JeffB

Quick update ...... the mess that is political reality continues to weigh heavily on a US economic recovery including getting revenue flowing again for the cruise lines. Yesterday afternoon, the president tweeted he had directed his negotiators to break of stimulus package negotiations with the Democrats - the stock market plunged 345 points. A few hours later then again late into the night he tweeted he was ready to sign smaller stimulus package bills including $25b to the airlines, $135B for the Pay Check Protection Program and finally $1200 stimulus checks. If this actually turns into legislation it could help open the door for discussions led by VP Pence involving the cruise industry's re-start calendar. But the D's have already opposed smaller packages and Pelosi and Schummer will undoubtedly dig their heels in again. Crazy times. Meanwhile, Hurricane Gamma, expected to hit the Yucatan Peninsula as a Cat 4 or 5 Hurricane (150mph winds), made landfall as a Cat 2 storm around 5:30am with winds in the town of Cancun reported to have registered 100mph. Tweets indicate some local damage, to what extent isn't clear yet but, Cat 2 is much better than a 5. Most roofs stay put under 120. So, maybe some hope for December but it seems we've been "hoping" on a month by month basis since the start of this thing only to be gut punched repeatedly causing hope to fade. Logistics - the entire spectrum of them - continue to be, IMO, the biggest hurdle to sailings in December, and that's assuming any dialogue going on right now about greenlighting cruising from US ports results in an end to the No-Sail Order by sometime in November. A restart date then might allow the industry time to assemble crews, train them and make some trial runs before passengers board and sail in December. My confidence level for that happening is low.

I'm not entirely ready to dump on Fain and RCG for not revealing November plans. I try to put myself into an executive level decision maker's shoes. I'll have a lot of departments providing input. Questions abound: How to best manage cash flow is probably at the top of the list. The good will of guests with previous reservations that took FCCs or L&Ss is pretty thin right now. A cancelation announcement for November could cascade into December or beyond. Potentially all of them asking for refunds not FCCs. The other thing RCG is dealing with involves planning crew and ship movements along with arranging for potential port calls - logistics, a complex issue at this time if there ever was one. But as a guess, I'd say the cash flow considerations are paramount. They would be if I were Fain. While that may seem greedy and not particularly customer friendly RCG, while more solidly positioned than any of them I think, cannot afford more red ink. Fain's job # 1 for now is to keep share prices high and the company from being unable to meet it's financial and debt repayment obligations going forward.

By now, anyone reading this blog knows that I am a strong re-opening advocate and support green-lighting cruise industry operations out of US ports. This is an update. Since Trump's infection with COVID, assessing the risk of C-19, benefits v. costs of mitigation measures has become more difficult. That is because every source of information from public health officials, main stream media (both broadcast and web based) and social media has become almost solely focused on COVID related information that is damaging to Trump. The purpose of this stream of negative COVID information is most likely to assure a Biden/Harris win such that Trump cannot contest the outcome of the election. It's working if today's polls showing Biden with a 10 point lead over Trump is an indicator of that. What does that have to do with rescinding or extending the No-sail-Order? A lot ........One would hope that a dialogue is continuing between the Pandemic Response Team, headed by VP Pence and interested parties on the cruise industry side of things. I think that is becoming increasingly difficult and the Team's potential to end the No-Sail-Order and restart cruise operations from US ports is going to fade into the background until after the election. It's possible that things could perk-up after Pence and Harris face off in the VP debate but other reelection tasks are going to keep Pence busy and not focused on getting everyone together at a round-table to talk about cruising. That's just the political reality of the cruising circumstances that are high on our list of important things to get done. it remains a shameful aspect of the current administration's neglect of an economic sector - the travel and leisure sector -that produces billons of dollars of revenues and wages annually and on a global scale. Weighing heavily on the political reality is the reality of US and Caribbean ports actually welcoming back cruise ships should the industry get green-lighted to restart. I just read a Bloomberg article on which Caribbean islands have opened their boarders. It's not a long list and those that are open require testing, quarantining or both. Porting in St. Lucia for example would not be an experience anything like you might have enjoyed previously. Now comes a Cat 4 Hurricane barreling though the Caribbean straights, headed for the Yucatan Peninsula of Mexico that will likely do extensive damage to Cancun and Cozumel, two potential ports that would probably welcome early start-up cruise ships. Accordingly, I'm much less optimistic today than a week ago about the potential for a return to cruising in November, let alone December. I wish I could be more up-beat. If we get news in the next week or so that the Pandemic Response Team and VP Pence have gathered interested parties to discuss restarting cruise operations from US ports, I might change my tune. Until then, not feeling great about it happening. '

