Don't Pull out of California!!!

[kath00]

There are all sorts of creative itineraries that could be run from the west coast if the requirement of a distant foreign port didn't exist. Coastal cruises with a night or two overnight in San Francisco. I'd love those!

 

It's not clear to me what big-money interest is being protected by this act. But it's becoming rather tiresome.

 

I totally agree with you, Linda. I wonder if it's the airlines. How cool would it be to have cruises from San Diego to Seattle once or twice a month just to get us up there! My DH, who travels North for business, would use that all the time!

 

Katherine

[Niwel]

Speaking to RCCL - the line we've sailed on most.

 

Mariner was WAY too large of a ship given the marketplace; Monarch was too old.

 

I think they should have moved Radiance to L.A. The ship itself is the destination - and I think they are the lovliest in the fleet.

 

Vision was out of L.A. at one point, too, and is also a great size for the region.

 

We LOVED the weekend cruises, but are not fans of Carnival. However, if Princess decided to return to the "Love Boat" weekend itineraries, I bet they'd get a lot of the RCCL faithful.

[lovcruzing]

ITINERARIES SHOULD INCLUDE OVERNIGHTS IN THE LARGER PORTS ON THE WEST COAST SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO CRAM ALL YOUR SHORE EXCURSIONS INTO JUST ONE DAY. THERE IS ALOT OF NIGHT LIFE GOING ON IN PORT TOO THAT WE MISS OUT ON. EVEN IN MEXICO.

SO MY VOTE IS TO BRING ROYAL CARIBBEAN BACK 7-12-14 NIGHT CRUISES, OVERNIGHT IN AT LEAST 2 PORTS. ITINERARIES MAY INCLUDE SOME MEXICO (overnight PV), or??? AND MAYBE OVERNIGHT IN SAN DIEGO, SAN FRANCISCO, OR SEATTLE.

[kath00]

ITINERARIES SHOULD INCLUDE OVERNIGHTS IN THE LARGER PORTS ON THE WEST COAST SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO CRAM ALL YOUR SHORE EXCURSIONS INTO JUST ONE DAY. THERE IS ALOT OF NIGHT LIFE GOING ON IN PORT TOO THAT WE MISS OUT ON. EVEN IN MEXICO.

SO MY VOTE IS TO BRING ROYAL CARIBBEAN BACK 7-12-14 NIGHT CRUISES, OVERNIGHT IN AT LEAST 2 PORTS. ITINERARIES MAY INCLUDE SOME MEXICO (overnight PV), or??? AND MAYBE OVERNIGHT IN SAN DIEGO, SAN FRANCISCO, OR SEATTLE.

 

Just want to make sure you realize that when you type in all capitals, that is the internet equivalent to SHOUTING at someone. :D I would stick with small letters so that folks don't get too excited or offended....

 

I agree with you that overnights are great, by the way. I think Carnival is now doing some O/N in Cabo and RCCL has done some in SFO, which is a great city to spend the night in since there are so many shows that don't end till 10 or 11pm....

 

Katherine

[AZ Karaoke Girl]

The 2 days in Cabo on Carnival are not really overnights. They leave port at night so they can open casino's and return the next day weather permitting. Only way to enjoy night life is to get a hotel and hope the ship can make it back to port the next night.

[arizona777]

The point that the cruise lines have done little or nothing to find new itineraries and ports on the U.S. west coast is well taken. And even Mexico has underutilized ports like Guaymas and Loreto. I think the answer lies in a lack of imagination and willingness to take risks on something new by cruise executives, who after all are wedded to their bottom lines like old spouses who go on the same tired old destinations year after year. Think Vegas and Pismo Beach.

 

I am not in the least sorry to see Norwegian pull out, and Royal Caribbean is easily replaced by Disney and as well Carnival's keeping Princess free to stick around. Speaking of bottom lines and bottom feeders, Carnival seems to be taking care of itself by packing 'em in (and I mean packing literally) on cheap cruises to Ensenada and filling the hugely inferior and huge as well as ugly new Splendor and the equally weird Spirit 8-day cruise to Acapulco and nowhere (which I have been on twice against my will).

 

It is an invidious comparison to think of the Pacific in the same breath as the Caribbean. All the Pacific needs is some new thinking by new executive heads.

[mooreport]

I agree 100%. NCL could have a lock on the west coast by adding a ship to their NCL America fleet. They could sail up and down the coast without visiting a foreign port. Of course they would need an American crew, but they would have an easier time doing than than they had in Hawaii. The crews could commute to work from most west coast ports.

[kath00]

I agree 100%. NCL could have a lock on the west coast by adding a ship to their NCL America fleet. They could sail up and down the coast without visiting a foreign port. Of course they would need an American crew, but they would have an easier time doing than than they had in Hawaii. The crews could commute to work from most west coast ports.

 

I am not sure why NCL would lock the West Coast when they have no ships here at all now. Star is leaving and Pearl is only in Alaska for 3 months. Pride is in HI and is the only US flag flying ship (and has been bought out and almost bankrupt many times in the past 10 years).

