RC “could be” banned from US waters through July

[tonyfsu21 926]

Just saw this article 

[Chadster 909]

Okay, so this is just their take on the CDC's latest guidance. What I don't understand is why Business Insider felt the need to single out RCCL and Carnival in their headline.

Now I'm even more annoyed. 

[RCIfan1912 692]

Its not as concrete as it seems. Read between the lines. If the emergency is declared over, this gets overturned. 

[JohnK6404 1,166]

Yeah, just a rehash of the CDC news... nothing new... the full article also singles out NCL. It also barely touches on the low stock prices of all 3 companies and concern over ability and time frame to recover from all of this...

https://www.businessinsider.com/carnival-royal-caribbean-banned-from-sailing-up-to-3-months-2020-4

 

[princevaliantus 1,283]

It's actually 100 days which is more than 3 months. 

[Ogilthorpe 943]

1 minute ago, princevaliantus said:

It's actually 100 days which is more than 3 months. 

True, but 3 months sounds worse in a headline ... they always seem to feel the need for maximum sensationalism and go the extra mile (which sounds so much farther than 5280 feet!)

[FManke 2,608]

10 minutes ago, Chadster said:

Okay, so this is just their take on the CDC's latest guidance. What I don't understand is why Business Insider felt the need to single out RCCL and Carnival in their headline.

Now I'm even more annoyed. 

I'm with you. Doesn't it apply to all cruise companies?

[JohnK6404 1,166]

14 minutes ago, FManke said:

I'm with you. Doesn't it apply to all cruise companies?

Yes... they address it in the first bullet in the article, but of course the headline is deceptive... surprise, surprise. They picked the big 3 I think because later in the article they touch on the strain on the cruise industry and when these companies will rebound.

"Cruise ships may not be able to sail in US-controlled waters until July, according to an order issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on Thursday. "

 

[Matt31 35]

Quote

1 hour ago, Ogilthorpe said:

True, but 3 months sounds worse in a headline ... they always seem to feel the need for maximum sensationalism and go the extra mile (which sounds so much farther than 5280 feet!)

Isn't it sad that your comment is so true, especially right now. I watched an interview the other day on CNN and the financial analyst guest was I kid you not asked the same exact question 3 times as the host (conducting the interview) was just reaching so hard for a quote she could use as a headline. The guest got very upset and said well I've already answered that question and kept saying the same thing but eventually she explained just a tiny bit more and sure enough that was the little she used as her take away. I think it's crazy in this instance for them not to say 3 months because that's in reality what it is and also for them not to just say all cruiselines instead of singling out a few big hitters, and lastly the headline should say Cruising potentially suspended for up to 100 day (3 months by CDC) just to emphasize the uncertainty

 

[klc317 62]

1 hour ago, JohnK6404 said:

Yes... they address it in the first bullet in the article, but of course the headline is deceptive... surprise, surprise. They picked the big 3 I think because later in the article they touch on the strain on the cruise industry and when these companies will rebound.

"Cruise ships may not be able to sail in US-controlled waters until July, according to an order issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on Thursday. "

 

I kinda wonder if that means with passengers or not.   Ive been watching the marine traffic and notice them all just hanging around adrift then come back into ports like Miami, Tamps, Ft Lauderdale, and Orlando for a day or so.  I assume its to refuel or take on supplies.  This whole thing is terrible for the industry but seeing where and when the ships end up daily is interesting to watch.   I did read that they have to move every so often to run certain systems on the ship so they seem to not sit still long.

[FManke 2,608]

24 minutes ago, Matt31 said:

 

Do you expect anything less from CNN?

[Marlena 165]

I think it's for the best anyways. I feel if they go back too fast there is a high change of 1 step forward and 3 steps back. Meaning possibly another break. 

[GlennGlenn 23]

2 hours ago, FManke said:

I'm with you. Doesn't it apply to all cruise companies?

Yes, since the CDC issues orders to the US Coast Guard (Executive enforcement arm) as well, no one is getting in or out of the US on a Cruise Ship for at least 3 months.   That may change in the interim, but as of now ALL of the Cruise Lines are looking at a travel restriction. 

[GlennGlenn 23]

1 hour ago, klc317 said:

I kinda wonder if that means with passengers or not.   Ive been watching the marine traffic and notice them all just hanging around adrift then come back into ports like Miami, Tamps, Ft Lauderdale, and Orlando for a day or so.  I assume its to refuel or take on supplies.  This whole thing is terrible for the industry but seeing where and when the ships end up daily is interesting to watch.   I did read that they have to move every so often to run certain systems on the ship so they seem to not sit still long.