To be clear, COVID-19 is the disease that presents through infection with SARS-CoV-2. While SARS-CoV-2 is related to the common cold in that it belongs to the family of coronaviruses, it is markedly different, hence the term novel coronavirus to identify it. The main difference is how the virus attaches to human cells, predominantly in the respiratory tract but also others. So far, studies of the novel virus indicate it isn't mutating. This and the novelty of the virus and particularly the spike protein that is the mechanism for attachment to the host cells, makes it a strong candidate for a vaccine that will be highly effective. While studies underway demonstrate that a COVID-19 vaccine will work and that side effects are mild (the typical arm soreness, some mild fatigue). We do not know yet how long an immunized person will be protected. However, it is known that the virus is not mutating, would not require new vaccines to address that, but rather booster shots. There are different types of vaccines in development but not yet FDA approved to prevent COVID-19. All of them target different features of SARS-CoV-2 to prevent it from replicating inside host cells or that prompt an antibody response so that humans have a head start when exposed to SARS-CoV-2. The common cold has no such novelty and attempts to promote immune responses to prevent a cold have not proven to work. Influenza, on the other hand, is susceptible to vaccines even though every season produces new, mutated flu strains. There are two ways influenza vaccines work. The first is by using an inactivated (killed) virus whose presence when introduced to the body by an injection, prompts a robust immune response. The second is by injecting a specific protein analog that prompts a human immune response. These vaccines are not always perfect protection but studies demonstrate that if it does not prevent symptoms, it lessens them often in significant ways. Neither of these types of vaccines give you the flu. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/prevent/misconceptions.htm Bottom line: get a flu shot and in the pandemic circumstance this is a doubly important public health preventative measure. Also, when vaccines for SARS-CoV-2 become available, especially if you are at higher risk for serious complications from COVID-19, avail yourself of it. The importance of getting a COVID shot in contributing to herd immunity and allowing a return to social and economic activity is absolutely essential.

Possibly but I'd say it's more about the CDC in the faces of Robert Redfield, Director of the CDC, Doctors Deborah Birx and Anthony Fauci, all of them very publicly and frequently appearing in interviews with main-stream media types, protecting the ground they've staked out on this. These people do believe in what they've put out there, none of it particularly flawed. The politics start to have an impact when a willfully combative president throws them under the bus. That is going to prompt defensive responses from these people who have reputations to protect. Pence can side step all of that if he handles it correctly and if there is anyone who can, it's him ...... assuming he's given the president's blessing to handle it.

A small, niggling point ...... the CDC has no regulatory powers. They advise on matters involving disease, disease spread and how to avoid or contain epidemics and pandemics in the US. They are an agency within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) - a Cabinet level branch with a Secretary that reports to the Executive Branch. When the No-Sail-Order was issued based on the CDC's recommendations, that was consistent with HHS's thinking that there was an urgent need to control entry to the US from across boarders, via airports and cruise ports alike. Therefore, it was codified (became law) under the powers of the Executive branch. The Department of Homeland Security was directed to implement its provisions and then enforce them through the US Coast Guard. This is important to understanding how and why VP Pence, acting as the Chairman of the Pandemic Advisory Panel within the Executive Branch of US government can dictate when the No-Sail-Order will expire. He's the guy that the cruise industry needs to convince that they can resume cruise operations safely and are going to go under if the No-Sail-Order isn't rescinded. I'd guess their goal is to get Pence to allow them to cruise starting in November - order will expire October 31st - to allow modest expansion of cruise ships and itineraries over the popular and potentially profitable Holiday season. You know that I will say this is a no-brainer for Pence when he is allowed to step away from the public health harangue coming from the CDC and bring the weight of the economic consequences that COVID has had on the travel industry into his decision making process. I'm not saying the CDC is full of it. They're trying to do a good job in the face of a president who is dismissive of the virus and it's public health impact. While, since he's had it, that might change, he's still a man all about the money. The economic cost to the cruise and travel industry of COVID has been catastrophic. He knows this. That dynamic hasn't been present to date in the decision making process about cruising - it's been all about what a mess that lash-up was when passengers and crew came down with COVID. We're well past that now. Pence may have gotten side tracked a bit with Trump's COVID diagnosis but it looks like he's going to make a quick recovery and will begin boasting about it soon ........ that could also be a substantial positive in that he tends to be a contrarian just to be one. One could conclude from that that he might be more politically prone to green-light the cruise industry even though that is politically risky due to the media's irresponsible, dire COVID consequences narrative that they are putting out there for public consumption as false a narrative as that is.

