Jump to content

Cruise Ship 'No Sail' Order Set to Extend Through October


Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, twangster said:

More interesting to me will be acceptance of American visitors by the Bahamas and Caribbean nations as we move into the fall.  Few if any have resources to handle thousands of severely ill citizens so they'll need to weigh the risks of potential infection of their population vs. tourism and their economy which is pretty much the argument to allow cruising to restart.   

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, princevaliantus said:

I have this strange feeling that most cruise lines will play a little game and just sail to their private islands ONLY while announcing that the next port has been cancelled.  This way, the cruise lines don't have to reduce their pricing on their respective cruises.

I have thought this for some time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JeffB said:

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.

If you were a cruise line would you spend millions to get the restart underway without knowing if you'll have somewhere to sail to?  Don't underestimate the importance of the destinations being available.  Without that they could open the ports and ships still won't sail.  If cruise lines bring thousands of crew back now they are right back where they were without guests or destinations.  If America is experiencing the next wave that science and doctors say it will, it's not a guarantee that Americans will be welcome anywhere and ships might not sail while America's ports are open. 

I thought I read somewhere that Celebrity stated their restart priority is Apex and Edge.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, twangster said:

If you were a cruise line would you spend millions to get the restart underway without knowing if you'll have somewhere to sail to? 

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.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The other aspect that needs to be considered and planned is the ports of call.  For example, Nassau can accommodate six ships.  It will take a lot of coordination between the port, local excursion operators and different cruise lines to ensure that each ship bubble isn't broken at congestion points like port security, waiting areas for excursions buses or just walking down the pier.  Is this being addressed by the Healthy Sail Panel?

How do different cruise lines ensure they play nice with each other and cooperate to maintain their respective bubbles?  If one ship's excursion is walking down the pier do other ships hold and wait until they are clear?  Who manages that when one ship trying to maintain schedule just proceeds ignoring the other ships?

Should the ports involved restrict the number of ships on a given day?  If so, how do they decide which line is allowed in?  It's like the capacity questions that people are raising for guests... what ship gets booted or denied entry to a port?

It's easy to just focus on one Royal ship and think no problem but when multiple cruise lines and multiple ships are all competing for port access who is managing or coordinating that with different countries, different cruise lines and different excursion operators all in play? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, twangster said:

It's easy to just focus on one Royal ship and think no problem but when multiple cruise lines and multiple ships are all competing for port access who is managing or coordinating that with different countries, different cruise lines and different excursion operators all in play?

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, twangster said:

The other aspect that needs to be considered and planned is the ports of call.  For example, Nassau can accommodate six ships.  It will take a lot of coordination between the port, local excursion operators and different cruise lines to ensure that each ship bubble isn't broken at congestion points like port security, waiting areas for excursions buses or just walking down the pier.  Is this being addressed by the Healthy Sail Panel?

How do different cruise lines ensure they play nice with each other and cooperate to maintain their respective bubbles?  If one ship's excursion is walking down the pier do other ships hold and wait until they are clear?  Who manages that when one ship trying to maintain schedule just proceeds ignoring the other ships?

Should the ports involved restrict the number of ships on a given day?  If so, how do they decide which line is allowed in?  It's like the capacity questions that people are raising for guests... what ship gets booted or denied entry to a port?

It's easy to just focus on one Royal ship and think no problem but when multiple cruise lines and multiple ships are all competing for port access who is managing or coordinating that with different countries, different cruise lines and different excursion operators all in play? 

One thing that Don over at EatSleepCruise brought up in a discussion is while most people have thought of Florida’s reopening as a positive, the CDC probably went the other way. Florida being reopened and without masks may have negated much of the goodwill towards the pre testing program presented by the lines. As most people come in before the cruise that’s additional meals out and potential infection vectors. The CDC would most likely prefer a bubble for a few days before the sailing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, JeffB said:

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.

That's possible but who is creating this process right now so it's ready to implement when ships sail in a month?  One port might have resources to consider this new role while a different port/country won't.  CLIA doesn't get into managing daily operations.  They have no resources or charter to assume this new role.  What happens when a non-CLIA ship arrives into port?  Some ports are desperate for cash and won't care to create an effective process, another country may be too restrictive and guests are left waiting in the theater for two hours for their excursion to start.  

Details matter i.e. marine channel 16 shouldn't be used for port or pier operations so what channel is universally accepted to coordinate ground traffic between ships?

Bridge crews have never had to be involved with ground traffic to this extent.  It can't be assumed it will just work itself out.

For Royal one question is will they only allow one ship at CocoCay on any given day?  

The plan for all this needs to be finished today so it can be distributed and reviewed by the participating ship crew for a November implementation.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, twangster said:

For Royal one question is will they only allow one ship at CocoCay on any given day?  

