Panama transit with sooooooo little ports

[fstuff1]

21day Panama canal:

EMBARK New York (New York); Cartagena (Colombia); Puntarenas (Puerto Caldera) (Costa Rica); Puerto Quetzal (Guatemala); Puerto Vallarta (Mexico); Cabo San Lucas (Mexico); Los Angeles (California); Victoria (British Columbia); DISEMBARK Seattle (Washington)

 

Only 7 ports. :o (im not counting the ending port as one)

so 3 sea days per port.

 

most panama canal transits are port heavy.

wonder why this one isnt?

 

also, im assuming its going to Canada because it cant go from LA and end at Seattle w/o a foreign port?

 

Edited October 18, 2019 by fstuff1

[salty dingo]

17 minutes ago, fstuff1 said:

21day Panama canal:

EMBARK New York (New York); Cartagena (Colombia); Puntarenas (Puerto Caldera) (Costa Rica); Puerto Quetzal (Guatemala); Puerto Vallarta (Mexico); Cabo San Lucas (Mexico); Los Angeles (California); Victoria (British Columbia); DISEMBARK Seattle (Washington)

, im assuming its going to Canada because it cant go from LA and end at Seattle w/o a foreign port?

Only if pax were embarking in LA and disembarking in Seattle. Those on the full 21 day trip are good to go from LA to Seattle with no stop in between.

Edited October 18, 2019 by salty dingo

[hallux]

14 minutes ago, fstuff1 said:

 

also, im assuming its going to Canada because it cant go from LA and end at Seattle w/o a foreign port?

 

Should be good to go without the Canada stop.  The stops elsewhere (primarily Colombia) qualify it for not violating the PVSA.  In fact - Canada would NOT satisfy the "distant foreign port" for not violating the PVSA.  Victoria just happens to be on the way to Seattle.

[mugtech]

30 minutes ago, fstuff1 said:

21day Panama canal:

EMBARK New York (New York); Cartagena (Colombia); Puntarenas (Puerto Caldera) (Costa Rica); Puerto Quetzal (Guatemala); Puerto Vallarta (Mexico); Cabo San Lucas (Mexico); Los Angeles (California); Victoria (British Columbia); DISEMBARK Seattle (Washington)

 

Only 7 ports. 😮 (im not counting the ending port as one)

so 3 sea days per port.

 

 

21 day cruise, 7 ports, means 14 sea days or 2 sea days per port.  Plus one of those sea days is a day in the canal.

[www3traveler]

In itinerary you posted, you do have a stop in Canada before arriving in Seattle:  Victoria, British Columbia, CANADA.

[Turtles06]

 

39 minutes ago, hallux said:

 

Should be good to go without the Canada stop.  The stops elsewhere (primarily Colombia) qualify it for not violating the PVSA.  In fact - Canada would NOT satisfy the "distant foreign port" for not violating the PVSA.  Victoria just happens to be on the way to Seattle.

 

Actually, Cartagena, Colombia, is the only port on this itinerary that is a "distant foreign port" under the PVSA, but one is enough! 😉

 

(Ports in Mexico and Central America, as well as in Canada as you noted, are not "distant foreign ports" by definition under the PVSA.)

[Zippeedee]

San Francisco was dropped and replaced with an earlier arrival in Vancouver and an overnight in Seattle. Glad I like sea days!

[roger001]

That is really short on port stops for a long cruise.   But if you like sea days......

[swmichigan cruiser]

47 minutes ago, Zippeedee said:

San Francisco was dropped and replaced with an earlier arrival in Vancouver and an overnight in Seattle. Glad I like sea days!

Pretty sure you meant Victoria not Vancouver. We are on this cruise as well. Also did the same cruise this spring on the Bliss but was only 15 days. And I do like sea days and not have to rush to get off the ship.

[fstuff1]

1 hour ago, Zippeedee said:

San Francisco was dropped and replaced with an earlier arrival in Vancouver and an overnight in Seattle. Glad I like sea days!

 

wonder why san fran was dropped?

[Zippeedee]

1 hour ago, swmichigan cruiser said:

Pretty sure you meant Victoria not Vancouver. We are on this cruise as well. Also did the same cruise this spring on the Bliss but was only 15 days. And I do like sea days and not have to rush to get off the ship.

Yes, sorry. Long day! Too late to edit it.

 

28 minutes ago, fstuff1 said:

 

wonder why san fran was dropped?

They didn’t explain. There is a rumor about Costa Rica being skipped now too. I really hope that doesn’t happen.

[tallnthensome]

Why would you assume that Colombia and such are not foreign ports? You’re leaving from New York instead of somewhere like Miami which makes for more sea days. The Canal transit itself is somewhat of a port day you could say. We did most of this itinerary in April. 

[bonvoyagie]

This has to be the Bliss or Joy repositioning for the AK season next year. NCL seems to be scheduling longer repo cruises - this makes sense as they can easily go from one US port to another US port with a stop in Columbia to satisfy the PVSA. If the cruise starts in NYC and ends in Seattle and there is no way to board in another US port then they eliminate either a non-revenue run from Vancouver BC to Seattle - or having to do a unique AK cruise ending in Seattle. NCL did this for the Jewel in 2017 leaving from NOLA and ending in Seattle - it did some Caribbean stops as well as they usual ports for a Panama Canal cruise. We were booked on that one but had to cancel due to family issues. Now we are on a PC cruise in Jan - SFO to NYC 21 days - at this point we do not care all that much about the ports - we just want an escape 🙂

 

BTW I believe that the PVSA allows the  "ABC" Islands and Victoria BC to be considered as "foreign ports" for Caribbean and AK cruises respectively 

Edited October 19, 2019 by bonvoyagie

[EllieinNJ]

I am on this cruise also.  Everyone was very disappointed when they dropped SF.  Said it was a berthing conflict.  Wish they would've added a new port instead of overnight in Seattle.  What could you do there after 6pm?