I didn't read it that way ....... NCL is in a different business position than RCCL. NCL was cash strapped when COVID hit and warned investors they didn't have enough cash to meet future obligations over the next 12 months in April. In order to conserve cash NCL cold stored most of their fleet. It takes a month or longer to bring a vessel out of cold storage - at least that's what I've heard. Warm storage takes about 2 weeks. If cruising doesn't resume within the next 90d, NCL will probably declare bankruptcy. That doesn't mean they will go away but it will be very hard for them to recover in a post-Covid cruise industry that is going to be cut-throat competitive when it comes to scrambling for market share. In the video that Matt posted Fain said that RCCL was ready to restart, could be restarted safely and European cruise ship operations are demonstrating it can be done. All they are waiting for is the CDC to remove the No-Sail-Order. It was encouraging to hear that "dialogue continues between the CDC, The Safe Sail Panel and the WH Covid Task Force." With regard to the length of cruises that will be "toast" in 2020, a restart with a "short cruise" would be a cruise of less than 10d and with limited ports of call. That was the industry word a short while ago. Not only are shorter cruises likely to have fewer health related problems, they are also generally more profitable. I don't know where the cut-off point is between, say, 3-5 or 7d cruises wrt profitability but there was a proliferation of 3-5d cruises that popped up a few years ago and seemed to grow in number. I read that the increased number of short cruises pre-Covid was due to their popularity and spending habits of those that booked them. Carnival's operations from North America dominated in scheduling and marketing those shorter cruises although RCCL and Celebrity had a few of them on their older ships.

I'm fine. I hold only a US Passport ....... It's just my passion to get past this false narrative that is being promulgated by several sources. The pandemic is real. It's impact on the public health is real but I believe it has been over-played at the detriment of the US economy and social well being.

They do but that's what they are paid the big bucks to do. We know more about SARS-CoV-2 than I think you are allowing. For example, it is not nearly as deadly as it was first thought to be when body bags were piling up outside Italian hospitals in February. You don't need to wash your groceries when you bring them home from the grocery store. That's because we now know that transmission by that mode is highly unlikely..... the public health benefit of doing that is nil. Virus transmission by contaminated surfaces, flushing toilets, many viral vectors previously thought to be significant modes of transmission, aren't primary modes of transmission. We know that the virus is transmitted through the air and there are proven public health benefits to air filtration with HEPA filters, in masking .... .so much so that Fauci said in June that, "if the US had uniformly masked from day 1, we would have controlled the spread of the virus." We know that 80% of COVID cases occur as a result of infrequently occurring, super-spreaders, people, not events...... understand this, aggressively ID these persons and trace their contacts and winner, winner, chicken dinner. I could go on but everyone will get the point. Look, disease control, what the CDC is all about, is based on a collection of post epidemic and pandemic epidemiology. One of the seminal data points in that field is R values. We don't know this for sure yet but the R value for SARS-CoV-2 is certainly going to turn out to be < 2; I've seen modeling that shows it will be less than 1. That is not a very virulent pathogen. The less virulent, the less it's spread. The quicker you jump on it, the less the public health impact measured by the various data points I've spoken of. Then tell me, JeffB, why are there millions of cases and millions of deaths globally? Well, countries that were prepared for and correctly mitigated the virus when it was introduced inside their boarders, correctly focused on testing and tracing, are doing fine (South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore among other Asian nations and China although I won't praise the draconian measures that country took that only communists could undertake). Countries that didn't are experiencing the exponential growth you've spoken of albeit with far less mortality than previously thought. This is important and why I think the CDC is mistaken in their wish to extend the No-Sail-Order. I've said that I don't think the US can gain sufficient control of the virus to contain it nationally but that should not prevent reopening and a return to a safe level of economic and social activity. There are many reasons for that but we can certainly gain control regionally and prevent it's spread in specific congregate settings. There are multiple examples of that. Regionally, Florida has counties that are homes to cruise ports where the percent positivity rate is < 5% - the CDC standard for control. Other regional example where viral spread is contained (new positivity below 5%) abound. For specific congregate settings, pro and college sports teams are playing, with and without fans, with and without disruptions but generally considered to be carrying on safely by limiting both spread and disease burden with effective mitigation and control protocols. IOW, it can be done. It CAN BE done for the congregate setting that is cruising. There is already proof of concept of that in Europe.....and that despite what the US press would have you believe spewing their false and misleading narrative I've pointed to.

