JeffB

Sad for sure. People don't behave ...... it's not just in the US. My take is that non-compliance with reasonable mitigation measures is part of the problem; the other is the geometric progression issue. i.e., one non-conforming person who becomes infected begets 3 infections, 3 begets 9 and so forth. Before you know it you have 1000 infections. IMO, it's why lock-downs won't work because as soon as you unlock and mobility returns, so do infections. Endless cycle. My view is that you learn how to manage the inevitable disease burden within communities experiencing it. There is some mathematical sense to trying to drive the R values in a locale as low as possible and lock-downs are a way to do that. R values are the figures that reflect how many people one person infects - it varies periodically but the closer you get it to 1, the better. I think lock-downs are too harmful economically and socially. I'd opt for less restrictive, data driven targeted closures/restrictions, i.e., if street parties or late night bars are spreading the virus, enforce closures of them. Testing and contact tracing are important. The US sucks at this. Other countries, obtaining downward sloping growth rates (R values < 1.0) like Germany, South Korea and others are much better at testing, contact tracing and isolation. Creating bubbles is a whole different approach. In this scenario you create a living environment free of SARS-CoV-2, make sure it does not get introduced into the bubble and if it does, quickly identify the case(s) and isolate them. It's working in the US National Basketball Association (NBA) that involves at least 500, probably more players, coaches and staff. They reside and play in a single, access controlled space. Testing is conducted periodically on everyone in the bubble. Obviously there are limits to the size of the bubble - or how many people and in what size a venue can be. Could you create a bubble in the entire city of Melborne? Theoretically, yes. PracticalIy? No ....... the Chinese brutally enforced zero mobility and complete shuttering in Wuhan with rumors that apartment doors were welded shut and proprietors found operating businesses immediately imprisoned. That won't work in democratic countries. It is pretty clear to me that cruise lines are working to create a sort of bubble on cruise ships. It seems to be working for TUI, for example, who are cruising now with 1200+ passengers and an additional number of crew rigidly screened and/or quarantined before entering the bubble and then essentially confined to the ship's bubble. MSC is trying a similar approach but will make port calls that theoretically break the bubble - but I can see ways to do that and still manage the ships's bubble environment with rapid testing, rigorous tracing and isolating.

Yes, something isn't right here. I assume you, not a TA, made the booking. If that is the case , call again to the number previously provided, concisely and briefly state the issue and politely ask your call to be elevated for resolution. While my experience with FCCs is with Celebrity, they should be no different ...... I had FCCs within a week or two via email. Check your spam and trash even though it appears the last agent you spoke to saw the FCC hadn't been issued yet - they're easy to miss and agent training varies greatly. I had credits for taxes to my CC in less than a month. On the training varies greatly ...... I wanted to L&S a cruise in October '20 to same time in '21. The first agent offered me alternatives but not the exact cruise i wanted and said that one (a translant/repositioning cruise) wasn't available or eligible for L&S. I said thanks, waited 24h and called again. Got the exact cruise in 2021, same cabin, same rate, same perks. Be persistent and pour out the honey.

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.

Well, that's right but, the press reports I'm reading today are not being friendly to the Paul Gauguin or Huertigruten. Pretty much what I expected. WIthin the several articles I've read, the mention that those infected were handled well to prevent contagion both aboard ship and when the infected disembarked is either no where mentioned or lightly mentioned without details. No credit given to the extensive infection control and containment measures any of these lines developed and implemented. No mention that public health ministers had signed off on them ..... none. Huertigruten execs have said, they had protocols and they broke down. Fine, fix them and press on but NOOOOOO, the press isn't going to let that happen...... The journalists reporting these COVID related incidents appear to be more interested in continuing the trope that cruising is too dangerous in the COVID circumstance, all of this just fuel to the fire of not opening anything until the risk is unattainably near zero. For example, in Huertigruten's case the "shocking headline" was 69 places that the company cruises to or operates ferry services are at risk for previously controlled COVID spread ..... this without a shred of evidence of COVID spread in any of these ports to support such allegations. Oh, and sure, TUI has cruised out of Germany, Chinese lines have cruised locally and so have Taiwanese lines without COVID related incidents but, do we hear about these? Nope. Sick of it.

