New Covid-19 Cruise Ship Rules

[HMR74]

44 minutes ago, time4u2go said:

Why?

 

good question.

if you read the protocols., they never during the trials exposed anybody, placebo or vaccine, to covid.

 

eg, watch a few weekend football games at a bar.

 

so how can effectiveness really be gauged.

 

Now the kicker; In Denmark they wanted to do exactly that Take a controlled group that had received the vaccination, both shots wait the 2 weeks and then assure the people were exposed to covid.

 

Doing that is not popular policy. and they are more interested in measuring results for a longer period of time including side effects.

 

now, also I think I mentioned that the flu shots are only 40% effective. They have not met any success on any coronavirus shots until this. So why is this time different, I do not see anything. Not to mention they already admitted the vaccine was rushed, the pharma companies have legal indemnification, and the CEO of Pfizer sold 2/3 of his stock the day after the EUA announcement.

 

Now, the flu shot effectiveness-and this is another way data is misleading. I get the flu shot every year, up until this year I caught the flu every year . each time I recuperate  a little slower so I have to wonder was it the shot or my age.

 

This year no flu--and thats because we do not go anywhere and we are taking vitamin supplements up the you know what. But in prior years I took a day or two and I felt better. So the data of 40% effectiveness is compromised by people like myself who do not report getting  the flu. and I bet if the real number was more like the 17% a doctor has claimed, then why even have the darn shot, its better, easier and healthier to just take good care of yourself and your immune system.

 

My wife has a good friend from HS and she married a doctor who believes in natural everything. They brought Tofo desert the first time over and after they left we took out the ice cream.

 

What he taught me was what I just said, if you are health everything is better.

But again, if they really did not throw the trial group in with a bunch of people who had the covid, then they are just making simulations and assumptions.

 

This  is apparently the first product  for Moderna--no prior drugs.

 

We also know that 2 weeks ago Modern distributed 1.3 million doses in California that were a problem.

 

The J&J vaccine is said to be 65% effective and they actually in their trials had a specific group of elderly who had the covid and that was effective. But the 65% effectiveness is troubling. Merck pulled out.

 

this is not underpromise and overdeliver.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 1, 2021 by HMR74

[not-enough-cruising]

4 minutes ago, HMR74 said:

 

good question.

if you read the protocols., they never during the trials exposed anybody, placebo or vaccine, to covid.

 

eg, watch a few weekend football games at a bar.

 

so how can effectiveness really be gauged.

 

Now the kicker; In Denmark they wanted to do exactly that Take a controlled group that had received the vaccination, both shots wait the 2 weeks and then assure the people were exposed to covid.

 

Doing that is not popular policy. and they are more interested in measuring results for a longer period of time including side effects.

 

now, also I think I mentioned that the flu shots are only 40% effective. They have not met any success on any coronavirus shots until this. So why is this time different, I do not see anything. Not to mention they already admitted the vaccine was rushed, the pharma companies have legal indemnification, and the CEO of Pfizer sold 2/3 of his stock the day after the EUA announcement.

 

Now, the flu shot effectiveness-and this is another way data is misleading. I get the flu shot every year, up until this year I caught the flu every year . each time I recuperate  a little slower so I have to wonder was it the shot or my age.

 

This year no flu--and thats because we do not go anywhere and we are taking vitamin supplements up the you know what. But in prior years I took a day or two and I felt better. So the data of 40% effectiveness is compromised by people like myself who do not report getting  the flu. and I bet if the real number was more like the 17% a doctor has claimed, then why even have the darn shot, its better, easier and healthier to just take good care of yourself and your immune system.

 

My wife has a good friend from HS and she married a doctor who believes in natural everything. They brought Tofo desert the first time over and after they left we took out the ice cream.

 

What he taught me was what I just said, if you are health everything is better.

But again, if they really did not throw the trial group in with a bunch of people who had the covid, then they are just making simulations and assumptions

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Danish study would not give you what is an accepted result. Efficacy results are to be measured in “daily living” situations. The America. Medical system would never allow for a purposeful exposure of candidates, that is unethical and not a real life situation. 
 

all the candidates in the current vaccine protocols went about daily lives; both vaccinated and placebo groups.  Comparing both groups positivity rate gives you a very reliable, universally accepted efficacy rate. 