 

Any ship that could avoid the PSA would have to fly under US flag, which means paying US minimum wage and adhering to US work protection laws (ie time and a half pay after 8 hours of work). Remember the crew on most ships now gets about $1 an hour and works about 14-18 hours a day with absolutely no US labor law regulations since the ships are flying foreign flags. Our Mariner OTS waiter this Spring actually made $0 but lives off the tips alone, and works from 6am until dinner closes, around 11pm, 7 days a week! He even had to buy his own uniform for $150. And he had to pay for his own flights to come from India to the ship. Talk about 0 benefits!

 

For a company to go to US ports only, I believe the ship would have to be made in the US and have US employees with benefits, limits on work time, health insurance etc... That is a big fat no can do for cruise ships, who simply can't afford the expense.

 

Katherine

[cruisy susy]

I agree that the Radiance class ships (around 90K tons)were ideal for Mexico cruises..We would drive to San Diego from LA just to sail on Radiance of the Seas....a very special ship....I think the lack of variety of ports on West coast could be balanced out with the "right ships". I would also like to see LA added to the world cruise itineraries (it's a future dream of ours to "do the World thing":rolleyes:). Cruisy susy

[Cruisin' Chick]

I agree 100%. NCL could have a lock on the west coast by adding a ship to their NCL America fleet. They could sail up and down the coast without visiting a foreign port. Of course they would need an American crew, but they would have an easier time doing than than they had in Hawaii. The crews could commute to work from most west coast ports.

 

Supposedly the ship would also have to be built in the US (even though apparently some strings were pulled with the NCL Aloha ships -- I've heard they were not completely built here. Of course, the cost to build a ship in an US shipyard would undoubtedly be much higher than the ones built in Europe and Japan.

 

But as I'm not interested in sailing on NCL, it doesn't matter to me.

 

I totally agree with you, Linda. I wonder if it's the airlines. How cool would it be to have cruises from San Diego to Seattle once or twice a month just to get us up there! My DH, who travels North for business, would use that all the time!

 

Katherine

 

A few years ago where some forces wanted the PVSA be more restrictive, it was NCL pulling the strings with Hawaii's Senator Inouye as the puppet. They were claiming that the RTs out of the West Coast were unfair competition to the Aloha ships. Lots of people, including me, submitted comments to the Congressional site, protesting any changes (requiring a certain percentage of time in foreign ports compared to American ones; requiring a very long stay in the distant foreign port, etc.) The governors of Hawaii and California, as well as west coast chamber of commerces (like Catalina, which would lose the cruiseship tourists), mayors of west coast ports, etc. Turned out that if the restrictions were enacted as originally planned, NCL's Alaskan cruises that were RTs out of Seattle would have to stop. So the now ousted Senator Stevens of Alaska was trying to change it to cruiselines sailing to Hawaii only.

 

Fortunately, cooler heads in Washington did the right thing for once.

[lovcruzing]

Didn't notice I had all caps. Oop's. I saw the overnight in Cabo. Not a port or ship I would choose.

[EddiesToys]

During Mexico's quarantine, cruise lines went north to some great ports like Santa Barbara, and Monterey.

 

Another port between San Francisco and Astoria is Eureka CA, which the ms Zaandam was scheduled to visit this year, but cancelled.

 

There is a lot to see in California for cruise passengers looking for new adventures.

 

Eddie M

[AZ Karaoke Girl]

I love the idea of California cruising. Would require a stop in Ensenada or Canada to meet requirements but I would like the option to see & do excursions in Cali especially in the summertime. Few summer options for people on summer break from school and for those in hot climates (me from AZ) a cruise northward where it is cooler would be a welcome change from cruising to Mexico where it is hotter than home in the summer.

[Fit S600]

I vote for San Diego and San Francisco. We've been once to San Diego and we will be back next spring. The ship stops in San Francisco for two days.

I would never start a cruise in Los Angeles, no matter how fancy the port because I would have to go through LAX and that is not ever going to happen again. There are many sea side cities to visit along the coast and the need for a quick Mexico/Canada stop can be met. Lots of ships are spending four hours here in Victoria.

[BruceMuzz]

I agree 100%. NCL could have a lock on the west coast by adding a ship to their NCL America fleet. They could sail up and down the coast without visiting a foreign port. Of course they would need an American crew, but they would have an easier time doing than than they had in Hawaii. The crews could commute to work from most west coast ports.

 

Just one small problem with your idea.

US Congress will only allow NCL America ships to sail in Hawaii - and to the West Coast for dry docks only.

Coastwise sailing by these ships in Califoirnia, Alaska, and the US East Coast is strictly prohibited by US Law.

[Cruisin' Chick]

We too (about 20 of us) want to have more ships out of San Francisco. A super great cruise would be a 14-15 day cruise to Hawaii. They do that cruise out of San Diego, why not San Francisco. Every cruise we have ever been on out of San Francisco always sails FULL. There is a need and the cruise lines should wise up and fill it.

 

People flock to San Francisco as a vacation destination, what better way than to include a cruise. We could have cruises to Mexico, Alaska, Hawaii, Pacific Coastal and Panama Canal out of San Francisco. I bet they would all sail full. Why are cruise lines ignoring this important market. There are cruises to Alaska, but only on Princess.