The thing to "watch" with the MSC launch, among other cruise lines getting back to cruising, is not the inevitable infection aboard ship but (1) how the cruise lines, port authorities and local medical authorities handle infected passengers and crew. (2) Whether involved public health and medical officials don't go nuts over a cruise ship disembarking infected crew or passengers for quarantine in accordance with a pre-approved plan. (3) Whether the media reports cruise ship infection events with responsible reporting rather than intent to shock readers. I have no doubt in my mind cruising can restart where community spread is reasonably controlled and there are plans in place to manage infections when they inevitably occur on a cruise. Italy, Greece and Taiwan are good examples. I think it will turn out that Norway and the French Polynesias handled things well but politics will discourage restarting again. Experts in the matters of "control" of community spread of a virus make that determination on the basis of several quantifiable measures - regional R(t) being < 1, > 10 tests to detect 1 positive case are two good ones. There are other measures of community spread that when pulled into the decision making process produce rational decisions for the public's health. For those who keep picking on FL identifying it as a dangerous COVID "hot spot", while it may have been just that in late June after reopening in the state began in late May, it's in pretty good shape as I write this. FL's RT was 1.35 on June 25th at it's recent zenith - roughly 1 person will infect 4 - it is now 0.98 or just less than 1:1. By those measures statewide community spread is declining and "controlled." 32 other states have R(t) values greater than 1, Hawaii's is 1.31. Every other FL data set, including those in the tri-county S. FL region where two cruise ports are located, used to measure community disease burden is downward trending including ED visits for symptoms suggestive of flu or COVID, hospital admissions and ICU or ventilator use. Test positivity rates in Broward County - where Port everglades is located - were the lowest yesterday that they have been since April - 8.4%. A week ago it took just 5 tests to find 1 positive COVD test. Yesterday it doubled to 10. On the basis of the science, could Port everglades open to cruise ships with community spread appearing to be under control? You could say that. Politically? No chance. We're going to be dealing with this disconnect between the reality of COVID spread supported by certain reliable data sets versus the alternate reality that is painted mostly by the press that COVID in the US is surging out of control. It's not helping that there are views held by otherwise reliable scientists and medical personnel that the risk of getting COVID has to be reduced to near zero before opening anything - schools for example. That isn't going to happen. Is SARS-CoV-2 spread a problem? Of course it is and will remain so for a while. But it is not one that is by any means out of control or unmanageable. Implementing sensible general mitigation measures (masking, distancing, hand washing), works and S. FL is proof of that. Strong local messaging and public health announcements here in Broward County and, where necessary, enforcing these measures work. As well utilizing targeted mitigation measures, for example, selected restrictions by locale or business when those restrictions are backed up by tracing of new cases to a local hot spot, e.g., restaurant, street party, gym, etc., work and again S Fl is proof that they do work without shuttering everything or locking everyone in their homes like is happening in Melbourne. It's an option but, IMO, a bad one. Too economically and socially costly with few public health benefits in the long run. Cities doing this will just keep opening and closing in an endless cycle. When human/host mobility returns, so does COVID infections. For now, learn to manage it. That goes for after a vaccine is approved and distributed at scale. SARS-CoV-2 isn't going away as in eradicated and there will be others like it in the future.

This is the most detailed cruise line mitigation measures plan I've seen. Most of us here have predicted these measures but to see them in writing is encouraging. That MSC is attempting to make port calls under controlled conditions is an indicator that this cruise line is taking an aggressive stance with respect to restoring operations. If I have my numbers correct, the embarkation/debarkation ports and all the port calls are in Italy and Greece where community spread is quite low as measured by positivity and growth rates. I know from my son-in-law who is an Italian with family in Milan that is currently living in Switzerland that Southern Italy has remained a pretty safe place to travel to. Can't speak with any personal knowledge about Greece but I think community spread there is low. As well, both countries are taking aggressive steps to restore activity in their tourist industries. Good show, MSC, Italy and Greece. I'd like to see this go off without a hitch as I am a reopening and manage the outcomes of that strategy advocate. While there may be isolated COVID infections during these initial trips, if plans to manage those are successful and the media gives credit for that instead of emphasizing infections without context, that would be nice. Italian and Greek Public Health officials also can't go nuts if isolated infections occur but are handled well. Not holding my breath for that though. https://www.msccruises.com/en-gl/Assets/Health_Safety_Factsheet.pdf

