FiredogCruiser

Broward County, the same county that tried blaming the USCG for closing off port access to returning cruise ships, just mandated masks to be worn in homes. Needless to say, they can't cite any science supporting that arbitrary decision. Yet these are the same county officials that will be determining whether or not Port Everglades will be open to cruise ships, with mostly likely the same lack of science to support their decisions. No matter what the CDC says or the cruise line procedures are, these locals will have a go/no go authority. And are apparently free to be as arbitrary in their decision making as they want to be. With no national standard enforcement mechanism, I would hate to be in a cruise line executive position trying to get all of these local port authorities to agree on even noon versus midnight.

Shoreside pandemic mitigation is, as I said, not a cruise industry responsibility. Any municipality that seeks to attract large volumes of people spending leisure dollars has a responsibility to have plans in place for their adequate protection. Many are very willing to impose all types of non-resident taxes to gain visitor dollars (resort taxes, hotel bed taxes, etc.) yet are unwilling to spend the money on required emergency management standards to protect those recruited visitors. Whether personnel, equipment, stockpiles, training, or for that matter coordination of effort between agencies and mitigation providers, visitors are left to fend for themselves, or in the case of the CONVID-19 virus refused access to assistance of any kind. (I will never spend another disposable dollar in Broward County again, and I have cruised from there, and stayed in hotels there, and ate in restaurants there, and flown in and out of there in the past.) Cruising is no different in regards to planning necessities than large sporting events, high rise towers, airports or any other venue with large population densities. So why is the industry being treated any differently? I maintain chiefly because of the negative publicity that has been heaped upon the industry for years. And I also maintain the reason for that is found in the foreign flag issue.

No one has ever suggested that 100% of a cruise ship population would arrive in a port requiring critical care unit hospitalization, or 4,000 ventilators per ship, or the necessity to transport 4,000 patients by ambulance. Yet that unrealistic expectation has been cited in numerous news articles, opinion pieces, and social media postings by people with no understanding of emergency management procedures, standards or guidelines, as a reason not only for closing ports, but keeping them closed. Right now there is massive efforts to cover up deficiencies, by blaming a novel virus for inadequate stockpiles, emergency operations plans, personnel and equipment.

So, while we are all carrying on about what is the cruise lines doing to protect everyone, and I won't question the validity of those question, I also want to know what the port cities are doing to bring their emergency response capabilities up to standards, and no one is even talking about that.

4 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

This is it precisely.  What Donald's statement shows is that while cruise lines could implement protocols to meet the CDC requirements, they are hoping that by the time the US has its internal struggle with the virus under control, that those protocols will be found to not be necessary, so why spend the money on something we don't need.  In other words, we could make protocols and submit plans that would clear the ships to operate, but since the ports are having trouble controlling the virus, and many are not allowing this kind of gathering/transportation, why should we bother.  This statement, alone, shows that it is not the CDC to blame for the continued delay in clearing ships to sail, it is the cruise industry itself.

Could not disagree more. Take a look at what Broward County just did in requiring masks in homes. Port shoreside pandemic mitigation is not a cruise line responsibility. Until these port cities are capable of meeting federal pandemic guidelines, expect ports to remain closed, and pressure to be on the CDC to continue extending no sail orders.

Ports that want the vacationers dollars have a responsibility to have plans in place to mitigate. Many don't, and worse don't want to. Philadelphia, no longer a cruise departure port, just recently said they won't allow home fans at NFL games this year. Huge numbers were seen in Philly, and they did not meet pandemic guidelines, and wanted stockpile inventories confiscated from other parts of the state.

4 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

I shouldn't go down this rabbit hole and feed this, but I will.  What nefarious conspiracy is the CDC hiding?  What is their "slant", if they are not "fully objective"?  What is the rationale for wanting to "ruin the cruise industry"?

I suggest greater bureaucratic control over foreign flagged ships, especially in areas of personnel management and compensation. I am waiting for greater concessions as a condition for engagement on protocols.

I am also amazed that there is no discussion regarding the manufacturing flaws in some of the test kits being used which are contributing huge numbers of false positive results. Article posted just this morning regarding that, and the policy implications the numbers are having.

What do you mean by "rough case against the industry"?

