15 minutes ago, loving goldens said:

  Just wondering if  anyone has an idea when these sail dates are released for the Carribean 2022?   Thks  :)

As soon as Carnival Corp decides which ships will be resurrected, countries provide their criteria for port visits, and anti-coronavirus procedures are promulgated by CDC and CLIA.

On 3/24/2020 at 1:51 PM, Fouremco said:

I totally agree about passengers needing to take responsibility and making their own decisions. Unfortunately, I think that there are a lot of passengers who simply don't seem to understand the realities of such things as closed ports, closed borders, enforced isolation and the fact the COVID-19 won't disappear and all returns to normal in a couple of weeks.

 

While you are 100% correct that they are struggling to keep up with the current volume of cancellations, I still think that it's incumbent upon them to announce the cancellation of cruises that they know full well will never sail. They could do so with an accompanying announcement that, due to the unprecedented situation, refunds and/or FCC's would be delayed by "x" many weeks or months, and that in the meantime, they will be working on establishing replacement itineraries. 

It's not really the volume of cancellations.  It's the refunds they are trying, rather not trying, to deal with.  They don't have the funds to refund paid-for cruises while trying to keep their ships afloat (pun intended).  If cruise lines state that cruises for this year are canceled that adds a huge financial burden on the line.   Keep "kicking that can" down the road, not informing customers, keeps the myth alive that cruising is coming back sooner than later at the same level it was pre-COVID-19.  Thus the pressure and incentives to take FCC, even at 125 percent.  Sound like a good deal, but it really isn't.  The money is just not there.  Providing FCC costs nothing.  In fact, FCC "disappears" if the cruise line goes into financial restructuring: real creditors are first in line.

Working this exact issue with Uniworld, a river cruise company, and have cruises with X and Princess on the books.

All three companies now adhere to guidance from the US CDC and from CLIA.  Reading both provides the perspective that chronic (long term) medical conditions are, and will be, a non-go for cruising.  As someone pointed out, most seniors have one or more "chronic" condition, but well controlled with medication.  

Uniworld has my full fare and the TA its share of commission.  Neither are anxious to refund.  That said, I have been trying to obtain a refund using the CDC/CLIA guidance and the fact that if we are not "healthy enough" to cruise with them today we surely won't be healthy enough in a year or more.  FCC is useless.  Crickets!  They don't have an answer.  Management/ownership (and their lawyers) are caught between reality of the guidance and their desire to keep your money at almost all costs.  It's almost as if they are saying "so sue me" for your refund.

Next step is to engage the travel insurance folks.  This new guidance, issued after booking, is not directly pandemic related for which they state they are not paying claims.  It's a health condition implemented after booking and one that the cruise lines state will preclude boarding.  Know this is going to become a push back from both sides, each referring to the other as the responsible party.  I sense class action suits galore.  "First thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers" - Shakespeare Henry VI.

As I have suggested earlier in other threads, cruising post-COVID-19 (and that may be years since the US CDC is suggesting that the next flu season will be combined flu/coronavirus and very difficult to deal with) will be significantly different from the past norm.  I doubt that the mega-ships with 5,000-plus passengers and 2,000 crew will be very popular.  Smaller ships, less than 1,000 passengers, are easier to manage health-wise based on experience with norovirus.  They are, however, more expensive and less attractive to younger cruisers looking for onboard adventure.  New normal!

18 hours ago, TikiIslandGirl said:

I was supposed to sail with Uniworld on 3/31 so I was to be on a early season cruise. For a 2-3 week period when all of this started their policies changed every few days.  They first came out with you can cancel for a FCC and the $450 airline penalty (this was before any cruise had been cancelled by any cruise company)-. I did this since I was going with my parents on 3/9.  On 3/11  Uniworld canceled all cruises into sometime is April (don't remember exact date).  I thought since I already cancelled with a FCC I didn't think I could get a refund. 