I live in Fort Lauderdale and use several web based sources to track hurricanes. Isaias tracked well South of Nassau, went over Andros Island as a high end tropical storm then, tracking WNW, veered well West of Freeport and fell apart with max winds dropping to 55kts. Max winds at Andros island were recorded at 45 kts. I think Coco Cay is well to the NE of Andros Island and probably had little wind or rain impact. You can see the track at this web site but it takes a bit of work with menu features to display the historical track: https://www.windy.com/-Hurricane-tracker/hurricanes?gfs,gustAccu,25.048,-79.649,8

It was a nothing burger in Fort Lauderdale. Passed abeam our city about 10am slowly moving N. We're about 3 miles from the coast and if we had 25 knots I'd be surprised. No power loss for us. Cruise ships in Port of Miami were asked to take to sea - a common approach for large vessels. Sea is safer (they just sail out of it's path) than port in a bad storm. There are two cruise ships docked at Port Everglades. Did not hear anything about them. This was a dress rehearsal for the rest of the Hurricane season in S. FL. It's very early. Chances of this region getting hit are pretty high through early October. From all reports state's emergency management strategy with COVID around looked like they had a plan. 7 shelters were opened in Palm Beach County to the N of us and yesterday, when that area was forecasted to be ground zero, the shelters took in about 500 people. Reportedly orderly, good distancing and compliant folks inside them. FL is good at this.

I lifted and shifted that Apex Translant/Repo cruise Barcelona to Fort Lauderdale departing 10/22/20 to 10/21/21. The issues for me were less about Port Everglades being open to cruise ships but rather restricted entry to EU countries. Our plan was to fly to Lisbon, spend two days there, fly to Geneva spend a week there then fly to Barcelona to catch Apex to return to our home in Fort Lauderdale. We may get the CDC to lift it's no-sail order from US ports before the arrival of Apex but I think it unlikely, given the current up-tick in community spread of the virus throughout the US as well as COVID upticks in various EU countries struggling themselves to contain the virus, that American citizens will be allowed to visit there and/or travel within the EU like we had planned to do. I can see some level travel restrictions for US passport holders (meaning that's the only citizenship that traveler holds) wanting to travel from the US to EU locations lasting through the first quarter of 2021.

I believe non-compliance with the various mitigation measures is not as wide-spread as the media paints the picture that it is. Geometric progression in the context or relaxing mobility restrictions is the primary factor in the recent surge in new cases. Generally, you can have mobility and the proximity that produces without surge consequence if your starting point is 1:1 or less, i.e., locations that drove the various measures of viral spread to 1 or less are less susceptible to high growth rates than a location that only brough that number to, say, 3. Caveat as has been pointed out even with 1:1 if that one is an isolated "super spreader" that's a problem not associated with geometric progression. I read some recent polling data that reported upwards of 80% of Americans report they wear a mask and practice social distancing all of the time indoors and some of the time out doors. There are, of course, exceptions. These receive extensive media coverage with photos and videos of bad actors. Experts in this sort of thing say that 75% compliance with masking and distancing is enough to produce a decrease in viral spread in a locale that achieves that goal. I think the recent downward trends in the S and SW states and CA in every useful measure of viral spread and disease burden, when viewed in the proper context, is an indication that the message is getting out.

I think the CDC's call for public comment is almost entirely political. I believe there is friction between CDC officials and Cruise line execs with the execs rightfully accusing the CDC of being unrealistic in their demands for what amount to a zero risk of having a passenger or crew member embarked on a cruise ship contract C-19. Instead of managing risks - which the cruise lines can do and have done in the past - the CDC is demanding perfect control of it and unprecedented levels of cross-coordination with foreign ports that a more friendly CDC could facilitate. Manage, not control would be by-words that the CDC could adopt. Instead, the CDC takes their "crazy" set of questions (and I believe it's a check list of CDC demands) so the public will agree with them that cruising is dangerous to the public health unless the cruise lines obtain this unobtainable zero risk. There is the capacity of the Executive to order the Department of Homeland Security - the agency that actually issued the no-sail-order on the advice of the CDC - to revoke it. That isn't likely to happen for purely political reasons. The public, not knowing what we know about how safe crising actually is, would howell.