[HMR74]

3 minutes ago, not-enough-cruising said:

The Danish study would not give you what is an accepted result. Efficacy results are to be measured in “daily living” situations. The America. Medical system would never allow for a purposeful exposure of candidates, that is unethical and not a real life situation. 
 

all the candidates in the current vaccine protocols went about daily lives; both vaccinated and placebo groups.  Comparing both groups positivity rate gives you a very reliable, universally accepted efficacy rate. 

that was the problem with the Danish study.

 

However, what has daily normal life been the last year with restaurants closed, theater closed , limits to numbers of people in grocery stores, people working from home, airline passenger numbers down 65%, hotels going BK, no cruises, no flights to and from cruises, no hotel stays not cabs or ubers,

 

So I would say we cannot rely on the results. Even the pharma companies are saying we would need frequent booster shots. Nobody really knows as these vaccines have not been thoroughly tested.

Back last April the data on Hydroxychloquine was 100% successful  prophylacticly  , 100% effective if taken when you thought you were exposed, 95% effective if you tested positive and 90% effective if you had a severe case--with time of 6 more months to see test results the  effectiveness came down to 70%--still good but not great. If we could only look ahead to see in 6 months whats happening, or better, put the crystal ball in 2023 mode which is a normal trial period for vaccines.

 

BTW, the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines are DNA altering in some manner. The medical profession is split on that too. some are fine with it, others not.

 

and that is why you have to do your own due diligence and make your own decisions.

I am just pointing out that the vaccines may not be the solution we are all dreaming about. Or they could be.

 

early on, the cruise lines did something pretty simple which I think was smart. if over 70 you needed a doctors letter , current one, to board the ship saying you were in good physical condition .

One reason for that  would be to cut down on emergencies of any type while on board, That's costly to the cruise line and upsetting to the cruisers since often the ships have to reroute to a specific port , or have a helicopter come out from someplace including a navy ship. Ideally we all want people coming on board who are overall healthy.

 

 

 

 

[not-enough-cruising]

54 minutes ago, HMR74 said:

that was the problem with the Danish study.

 

However, what has daily normal life been the last year with restaurants closed, theater closed , limits to numbers of people in grocery stores, people working from home, airline passenger numbers down 65%, hotels going BK, no cruises, no flights to and from cruises, no hotel stays not cabs or ubers,

 

So I would say we cannot rely on the results. Even the pharma companies are saying we would need frequent booster shots. Nobody really knows as these vaccines have not been thoroughly tested.

Back last April the data on Hydroxychloquine was 100% successful  prophylacticly  , 100% effective if taken when you thought you were exposed, 95% effective if you tested positive and 90% effective if you had a severe case--with time of 6 more months to see test results the  effectiveness came down to 70%--still good but not great. If we could only look ahead to see in 6 months whats happening, or better, put the crystal ball in 2023 mode which is a normal trial period for vaccines.

 

BTW, the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines are DNA altering in some manner. The medical profession is split on that too. some are fine with it, others not.

 

and that is why you have to do your own due diligence and make your own decisions.

I am just pointing out that the vaccines may not be the solution we are all dreaming about. Or they could be.

 

early on, the cruise lines did something pretty simple which I think was smart. if over 70 you needed a doctors letter , current one, to board the ship saying you were in good physical condition .

One reason for that  would be to cut down on emergencies of any type while on board, That's costly to the cruise line and upsetting to the cruisers since often the ships have to reroute to a specific port , or have a helicopter come out from someplace including a navy ship. Ideally we all want people coming on board who are overall healthy.

 

 

 

 

The moment you bring out the DNA altering argument, everything you have posted has been tainted. Next it will be microchips and 5G.

 

It is impossible to have any further educated dialogue.

Edited February 1, 2021 by not-enough-cruising

[HMR74]

8 minutes ago, not-enough-cruising said:

The moment you bring out the DNA altering argument, everything you have posted has been tainted. Next it will be microchips and 5G.

 

It is impossible to have any further educated dialogue.

you are entitled, if I had time I would pull out the issue. but your comment tells me you are not willing to engage in a teach and/or learn discussion.

 

what you want to say is I am wrong. But that's okay, you are entitled to say what you want,

[not-enough-cruising]

41 minutes ago, HMR74 said:

you are entitled, if I had time I would pull out the issue. but your comment tells me you are not willing to engage in a teach and/or learn discussion.

 

what you want to say is I am wrong. But that's okay, you are entitled to say what you want,

I am 30 years into a career of internal and critical care medicine and am quite well versed on the topic. 
 

MRna vaccines are NOT DNA altering. There is nothing you can produce that changes that fact. 
 

I am sorry, but you are wrong. 