This is a good point.  Then even if they do one ship per day, what happens when a ship does end up with someone testing positive?  Do they contract trace and find out that person visited CocoCay and thus any subsequent ship that visited CocoCay was potentially exposed via interaction with the CocoCay staff? 

If they truly expect to operate a ship in a bubble as much as possible, even only visiting private islands can pop the bubble if it isn't done correctly.  

IMO it's impossible to create a perfect bubble, so the only thing to do is to try to eliminate as much of the risk as possible. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Andrew72681 said:

One thing that Don over at EatSleepCruise brought up in a discussion is while most people have thought of Florida’s reopening as a positive, the CDC probably went the other way. Florida being reopened and without masks may have negated much of the goodwill towards the pre testing program presented by the lines.

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.       

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, AshleyDillo said:

This is a good point.  Then even if they do one ship per day, what happens when a ship does end up with someone testing positive?  Do they contract trace and find out that person visited CocoCay and thus any subsequent ship that visited CocoCay was potentially exposed via interaction with the CocoCay staff? 

If they truly expect to operate a ship in a bubble as much as possible, even only visiting private islands can pop the bubble if it isn't done correctly.  

IMO it's impossible to create a perfect bubble, so the only thing to do is to try to eliminate as much of the risk as possible. 

It's not even remotely a bubble. The only way it would be a bubble is if everyone on that ship were locked down for 14 days together in the same places, and then boarded with no outside interaction. That 5 day prior test doesn't do a damn thing when you pick up the virus at miami international, and then show symptoms on days 5/6

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, AshleyDillo said:

IMO it's impossible to create a perfect bubble, so the only thing to do is to try to eliminate as much of the risk as possible. 

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.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, CruisinForABruisin said:

It's not even remotely a bubble. The only way it would be a bubble is if everyone on that ship were locked down for 14 days together in the same places, and then boarded with no outside interaction. That 5 day prior test doesn't do a damn thing when you pick up the virus at miami international, and then show symptoms on days 5/6

Unfortunately we can't count on everyone to do the right thing, so even if they tried to restrict cruising to those who have done an isolation quarantine, people are still going to lie about their compliance.  They would be hard-pressed to find folks to be the guinea pigs for first cruises that will do the isolation thing.  Folks that can honestly say they have had zero contact with anyone else in the past 14 days are likely not folks that would be willing to go on a cruise.  It just isn't reality, so instead they have to come up with the best ways they can to reduce the risk which seems to be more frequent testing and immediate isolation of those that test positive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, AshleyDillo said:

so instead they have to come up with the best ways they can to reduce the risk which seems to be more frequent testing and immediate isolation of those that test positive.

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. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, twangster said:

More interesting to me will be acceptance of American visitors by the Bahamas and Caribbean nations as we move into the fall.  Few if any have resources to handle thousands of severely ill citizens so they'll need to weigh the risks of potential infection of their population vs. tourism and their economy which is pretty much the argument to allow cruising to restart.   

While some islands are accepting fly in guests on a limited basis several thousand visitors arriving on ship after ship, day after day is another matter.  

So it seems the countries involved will also need to review the cruise line protocols and decide if the risk vs. reward is acceptable to them.  Some countries that are desperate for an influx of money may have no choice but to open and accept the risk.

You're right - will be $$ driven.  Bahama resorts like Atlantis are promoting fly in's for the casino action.   Vegas is open too.   Aruba is also promoting fly ins and extended stays.    Some of these islands have no other revenue source except tourism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, CruisinForABruisin said:

It's not even remotely a bubble. The only way it would be a bubble is if everyone on that ship were locked down for 14 days together in the same places, and then boarded with no outside interaction. That 5 day prior test doesn't do a damn thing when you pick up the virus at miami international, and then show symptoms on days 5/6

As I understand it, the plan is to do 2 tests pending the availability of rapid testing (pages 19-20 of healthy sail document). So each guest would get  the 5 day and then a rapid result test during boarding.  It will be interesting to see if RCCL implements the Rapid test at the port because assuming they do, this pretty much IS a bubble compared to any other place you could be visiting (obviously not counting sitting in your house). I mean you’ve got the crew that have been on that ship for x days and then guests that undergo 2 Covid checks before getting onboard. The pseudo bubble is then only broken at destination ports. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, CruisinForABruisin said:

Hey Alexa, how many unpaid football players tested positive at Wake Forest (leading to a cancelled game, ACC school) this past weekend?

?????? 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.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, JeffB said:

?????? 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.

 

 

A fifth of the team contracted it, don't say idiocy won out because you hate liberal areas. They're are no hard protocols  for what happens if someone contracts the virus yet on a ship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JeffB said:

Nor has he said, "Florida is being opened."