 

 So a few days later someone on these boards said they were getting a refund.  On 3/14  I called Uniworld (I booked via a TA but since I already cancelled the cruise and was told after 3 days I can directly talk with Uniworld)-the agent said since the FCC hasn't been issued that I can get a refund and not be charged the $450 airline penalty and my parents would get the cost of the uniworld insurance back. So my "official" date of cancellation was 3/17 per Uniworld.  Now I put in these dates because since this was a moving target and Uniworld didn't have a grip on things. I think once they saw how this was evolving that they put the breaks on refunds (which I don't see how they can legally do).   It's been 5 1/2 weeks and have yet to see a refund and have been told 4 different time frames-but every time I call to get a update I'm told I'm getting a refund. I asked the last time the exact amount and it lines up with what I paid.  I did that because they are on a recorded line and if I have any trouble it's recorded. So, in my opinion-I don't see legally how they can keep anyones money if Uniworld cancels the cruise.  

 

Uniworld is part of The Travel Corporation which is owns numerous travel agencies, hotels and tour operators.  Likely the privately held company is hemorrhaging money at the moment and Uniworld may be its only "cash cow" left with the possibility of generating income.  Sad to see what is a good company dragged down like this.  

Its just not the financial machinations Uniworld is using, but we are also bumping up against their stated (on the website) policy of following CLIA and CDC guidance.  We are both over 65/70 and will now be required to produce a "fit for sailing" certificate.  Which if viewed strictly, will mean no cruising since I have, under control, several of the medical afflictions mentioned by CLIA and CDC.  Uniworld offered (and its offers are vary dependent on date) FCCs at the same price.  Now they say FCC but send us $1,200 to hold the cabins you selected despite that fact they are "holding" over $16,000 in cruise fare, already paid.  FCC is essentially useless if we cannot meet CLIA and CDC guidance today, much less a year from now.  Additionally, I am finding that travel agents, dependent of monies from cruise fares, are now functioning less as advocates of the passenger and more as advocates of the cruise line.  In our case, the TA wants us to take the FCC and they will then "give us" half of their commission as FCC as well.  

Bottom line is that cruise lines and TAs are now in the "so sue us" mode of operating.  Despicable.  The rest of their commission to be paid later...

21 hours ago, Host Jazzbeau said:

The first North America-oriented cruise line to announce new health measures, Princess, is not requiring a health letter for older cruisers:

Princess Cruises Details New Health Guidelines

Doesn't say that.  What it does say:

"We are working closely with public health officials, including the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the World Health Organization (WHO), as well as the Cruise Lines International Association (CLIA), to define and implement best practices to protect the health of our guests and crew as it relates to COVID-19."

and

"The line will also maintain its policy of refusing boarding to booked travelers who meet a variety of criteria including anyone who has been in contact with a suspected or confirmed case of COVID-19; anyone suffering from a fever or flu-like symptoms prior to embarkation; and anyone with underlying severe chronic medical conditions."

Note that CDC and CLIA list the age related screening requirements, specifically as it relates to "chronic" (long term) health issues, to include diabetes, high blood pressure, COPD, etc.

River cruising in Europe?  Well, France and Spain are closed to tourism through the end of 2020.  Italy is closed to tourists through 31 March 2021.  Germany has canceled Octoberfest.  No word yet that I know of but its likely that European holiday markets will not open.  Where is one going to river cruise in Europe?

21 hours ago, Host Jazzbeau said:

CroisiEurope – La Belle de l'Adriatique – 197 pax [2007]

CroisiEurope – La Belle des Oceans – 120 pax [ex-Silver Discoverer, 1989]

 

Noble Caledonia – Caledonian Sky, Hebridean Sky, Island Sky – 118 pax [ex-Renaissance VI, VII and VIII, 1991]

 

Ponant – Le Ponant – 64 pax [2009, sailing ship]

Ponant – Le Bellot, Le Bougainville, Le Champlain, Le Dumon-d'Urville, Le Jacques Cartier, Le Laperouse – 184 pax [2018-2020]

Ponant – L'Austral, Le Boreal, Le Lyrial, Le Soleal – 264 pax [2011-2015]

Ponant – Le Commandant Charcot – 270 pax [2021, icebreaker]

Ponant – Paul Gauguin – 332 pax [1998]

 

Windstar – Star Breeze, Star Legend, Star Pride – 312 pax [ex-Seabourn, being enlarged from 212 to 312 pax]

Windstar – Wind Spirit, Wind Star – 148 pax [1988, 1986]

Windstar – Wind Surf – 312 pax [1990]

Compagnie du Ponant and Windstar are members of CLIA and fellow the same guidance as the "big boys."

