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

[SpeedNoodles]

Not that there are any sailings in October anyway...

https://www.cruiseindustrynews.com/cruise-news/23576-cruise-ship-no-sail-order-set-to-extend-through-october.html?fbclid=IwAR3O9CEJXMNImQhdxiMV6Slowy46vsjXZh0ca0oyagB5PJtCX6V33jw0FQs

[cruisellama]

Read CDC wanted to push to Feb '21 but others in the gov't believed too long so  Oct was used as starting peg with the option for a month-to-month slip.   Think that reduces probability of Nov restart.   The CDC could still just sit on the plans until they decide to allow.

[mark52479]

7 minutes ago, cruisellama said:

Read CDC wanted to push to Feb '21 but others in the gov't believed too long so  Oct was used as starting peg with the option for a month-to-month slip.   Think that reduces probability of Nov restart.   The CDC could still just sit on the plans until they decide to allow.

Probably from this floating around

 

Looks like the White House overruled the CDC director. 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.axios.com/scoop-white-house-overruled-cdc-cruise-ships-florida-91442136-1b8e-442e-a2a1-0b24e9a39fb6.html

 

[Andrew72681]

2 hours ago, cruisellama said:

Read CDC wanted to push to Feb '21 but others in the gov't believed too long so  Oct was used as starting peg with the option for a month-to-month slip.   Think that reduces probability of Nov restart.   The CDC could still just sit on the plans until they decide to allow.

It also means those of us with November cruises won’t get much notice before the next round. I’d be RC and Others spend the next few weeks pleading their case and my November 8th cruise doesn’t get cancelled till 10/15. 

[princevaliantus]

8 hours ago, Andrew72681 said:

It also means those of us with November cruises won’t get much notice before the next round. I’d be RC and Others spend the next few weeks pleading their case and my November 8th cruise doesn’t get cancelled till 10/15. 

Well, to make it easier, we know at this point that the CDC was going to extend the no sail order to Feb. 2021. This tells me when the end if October rolls around, there most likely will be another extension and snother round of cancellations. With that in mind, the smart thing to do would be to move your reservation and make oter plans. Most people have done this and, like me, should cruising start up, I will be booking a last minute cruise. 

[jticarruthers]

1 hour ago, princevaliantus said:

Well, to make it easier, we know at this point that the CDC was going to extend the no sail order to Feb. 2021. This tells me when the end if October rolls around, there most likely will be another extension and snother round of cancellations. With that in mind, the smart thing to do would be to move your reservation and make oter plans. Most people have done this and, like me, should cruising start up, I will be booking a last minute cruise. 

Yep i gave up on trying to find itineraries that i liked that might survive the rolling ban. Added a Feb option into my portfolio this week though ..... and like you i will probably book a short notice one as soon as they are actually sailing again.

[cruisellama]

28 minutes ago, jticarruthers said:

Yep i gave up on trying to find itineraries that i liked that might survive the rolling ban. Added a Feb option into my portfolio this week though ..... and like you i will probably book a short notice one as soon as they are actually sailing again.

When our Nov cruise gets canceled,  collect the 125% FCC and put it on the Mar '21.

[ehw51]

I guess it will be another waiting game for our Nov 30, we either cruise or get 125% FCC. Would rather cruise but We will be happy to take the 125% with a smile, and wait till 21.

[Cruisegirl1976]

Cases are starting to go back up... there isn't going to be any cruises sailing from the US until next year at the earliest. , covid needs be under control before any type of sailing is possible.

[Atlantix2000]

3 hours ago, princevaliantus said:

Well, to make it easier, we know at this point that the CDC was going to extend the no sail order to Feb. 2021. 

 

2 hours ago, jticarruthers said:

Yep i gave up on trying to find itineraries that i liked that might survive the rolling ban. Added a Feb option into my portfolio this week though ..... and like you i will probably book a short notice one as soon as they are actually sailing again.

