be mitigated by locally implemented measures?  If there is a cluster of C-19 infections, will such disease burden outpace the capacity of the health care system to care for the infected? What is the benefit of improving the island's economies weighed against all these risks?
These are hard questions and, it seems to me, local public health officials are answering them by saying, right now, we will continue to allow travelers to come to our islands and believe this step, while it carries some risks, those risks are outweighed by the benefit to our economies and our citizens.
Encouraging and I like it.

The links are great and the reporting at them is pretty good. Facts not fear. 
Will US and EU media outlets quote these ameliorating facts? Time will tell ..... and as you should know, I won't be counting on that.
The health ministries stating they don't want a repeat of these occurrences is somewhat problematic as it implies they'll not allow the PG to operate. They could, I suppose, regain authority to do that but, I can see the threat of introduction of COVID to the islands by foreign travelers as worrisome. It seemed, though, public health officials, cognizant of the importance of the tourist trade to the islands, won't close airports or sea ports or impose quarantine on arriving travellers unless a "cluster of cases" (implying community spread) can be identified. This is an impressive fact and data based position. We need more of these takes surrounding resumption of cruising globally.   

An update on the Paul Gauguin:
More detailed (and well balanced) info is now available in local media:
https://www.radio1.pf/paul-gauguin-les-passagers-en-septaine-a-terre-le-protocole-sanitaire-renforce/
https://www.tahiti-infos.com/Les-passagers-du-Gauguin-debarques-et-confines_a193190.html
None of the other passengers and crew tested positive from Sunday’s testing, and they have been allowed to start to disembark the Gauguin Monday night. Here, IMO, are the salient facts to note:
The infected passenger is a 22-year-old travelling with her mother. They arrived from the States last Sunday, before boarding on Thursday. They’d been diligently following the mandatory masking and social distancing protocols, and were also diligent about doing the required self-test and dropping it off as instructed. They 100% complied with all of the conditions that were imposed on their travel and their cruise -- they did their part to mitigate risk.
The requirement for a test to be done 72 hours before boarding the departure flight is not perfect - but we all knew that already. It’s acknowledged that she could have easily been infected in the interval, or had a first false-negative. The required self-test done 4 days after arrival did its job. However, it did not prevent her from embarking the ship. Because of this, a 3rd test on the eve of embarkation is now going to be required, administered by the authorities.
The sanitary protocols onboard ship were strictly adhered to, and worked. Tracing identified 24 ‘at risk’ crew and passengers that had been in contact with the pair (out of 340.) The pair’s shoreside day on Bora-Bora, with the use of a rental car and a stop at a restaurant, as well as their time in Tahiti could reliably be contact-traced as well.
The authorities expressed confidence in their testing, tracing and isolating policy. They feel that the E.T.I.S. system (https://www.etis.pf/en/), that they have put in place to manage the health screening and monitoring of the tourists on the islands, functioned as intended. They felt that the risk of exposure had been minimal (not zero.)
All passengers and crew that tested negative must now adhere to a 7-day quarantine, to end with retesting to be redone at the end of this period. The monitored ‘confinement’ must be done at home for the residents, or in designated accommodation for the other passengers. All had to sign an ‘honour-bound’ quarantine compliance agreement. Passengers who live on Tahiti were the first to be allowed to disembark and go directly home on Monday night. Residents of the other islands are expected to disembark to return home today. The crew shall remain onboard. 
The mother-daughter pair will be closely monitored during their quarantine on Tahiti, for any sign of illness.
The interesting thing about all of this is that this incident has happened in a “closed environment” of sorts - with French Polynesia being essentially free of community transmission. What remains to be watched, especially in the next 7-10 days, is if the islands remain cluster-free, and if none of the passengers and crew return a positive result when retested in 7 days.
The French Polynesian authorities did state that they do not want situations like this one to repeat, where a ship carrying passengers has to return to port and deal with a quarantine situation again.
The main take-away here is the importance of compliance with the sanitary protocols.