Twangster ...... heh. So, yeah, NCL has cancelled all it's cruises within its brands to include Oceania and Regent Seven Seas through November. A signal of things to come for RCCL? Could be and the biggest reason why RCCL may follow is the connection of NCL and RCCL to the Safe-To-Sail Commission's Report and the Healthy Sail Panel serving both lines and the cruise industry in general. As much as I believe the public health risks for the virus are being over-played and the cruise industry could safely return to operations with layered mitigation measures, I think Twangster's view described in another thread that describes the political risk to the Trump administration of promoting a return to cruising is going to snuff out cruising in the reminder of 2020. A lame duck administration though could do all sorts of weird stuff. While the chances of a return to cruising just got a little less likely with the NCL announcement, I'm not ruling out a restart just yet. Norwegian could be recognizing that it cannot resume operations in November with October being unavailable to accomplish the logistics of getting even just a few ships operational. That might be a business decision applicable to NCL but not other lines including MSC, Carnival and RCCL, both MSC and one of Carnivals' brands, Costa, already operating in Europe. We'll know soon enough.

....... one other point, Twangster. I think you are correct that it is politically risky for the administration to allow the cruise industry to resume operations out of US ports. The press is going to murder Trump for doing that. I'm pretty sure that as Trump emerges from his bout with COVID-19 he is going to be reluctant to take any steps pertaining to the pandemic that his political opponents and the press could jump on. He may even admit he was wrong to be dismissive of it and demonstrate a new resolve to mitigate the spread of the virus. On top of his list of politically attractive things to do? Keep the cruise industry shut down. That would be a step that is a purely political one and not based on the facts that I presented above. My view is that given the Safe-To-Sail Commission's report, congregate settings such as are typical on a cruise ship can be made safe - not entirely risk free - and that the resumption of that popular activity then becomes a personal choice not one inappropriately prevented by the CDC's over-reach. That purely political move does however resonate with the false narrative the media has unfortunately created and that I have steadfastly tried to demonstrate is misleading.

Thanks for your response, Twangster. Fair points. If I'm understanding you correctly, it is your view that the CDC provided a reasonable basis - a combination of an ongoing pandemic with the flu season - to support an extension of the No-Sail-Order through February 2021. My problem with the CDC's position is that they are basing the order to shutter the cruise industry on presumptions. If they do offer data (facts), we are being misled by them. The public is being fed a narrative that depicts the virus' public health impact on new daily case numbers. That they are rising is therefore an absolute indicator that community spread of the virus is uncontrolled everywhere and disease burden is increasing. That is false. Some, not all of the increase in new case numbers, is a result of increased testing. While the presence of the virus may be increasing, the disease impact on US public health isn't. Proxy measures of that to include Case Fatality Rate (CFR), ED visits for flu or COVID like symptoms, hospital admissions, ventilator use are all downward trending. IOW, we are getting much better dealing with the virus and managing vulnerable populations that do get infected and need to be treated in a hospital setting. Percent positivity is a good measure of regional community spread. It varies by state and county with some places dealing with temporarily high positivity rates. In the Tri-County region of South Florida daily rates have held at or below 5% for three weeks with exceptions in Miami-Dade county being in the 6% range. I can list thousands of counties throughout the US that have positivty rates below 5%. Yet, the public is fed cumulative state, not county, percent positivity which by it's nature is going to be higher and more ominous appearing than the much lower county daily rates. This is misleading. Holding positivity rates to 5% is the CDC standard for indicating control of community spread. On a regional basis, including Florida counties where cruise ports are located, that is exactly what it is. How do we reconcile the CDC's basis for extending the No-Sail-Order with the reality that COVID disease impact on public health is low and in the places that matter community spread of the virus is controlled as measured by the CDC's own standard?