All the articles I can find basically quote each other that the CDC wanted to extend "to Feb 2021".  But does that mean the no sail order would have ended Jan 31 or would it have extended all the way through Feb?  I don't think I'd be looking at anything before March 2021 just to avoid the frustration of another move.

[Matt]

8 minutes ago, Atlantix2000 said:

All the articles I can find basically quote each other that the CDC wanted to extend "to Feb 2021".  But does that mean the no sail order would have ended Jan 31 or would it have extended all the way through Feb?

My understanding was extended through Jan 31 

[YOLO]

Can I still L&S my Nov 1st Harmony cruise, or am I stuck waiting to see if RCL cancels?  I am now 32 days out...

[DublinFC]

Hopefully the meeting at the White House is favorable to getting cruising going again.  The success in Europe is encouraging.  I am hoping what is being learned there can be applied here so we can get back out on the water sooner than later.

[WAAAYTOOO]

45 minutes ago, YOLO said:

Can I still L&S my Nov 1st Harmony cruise, or am I stuck waiting to see if RCL cancels?  I am now 32 days out...

Yes, you can still L&S proactively.  They extended the program for another month.  YIPPEE !!!

[StephanieH]

Keep in mind when you do a Lift and Shift are then locked into the cancellation penalties you are currently under.  Also, you can only Lift and Shift ONE time.

 

[princevaliantus]

Just reported in New York Times....please pay close attention to the 3rd paragraph, which states, "The administration will instead allow the ships to sail after Oct. 31, the date the industry had already agreed to in its own, voluntary plan." Can this be the go-ahead we've all been waiting for???

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/30/health/covid-cruise-ships.html?smtyp=cur&smid=fb-nytimes&fbclid=IwAR20qirTGr5DpBhwI98pGseRUfwbz41vmy-Xqwxs9obDQnzo-C26ICRWTmU

[Oliver]

This is very worrisome to me. I know that the CDC hasn’t been entirely fair to the cruise industry but I’m not terribly happy that the White House is overriding them either. Cases are still going up in most of the country. I’m afraid to say much more because I know we aren’t supposed to be political here. But overriding the CDC isn’t a good solution either. We trust them to make these kind of decisions for us to keep us safe even if we don’t always understand or agree with all of them. 

[nate91]

Trying to leave politics out of it, but simply by comparison, restricting cruises now, and especially until February, makes no sense. I think Vegas is the closest land based approximation of a cruise. 

- Trying to keep people in a small bubble (the Strip)

- Casinos, fine dining, hotel rooms

- Visiting different destinations during the day but returning to home base at night

- Live shows (currently closed in Vegas due to COVID, but scheduled to return in November.)

 

Vegas is open (with restrictions like social distancing and masks). I see no reason that is not politically motivated for either 

A. It's not dangerous. Cruises can reopen like Vegas, Walt Disney World, etc.

B. It's too dangerous. Cruises should stay closed, and Vegas, Disney World, theme parks, need to close down as well.

Having said that, my trust that the CDC is doing this out of goodwill for our safety is very low. 

[CruisinForABruisin]

2 minutes ago, nate91 said:

Trying to leave politics out of it, but simply by comparison, restricting cruises now, and especially until February, makes no sense. I think Vegas is the closest land based approximation of a cruise. 

- Trying to keep people in a small bubble (the Strip)

- Casinos, fine dining, hotel rooms

- Visiting different destinations during the day but returning to home base at night

- Live shows (currently closed in Vegas due to COVID, but scheduled to return in November.)

 

Vegas is open (with restrictions like social distancing and masks). I see no reason that is not politically motivated for either 

A. It's not dangerous. Cruises can reopen like Vegas, Walt Disney World, etc.

B. It's too dangerous. Cruises should stay closed, and Vegas, Disney World, theme parks, need to close down as well.

Having said that, my trust that the CDC is doing this out of goodwill for our safety is very low. 

vegas's reopening saw an enormous spike in cases 2 weeks after the fact

[nate91]

4 minutes ago, CruisinForABruisin said:

vegas's reopening saw an enormous spike in cases 2 weeks after the fact

And they remained open, and are now having their lowest deaths since June. My point is that the CDC is essentially playing favorites while saying they are protecting us, but it's pretty hard to believe them right now.