[sugcarol]

Well put and spot on

7 minutes ago, not-enough-cruising said:

I am 30 years into a career of internal and critical care medicine and am quite well versed on the topic. 
 

MRna vaccines are NOT DNA altering. There is nothing you can produce that changes that fact. 
 

I am sorry, but you are wrong. 

 

[Pandamonia]

4 hours ago, HMR74 said:

you are entitled, if I had time I would pull out the issue. but your comment tells me you are not willing to engage in a teach and/or learn discussion.

 

what you want to say is I am wrong. But that's okay, you are entitled to say what you want,

To be honest everything you wrote about vaccines is wrong and borderline anti vaxxer dangerous. 

 

Firstly The Oxford vaccine was developed for SARS and modified to Covid. So its hardly a fast turnaround.  

 

They run double blind trials with control groups to see who died and who didnt and who got seriously sick. When you compare 45,000 people where 22500 had the  vaccine and the other 22500 didnt then you can compare results. 

 

you really need to change your view of how a vaccine works. It trains your immune system to respond more effectively and faster to the presence of the virus. This time period is critical to how sick you get. They can do this via mRNA or Viral vector. mRNA is the new kid on the block and is more effective because you can be already immune to a viral vector which reduces the effectiveness. 

 

Fact is that so far J&J has not had a single covid death of any vaccinated person. Thats 100% efficacy from a single shot. Thats what is important. I could be wrong but nobody got seriously sick either. and it blocked most infections with an overall efficacy of 66% based on positive tests. 

 

Another load of rubbish is the corona virus vaccine myth, there has been no vaccine because nobody ever needed one. Now there are 4 and soon to be 5 or 6 at least. 

 

Also if you dont understand the difference between DNA and mRNA you should politely stop talking about the safety of vaccines. 

[SNJCruisers]

To those who do not want to get vaccinated in order to cruise since the cruise lines may make it mandatory....stay home.

To those who don't want to cruise because of the laundry list of possible restrictions that may be implemented once cruising resumes in the US that were itemized in post #1....stay home.

To those that don't want to cruise because "masking up" could still be a requirement even after vaccinations....stay home.

To those that don't want to cruise because if vaccinations were required and children could not get vaccinated initially and thus their family could not cruise....stay home.

To those that don't want to cruise because shore excursions will be mandatory via cruise line sponsored tours only....stay home.

 

With all of these groups staying home, there should be no problem meeting the reduced capacity that the cruise lines will be sailing at once the test cruises and CDC hoop jumping is over with so those of us that wish to go on a cruise vacation, even with the aforementioned restrictions can do so.  Those that wish to go "on holiday" via other methods that are less restrictive, enjoy....that's why there's vanilla and chocolate.

 

[L454S]

6 minutes ago, SNJCruisers said:

To those who do not want to get vaccinated in order to cruise since the cruise lines may make it mandatory....stay home.

To those who don't want to cruise because of the laundry list of possible restrictions that may be implemented once cruising resumes in the US that were itemized in post #1....stay home.

To those that don't want to cruise because "masking up" could still be a requirement even after vaccinations....stay home.

To those that don't want to cruise because if vaccinations were required and children could not get vaccinated initially and thus their family could not cruise....stay home.

To those that don't want to cruise because shore excursions will be mandatory via cruise line sponsored tours only....stay home.

 

With all of these groups staying home, there should be no problem meeting the reduced capacity that the cruise lines will be sailing at once the test cruises and CDC hoop jumping is over with so those of us that wish to go on a cruise vacation, even with the aforementioned restrictions can do so.  Those that wish to go "on holiday" via other methods that are less restrictive, enjoy....that's why there's vanilla and chocolate.

 

 

Not a problem, you can have ALL those cabins for yourself.

We won't be staying home, rather go someplace or do other things that don't have all the big brother rules.....have a nice trip.

[Ocean Boy]

3 hours ago, SNJCruisers said:

To those who do not want to get vaccinated in order to cruise since the cruise lines may make it mandatory....stay home.

To those who don't want to cruise because of the laundry list of possible restrictions that may be implemented once cruising resumes in the US that were itemized in post #1....stay home.

To those that don't want to cruise because "masking up" could still be a requirement even after vaccinations....stay home.

To those that don't want to cruise because if vaccinations were required and children could not get vaccinated initially and thus their family could not cruise....stay home.

To those that don't want to cruise because shore excursions will be mandatory via cruise line sponsored tours only....stay home.