2 weeks ago I was optimistic about a return to cruising. Today, and after seeing the CDC's check list, and make no mistake, that's what it is, for the cruise industry wishing to operate from US ports, I am much less so. The demands for safety, assumptions of costs associated with obtaining near zero risk of infection, are unprecedented. I've never seen anything like it yet, they have the keys to the car and won't give them up until every demand they choose to make gets a check in the box. I think it is terribly unfair. That is because I believe that officials over-seeing the operation of cruise ships from US ports want the unobtainable and that is zero risk of a single C-19 infection on a cruise ship. Meanwhile managing those risks, managing C-19 infections should they occur onboard are entirely obtainable.

Oh, I think this is definitely good news and an AIDA spokesperson said so in a quote. The thing is that here in the US we are trying to wage an unwinnable battle v. SARS-CoV-2 by mitigating the virus back to levels where lockdowns had R(t), or any other measures you might choose, to mid-April levels. I don't think that is going to happen with a return to nation wide lockdwons and, as I have said, there is no political appetite to do that. I also don't support that course of action as it will crater an already severely weakened US economy. The sensible alternative, IMO, is managing not trying to control the virus until a vaccine is introduced that does control it. Short term you keep CFR/IFR at politically acceptable levels with better medical management of hospitalized patients with C-19 and appropriate administration of emerging pharmaceuticals. Work to bring new case #s and positivity rates down with EO mandated local and targeted mitigation measures. Here's the problem, though. The two German and the one Taiwanese cruise lines are setting precedent in the context of their country's COVID circumstance. Both Germany and Taiwan drove R(t) values to well below one (virus is receding) before ending lock downs. Here in the US, we are saddled with a poor federal response that produced a patch-work approach to every type of responsible public health measure to reduce the spread of the virus. Then we compounded those failures by patch-work reopenings that had some regions doing that with the virus still spreading. As soon as mobility resumed, areas previously free of the virus saw it get seeded by travelers coming from areas where spread was still happening. Testing and tracking has also been poorly funded and executed and varies state by state. The US and it's citizens have become a COVID pariah to countries that were better prepared and mounted more effective responses to SARS-CoV-2. I can't see how the CDC, given their current positions, both politically and on the basis of the science on this, are going to allow cruising to resume from US ports with the states, acting independently and with a lot of variance, "managing" instead of controlling the virus. The CDC has at it's disposal evidence that countries can control the spread of the virus and their transportation and PH ministers have rewarded the travel and leisure industries resident in those countries by allowing sectors like the cruise industry to resume operations. I don't see that happening in the US until we get a vaccine that works, is distributed at scale and is proven to reduce case #s, growth rates and deaths. April 2021? That may even be a stretch.

Let me clarify ....... the 10 crew members who tested + were not on TUI's Mein Schiff 2 but rather AIDAmar and AIDAblu (Another German Company affiliated with Carnival) with planned sailings out of Rostok Germany in August. In the case of AIDA's ship, they are assembling crews for the August sailing. The 10 crew who tested + were quarantined on another unnamed ship. The important point is that what we're probably seeing here is Carnival's (AIDA) and RCL's (Mein Schiff) COVID mitigation strategies. I'd expect if and when cruising resumes for RCL and it's brands from US ports, COVID mitigation measures aboard those ships will be similar if not identical to the two German brands.

We have every reason to believe that TUI submitted protocols to address this situation for approval to public health bodies within Germany before Mein Schiff 2 sailed. Although it wasn't entirely disclosed in the TUI press release, that crew who tested + at the TUI pre-boarding screening were denied boarding and quarantined on another ship, suggests that this is the protocol that may be observed here in the US ...... IOW, there's another ship, not yet sailing with passengers, designated to receive and quarantine crew at the same port as the sailing vessel. At start-up there would appear to be plenty of vessels to do that. I could also see embarking passengers who test + via a similar embarkation protocol as TUI's being quarantined on the same ship as crew members and managed accordingly - 10 to 14d, negative tests before release from quarantine.