[CruisinForABruisin]

5 minutes ago, nate91 said:

And they remained open, and are now having their lowest deaths since June. My point is that the CDC is essentially playing favorites while saying they are protecting us, but it's pretty hard to believe them right now.

One employees an entire state, the other is a leisure activity. Go scroll back in reddit/las vegas, the citizens were pissed when they reopened,  and the workers did feel safe.

[nate91]

3 minutes ago, CruisinForABruisin said:

One employees an entire state, the other is a leisure activity. Go scroll back in reddit/las vegas, the citizens were pissed when they reopened,  and the workers did feel safe.

Got it. I'm not going to argue over whether Vegas should or shouldn't have opened. It did, it is, and I used it as an anecdote to my point, not as the main point. Thanks for your input though!

[Tanner]

It's fair that the forum rules don't support political discussions and I can easily adhere to those rules but to think that this whole shut down is not at least as much political as it is health based would not pass the smell test.  The emerging stories, Royal hiring a Government Relations expert, the different port authorities making their comments heard, CLIA weighing in, even some other line's CEO's speaking out, it's all too much.  The writing is on the wall with what's actually happening and we can safely say that without weighing in on the actual politics of it.   

I know it doesn't change the fact we are all not sailing but it is a different type of frustration compared to just waiting for the health factors to be sorted out.  

 

[Scrumps]

This will end up being a political decision.  The admin knows there are a lot of workers in FL who want to get back to, well, work. The CDC just wanted a blanket ban into 2021 with zero consideration for anything or reviewing the plans. The admin wants people back to work.  Announcing a return to sailing for 1st November is going to be a big deal.  I fully expect a decision in the next week that the no sail order ends on Oct 31.

[nate91]

8 minutes ago, Scrumps said:

This will end up being a political decision.  The admin knows there are a lot of workers in FL who want to get back to, well, work. The CDC just wanted a blanket ban into 2021 with zero consideration for anything or reviewing the plans. The admin wants people back to work.  Announcing a return to sailing for 1st November is going to be a big deal.  I fully expect a decision in the next week that the no sail order ends on Oct 31.

I love your confidence! I really hope that you're right, as I would love to see cruises get started again. Most of all, I think we all seek some definitive answers, as in are November/December cruises happening or not?

[Scrumps]

I just don't see how the admin can be saying we need to open up the country and schools and then embrace a decision to shutdown an entire industry until next year.  Added to that FL decision to open up completely.  I am in no way advocating for one side or the other.. just stating what I believe will happen.

[JeffB]

Allow the cruise industry to restart or keep it shuttered ........ a political decision? I think this is more likely to involve two different viewpoints both of them with supporting data behind them. One of them seriously flawed.

The CDC believes congregate settings, such as those present on cruise ships have a high enough risk of promoting viral spread and endangering the Public Health to be curtailed. The data is unambiguous. Congregate settings do promote viral spread. The administration believes that with mitigation measures present, such as those proposed by the Sail-Safe Panel, the risk is sufficiently lowered that the economic benefits of green-lighting the cruise industry outweigh the Public Health risks.  The economic harm to the cruise industry including every facet of supporting operations being rendered by the CDC's no sail order is also unambiguous. It is significant. I'd call it catastrophic when the entire supply chain for the cruise industry is considered. 

Two sides both with fair points. The CDC has been wrong before in matters involving SARS-CoV-2. They are wrong again extending the no-sail order for the cruise industry

My personal view is that the CDC has, from the beginning of the pandemic in the US, over-stated the public health risks. That is not to say, by any means, that SARS-CoV-2 is harmless. It is not. It has the capacity to produce significant morbidity and mortality but the degree of it is highly age stratified allowing for targeted, specific containment measures instead of mass lock-downs. Moreover, and as our knowledge of the virus has increased, we have learned that simple mitigation measures that are layered are effective in controlling viral spread short of shuttering the economy and immobilizing citizens. Meanwhile, the protection of vulnerable populations has improved along with improved patient management when this cohort does become infected and requires hospitalization.