American government agencies at all levels, from local port authorities through federal agencies have shown aggressive approaches to the cruise industry for years. In some cases bureaucrats mimicing political figures with an axe to grind because of ocean cruise ships being foreign flagged. In other instances it was the other way around, but the bottom line is that there has been long standing resentment over the lack of bureaucratic authority over the industry, despite the amount of control currently in place. A perfect example IMHO was the Broward County hearing fiasco, where local bureaucratic authority tried to make the USCG responsible for the lack of shoreside pandemic mitigation. Anyone who objectively listened to that hearing could see how unprepared they were, and how desperate they were to assign blame, and ignore completely their inability to meet updated pandemic guidelines, in place since the SARS scare.

Bottom line is what we are seeing is the use of the COVID-19 fear, as cover for ports unable and in many cases unwilling, to meet pandemic guidelines. Until the shoreside deficiencies are addressed expect the no sale orders to continue.

We have put off until the end of January 2021, and are not sure about that. Originally had been booked on the 1/30/21 Mardi Gras, but that got cancelled. So switched to RCCL HOS also out of Port Canaveral, for a day earlier. Fingers crossed. Rebooked the Mardi Gras for January 2022. Hopefully done by then.

We were cancelled for our January 2021 booking, but opted to rebook for January 2022. Plan to put the $600.00 on board credit to liquid use. Going to try RCCL HOS for 2021.

I am just happy to see them pulling out of Port Everglades. Personally, I will never spend another dollar in Ft. Lauderdale.

Frustrating thread to follow. None of us know for sure what will happen because the cruise industry doesn't know what the governments (federal, state and local ports) are going to do or require. And that is because government itself has no idea at this point what they are going to do. They are literally making things up as they go along. Expecting government to develop a sensible response plan, set a time table for implementation and actually carry it through to completion is foolhardy. They are more interested in fighting with each other, which is where I think the comments regarding politics comes in.

Will things improve after November? Maybe, simply because the election will be over and there might be a slightly greater interest in focusing on standards and plans. But I doubt it.

Eventually, the pandemic will end. They all do. The question is how much non-repairable economic damage will have been done?

Second question is whether the various level of governments will work cooperatively? For instance will federal standards be accepted by the states, and will local governments agree to reopen ports based upon the federal standards? I doubt that very much.

Through out this pandemic we have seen a multitude of examples of every government level going off in different directions, unwilling to work together, or in many cases, even communicate. Most of that inability to work cooperatively was partisan driven.

Anyone thinking whoever loses in November is going to be motivated to work cooperatively to the benefit of the public has obviously little knowledge of history. The winner, whoever that is, will gloat. The loser will whine.

I would absolutely hate to be a cruise line executive in this environment. And to the extent that ill informed members of the cruising public opt to hold cruise line executives responsible for the inability of the various levels of government to work together, there is no incentive on the part of government to doing anything different. They do nothing, and the cruise industry gets to take the flack. What could be better for them?

2 hours ago, jimbo5544 said:

While I understand your point, and understand that they are the experts, they are certainly learning with the rest of us.  My entire problem with the CDC (outside of them changing directives and flip flopping more than a couple times) is that their stance on the cruise lines is untenable.  They have not worked with the cruise lines and treated them harsher and at a arms length and totally different than any other industry.

 

In regard to the Carnival stance of adding the 15 days, I think it probably the wisest thing they have done on a long time.  This give them more flexibility and the ability to use the time to adjust to the next set of rule changes.  Clearly, countries and the CDC dramatically delayed repatriation (disgusting performance of ineptitude and lack of passion), so this delay probably influenced their decision as well.

 

Lastly, who know what the heck the CDC is saying.  Without going back to look, I recall 2 (as in one more than one) announcements to the industry since the 100 day stay.  Even the last one did not come from the CDC.  The color coded (really....?????) version for repatriation should have come out at least a months and probably 2 months ago.  Disappointing to say the least.  Their version of show us what you got, vs working together shows lack of respect, business partnership and disregard for the industry as an entity.  

Experts? I have come to believe that X is the unknown quantity and "spirt" is a drip under pressure.

3 hours ago, jeremyosborne81 said:

The biggest obstacle is that the CDC, instead of classifying cruise ships in the same category as airplanes, hotels, and theme parks, which are still operating, classified cruise ships in the same category with prisons and retirement homes, which are thought to be much higher risks.

Same category as retirement homes? Doesn't that mean ordering people on to them, like New York and Pennsylvania did?

