Unintended consequences

[sanger727]

I'm not saying that MSC did the wrong thing. But I do hope they are applying the rules in a way that is fair to passengers as well.  Number 1 being is from the point they announced this new rule until the ship sailed, did the passengers who didn't want to follow it have the opportunity to cancel without losing all of their money. I have seen many people on here say that they would prefer not cruise than to follow some of the rules (like mandatory shore excursions and masks) which is all fine and dandy if they are given the opportunity to cancel/rebook the an already booked cruise. If it's a lose your money situation, they will have many who aren't onboard with the rules trying to skirt them. Second, I'm truly curious about the details to this situation. If you are told to stay in a group and need to use the restroom or grab something to eat at a snack bar, would like accuse you of not following the rules? Now, obviously if they took you to one location and you grabbed a taxi to head out on your own then you should get left fair and square. 

[carlmm]

32 minutes ago, sanger727 said:

I'm not saying that MSC did the wrong thing. But I do hope they are applying the rules in a way that is fair to passengers as well.  Number 1 being is from the point they announced this new rule until the ship sailed, did the passengers who didn't want to follow it have the opportunity to cancel without losing all of their money. I have seen many people on here say that they would prefer not cruise than to follow some of the rules (like mandatory shore excursions and masks) which is all fine and dandy if they are given the opportunity to cancel/rebook the an already booked cruise. If it's a lose your money situation, they will have many who aren't onboard with the rules trying to skirt them. 

 

These are new cruises. Nobody booked these cruises many months or years ago.

Everybody booking these cruises now on short notice knew we are living in a pandemic and special rules do apply.

 

[vulcan1971]

5 hours ago, Miaminice said:

We normally really dislike the ship’s tours. I always say I have a bus and crowd allergy. So we usually book with local guides for 6 persons max.

 

But people, this ain’t normal times!!!

Maintaining a controlled environment makes perfect sense.

 

So it’s kind of funny to read so many post here about what people don’t like or won’t do... Tours, dancing and even the most basic thing like masks.

 

With all due respect: compromise or stay at home. This is how it needs to be done now and probably for some time to come - vaccine or not. Nobody is forced to cruise. But stop whining if you can’t just because you are not willing to do the right thing,

 

We can’t just press a button an make it all go away!

BTW: so far the price for excursions on the cruises sailing is just the same as before - regardless of smaller groups.

 

 

Exactly this!!! Thank you for saying it in a way more appropriate than I could have managed in the moment. If cruising is to come back with any amount of confidence for passengers to be safe, cruisers will need to start being part of the solution (not part of the problem) when it comes to embracing changes in the cruise industry.

 

There was another separate thread on the MSC decision to remove a family for not following rules for shore excursions and I see that this thread now is talking about it. I won't derail the OPs topic about crowding on ships but now that I have given it some thought, and after having read a few of the comments in this thread, I have some thoughts...

 

In cruises occurring in pre-COVID times:

 

• the ship has all passengers on board on embarkation day (for most of the day).
• the ship has all passengers on board on sea days (all day).
• the ship has all passengers on board overnight (entire cruise, except for overnight port stops).

 

The ship seems to operate just fine when the ship was at full capacity. Given that it is very likely that cruising will resume with a reduced passenger capacity, I seriously doubt that passengers will feel "crowded" on the ships.

 

The cruise lines would be well suited to be creating and planning for more types of on-board activities occurring across the whole ship (whether free or with a price). While there will be a segment of passengers that will take the ship sponsored port excursions, Many passengers are likely not going to be leaving the ship for any other reason than to disembark when the cruise ends.

[chemmo]

12 minutes ago, vulcan1971 said:

 

If cruising is to come back with any amount of confidence for passengers to be safe, cruisers will need to start being part of the solution (not part of the problem) when it comes to embracing changes in the cruise industry.

 

 

 

Absolutely...same applies on land too. 

[K.T.B.]