 

With all of these groups staying home, there should be no problem meeting the reduced capacity that the cruise lines will be sailing at once the test cruises and CDC hoop jumping is over with so those of us that wish to go on a cruise vacation, even with the aforementioned restrictions can do so.  Those that wish to go "on holiday" via other methods that are less restrictive, enjoy....that's why there's vanilla and chocolate.

 

We all already knew our options but thanks for verifying.

[not-enough-cruising]

3 hours ago, L454S said:

 

Not a problem, you can have ALL those cabins for yourself.

We won't be staying home, rather go someplace or do other things that don't have all the big brother rules.....have a nice trip.

Ahhh, the beauty of free will, and democracy!!

[Keksie]

3 hours ago, L454S said:

 

Not a problem, you can have ALL those cabins for yourself.

We won't be staying home, rather go someplace or do other things that don't have all the big brother rules.....have a nice trip.

It will be interesting to see if/when cruises start back up if they can fill enough cabins with all the restrictions to thrive as a business.  I can't imagine that many people that desperate to cruise and to cruise over and over again to keep a lot of ships sailing.  Not when there will be land vacations without all the restrictions that will be available.

[Billy Baltic]

4 hours ago, SNJCruisers said:

To those who do not want to get vaccinated in order to cruise since the cruise lines may make it mandatory....stay home.

To those who don't want to cruise because of the laundry list of possible restrictions that may be implemented once cruising resumes in the US that were itemized in post #1....stay home.

To those that don't want to cruise because "masking up" could still be a requirement even after vaccinations....stay home.

To those that don't want to cruise because if vaccinations were required and children could not get vaccinated initially and thus their family could not cruise....stay home.

To those that don't want to cruise because shore excursions will be mandatory via cruise line sponsored tours only....stay home.

 

With all of these groups staying home, there should be no problem meeting the reduced capacity that the cruise lines will be sailing at once the test cruises and CDC hoop jumping is over with so those of us that wish to go on a cruise vacation, even with the aforementioned restrictions can do so.  Those that wish to go "on holiday" via other methods that are less restrictive, enjoy....that's why there's vanilla and chocolate.

 

I genuinely hope I’m wrong but I don’t see a sustainable market for cruise lines to restart their businesses anytime soon. Even one Oasis class ship at half capacity will need 3000 paying customers. If that is running on a 7 day schedule that’s over 12000 people a month. Take out all the ‘stay home’ and ‘Other holidays’ that you mention and I don’t think the numbers add up. 
 

[Eddie Wilson]

4 hours ago, SNJCruisers said:

To those who do not want to get vaccinated in order to cruise since the cruise lines may make it mandatory....stay home.

To those who don't want to cruise because of the laundry list of possible restrictions that may be implemented once cruising resumes in the US that were itemized in post #1....stay home.

To those that don't want to cruise because "masking up" could still be a requirement even after vaccinations....stay home.

To those that don't want to cruise because if vaccinations were required and children could not get vaccinated initially and thus their family could not cruise....stay home.

To those that don't want to cruise because shore excursions will be mandatory via cruise line sponsored tours only....stay home.

 

With all of these groups staying home, there should be no problem meeting the reduced capacity that the cruise lines will be sailing at once the test cruises and CDC hoop jumping is over with so those of us that wish to go on a cruise vacation, even with the aforementioned restrictions can do so.  Those that wish to go "on holiday" via other methods that are less restrictive, enjoy....that's why there's vanilla and chocolate.

 

 

I am Switzerland on the vaccine/anti vaccine discussion on this thread, but I think there is a ton of good old common sense in SNJ’s comment.

Edited February 1, 2021 by Eddie Wilson

[HMR74]

remember, I did qualify my comments by saying do your own due diligence.

 

and that you are your own best advocate.

 

So you all  do what you want with the info. But until the CDC lifts restrictions, whats going to happen?

 

What I come up with is something different. There seems to be a blind trust in things now a days, especially when someone thinks out of the box and gets shouted down. Questions need to be asked and issues raised, and that's the teach and learn aspect.

 

On the cruise lines. Like any other business they need cash flow and the only cash flow they have the last year is new deposits. Unless vendors/suppliers do not want to be paid, assuming they are still in business, and lenders do not mind sending money into what might be a black hole, the cruising with an enjoyable experience better get started soon. I have some concerns about the value of FCC's. Let's be realistic.  Cash flow is everything to a business. And its not just the Cruise lines.

 

The same applies for airlines (which give credits if you cancel) and hotels. 

 

Meanwhile the overall markets are going up due to the US Government and other Governments printing money. I am going to focus on that for the rest of the week. .