 

We wanted to book a cruise on Princess to Mexico in September (one sailing only) and it has been waitlisted for months........why don't the cruise lines get a clue.:eek:

 

San Francisco has a lousy terminal, but that would probably be impoved if they could get more ships.........wise up cruise lines.

 

Hope to cruise out of San Francisco. We have been on over 40 cruises and love the ones out of SF.:)

 

As mentioned, this cruise would have to go to Canada or Ensenada. I wouldn't mind this cruise as long as it went to Canada and not Mexico.

[kath00]

As mentioned' date=' this cruise would have to go to Canada or Ensenada. I wouldn't mind this cruise as long as it went to Canada and not Mexico.[/quote']

 

That would be WAAAY out of the way and against very strong currents and rough waters. A line could not afford all the gas it would take to motor all the way up to Canada, just to come down the coast to SF. That's why LA is so much easier for them than SFO as a departure port.

 

The waters around San Fran and Northern CA are really rough and the weather is generally very cold and windy and the summer fog is brutal. Currents are also strong around the area. All those factors make routine sailings out of San Francisco waaay harder than a port like LA or San Diego... and prohibitively costly thanks to the current fuel prices.

 

Katherine

[gogy]

We too (about 20 of us) want to have more ships out of San Francisco. A super great cruise would be a 14-15 day cruise to Hawaii. They do that cruise out of San Diego, why not San Francisco. Every cruise we have ever been on out of San Francisco always sails FULL. There is a need and the cruise lines should wise up and fill it.

 

People flock to San Francisco as a vacation destination, what better way than to include a cruise. We could have cruises to Mexico, Alaska, Hawaii, Pacific Coastal and Panama Canal out of San Francisco. I bet they would all sail full. Why are cruise lines ignoring this important market. There are cruises to Alaska, but only on Princess.

 

We wanted to book a cruise on Princess to Mexico in September (one sailing only) and it has been waitlisted for months........why don't the cruise lines get a clue.:eek:

 

San Francisco has a lousy terminal, but that would probably be impoved if they could get more ships.........wise up cruise lines.

 

Hope to cruise out of San Francisco. We have been on over 40 cruises and love the ones out of SF.:)

I also would love cruises out of San Francisco, my home port. In years past Celebrity would have 7 day coastal cruises from S.F., my husband and I have taken 4 of them between the years of 2002 and 2008. I had called Celebrity and asked why they stopped these cruises, they said they were looking into more exotic destinations. Not everybody wants to fly or have enough time for a longer cruise.

[Cruisin' Chick]

That would be WAAAY out of the way and against very strong currents and rough waters. A line could not afford all the gas it would take to motor all the way up to Canada, just to come down the coast to SF. That's why LA is so much easier for them than SFO as a departure port.

 

The waters around San Fran and Northern CA are really rough and the weather is generally very cold and windy and the summer fog is brutal. Currents are also strong around the area. All those factors make routine sailings out of San Francisco waaay harder than a port like LA or San Diego... and prohibitively costly thanks to the current fuel prices.

 

Katherine

 

Many of us certainly wouldn't mind starting south and sailing north. But those who live in SF would have to fly or drive down here then.

[Cosette]

I could not agree with you more!!!! I have been mentioning this exact same thing quite often with cruise line executives and representatives, to no avail!

[BruceMuzz]

I could not agree with you more!!!! I have been mentioning this exact same thing quite often with cruise line executives and representatives, to no avail!

 

So Cosette. Those highly paid cruise line execs spend additional millions every year with consultants and polls to determine where the most profitable itineraries will be.

 

Strangely somehow they have squandered those millions - and are losing additional big profits - by not taking advantage of this golden opportunity to make big money on West Coast cruises????

 

Or could it be that they know exactly what they are doing and have chosen to move their ships to locations that are more profitable and popular???

[Cruisin' Chick]

Focus groups, polls and highly paid consultants have been wrong on occasion.

[Tgianco]

We did one of the swine flu cruises on the Carnival Splendor last year that went to Astoria, Victoria and Vancouver. It was awesome. I'd skip Astoria (which I did, since I had been there before), but Victoria and Vancouver were absolutely incredible.

 

The weather in those two towns was awesome (low-mid-80s) in early June, 2009. The sea wasn't rough at all. Two of the sea days were pretty chilly, but that's what the spas and activities were for. The last day at sea was blue skies and warm temps.

 

All in all, you couldn't ask for much more. You could do 6-9 day cruises from SD, LA or SF to these destinations. If you replaced Astoria (or mixed it in occasionally) with Seattle, it would almost be a dream intinerary.

[kath00]

Crystal is following Princess' footsteps. Looks like they cancelled 2 of their Mexican Riviera cruises and replaced them with one 7 day cruise that goes north from LA to Vancouver and one that comes back South to LA!

 

I am guessing that their million dollar research consultants have managed to realize the tides are changing, so to speak, and have come up with a unique itiniary/solution to try out.

 

Now I can thank 2 cruise lines for thinking outside the box and not just abandoning the West Coast entirely. HURRAY.

 

Katherine