Good luck with resorting to semantics by putting it quotes. But last week he said the following. That’s a governor saying Florida is open and also saying that no matter what he wouldn’t close it again. 

 

“The state of Florida is probably the most open big state in the country,” DeSantis bragged Friday, as he announced the reopening and said he was using his executive power to cancel all fines levied against people who didn’t wear masks. “We’re not closing anything going forward.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.      

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, JeffB said:

College Football is a prime example.

Heck, even my Florida hometown ACC team's coach tested positive.  The team still played without him as coach that weekend.

I always assumed the point of the initial lockdown was to stop rapid spreading that would overwhelm our medical care infrastructure.  A byproduct of that is that it bought us time to learn more about the virus and now we are getting to the point where the impact is understood more and we know how to mitigate the risk a bit better.  Now it's time to keep implementing the practices to keep moving forward and slowly reopening everything.  It's still personal choice whether someone wants to patronize a private business but at least the businesses are allowed to be open so you can make that choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, AshleyDillo said:

Heck, even my Florida hometown ACC team's coach tested positive.  The team still played without him as coach that weekend.

I always assumed the point of the initial lockdown was to stop rapid spreading that would overwhelm our medical care infrastructure.  A byproduct of that is that it bought us time to learn more about the virus and now we are getting to the point where the impact is understood more and we know how to mitigate the risk a bit better.  Now it's time to keep implementing the practices to keep moving forward and slowly reopening everything.  It's still personal choice whether someone wants to patronize a private business but at least the businesses are allowed to be open so you can make that choice.

The biggest problem with the announcement of decriminalizing not wearing mask is the position it puts local municipalities and private businesses in. I’d bet we see video out of some Karen/Kevin screaming at a private business owner that the governor said he didn’t have to wear a mask. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Andrew72681 said:

The biggest problem with the announcement of decriminalizing not wearing mask is the position it puts local municipalities and private businesses in. I’d bet we see video out of some Karen/Kevin screaming at a private business owner that the governor said he didn’t have to wear a mask. 

True.  That behavior was happening anyways, though.  Locally it has always been on the business to turn a customer away despite the county mask mandate.  But now the business at least isn't at risk of losing their business license if their customers don't comply with the mask mandate.  It's back being as enforceable as "no shirts, no shoes, no service" for the business -- the business can make the decision to enforce it or look the other way, but they won't get in legal trouble for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The role of the CDC has been interesting to observe as it relates to all aspects of life in America.  

On one hand there is a valid argument that an infected person places a burden on health care resources.  That applies equally regardless how an individual contracts the virus.  If a virus is spread at a movie theater, thrill park, airplane, bus, train, church, school, workplace, taxi, Uber, hotel, resort, timeshare, ferry or ship the burden per infected individual is the same.   

The CDC makes a point in yesterday's announcement stating that 0.019% (41) of US deaths have occurred or are believed to occur related to cruise ships.  They didn't provide the percentage because it would make their argument look silly.  

How many US deaths from the workplace?   In meat packing plants alone the CDC reports 86 deaths as of July 10, 2020 directly related to COVID-19, more than twice that of cruise ships.  Why isn't the CDC focusing more resources on meat packing plants?  Maybe because its only 0.041% of all cases and their resources are better spent elsewhere like banning cruise ships.

If they reported all workplace deaths across America beyond meat packing plants the number would be make cruise ships look pretty darn safe.  

Hopefully tomorrow's meeting in Washington will result in some balance being applied to the cruise industry as it has in many other industries.  There is risk of becoming infected every time an individual leaves their home.  I could get the virus grocery shopping later today.  I could get the flu and die on my next airplane ride.  I could get in a car accident on the way to board a plane to fly to a cruise.  I choose to accept that risk.  Cruising should be the same.  If I get the virus in the grocery store my burden on healthcare is no different than if I get the virus on a ship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, twangster said:

The CDC makes a point in yesterday's announcement stating that 0.019% (41) of US deaths have occurred or are believed to occur related to cruise ships.  They didn't provide the percentage because it would make their argument look silly.  

The problem with the argument of their only being 41 is that there were no cruises after early March. They could just as easily extrapolate that number out and say “If cruising had continued we may have had an Oasis class sized passenger count of deaths”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, twangster said:

If I get the virus in the grocery store my burden on healthcare is no different than if I get the virus on a ship.

For most people I would say that that they have to go grocery shopping to survive but not cruising. But we’ve seen how much you cruise ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Andrew72681 said:

The problem with the argument of their only being 41 is that there were no cruises after early March. They could just as easily extrapolate that number out and say “If cruising had continued we may have had an Oasis class sized passenger count of deaths”

The counterargument is that we knew so little about the virus in March.  In the subsequent months we knew more and the month after that we knew even more.  Just like the New England area saw a massive spike with extraordinary death rates in March.  It's understandable that cruise travel saw the spike of deaths in the dozens up through March meanwhile deaths in New England skyrocketed during the same time.  Both were open up to that point.   