During the entire pandemic, it is only now, 6 months down the road, that governments at the national level and local levels are realizing that the continued curtailment of social and economic activity is not sustainable. Cost/Risk/Benefit analysis is taking shape globally. Countries are recognizing that lock-down were counterproductive at the start and now continue to be more useless in controlling viral spread. Not only is this approach not sustainable but it also has already created previously unfathomable social and economic hardships that having nothing to do with the health related issues involving COVID-19.

To sum it up, the damage done implementing many aspects of the CDC's approach to disease control has been enormous with little benefit to the public health. Keeping the cruise industry shuttered is just another example of bad policy with huge objectifiable downsides and few objectifiable benefits.

 

[Matt]

Waiting for an update on the No Sail Order.....

 

[cruisellama]

9 hours ago, Matt said:

My understanding was extended through Jan 31 

Any set date is arbitrary.  I would expect use of some standard infection rate and not just set an arbitrary date.  

[DunkelBierJay]

If it expires, how can it extend? I don't remember the no sail order having an expiration time on 9/30/20. Does that mean it's already expired?

[Andrew72681]

3 hours ago, JeffB said:

The CDC believes congregate settings, such as those present on cruise ships have a high enough risk of promoting viral spread and endangering the Public Health to be curtailed.

I think the biggest part is that this is the easy one for them to control. If we really were going to stop people congregating together churches would still be closed. But that’s a third rail. Airplanes are confined situation, but they are American companies with huge lobbying organizations behind them. 

[Pattycruise]

I see a lot of talk about people taking the FCC of 125%....the price of my March 28 out of Cape Liberty NJ  junior suite is just above double of what I paid for it. 

[DunwoodyDad]

It’s official. 10/31 on the CDC website

[Scrumps]

The reason I state this will end up being a political decision is because I do not believe the CDC is going to make it. As we have learned, the CDC director wanted a straight banned through Feb 2021..  he was over ruled by the WH.. that makes it a political decision, not a health and safety one.  I suspect after the meeting on Friday, there will be a joint statement from the Cruise Lines and the WH they are resuming on Nov 1st.   

You can't have a policy of opening everything up and at the same time shutting down an entire industry saying it is unsafe.  Ted Cruz last night blasted the shutdown policy for Disney laying off thousands of workers, not in FL, but in CA where the shutdown is stricter. 

[DunwoodyDad]

1 hour ago, Scrumps said:

The reason I state this will end up being a political decision is because I do not believe the CDC is going to make it. As we have learned, the CDC director wanted a straight banned through Feb 2021..  he was over ruled by the WH.. that makes it a political decision, not a health and safety one.  I suspect after the meeting on Friday, there will be a joint statement from the Cruise Lines and the WH they are resuming on Nov 1st.   

You can't have a policy of opening everything up and at the same time shutting down an entire industry saying it is unsafe.  Ted Cruz last night blasted the shutdown policy for Disney laying off thousands of workers, not in FL, but in CA where the shutdown is stricter. 

I think many will classify this as a political decision as you state, but as I have said previously in other threads I think of this in the same way most corporations don’t let theIr lawyers make business decisions.  That’s because the lawyers job is to protect the company from risk. However it’s usually the necessary to take on some risk to grow a company.  The root of the issue is that the CDC should never have been in the position they were to make the call about the whether cruises could sail from US ports or not. They are scientists/doctors and are focused on any/all risks of COVID spread. It’s just not in their mindset to make a balanced call on whether the risks are outweighed by other factors.  Plus, as others have said, they don’t want to be distracted by the cruise industry while they have other things to worry about. 