3 hours ago, MsTabbyKats said:

Or, you can say the cruiselines haven't figured out how to socially distance people which is why everything is canceled thru Sept.

 

The CDC's jot isn't to care about cruiselines or profits...it's to do what it's name says...Control Disease

I have yet to meet a single bureaucrat with even the slightest concern about business profits. Any business.

Some even appear to be celebrating the damage being done to a number of industries, with absolutely no concern.

In light of both Carnival's decision to reduce the number of their ships, coupled with the popularity of all the Spirit Class ships, given their age I hope they decide to keep them. In this age of so called 'new normals' (a term which I dislike) I wonder how long they intend to keep them in service. I also wonder if there would be any chance, given circumstances, of a couple new builds of similar size and design being build using the newer fuel efficiency standards.

Spirit class. Pride is the favorite. 6 trips on her.

2 hours ago, Ride-The-Waves said:

Thats the least of the worries.  "Loyalty" programs are designed to have the appearance of providing some benefit to those who have already crushed (or flown) by "offering" a perceived incentive.

 

The future is looking to be much different.  Altered itineraries do to port closures to cruise ships.  Social distancing necessitating  fewer passenger (and crew).  Higher prices to achieve even a small profit.  Likely more "nickel and dimming" for everything.  Fewer and smaller venues for entertainment.  Limited access to bars.  Etc.  These things and others will have a "natural selection" to reducing perceived value of any remaining loyalty programs.

I wonder. According to Gary Bembridge, the newer more efficient ship have a breakeven point at about 30% capacity, while the older less efficient ships are about 50% to break even. So as I see it, they have a lot of room to limit capacity supporting whatever social distancing practices they put into place, and still maintain an opportunity to make a profit, albeit smaller. I believe it was he (although it might have been Don from Don's Family Vacations) that reported that at least one line had decided to entirely close two decks worth of cabins, which would reduce staffing requirements/cost.

It will be interesting to see how the economics of this dynamic play out over time.

14 hours ago, GLCM GUY said:

As a long time CCL shareholder it has been quite a ride.  Bookings across all of the major cruise lines are up for Q-4 this year and in 2021.  Will be interesting to see what the future holds.  What changes we will see when cruising resumes will have some impact in any number of ways--good and bad.  We are not currently adding to our position but we are not selling either.  As an earlier poster said the OBC is a nice perk.

As another long time CCL shareholder I have to agree with you on the ride. Good thing I bought the stock as wanting to own a piece of something I enjoyed doing rather than a retirement investment.

As for the future, I am interested in what the shoreside port authorities are going to do. I keep reading about both nursing homes, assisted living facilities, long term care facilities, and local emergency management authorities who were no where near following federal pandemic guidelines relative to PPE stockpiles, nor meeting staffing levels and training requirements. Reopening ports will require them to step up, and I am betting many will refuse to do so. I will never spend another dollar in Ft Lauderdale for example.

15 hours ago, bobandsherry said:

How are you sure? So let me say no money is being withheld (honestly I have no idea but neither do you so I might as well say something that I don't know to be true either). Performance bond usually held to ensure ship built and delivered to specs. Obviously neither of us know anything so you are just as right or wrong as me.

 

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using Tapatalk

 

 

 

Performance bond probably has act of God exclusion, which would mean the pandemic renders it void. I do wonder what the initial penalty might have been for the first rescheduling of delivery prior to the pandemic.

We have been on several Journey Cruises and Radu was not on any of them. The photo seminars were put on by the ship's staff photographers on all. Still a worthwhile experience, and as others said, they were willing to answer questions posed to them either after the program, or you could approach them around the ship. On the Pride they generally always had people approaching them as they were setting up before dinner, and at least one would be the designated question taker.

33 minutes ago, EscapeFromConnecticut said:

 

This really isn't about whether people like the rules or believe in the reasons for the rules. It's only about whether they can discipline themselves to comply.  So far, at least in the U.S., the answer has been a crushing "no."

 

And so the question becomes, since large segments of the public are not going to support the 'rules' as you put it, regardless of the science, or lack of science, behind the 'rule', will government intentionally prolong the misery? My guess is that they are already doing it. Science has been replaced by politics. The curve has been bent. That was the objective. Prolonging is not being supported by either numbers or science, only politics, therefore the lack of public support for 'rules'. The public is actually not as dumb as many in government would want to believe.