 

 

 

[John&LaLa]

On 1/29/2021 at 1:40 PM, HMR74 said:

anybody know cruise line occupancy thresholds before they cancel a cruise for last minute lack of interest??

 

 

I don't see that happening at all

[mpk]

20 hours ago, HMR74 said:

you tube has plenty on this, and if not true you tube would have censored it a long time ago:

 

Not commenting about this specific vitamin need...

 

But about YouTube censoring or checking the validity of videos: it's not going to happen.  There isn't any validation, checking, or taking down of inaccurate videos.  There are plenty of videos hawking herbs, muscle building products, etc. that may or may not be effective.

 

That's the problem with social media.  The companies behind social media specifically say they do not check videos, posts, tweets, etc.  There is a debate going on right now about this.  You can search about Section 230, a law that the social media companies rely on as a shield against lawsuits.

 

 

Bottom line-  just because a video is on YouTube does NOT mean it is true.

[billf0401]

58 minutes ago, Billy Baltic said:

I genuinely hope I’m wrong but I don’t see a sustainable market for cruise lines to restart their businesses anytime soon. Even one Oasis class ship at half capacity will need 3000 paying customers. If that is running on a 7 day schedule that’s over 12000 people a month. Take out all the ‘stay home’ and ‘Other holidays’ that you mention and I don’t think the numbers add up. 
 

I think a flood of cancellations are on the horizon....we have 2 cruises booked...Oct 21 and Jan 22....we will be cancelling with masks being required...

[Iamcruzin]

5 hours ago, SNJCruisers said:

To those who do not want to get vaccinated in order to cruise since the cruise lines may make it mandatory....stay home.

To those who don't want to cruise because of the laundry list of possible restrictions that may be implemented once cruising resumes in the US that were itemized in post #1....stay home.

To those that don't want to cruise because "masking up" could still be a requirement even after vaccinations....stay home.

To those that don't want to cruise because if vaccinations were required and children could not get vaccinated initially and thus their family could not cruise....stay home.

To those that don't want to cruise because shore excursions will be mandatory via cruise line sponsored tours only....stay home.

 

With all of these groups staying home, there should be no problem meeting the reduced capacity that the cruise lines will be sailing at once the test cruises and CDC hoop jumping is over with so those of us that wish to go on a cruise vacation, even with the aforementioned restrictions can do so.  Those that wish to go "on holiday" via other methods that are less restrictive, enjoy....that's why there's vanilla and chocolate.

 

I agree. I think the cruise lines also agree and realize that capacity will be down which explains the big jump in price for next year.  Those 125% FCCs won't buy much.

[Ellaleah]

2 hours ago, Iamcruzin said:

8 hours ago, SNJCruisers said:

To those who do not want to get vaccinated in order to cruise since the cruise lines may make it mandatory....stay home.

To those who don't want to cruise because of the laundry list of possible restrictions that may be implemented once cruising resumes in the US that were itemized in post #1....stay home.

To those that don't want to cruise because "masking up" could still be a requirement even after vaccinations....stay home.

To those that don't want to cruise because if vaccinations were required and children could not get vaccinated initially and thus their family could not cruise....stay home.

To those that don't want to cruise because shore excursions will be mandatory via cruise line sponsored tours only....stay home.

 

With all of these groups staying home, there should be no problem meeting the reduced capacity that the cruise lines will be sailing at once the test cruises and CDC hoop jumping is over with so those of us that wish to go on a cruise vacation, even with the aforementioned restrictions can do so.  Those that wish to go "on holiday" via other methods that are less restrictive, enjoy....that's why there's vanilla and chocolate.

 

Expand  

I agree. I think the cruise lines also agree and realize that capacity will be down which explains the big jump in price for next year.  Those 125% FCCs won't buy much.

I also agree.  I booked a cruise for 12/26/20 in March, 2018 for my whole family.  It was cancelled (thank goodness) and I rebooked for 12/27/22.  My 12/22 cruise is not as expensive as ty e almost identical one 12/21, which is almost fully booked.  I think that if there was no CDC, the cruise lines would still not be sailing under the present conditions.  It is baffling to me that so many on these boards are so desperate to sail that they would take the risk of being stranded in the middle of the ocean with this life threatening illness.  I have had several family members experience Covid and it is not pretty even if it is not fatal.  I don’t need the CDC to tell me it is too dangerous for them to give the “go ahead!”