I thought the same, BUT they are NOT physically coming into port.  They are simply pinging at the port and then go "adrift" for a day and then come back in.  Its not likely that they will need to refuel or take supplies for weeks at a time. 

[klc317 62]

2 hours ago, GlennGlenn said:

I thought the same, BUT they are NOT physically coming into port.  They are simply pinging at the port and then go "adrift" for a day and then come back in.  Its not likely that they will need to refuel or take supplies for weeks at a time. 

I don't know...they are physically there when you look at the webcams....

https://www.portmiamiwebcam.com

[ehw51 268]

Have to move to make water???? Yep web cams show in Nassau 4 ships one is Norwegian Gem. I thought Nassau was locked down no one in or out.

[tonyfsu21 926]

5 hours ago, GlennGlenn said:

I thought the same, BUT they are NOT physically coming into port.  They are simply pinging at the port and then go "adrift" for a day and then come back in.  Its not likely that they will need to refuel or take supplies for weeks at a time. 

Oh, they are there. I will snap a pic for you tomorrow am when I grab a coffee on 17th street in Fort Lauderdale. 

[KWofPerth 333]

I've never seen this channel, but it gives an excellent overview of the current situation.

 

 

[RCIfan1912 692]

1 minute ago, KWofPerth said:

I've never seen this channel, but it gives an excellent overview of the current situation.

 

 

Saw this, excellent video. 

[Sunny429 0]

10 hours ago, Chadster said:

Okay, so this is just their take on the CDC's latest guidance. What I don't understand is why Business Insider felt the need to single out RCCL and Carnival in their headline.

Now I'm even more annoyed. 

RCCL and Carnival own a lot of other cruise lines.

 

[twangster 25,638]

Bored reporter working from home.  

Note to self: Another source that can't be trusted in the future.

[tonyfsu21 926]

Here’s a thought. Is it possible they ban cruising until a vaccine is available in 2021? If so, can the big 3 weather the $1B/month bloodbath until then? 

[Cruzinfun 44]

17 hours ago, Marlena said:

I think it's for the best anyways. I feel if they go back too fast there is a high change of 1 step forward and 3 steps back. Meaning possibly another break. 

I agree with this wholeheartedly.  As much as people want to go back to their regular lives things are going to be in limbo for a long while and all vacations are going to have to be on the back burner. 

[bobroo 454]

21 minutes ago, tonyfsu21 said:

Here’s a thought. Is it possible they ban cruising until a vaccine is available in 2021? If so, can the big 3 weather the $1B/month bloodbath until then? 

Absolutamente correcto!!!

In my opinion it is only until a vaccine or cure is found and is widely available that passengers will be allowed their vacations on cruise boats. It's not widespread testing nor flattened curves that will convince the CDC and the Coast Guard and FEMA that 6,000 people will be able to get into a 1,000' X 250' area without endangering one another.

Does this happen in 100 days? In 2020? In 2021? Ohhh....I don't think it's in the near term.

 

 

Co-incidentally the widely available vaccine is also what Wall Street is waiting for. 

 

 

 

 

 

[RCIfan1912 692]

37 minutes ago, Cruzinfun said:

I agree with this wholeheartedly.  As much as people want to go back to their regular lives things are going to be in limbo for a long while and all vacations are going to have to be on the back burner. 

The answer is of course not. They will be long gone before that. 

Will it come down to that, the answer is of course not. Come on people, do you really think that is the answer? I'm not saying that specifically for you but as whole to people that see this thread. You don't need a vaccine for cruises to restart. 

June is possible, July is definite to restart. Delta airlines said the airline Industry hit bottom is going to start to improve from here. Look at the numbers of cases and deaths going forward from a reputable, scientific website. By June 6th in NJ where I live we are at zero deaths. There healthcare system and hospitals are back to normal. The peak and decline is a little later for other places but not that far off. 

Blood testing from the CDC started last week to see who has had it and recovered or never knew it and have antibodies. I volunteer to test. Who the heck knows if I had it and never knew. Let's not loose sight of the light at the end of the tunnel here. Sorry for the long post but this talk of waiting for a vaccine is getting on my nerves. Education is key.