I assume your position is that you are opposed to restarting cruise line operations from US ports until the risk of becoming infected with SAR-CoV-2 is sufficiently reduced. Is that correct? If it is, by what criteria would you be in favor of restarting cruise line operations? These aren't questions designed to drag you into some kind of argument. You've been genuine and articulate in your positions in this thread. I'm interested in what your thinking is on this. For reference, I have been a reopening advocate since it became apparent to me that significant reductions in infection risk to near zero - or driving measures of viral circulation, as defined by R(t), to < 0 and keeping it there - were unobtainable goals in the absence of a vaccine and herd immunity that follows. I see the harm (cost) to the economy of business closures ostensibly implemented to reduce social mobility and viral spread have been and continue to be considerably higher than the public health benefits derived from such closures. Therefore, the best approach in this pandemic is to layer mitigation measures, proven to derive public health benefit and appropriate to the specific circumstance within which they are to be applied, that are the least disruptive. At the same time returning to reasonable social and economic activity. The risks of infection from the virus individuals are willing to take is a personal choice. That choice is made in the context of knowing that a congregate setting one wishes to enter is or is not enjoying appropriately layered and implemented mitigation measures as I defined them above.

Twangster, I think you're right from a political standpoint but probably not from a factual and practical one. The infection of President Trump with SARS-CoV-2 does not disprove the efficacy of testing. Not even close. Testing is absolutely fundamental, as a layered measure, for virus control and thinking it's not is foolhardy and counterproductive. I don't think you were implying this. Others who have just posted were. From the beginning, the WH has been dismissive of the virus. Cruise lines? No - they have very seriously addressed every aspect of its impact and probably more completely than any organization that features congregate settings. As a reflection of that dismissiveness, masks were rarely worn in side or around the WH. I expect cruise lines to enforce masking rules while aboard ship and in public areas, unlike the WH. Most importantly the WH relied on the Abbot product known as ID-NOW that was released with great promise in March. We saw the device in one of Trump's press conferences when he bragged about it. As early as April, labs using the device were reporting high false negative rates necessitating confirmatory RT-PCR, Molecular tests to rule COVID in or out. Abbot claims that inappropriate sampling and testing too soon after infection was the problem, not the device itself. The ID-NOW product works but (it detects antibodies), the company says, only 7d after becoming infected. That's a lot of time for the purpose the WH was using it or for the purposes the cruise lines would test. As far as I know, this Abbot ID-NOW device continued to be used by the WH, despite it's limitations, to insure the president did not come in contact with COVID positive people. I don't know what the testing regimen was for staff in terms of frequency. I do know that everyone visiting the president is tested before seeing him in person and I assume they used the Abbot Labs ID-NOW device. I also know that not everyone was tested that attended Judge Barrett's nominating events and social gatherings in DC. It was hit or miss, typical of the attitude the WH routinely displayed with Trump leading the way with his dismissiveness. One simply cannot use the WH's expereince with infections of key support staff or super-spreader events associated with the Barrett nomination in DC and generalize it to all congregate events, including cruising. There's dozens of manufacturers producing FDA approved COVID testing products. They utilize various testing mechanisms to do that. The newest, with sensitivity and specificity for detecting COVID having accuracy > 95%, are the rapid antigen tests. Abbot Labs has one called BINAX-NOW. It detects antigens, or the components of SARS-CoV-2, not the antibodies to it. There's no time delays. If you become infected with the virus BINAX-NOW (and other similar products) will detect it. It's also easy to use and the testing device is packaged in a cassette about the size of a credit card. If you've ever been tested for Influenza A/B, you've seen on e of these. It's this type of test that I presume the cruise lines would use for passengers and onboard surveillance, possibly other RT/PCR products for crew. Each type of testing device has it's own unique capabilities. The point here is that COVID testing is complex. Details are important. Hot-takes are usually wrong.