7 minutes ago, EscapeFromConnecticut said:

MsTabbyKats - exactly. 
 

    Of course, there's a segment of society that thinks it's above rules (or at least rules that it doesn't like). We see them draped in flag, screeching in the faces of nurses and police.

 

     This will make it "interesting" for ship Security workers of cruising reopens while distancing is still necessary. Many, many cruisers won't accept the risk for being onboard for days and days amidst people who refuse to wear masks.

      Yet you can easily imagine 20 or 50 - or 1,500 ??? - on any cruise ripping off the mask before the embarkation lunch and loudly declaring they won't put it back until luggage pickup at the end of the trip.

     

       Regardless of which side "wins,"

Security and the Guest Services Desk will not be fun jobs to work.

   

I really believe that before people get to caught up in 'side' they really ought to do some research into both the virus size, (relating to pass through ability) and the actual science involved with the masks. They are not as effective as 'common knowledge' would lead you to believe.

I don't look at owning my Carnival stock so much as an investment, as owning a piece of something I enjoy and value. Like a well broke in pair of boots.

2 hours ago, Saint Greg said:

 

They don't have CNN anymore. They have some form of CBS News. I don't think it's a real station. I think it's some sort of online news put on a TV channel.

I too would like to catch a little afternoon TV and maybe a nap before dinner, and am not impressed with the current channel options. On my last cruise on the Pride, I asked about the TV service, and news specifically. I was told by by room steward that the satellite providers had increased their rates so much it was no longer affordable. As for news, (I am a news junkie) I was told there were many complaints about CNN by passengers, and many requesting FOX news. They would not, or could not, replace CNN (liberal slant) with Fox (conservative slant) and so CBS was selected by default, and was a cheaper alternative. According to the steward, the current line up has not reduced the complaints he hears, and to the contrary only increased them. The said he thought management felt it had become a selling point for the more expensive premium wifi packages, and that they have been selling more since the lineup change. Now he said, their biggest complaints are about the need for more charging ports.

2 hours ago, ULCajunCruiser said:

Yep, I got it too.    Was also interested in seeing questions about free CHEERS and all-inclusive options!!    

 

I firmly believe that there is a future for cruising, these questions may be an indication of what that future may look like!!

I believe this speaks to smaller ships, fewer passengers, higher price and premium experience being the future.

I am of the opinion that the days of constructing these mega ships might be numbered once the current builds are completed. I believe this for a number of reasons starting with what I believe will be a harder sell for first time cruisers for the foreseeable future.

I also believe you will see any number of home ports enacting limitations to turn around day populations, especially in ports able to accommodate more than one ship in a single day. The reason for that being they do not have public safety capability in place to handle that size of population shore side.

I think in the after action reports following this crisis any number of places are going to be found deficient, in not following federal pandemic stockpiling guidelines and emergency operations plans recommended. Many have been in place for decades, and recently updated following SARS.

Finally, I believe it will take a couple years at least before air travel recovers to 2019 levels, making the ability to meet a ship on a specific day either more difficult, more expensive, or probably both.

I would go with MG. (In fact we have one booked for 1/30/21), Main reason at this point is because I believe CCL is in much better financial shape than NCL, and future cruise deposits and payments would be, in my opinion, at less risk.

15 hours ago, TNcruising02 said:

There is no doubt that the virus is very deadly to many people who are older and also people with certain health conditions. It is also extremely contagious.  It will be interesting to look back a year from now and see a more accurate death rate when they can factor in all of the people who had the virus, yet had no symptoms or had mild symptoms.  More testing is needed to get a more accurate figure of the death rate since it's been discovered that people can have the virus and not show symptoms.  That will eventually lower the stated death rate.  

The first figures to come out were based on the people who tested positive.  Since people who had no symptoms or had mild symptoms were not tested, the death rate stated was higher than the actual death rate.  I hope the US will test as many people as possible once we start reopening the country.

I no longer believe you can have any faith in the numbers. Since the IHME revised the reporting matrix, the numbers have jumped, chiefly due to not coming close to the numbers their initial models indicated. Now it is all about cooking the books to justify what some are claiming is an over reaction.

It also has to be remembered that year by year the effectiveness of the flu vaccine varies, as the formula is just a guess as to what stain will be that year. This virus, like all others can mutate, meaning the effectiveness of any vaccine developed may be more effective in some cases than others. I doubt there will be any vaccine with a guarantee associated with it.