[JeffB]

Scrumps, well, decisions relating to the pandemic response in the US is "political" to some degree. With respect to mitigation measures, in thie case the No-Sail-Order, it is more of a legal argument. You have the abridgment of personal freedoms  v. the imposition of rules and regulation in the national interest, in this case public health. The Circuit Courts have, as far as I know, ruled against litigants who appear before them arguing that local restrictive measures such as mandating masks is unconstitutional. Under the pandemic circumstances the courts have ruled it is not. End of argument there.

Extending or letting the No-Sail-Order expire is a matter involving the question of whether or not the US Government has the authority to curtail an activity that is potentially hazardous, e.g., the operation of cruise ships from US ports, in a pandemic. I think it does and, if this authority were challenged in the courts, the litigants challenging it would likely lose. There are no politics involved here at all. Period.

Let's break this down further. The CDC, a branch of the Department of Health and Human Services,  is subordinate to the Executive Branch. The CDC recommends and the Executive branch decides. At the time of the issuance of the No-Sail-Order, The Department of Homeland Security under the authority of the Executive closed US ports to cruise ship in March. It was a lawful order, within DHS's authority to issue. Lots of water under the bridge since then.

Has the CDC objectively demonstrated that cruise ship operations threatens public health in the US? No, they said it COULD. Looked at in total, the cruise industries contribution to global COVID-19 before the industry was shut down was minuscule. The visuals were condemnatory; the facts are anything but. Not only that, the cruise industry has developed a comprehensive Safe-To-Sail Plan addressing every possible public health concern the CDC could have about cruise ship operations and submitted it to them. Going beyond that, they have addressed every issue involving any burden on a US port facility and the city within which that port is located should a cruise ship need to disembark passengers or crew infected with SARS-CoV-2   

In the face of a weak case for endangering the public health or burdening cruise port facilities offered by the CDC and based on it might or it could, the Executive branch has demonstrated the economic harm being done by continuing them The cruise industries balance sheets are objective. The unemployment secondary to layoffs in the entirety of cruise ship operations are both enormous and objective. These are real facts. The CDC? Well, they say it cruise ship operations from US ports COULD be dangerous...... and this in the face of successful cruise ship operations in Europe. Case closed. The CDC hasn't made one based on the necessary facts.

This is why in America, we have a a system of government framed in checks and balances. Pence, IMO and acting within his authority as the Chairman of the Pandemic Advisory Committee told Redfield to sit down. There's no politics in Pence's actions at all. Looking forward, I expect the Executive to let the No-Sail-Order expire on October 30th...... amidst the hand wringing of the various groups that have a vested interest in continuing the exaggerated negative narrative associated with COVID-19.   

 

[cruisellama]

7 minutes ago, DunwoodyDad said:

I think many will classify this as a political decision as you state, but as I have said previously in other threads I think of this in the same way most corporations don’t let theIr lawyers make business decisions.  That’s because the lawyers job is to protect the company from risk. However it’s usually the necessary to take on some risk to grow a company.  The root of the issue is that the CDC should never have been in the position they were to make the call about the whether cruises could sail from US ports or not. They are scientists/doctors and are focused on any/all risks of COVID spread. It’s just not in their mindset to make a balanced call on whether the risks are outweighed by other factors.  Plus, as others have said, they don’t want to be distracted by the cruise industry while they have other things to worry about. 

I believe the legislation (which won't see the light of day) proposed by the 2 Florida senators moves the CDC to a consultation role over the cruise industry as opposed to the decision authority.  Agree with your opinion - would think that whatever agency controls maritime industry in general should be lead agency with other agencies providing input.

[JeffB]

3 minutes ago, cruisellama said:

I believe the legislation (which won't see the light of day) proposed by the 2 Florida senators moves the CDC to a consultation role over the cruise industry as opposed to the decision authority.  Agree with your opinion - would think that whatever agency controls maritime industry in general should be lead agency with other agencies providing input.

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.  

[twangster]

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.

[princevaliantus]

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.