Trump becoming infected with the virus has mucked up what I believe was a White House plan, w/Pence in the lead, to allow cruise lines to begin to prepare for a November 1st restart. That restart to be on the limited basis we are all familiar with. Before that, I thought there was a very good chance we'd have a reduced number of sailings in November with those gradually expanding in December. Now chances of that look slim ...... unless the WH reconvenes the meeting with cruise execs this coming week. A meeting might foreshadow a restart; the lack of a meeting probably means doom. The resumption of cruising in Europe and Asia, pressures resulting from the sheer economics of the Caribbean travel industry to re-open Caribbean ports, are positives. That ports are already open in Europe and might open in the Caribbean would allow the major cruise lines that have ships in warm-storage in adjacent waters there an opportunity to assemble crew. From there they could conduct training and proof-of-concept trial runs with employees acting as passengers. Those could occur before repositioning ships in European and Caribbean waters to North American ports once they are opened. Keep in mind, we're talking about only a very few ships actually doing something like this as the logistics of such a plan are complex. It could take months to get even one-half of the global fleet of cruise ships operational. As well, the complexity of opening ports and anchorages and then deconflicting itineraries to lessen crowding in those places to be visited is considerable. The timing though is becoming critical and as the days in October pass by, hope for a North American restart in November will fade.

The sharing of viewpoints here, in a highly emotionally charged circumstance re COVID/Cruising has been genuinely civil and informative. I've done a bit of sleuthing today. My first resource was the CDC's web page dealing with COVID and cruise lines. There's a lot of information here if you' re interested in learning about the protocols the CDC has imposed on cruise ships operating in US waters or disembarking crew members over the last 4-5 month. The CDC developed a color system to designate the COVID status of only those cruise ships operating in US waters. There only 30, 3 have active COVID case(s), all of them are RCCL ships (Adventure, Mariner and Serenade). RCCL or Celebrity ships make up 22 of the total of 30 ships sailing in US waters and subject to the CDC imposed color coding system for crew management. The first link is to the CDC's web page that explains the No-Sail-Order and there is a link to the .pdf file that provides justification for the extension of it past 30 September, 2020 . You can be your own judge whether the CDC makes it's case to continue to shutter cruise line operation out of US ports for the benefit of the public's health or not. You'll know I think it is laughable, discriminatory and relies on data points that are 6 months old. It's based on what we knew about the virus 6m ago and utterly fails to recognize the advances in SARS-CoV-2 knowledge, how to best control its spread and most importantly it is completely silent on the Safe-To-Sail commission's report and input to the CDC. Shameful. The second link is to the CDC's Cruise Ship Crew Management protocols and the color coding system. https://www.cdc.gov/quarantine/cruise/index.html https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/travelers/crew-disembarkations-commercial-travel.html My next resource was the Cruise Industry News web page where an article appears that speculates on the ships that will start cruising in November. It's interesting to see which ships and itineraries this source sees as likely candidates to be sailing with PAX first. https://www.cruiseindustrynews.com/cruise-news/23584-here-are-the-first-cruises-set-to-sail-in-november.html I was interested in finding out how likely it was that a cruise I'm booked on in December - Celebrity Infinity, 5n, Miami, Key West, Cozumel, Miami sailing the 28th - was in a position to somehow resume cruising in November. The resource I used was CruiseMapper. This is a great resource with cleanly laid out web pages that provide a lot of information. From it I learned that Infinity is currently sailing in the Aegean Sea enroute to Piraeus and is then scheduled to reposition from Lisbon to Miami on November 6th as a scheduled 14n Transatlantic cruise with passengers. After that it is scheduled to do rotating 4n and 5n cruises in the Caribbean, Bahamas and Mexico starting on November 30th. So, if everything false into place - a big if - the cruise I'm booked on will sail. I could see Piraeus being the point at which a controlled embarkation of a full crew compliment could take place in a 3-4w time frame allowing for appropriate testing and quarantining to form the semi-bubble we've been talking about. Then, the ship's senior staff could conduct a weeks worth of training in the new health and safety protocols. From there, perhaps trial runs with crew and employees as proof of concept sailings. The timing works and allows for Celebrity in this case to implement and test the protocols contained in the Safe-To-Sail commission's report. If you have cruises booked in November or December of 2020, you can sleuth your way through the possibilities to see if what needs to be done, like I did with Infinity, is doable on your ship. Have fun. It was great therapy for me on a day filled with bad news. https://www.cruisemapper.com/ships/Celebrity-Infinity-658#:~:text=Celebrity Infinity current location is,en route to VALLETTA MALTA.