An update on the Paul Gauguin:
More detailed (and well balanced) info is now available in local media:
https://www.radio1.pf/paul-gauguin-les-passagers-en-septaine-a-terre-le-protocole-sanitaire-renforce/
https://www.tahiti-infos.com/Les-passagers-du-Gauguin-debarques-et-confines_a193190.html
None of the other passengers and crew tested positive from Sunday’s testing, and they have been allowed to start to disembark the Gauguin Monday night. Here, IMO, are the salient facts to note:
The infected passenger is a 22-year-old travelling with her mother. They arrived from the States last Sunday, before boarding on Thursday. They’d been diligently following the mandatory masking and social distancing protocols, and were also diligent about doing the required self-test and dropping it off as instructed. They 100% complied with all of the conditions that were imposed on their travel and their cruise -- they did their part to mitigate risk.
The requirement for a test to be done 72 hours before boarding the departure flight is not perfect - but we all knew that already. It’s acknowledged that she could have easily been infected in the interval, or had a first false-negative. The required self-test done 4 days after arrival did its job. However, it did not prevent her from embarking the ship. Because of this, a 3rd test on the eve of embarkation is now going to be required, administered by the authorities.
The sanitary protocols onboard ship were strictly adhered to, and worked. Tracing identified 24 ‘at risk’ crew and passengers that had been in contact with the pair (out of 340.) The pair’s shoreside day on Bora-Bora, with the use of a rental car and a stop at a restaurant, as well as their time in Tahiti could reliably be contact-traced as well.
The authorities expressed confidence in their testing, tracing and isolating policy. They feel that the E.T.I.S. system (https://www.etis.pf/en/), that they have put in place to manage the health screening and monitoring of the tourists on the islands, functioned as intended. They felt that the risk of exposure had been minimal (not zero.)
All passengers and crew that tested negative must now adhere to a 7-day quarantine, to end with retesting to be redone at the end of this period. The monitored ‘confinement’ must be done at home for the residents, or in designated accommodation for the other passengers. All had to sign an ‘honour-bound’ quarantine compliance agreement. Passengers who live on Tahiti were the first to be allowed to disembark and go directly home on Monday night. Residents of the other islands are expected to disembark to return home today. The crew shall remain onboard. 
The mother-daughter pair will be closely monitored during their quarantine on Tahiti, for any sign of illness.
The interesting thing about all of this is that this incident has happened in a “closed environment” of sorts - with French Polynesia being essentially free of community transmission. What remains to be watched, especially in the next 7-10 days, is if the islands remain cluster-free, and if none of the passengers and crew return a positive result when retested in 7 days.
The French Polynesian authorities did state that they do not want situations like this one to repeat, where a ship carrying passengers has to return to port and deal with a quarantine situation again.
The main take-away here is the importance of compliance with the sanitary protocols.

Back to this issue of the Paul Gauguin.
It’s now been confirmed that the infected passenger is one of a few Americans who travelled earlier in the week to Papeete to board the cruise. She was tested negative 3 days before leaving home.
She was probably infected 0-5 days before leaving home. She could have been in contact with an infected person at a Home Depot or Walmart or Macy’s, doing last minute shopping. She could have been infected at LAX. Who knows... with the U.S. having uncontrolled COVID-19 community transmission, it’s really not important where or how she came in contact with the virus before arriving in French Polynesia.
However, it will matter to the French authorities, and to every other country who is considering allowing American tourists to return, that she very likely arrived already infected and pre-symptomatic before her second test was done.
Almost all of the ship’s passengers right now are residents of French Polynesia, which has literally been COVID-free for weeks, after having very few cases to begin with. Many onboard went to visit family members on Bora Bora. Some are just a couple of miles from home, stuck on the ship in Papeete right now, who at best will need to strictly self-isolate for 14 days if they are allowed to disembark in the next day or so and return to their homes.
Island nations do not have the medical resources to respond to large outbreaks. Tahiti has a large hospital, Bora Bora does not. Returning residents who go back to their homes on other islands than Tahiti, and those exposed residents and locals who may later develop a positive test or symptoms, or draw a losing ticket and become very sick with COVID, may not have quick access to adequate care.
This is what the rest of the world is looking at. So stop making any and every discussion about cruising and this pandemic a uniquely U.S.-centered problem. And stop making it a political issue.
All that the rest of the world is perceiving right now is that American tourists are covidiots. 
By reading many of the responses here, I’d agree.