Again by that measure, cruise is safer than land where thousands died... when both were relatively open.

There was an opportunity to learn from that and apply that early knowledge.  The CDC did just that and now months later we all benefit from it.  They were very slow to do so, but eventually they did.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Andrew72681 said:

For most people I would say that that they have to go grocery shopping to survive but not cruising. But we’ve seen how much you cruise ?

You can get groceries delivered.  Should that be a new law?  Curbside pickup or delivery only. 

Theaters are not essential.  Restaurants are not essential as you can cook at home.  If that's the measure and the CDC had the authority I wouldn't be grocery shopping tonight, not in the store anyways, just at my laptop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CDC extending to Oct 31st was inevitable, it's just a waiting game really.. honestly, consider it very lucky if they open up sailing this year, even with that document they submitted... how much you wanna guess no one at the CDC has read through it? CDC has been out to ignore the cruise lines... every other aspect of the travel industry is up and running, airlines, Disneyworld, Vegas, etc etc, but no cruises even though they are going to probably be cleaner than any other place... these no sail order extensions are just annoying.

I know they are doing it on a month to month basis, but as we cruise fans need to stop hoping that it will be put to an end. Seriously, it's getting old. I am waiting for the day they just come out and say, okay, it is lifted, rather than giving people false hope. I cancelled my Nov 2020 cruise 5 months ago knowing it wasn't going to happen and if it was, I wouldn't want to experience that onboard experience, just sounds terrible and un-vacation like. I am keeping my  fingers crossed things look better by Spring 2021 and a vaccine is out (that is effective) so we can go on our cruise to Alaska in July 2021. And by then, hopefully we can go cruising without a mask and screenings. Let's see what happens!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The month to month decision process works no better for the cruise industry then it would for something like farming. 

Tell a farmer they might be allowed to gather workers to pick crops on a month to month basis.  It can take several months to grow produce so how is a farmer supposed to know when to begin planting if they don't know when they will be allowed to have individuals on hand to harvest?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, twangster said:

You can get groceries delivered.  Should that be a new law?  Curbside pickup or delivery only. 

Theaters are not essential.  Restaurants are not essential as you can cook at home.  If that's the measure and the CDC had the authority I wouldn't be grocery shopping tonight, not in the store anyways, just at my laptop.

At its peak, the wait to get groceries delivered from my wegmans was 9 days. Curbside pickup was a week to get a spot. 
Amazon/Whole Foods ended up publicizing 20k confirmed cases today from its employees. And if they could, I’m sure they’d want them shutdown. 
The cruise industry never belonged under the purview of the CDC and are now being punished for it. They probably never thought they’d be in this situation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, johnt83 said:

CDC extending to Oct 31st was inevitable, it's just a waiting game really.. honestly, consider it very lucky if they open up sailing this year, even with that document they submitted... how much you wanna guess no one at the CDC has read through it? CDC has been out to ignore the cruise lines... every other aspect of the travel industry is up and running, airlines, Disneyworld, Vegas, etc etc, but no cruises even though they are going to probably be cleaner than any other place... these no sail order extensions are just annoying.

I know they are doing it on a month to month basis, but as we cruise fans need to stop hoping that it will be put to an end. Seriously, it's getting old. I am waiting for the day they just come out and say, okay, it is lifted, rather than giving people false hope. I cancelled my Nov 2020 cruise 5 months ago knowing it wasn't going to happen and if it was, I wouldn't want to experience that onboard experience, just sounds terrible and un-vacation like. I am keeping my  fingers crossed things look better by Spring 2021 and a vaccine is out (that is effective) so we can go on our cruise to Alaska in July 2021. And by then, hopefully we can go cruising without a mask and screenings. Let's see what happens!

I share your opinion.  Using an arbitrary start up date is becoming meaningless.  The date can have no tie to any assurance the effects of the infection are curbed/mitigated or not.   At the start of this, it made sense from a financial (stock market) perspective.  It provided breathing space for these publicly traded companies to present some level of confidence to investors that operations restart are "just a quarter away".  The gov't didn't want to further contribute to the financial degradation of these industries.   The month-to-month delays will soon no longer protect valuation slide and the gov't will need to either allow cruise lines to operate (at some level) or allow them to go under.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, DunwoodyDad said:

I wonder if the meeting in DC is still on today given what’s going on....

I imagine our VP has to review his schedule and might have to re-prioritize his calendar.   Since he leads the CV task force I imagine this is most likely who cruise line execs are scheduled to meet with.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...