Honestly, I'd never do a cruise where all the stops were owned by the cruiseline.  I've done exactly one cruise where one port was an island that Celebrity owned.  We didn't get off the ship because it either just shopping or beach activities.  Not what my wife and I like to do.

 

 

[Miaminice]

2 hours ago, K.T.B. said:

Honestly, I'd never do a cruise where all the stops were owned by the cruiseline.  I've done exactly one cruise where one port was an island that Celebrity owned.  We didn't get off the ship because it either just shopping or beach activities.  Not what my wife and I like to do.

 

 

The stops we are talking about on the cruises already happening are not owned by the cruise lines. Regular Mediterranean ports... just that you can‘t tour or just wander off on your own.

 

Edited August 20, 2020 by Miaminice

[Anubi]

We have a Baltics cruise booked with Celebrity.  I understand completely why the cruise line is saying that people have to take the ship's tours and I agree with it.  That being said, this is a Bucket List cruise for us and we want the full experience;  of all the ports, one is a private tour and the others are all DIY.  Knowing the cruise line's plans in advance means we have the choice to postpone our Baltics cruise to 2022.  

[mayleeman]

On 8/19/2020 at 1:01 PM, Dwight1 said:

If I go, I go on my own or I will go to a resort on the island to do my own thing. I will pass on cruising. Go to the Caribbean and sit on the ship the whole time? Silly.

 

For those of you offended by this comment, I think he is expressing his own preference for shoreside activities, and so for him it would be silly to stay on board if he could go to a resort and do what he wants without cruising.

 

Pretty weird to think he is being judgmental.

[Fouremco]

3 hours ago, mayleeman said:

 

For those of you offended by this comment, I think he is expressing his own preference for shoreside activities, and so for him it would be silly to stay on board if he could go to a resort and do what he wants without cruising.

 

Pretty weird to think he is being judgmental.

Nice spin, but not buying it. On the other hand, it certainly didn't offend me.😷

[sanger727]

15 hours ago, Fouremco said:

Nice spin, but not buying it. On the other hand, it certainly didn't offend me.😷

 

Why not buying it? I happen to agree with both posters. My best cruising experiences have been on independent excursions or touring on my own. So this new version of cruising, for many reasons, including the "mandatory" shore excursions is certainly a downgrade experience. I see no reason to pay for a downgraded experience if I have an alternative. That's my choice to make. 100% agree that if you are aware of these rules before booking then if you don't like then you are obligated to not book, as opposed to booking and skirting the rules

[Fouremco]

4 hours ago, sanger727 said:

 

Why not buying it? I happen to agree with both posters. My best cruising experiences have been on independent excursions or touring on my own. So this new version of cruising, for many reasons, including the "mandatory" shore excursions is certainly a downgrade experience. I see no reason to pay for a downgraded experience if I have an alternative. That's my choice to make. 100% agree that if you are aware of these rules before booking then if you don't like then you are obligated to not book, as opposed to booking and skirting the rules

Our best cruising experiences have also been on independent or DIY excursions, even at ports we've visited many times previously. On the other hand, I can fully understand why some people enjoy staying aboard and enjoying a much less crowded ship instead of getting off at an oft-visited port. I wouldn't call it "silly" just because it's not my preference. 

[Miaminice]

His or her opinion - fine! 
I read it and think: I couldn’t think of a better place to stay onboard than the Caribbean. Sun, sea, palm trees, crowded beaches and Senior Frogs - great 🙄

Which is probably the reason why we don’t cruise in the Caribbean (yes, we have done a few).

 

But that’s how WE feel about our vacation. Others have different ideas and preferences. It’s everyone’s own spare time and money - so why be offended???

[mom says]

On 8/20/2020 at 2:15 PM, mayleeman said:

 

For those of you offended by this comment, I think he is expressing his own preference for shoreside activities, and so for him it would be silly to stay on board if he could go to a resort and do what he wants without cruising.

 

Pretty weird to think he is being judgmental.

If the poster was stating an opinion as it applied only to himself, then he should have said so. But he didn't. He simply said it as silly. Period. Therefore, a judgemental statement. 