[Turtles06]

9 hours ago, EllieinNJ said:

Wish they would've added a new port instead of overnight in Seattle.  What could you do there after 6pm?

 

I'm not familiar with Seattle, but this is a good question to ask of the folks who are, over in the West Coast Departures forum:

 

https://boards.cruisecritic.com/forum/315-west-coast-departures/

[mugtech]

On 10/19/2019 at 1:27 PM, bonvoyagie said:

ABC" Islands and Victoria BC to be considered as "foreign ports" for Caribbean and AK cruises respectively 

Yes, but ABC are considered distant foreign ports,  Victoria is just a foreign port.

[SouthLyonCruiser]

On 10/18/2019 at 7:49 PM, hallux said:

 

Should be good to go without the Canada stop.  The stops elsewhere (primarily Colombia) qualify it for not violating the PVSA.  In fact - Canada would NOT satisfy the "distant foreign port" for not violating the PVSA.  Victoria just happens to be on the way to Seattle.

Canada does qualify, it is used on 7 day Alaska round trip cruises out of Seattle.

 

[Turtles06]

On 10/18/2019 at 7:49 PM, hallux said:

 

Should be good to go without the Canada stop.  The stops elsewhere (primarily Colombia) qualify it for not violating the PVSA.  In fact - Canada would NOT satisfy the "distant foreign port" for not violating the PVSA.  Victoria just happens to be on the way to Seattle.

 

2 hours ago, SouthLyonCruiser said:

Canada does qualify, it is used on 7 day Alaska round trip cruises out of Seattle.

 

 

SouthLyon -- as explained in the comments above, under the PVSA, when a foreign-flagged carrier transports passengers between one U.S. port and a different U.S. port (e.g., a Panama Canal transit from Miami to LA), it must stop along the way at a "distant foreign port" as defined in the Act.  Ports in Canada are not "distant foreign ports" and would not qualify here, as hallux correctly explained.   When a foreign-flagged carrier sails roundtrip out of a single U.S. port (e.g.,  your example of an Alaska cruise roundtrip out of Seattle), it need only stop at "any foreign port" (which is why a port in Canada would suffice for such a cruise, but that's irrelevant here since the OP is planning a Panama Canal cruise).

[Starry Eyes]

So, the OP wants to know why there are few pots days on this long cruise.   That’s simple...the goal is to get the ship from it’s former home port of New York to it’s new home port for the Alaska cruise season.  The more days the ship spends in port, the more days it takes to make that transit, and later the ship is working the Alaska cruise market. 

 

Relocation cruises tend to be long, relaxing cruises with a lot of sea days.  There is a clientele that enjoys them, but many people cannot spare the time.  Furthermore. making such cruises even longer (by adding port days) does not make them more marketable.

[All-ready2cruise]

I was on theJoy, a 5 day repo cruise from Vancouver with stops originally in Victoria and San Fran. The Victoria stop was cancelled, so, if Vancouver was not considered a foreign port, IMO it certainly is, what would happen? Would NCL have had to pay the fine for not stopping at a foreign port?

 

Canada is a foreign port! Distant, no but, still must be considered foreign enough, doubt NCL would design an itinerary that would cost them that much money. 

[FLAHAM]

Not a cruise between two US ports, so act does not apply.

[FLAHAM]

39 minutes ago, Starry Eyes said:

Relocation cruises tend to be long, relaxing cruises with a lot of sea days.  There is a clientele that enjoys them, but many people cannot spare the time.  Furthermore. making such cruises even longer (by adding port days) does not make them more marketable.

I like to transatlantics and keep up with NCL's offerings.  The trend seems to be moving from shorter cruises with 1-3 stops to longer cruises with 7-8 stops.

[Starry Eyes]

57 minutes ago, FLAHAM said:

Not a cruise between two US ports, so act does not apply.

Look at first post: the cruise is between two US cities: NY to Seattle

[Turtles06]

1 hour ago, All-ready2cruise said:

I was on theJoy, a 5 day repo cruise from Vancouver with stops originally in Victoria and San Fran. The Victoria stop was cancelled, so, if Vancouver was not considered a foreign port, IMO it certainly is, what would happen? Would NCL have had to pay the fine for not stopping at a foreign port?

 

Canada is a foreign port! Distant, no but, still must be considered foreign enough, doubt NCL would design an itinerary that would cost them that much money. 

 

NO ONE here has said that ports in Canada are not "foreign ports."  But, as has been explained above, Canadian ports are not "distant foreign ports" AS DEFINED by federal law, the PVSA.  So stopping in a Canadian port will NOT satisfy the requirements of the PVSA if the ship is transporting passengers between one U.S. port and a different U.S. port.  Since your cruise did NOT start in the U.S., the PVSA does not apply.

 

Please, folks, I think you would find it helpful to read the comments that have been posted above explaining the PVSA, and/or do some research on your own. 😉

Edited October 21, 2019 by Turtles06

[Turtles06]

1 minute ago, Starry Eyes said:

Look at first post: the cruise is between two US cities: NY to Seattle

 

I'm pretty sure @FLAHAM was replying to comment 20, which postulated a cruise starting in Canada (and not replying to the OP).  Comment 20, as I discuss in my own reply above, expresses a misunderstanding of the PVSA.