[Iamcruzin]

20 minutes ago, Ellaleah said:

I also agree.  I booked a cruise for 12/26/20 in March, 2018 for my whole family.  It was cancelled (thank goodness) and I rebooked for 12/27/22.  My 12/22 cruise is not as expensive as ty e almost identical one 12/21, which is almost fully booked.  I think that if there was no CDC, the cruise lines would still not be sailing under the present conditions.  It is baffling to me that so many on these boards are so desperate to sail that they would take the risk of being stranded in the middle of the ocean with this life threatening illness.  I have had several family members experience Covid and it is not pretty even if it is not fatal.  I don’t need the CDC to tell me it is too dangerous for them to give the “go ahead!”

I believe that reality hasn't hit yet. They are still imagining cruising as it was before the pandemic. It's easy to say that you are willing to wear a mask, when at home you are only wearing it an hour or so at a time to do daily errands. Wait to they see how much it costs to go on a ship sponsored tour to the beach. I think pre covid it was $30 to $50 per person depending on what was included. A $20 cab ride brought my family to the beach and it included an umbrella and lounge chair.

 

Only being able to drink in a bar and not on deck is just as restricting as being trapped in your room. What's the point in going. I don't cruise for the carnival rides or the repetitive shows.  I enjoy the adult areas of the ship which involve hot tubs and pools that will be restricted in capacity and length of time. I also enjoy a drink while lounging there. What I see is a line to get into a bar indoors during the day when I want to be outdoors.  As for the ship sponsored excursions, been there done that and they haven't changed in 30yrs. Sugar cane plantation, Governors Mansion, Statue of the founder ect. ect. You know the tour will end in an over priced cruise line sponsored store. I would rather spend a week on one island.

[Pandamonia]

1 hour ago, Iamcruzin said:

I believe that reality hasn't hit yet. They are still imagining cruising as it was before the pandemic. It's easy to say that you are willing to wear a mask, when at home you are only wearing it an hour or so at a time to do daily errands. Wait to they see how much it costs to go on a ship sponsored tour to the beach. I think pre covid it was $30 to $50 per person depending on what was included. A $20 cab ride brought my family to the beach and it included an umbrella and lounge chair.

 

Only being able to drink in a bar and not on deck is just as restricting as being trapped in your room. What's the point in going. I don't cruise for the carnival rides or the repetitive shows.  I enjoy the adult areas of the ship which involve hot tubs and pools that will be restricted in capacity and length of time. I also enjoy a drink while lounging there. What I see is a line to get into a bar indoors during the day when I want to be outdoors.  As for the ship sponsored excursions, been there done that and they haven't changed in 30yrs. Sugar cane plantation, Governors Mansion, Statue of the founder ect. ect. You know the tour will end in an over priced cruise line sponsored store. I would rather spend a week on one island.

 

Aint this the truth!

 

I think people booking and expecting anything like normal will be seriously in for a shock.

 

Die hard cruise fans might grin and bear it and come on a forum like this telling everyone how good it was but 99% of normal cruisers will think its crap. I just dont see any part of a cruise working with social distancing. But there are plenty of anti social cruisers which might think its fine...

[SNJCruisers]

6 hours ago, Eddie Wilson said:

 

I am Switzerland on the vaccine/anti vaccine discussion on this thread, but I think there is a ton of good old common sense in SNJ’s comment.

Thanks Eddie....appreciate it.  Many times I get roasted on the Royal boards, but I am here because of our Oasis cruise in August.  I'm fully expecting it to get cancelled and I am iffy about our Halloween cruise on the Mardi Gras, but if the short cruises start in September, then it'll be a go since Carnival will want to start their 7 day cruises with their new jewel.

[Eddie Wilson]

3 hours ago, Pandamonia said:

 

Aint this the truth!

 

I think people booking and expecting anything like normal will be seriously in for a shock.

 

Die hard cruise fans might grin and bear it and come on a forum like this telling everyone how good it was but 99% of normal cruisers will think its crap. I just dont see any part of a cruise working with social distancing. But there are plenty of anti social cruisers which might think its fine...

 

To be a little fair, or fairer, it’s not just the cruise world that will have a new normal, the entire world will.  Amusement parks, air travel, hotels, concerts, sporting events, everything all the way down the line to my nieces dance recital will change.  So I think a person who loves cruises, who has adapted to the new normal of life, will not be so shocked upon a return to cruising.

 

Life has always had its moments, and cruising vacations are a wonderful escape to forget about the routines at home.  They will still be an escape.

 

Just an opinion.

 

Eddie