 

I'm not offended by what he said, although I reserve the right to disagree. But I do wish the poster had a better grasp of written English so that his statement left no ambiguity. 

[PROCRUISE]

On 8/20/2020 at 1:02 PM, Anubi said:

We have a Baltics cruise booked with Celebrity.  I understand completely why the cruise line is saying that people have to take the ship's tours and I agree with it.  That being said, this is a Bucket List cruise for us and we want the full experience;  of all the ports, one is a private tour and the others are all DIY.  Knowing the cruise line's plans in advance means we have the choice to postpone our Baltics cruise to 2022.  

Just a suggestion -  move the cruise to 2022. Private tour is a MUST in St. Petersburg!

[DaveSJ711]

On 8/19/2020 at 10:55 PM, Miaminice said:

With all due respect:  compromise or stay at home. This is how it needs to be done now and probably for some time to come - vaccine or not. Nobody is forced to cruise. But stop whining if you can’t just because you are not willing to do the right thing,

 

That's a false choice.  If people decide, for their own reasons, that cruising post-Covid isn't for them, they don't have to "stay at home."  They can do independent trips where they aren't herded around like sheep.

 

In our case, my wife and I love cruising -- but we also love to travel on our own.  Over the last 30+ years, we've made dozens of independent trips around the world.  When Americans are welcome again, we hope to resume our travels.  Regardless of what the cruise lines require, we're not going to "stay at home."  

[Miaminice]

14 hours ago, DaveSJ711 said:

That's a false choice.  If people decide, for their own reasons, that cruising post-Covid isn't for them, they don't have to "stay at home."  They can do independent trips where they aren't herded around like sheep.

 

In our case, my wife and I love cruising -- but we also love to travel on our own.  Over the last 30+ years, we've made dozens of independent trips around the world.  When Americans are welcome again, we hope to resume our travels.  Regardless of what the cruise lines require, we're not going to "stay at home."  

🙄 Since we are talking about requirements of cruises in this topic, I did not see the need to explicitly exclude any other kind of travel.

 

 

 

[mayleeman]

2 hours ago, Miaminice said:

🙄 Since we are talking about requirements of cruises in this topic, I did not see the need to explicitly exclude any other kind of travel.

 

 

 

 

Actually, the comment you made can be made universal: Don't like the rules, don't go.

 

Many people seem to be having trouble with this concept!

Edited August 22, 2020 by mayleeman

[K.T.B.]

5 hours ago, mayleeman said:

 

Actually, the comment you made can be made universal: Don't like the rules, don't go.

 

Many people seem to be having trouble with this concept!

 

'Merica

 

 

[cl.klink]

My point in starting this thread was that if reducing spread of virus is going to be achieved by having all disembarkation be on cruise based excursions that therefore control access, I think there is an unintended consequence that will water down the effectiveness of this move.  If people stay on the ship, that's not a neutral decision, because it could increase chance for contact.  I agree that this already happens on sea days, nights, embarkation / disembarkation days.  Here, it would happen more.  Just an observation, such that if all other things were to have been equal (I know they are not), people staying on the shio rather than going ashore is not having no effect on chance of virus spread. 

 

- Joel

[phoenix_dream]

On 8/19/2020 at 12:28 PM, cruisestitch said:

Not silly at all to me.  In theCaribbean, the ship is my destination.  I don’t care for salt water, avoid the sun, and generally stay on board in the shade.  
 

i don’t think you are “silly” for going to a beach, please don’t call me “silly” for staying on board.

Exactly.  In our case, we do get off the ship at most ports just to walk around and get some exercise.  But we really are not beach people, aren't into snorkeling, and have seen all the cheap tourist junk in the stores which rarely varies by island.  So we spend a good amount of time on the ship, relaxing and enjoying the peace and quiet when we sail the Caribbean.  If we want to cruise often now that we are retired, want to do it reasonably inexpensively, and don't want to be on an airplane for 9+ hours, then we are pretty much "stuck" with cruises out of the US, and primarily the Caribbean.  To each their own.