Thanks for this insight, JLMorgan and thanks Crisgold52 for directing me here after my post today in the other thread. I wonder, as others here have, what the actual demand for a cabin on these early cruises in Germany is. I also wonder how TUI is handling crew that might justifiably refuse to return to work - an issue that happens often in the US. As well, what are the profit margins, if any, for each TUI sailing? I do think that TUI will purposely operate a cruise at a loss in order to test and demonstrate effective protocols, at least at first. If I'm reading the available information correctly, the concept of creating a ship board "bubble," modified of course to fit shipboard circumstances, with all the implications for doing that is at play here. So, this is probably the model going forward. Again, I question demand for such cruises with these strict mitigation protocols in place. I'll go!?

Good insight, Crisgold52. .....this fits with a limited startup after 12/15/20, CDC lifting the no-sail-order before then and a more robust schedule ramping up fairly quickly .... foreign ports permitting. Caveat ..... I'm biased. I have a 12/28/20 NY Holiday Cruise and a B2B 21d in March '21. Wishful thinking perhaps! Already moved two other cruises to August and October, '21.

One related add ....... I am booked on a Barcelona to Fort Lauderdale repositioning cruise aboard Celebrity Apex. It sails from Barcelona on October 22nd. My final payment is due on July 20th. I had my TA check to see if this booking was eligible for L&S to 2021. She was told by the Celebrity CSR that I could L&S but only to Apex's Barcelona to Barcelona R/Ts departing ion October 9th and just before the repositioning cruise. IOW, L&S is not always available - another one of the "ifs ands or buts" of this mess. I'm planning on keeping the booking and taking a refund when Celebrity cancels it - which I give a 90% chance that is going to happen. There are no FCCs applied to this booking. The only reason I'm keeping the booking on the 10% chance it will sail is because I have airline tickets one way to Lisbon, overnight accommodations there, a flight from Lisbon to Geneva, accommodations there and then Geneva to Barcelona where I plan to embark on Apex. I can cancel all these land and air bookings but I'm not going to get refunds from the air carriers I booked with within the EU. Maybe vouchers but I'll be out some money. I do have travel insurance and the precipitating event that would trigger coverage would be the cruise line canceling the cruise. However, this is a tricky situation and not sure I'd be covered at all. Not sure how EU air carriers will handle bookings made by US citizens if the EU is still barring travel from the US and I expect they will continue to do so at least through October. Thoughts on how I'm approaching this and my thinking.

Probably ...... let's look at this more closely. I've not seen the data but I'm sure it exists that lists the common cruise ship bugs. I suspect that there are two classes that predominate: (1) GI viruses/bacteria and (2) respiratory viruses. Examples of the former are Norovirus and bacterial E. Coli gastroenteritis. Norovirus can be transmitted by both airborne means and your fingers touching a contaminated surface and then your fingers touching eyes, mouth or nose. E. Coli is predominantly a food-borne disease. Both are known to persist secondary to a lack of toileting hygiene and hand-washing My knowledge of the "cruise crud" as I have seen it described is that it is a funky cough that seems to show up about day 5 of your cruise. IOW, it's a respiratory virus. It's probably the common cold or coronavirus - not THAT coronavirus! So, yep, ship's sanitation and infection control measures reduce the spread of these things and mandatory masks onboard would certainly add to a reduction in the spread of respiratory illness.

What's your point? is your list of questions a defense of an anti-masking position? If not, what it is it? Lots of potential for strawman arguments of no consequence to my point: To provide readers of this blog an easy to understand explanation of why a properly worn and fitted mask reduces the tranmissability of SARS-CoV-2 Do you dispute any of the findings this particular scientist presents? TBF, there is a great deal we do not know about the virus or about the disease that it produces. The effectiveness of masking to reduce transmissability of it is not one of the those things that we do not know.