My two points stand: (1) The media has created an inaccurate characterization of Governor Desantis' announcement to move FL to Phase III and to prohibit citing or fining people or businesses that don't comply with lawfully established mitigation measures. That inaccurate media characterization is one that paints Desantis as irresponsible .... not the first time the media has done that and it won't be the last. My view is that Desantis is not only acting responsibly but also making it clear state and local governments in FL shall not operate as police states dictating behavior and meeting out punishment for those that don't behave. Freedoms granted require personal responsibility. I favor rejection of the nanny state, less litigation and more citizens taking responsibility for themselves and their actions. YMMV. (2) With appropriate targeted mitigation measures and protocols SARS-CoV-2 spread can be controlled without the severe restrictions to social and economic activity that have proven to be ineffective in producing significant public health benefits. I provided many examples of countries and organizations doing just that while others take more draconian, widely applied measures that are harmful. YMMV. BTW, after Florida's weekend of allegedly unmasked revelry without appropriate distancing in bars and clubs unleashed by Governor Desantis' irresponsible actions, FL's positivity rate as of today's numbers continues to decline, remaining below 5%, along with every other meaningful measure of disease burden in FL. Employment in the hard hit restaurant and entertainment sector continues to improve and unemployment claims continue to drop. But, yeah, let's shut everything down.

?????? I would think you'd understand that is part of the plan to play football safely. There are other examples besides that particular college game where a contest has been cancelled. MLB and the NFL are examples and both of those organizations have partial, not complete bubbling protocols. It's just not practical to completely bubble but you can reduce risks to the players, coaches and staffs with layered approaches that do contain some aspects of a complete bubble. The cruise industry has NEVER said we can eliminate all risks of a passenger or crew member or baggage porter or terminal personnel from getting infected completely but we can reduce that risk significantly and in the event one of those people does become infected, we can identify them, isolate them and contract trace in effective ways.

The aspect of passengers being less than forthcoming about exposure was addressed in the Commission's report. They acknowledged it and offered that "layering" of mitigation measures was sufficient to reduce exposure risk once on board. That is pretty much what organizations creating "bubbles" have done. Layered mitigation measures. Zero risk of infections is unobtainable and to think that it can be before resuming any activity flys in the face of logic and reason. College Football is a prime example. Logic and reason prevailed in the SEC, ACC and Big12 while idiocy prevailed in the BIG10 and PAC10. Logic and reason prevailed, both conferences announced they would compete on the football field after a civil suit was filed against the BIG10 asking them to show why they had cancelled the fall season. They caved becasue their position was not defensible. With enough pressure, enough voices, enough logical thinking, cruising will resume and ports will open.

Correct ........ multiple organizations are managing to do that albeit on a smaller scale (NFL, MLB, NHL, NBA and others). It's doable. Testing, isolating and tracing contacts are key and, despite doubts, based only on speculation, the cruise industry, based on facts, is willing to try and it has a very well defined plan to do so. I hope everyone here has either read the entire Safe-To-Sail Commission's report or at least seen the executive summary. The protocols that are being planned and will be tested are very good. MSC submitted a similar plan to the Italian Government, received clearance to resume operations out of Italian ports and so far, fingers crossed, things have gone well involving 7d itineraries with several port calls.

I live in Fort Lauderdale. Let's be clear here. Desantis has never said that masks are not required. Nor has he said, "Florida is being opened." Desantis from the beginning, while formulating and promulgating guidance for FL by phases, has said the imposition of mitigation measures, including masks, is at the discretion of local county and city officials and should be based on local data. How measures implemented are enforced is also a local decision. All of the three counties that make up what is known as S. FL - Palm Beach, Miami Dade and Broward (home of Port Everglades) counties have distancing, masking and sanitation mitigation measures in place and consistent with CDC and state guidelines for them. All of them are being enforced either with citations, fines or both. What Desantis did last Friday was announce the state is "moving to Phase III" - a precisely defined phase that the state can move to when certain gating criteria are met. The statewide percent positive rate has been at or below 5% for 14 consecutive dates. Even the Tri-County region of S. FL has had positivity rates below 5% although Miami-Dade popped above it for the last 7d rolling average (6%). He also ordered that counties and cities can no longer cite with a criminal charge or fine businesses or individuals who don't follow a standing mitigation measure emergency order. Miami-Dade has announced that it will continue to do so and is working with the Governor's office to allow them to do it based on the perceived public health risks in that county- The Miami-Dade County Mayor has to submit what objectifiable Public Health benefit is being derived from that policy and what are the economic costs to businesses of restricting their operations, citing and fining. IOW an appropriate calculation of Risk/Cost/Benefit. For now, Broward County and Fort Lauderdale are safe places to be. Residents are, for the most part, masking, distancing and acting responsibly. The vulnerable are being protected and people in that group are taking the virus seriously by avoiding unnecessary exposures. So are businesses who have made it clear that they aren't just flinging their doors open to party goers as if COVID-19 never existed. That's what the press wants you to think and it appears, given your post, that they are succeeding.

