Jump to content
Royal Caribbean Blog

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


Recommended Posts

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 post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 96
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The two for twenty t-shirt sale in the promenade:

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.

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 spr

Posted Images

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 post
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 post
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 post
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 post
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 post
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 post
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 post
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 post
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 post
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 post
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 post
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 post
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 post
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 post
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 post
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 post
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 post
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 post
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 post
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 post
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 post
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...