I pulled this up from early June because I want people who are anti-maskers, both ashore and if we ever cruise again, to see this video. Wearing a mask isn't about party or identity politics. Wearing a mask isn't about giving up your personal freedoms or being forced to do things like one horribly offensive cartoon suggests the Nazis forced Jews to do - be marked with a star of David. Wearing a mask is about stopping the spread of SARS-CoV-2 so that we can all get back to the thing we love ..... cruising.

A few words on the subject of arranging a cruise and using a TA to do that. First, once you go down that road, you're stuck with the agency and agent you chose to do that. I don't need to tell posters here that the cruise lines won't talk with you about changing a reservation if you booked with a TA. Reputation is everything in the TA and agency world. This blog is a great place to learn who has earned their chops. I can't speak for MEI but I can for several others that I've used. I tend to go with whatever consolidator - and make no mistake TAs work for agencies that are just that - is offering the best cabin price and perks for the itinerary I'm considering. The differences in these two things can be mind boggling between agencies. In my experience, the bigger and more successful an agency is in selling out the cabins cruise lines have given them, the deeper the discount the lines will provide next time, the more leeway that agency has in pricing and perks they offer customers. There's obviously a relationship between top sales for an agency and the agents selling. Good agents sell cabins. You can get quotes from various agencies/TAs working for them and compare prices and perks - these are perks the agency is offering for you to book with them, not the cruise line's perks. Then go from there. For me, pricing is more important than service and that may not be the case for everyone. Accordingly, I tend to be a bit more patient with TAs although the ones I use now (Delta SkyMiles Cruises, Costco Travel and Cruises-n-More) I have relationships with TAs that work for these agencies ..... all of them recognize that I price shop and are not at all discouraged when I say a found a better deal. They'll say, I can't beat that or, if they can, they will tell me. I always get call backs or an email within 72h at the longest from all of them. Times right now are, to say the least, taxing. I'm juggling 5 cruises over the next 12 months and with different TAs/Agencies. And I'm only one guy with 5 cruises. Think about the TA's situation ..... he/she might have dozens of customers and is handling 100s of itineraries for both new bookings while dealing with the perfect storm inherent in COVID caused FCC, L&S and refunds. Patience should be your byword. OTH, the times you are experiencing for a call back from your TA seems to be an outlier. Maybe consider looking elsewhere to book your next cruise. PM me and I'll send you names of the TAs I've found to be pretty good within the agencies I've booked with.

Hmmmm ...... don't know. Anyone?

Figuring out the ifs and and buts can be hard ....... here is my understanding and let's start off with the basics: (1) you will have a choice to either take your vacation at a later date and receive 125% of the value of your booked cruise as a Future Cruise Credit, LIFT and SHIFT (Before July 10th, 2020, move to a qualifying cruise next year and price/promotions are protected) or a take a full refund. (2) The FCC you receive for the most recent cancelled cruise will roll the amount you receive into one FCC calculated as follows: You will receive the full value of your FCC that you applied to the cancelled cruise plus 125% of the value of the canceled cruise minus the value of the previously applied FCC. For example, let's say the cruise that just got cancelled cost $2000. You applied a FCC valued at $1000 and had a balance due of $1000 and paid that in full. You'll get one FCC to be applied to a future cruise that will be in the amount of $1000 (the value of the FCC you applied) + $1250 (125% of the $1000 balance you paid in full) for a total new FCC of $2250. Keep in mind taxes and port fees are not counted as part of your cruise fare in calculating your 125% FCC. These are refunded directly to the CC you paid for the cruise with. I'm, pretty sure if you Lift and Shift and the cruise you shift to meets certain requirements (like same itinerary, same cabin category, etc) you are protected on your cruise fare and any perks you received such as an OBC .... of course there are exceptions!!! There are ifs and and butts that may apply in your situation. If you have a travel agent, make sure they understand how RCL is doing FCCs. If you have a good one that knows the ropes, work with them. If not, the way to go is to contact RCL. I just dialed 800 205 9812 a number I have seen listed as the Resolutions Department also referred to as the Post Cruise Resolutions Department. It is more likely you are going to get the FCC policy for RCL that is correct in your situation from this group of CSRs. Just put up with the robotic phone message you'll start with and you will get to the place you need to be - its the option to "press 6." Good luck