Ultimately, it will be the national and local governments and the ports themselves if they have that authority where the ports of call are located that will decide. As the cruise industry expanded over the last decade, who got access to the anchorages and berths seemed to sort itself out. This won't be any different. I am not familiar with a coordinating entity for something novel like this but there has been remarkable cooperation, from my perspective, between the majors regarding ship deployments and itineraries as the industry expanded. I do believe CLIA serves as a platform for the parties to get together. That may or may not be used but it's there.

Yes ...... businesses take risks. This is one I am almost certain that the majors, RCCL, Carnival and NCL, will take. A re-start of the cruise industry operations has more than bottom line considerations. It's the visuals. Liberal governments, and in my limited knowledge of those in the Caribbean basin, they are - could be problematic but tourism and the money those governments get from it is a powerful motivator to allow a controlled return of cruise ships to their ports. The travel industry is their economy and the primary source of income for their treasuries. Certainly the cruise industry is working with governments globally to assure them they can manage the virus if they are allowed to visit their ports. They have the facts and the plans behind them to do that safely. What does the WHO and the CDC have? Muddled data and vague fears. Despite the intense negativity surrounding the pandemic by the media, the facts are starting to get ahead of all that. What has happened, continues to happen but is now being questioned by decision makers at the federal and state levels is the failure to contextualize key data points like deaths and new case numbers. I've been down the list of failures by the media to do that. I'll repeat them again if anyone is interested and that is becasue that is where most people get their information about the virus. But the bottom line is that mass shutdowns involving personal mobility and economic activity are counterproductive and fail to deliver promised public health benefits, such benefits, for example, that the CDC and the WHO vaguely and often confusingly talk about. What the Feds should be doing is focusing on the US's capacity to test and trace using the technology to do that in a timely way. That capability has always been there and is even more sophisticated and available now than it was in March. Meaninglessly posturing with additional lock-downs, in this case continuing to lock-down the cruise industry, as a means of demonstrating they are doing something is shamefully counterproductive. There are meaningful and productive ways to prevent the spread of SARS-CoV-2 that don't involve shutting things down. Examples abound - South Korea, Taiwan, Japan, Singapore and Sweden throughout the Pandemic and the best example now is Italy. Governments that choose to use a sledge hammer instead of a scalpel to reduce the spread of the virus are doing enormous damage to their social fabrics and economies. Citizens are starting to see that and governments are waking up to reality. I suspect those in the Caribbean will face reality as well.

Sure ....... one step at a time. First priority is to get cruise ships operating out of US ports. Once that gets underway, the rest will fall in place. Right now there are the private islands and ports in Mexico - who will undoubtedly welcome cruise ships return if not on a limited and controlled basis. What we know of RCCL's plans right now is that that they will have proof of concept sailings before PAX will embark. Get FL's ports open is priority number 1 and I think t's going to happen after October 30th. I have a 5d Celebrity Infinity Cruise booked that is scheduled to leave Miami on December 28th with stops in Key West and Cozumel. I feel confident this will be one of the early cruises and itineraries to get green lighted.

Correct ....... FL Senators Scott and Rubio introduced this legislation to create a Maritime Commission with the legal authority to decide how cruise ships will operate in US ports and waters. Right now we have CLIA that is an advisory entity and the US Coast Guard that regulates ship operations but such regulations are primarily engineering and safety related. The new Commission would take up the role of both CLIA and the US Coast Guard developing and publishing much more comprehensive operating protocols and regulations enforceable under US law and intended to provide a thorough and fair review of violations or operating dangers. That would preclude the capriciousness of having the CDC precipitate the shut down in the us of the entire cruise industry.