The Paul Gauguin just restarted cruising with international passengers last Thursday, with a mix of resident, American and European passengers.
Both French Polynesia and the Gauguin (Ponant) had extensive arrival & embarkation testing & screening protocols.
See here: https://www.pgcruises.com/travel-advisory
it was as a result of the 4-day self-administered follow-up test that a female passenger was found to be positive late on Saturday. The ship returned to Papeete on Sunday, the passenger was retested positive, then taken off the ship with her companion to be placed into quarantine. All remaining passengers and crew were also retested on Sunday, with the results - and a decision as to what will happen next - to be announced later today. Passengers are now confined to their cabins.
This morning, there was more info available on French media, with little elsewhere - one English language source incorrectly identified the case as a crew member. The nationality of the infected tourist has not yet been disclosed.
Bora Bora, which had remained COVID-free up to now, had all passengers disembark for the day, before the results of the follow-up test came back. Extensive contact tracing will be undertaken there as well as in Tahiti, where the passenger spent a couple of days before boarding.
*This* is the one to watch, folks...

@Mrs. Thomas How have you determined if 98% of American's have not had the virus? Given the new and changing facts of the virus it is possible that more than half of Americans have had the virus.  Also there are facts and perceptions. Since are numbers keep increasing...whether you attribute that to testing or actual spread....we look like we are incompetent and diseased filled to the rest of the world. I mean people who try to treat this as nothing or the flu in America, while other countries take it serious, is idiotic. So in this case that woman is at fault, not the island.
 

The ongoing uncontrolled community transmission in the States is making it impossible for other countries to accept your citizens as tourists. Saying this does not make any of us treat a person who is American as “a nasty virus”  - as you state in your strawman argument. You can, however, justifiably be regarded as a society that lacks the collective will and direction to change your situation.
I am sure that the American tourists now in quarantine in Tahiti will be treated very well, and if she becomes sick, will get good medical care in Papeete.

Back to this issue of the Paul Gauguin.
It’s now been confirmed that the infected passenger is one of a few Americans who travelled earlier in the week to Papeete to board the cruise. She was tested negative 3 days before leaving home.
She was probably infected 0-5 days before leaving home. She could have been in contact with an infected person at a Home Depot or Walmart or Macy’s, doing last minute shopping. She could have been infected at LAX. Who knows... with the U.S. having uncontrolled COVID-19 community transmission, it’s really not important where or how she came in contact with the virus before arriving in French Polynesia.
However, it will matter to the French authorities, and to every other country who is considering allowing American tourists to return, that she very likely arrived already infected and pre-symptomatic before her second test was done.
Almost all of the ship’s passengers right now are residents of French Polynesia, which has literally been COVID-free for weeks, after having very few cases to begin with. Many onboard went to visit family members on Bora Bora. Some are just a couple of miles from home, stuck on the ship in Papeete right now, who at best will need to strictly self-isolate for 14 days if they are allowed to disembark in the next day or so and return to their homes.
Island nations do not have the medical resources to respond to large outbreaks. Tahiti has a large hospital, Bora Bora does not. Returning residents who go back to their homes on other islands than Tahiti, and those exposed residents and locals who may later develop a positive test or symptoms, or draw a losing ticket and become very sick with COVID, may not have quick access to adequate care.
This is what the rest of the world is looking at. So stop making any and every discussion about cruising and this pandemic a uniquely U.S.-centered problem. And stop making it a political issue.
All that the rest of the world is perceiving right now is that American tourists are covidiots. 
By reading many of the responses here, I’d agree.