4 hours ago, EscapeFromConnecticut said:

The facts tell us all we need to know about the odds for 2020 cruising:

 

Royal Caribbean laid off 26 percent of its workers, Hertz just laid off 10,000 in North America, Germany just canceled Oktoberfest 2020;

 

Cruise ships are sailing right now for one reason: To return crews members to their home countries;

 

CCL has publicly predicted "the substantial majority" of its fleet will be in "prolonged ship layup," California communities are already canceling July 4 fireworks, MLB is talking about playing the season in ballparks without fans;

 

No national concert tours are on schedule for 2020, there is no talk of international border restrictions being lifted, and the CDC this week warned of a second - more lethal - round of this virus starting this fall.

 

 

If there is evidence (genuine facts and science, not "optimism" and angry conjecture) to indicate cruise ships will sail again in 2020, let's see it.

 

Want some more?

France and Spain have closed borders to all tourism through the end of 2020. 

Italy has closed borders to tourists through 31 March 2021.

Next flu season begins in September.

Coronavirus is now known to cause blood to coagulate - clotting.

Coronavirus and flu together is a significant fear of the US CDC.

5 hours ago, caribill said:

 

Although that was the original thought, the Navy now believes it did not come on the ship from the port stop, but from an infected person who delivered supplies to the ship while at sea.

Under replenishments at sea on aircraft carriers are accomplished via helicopters, not person-to-person.

1 hour ago, richsea said:

The email I received today from Princess with enhanced boarding requirements said:

 

Enhancing Health Requirements

We will deny boarding to guests and crew if they:

• Have been in contact with a suspected or confirmed case of COVID-19 or a person being monitored for COVID-19.
• Are suffering from a fever or flu-like symptoms prior to embarkation.
• Have an underlying, severe, chronic medical condition.

They do not specify what constitutes “severe, chronic medical condition”, which to me , is meant to be vague. They also do not mention an age range.

Again, if what you say turns out to be normal protocol, with hypertension & coronary artery disease, my cruising days are over. Not going to the doc everytime I cruise. 

The definition of "chronic" is long term.  High blood pressure is chronic.  Diabetes is chronic.  COPD is chronic.  Hypertension is chronic.  All controllable, still chronic.

This year (2020)?  Next year is also in serious jeopardy.  US CDC has announced that the Fall 2020 Flu season, combined with COVID-19, could be significantly worse than the current situation.  Wave II is coming.  France and Italy have restricted tourists from entering their countries through 2020.  Where will the ships go?  Who will want to cruise?

Take that FCC!  Provide cruise lines with free loans.  Good for them, bad for you.  FCC is a liability easily eliminated in a financial restructuring.  These huge companies know more about that than we do...

We have to remember, as does Princess, that viruses like COVID-19 can and are acquired after embarkation.  USS Theodore Roosevelt's crew, now over 800 infections out of 4800 crew persons, was picked up during its port visit to Da Nang, Vietnam.  Its a very highly communicable disease which can show no outward symptoms until it "breaks."  Princess's (Carnival Corp) declaration is meaningless and designed only to scare.

"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers."

Shakespeare, Henry VI

6 hours ago, WmFCoyote said:

We just booked 2 cruises on Princess for 2021. First one is a 14 day RT from LA to Alaska and the second is a 14 day Quebec to Ft Lauderdale a few months later also in 2021. I plan on waiting a while (Before final payment is due) before I write Princess and ask "We are both over 70 and I have had type II diabetes for over 25 Years and my Blood sugar is normally about 101. Will you allow us to cruise?" I will ask for a written reply. Maybe by then PCL will be able to establish a consistent policy.

I am working the same issue with a river cruise line.  IMHO its unlikely you will get a definitive statement from Princess regarding your ability to embark.  Several reasons.  It would require Princess to refund your monies sooner than later - no obfuscation of FCC.  Second, it implies that Princess is endorsing your claim with insurance.  Neither is of benefit to Princess.

Just now, Babr said:

No, but if you click the “Learn More” button, it does say that passengers or crew with chronic, severe underlying conditions will not be allowed to embark.

And as CLIA embers they take guidance from CDC.  CDC states the guidance applies to those 65 and over with chronic (long term) afflictions.

On 4/17/2020 at 5:25 PM, DrKoob said:

 

This is a prime example of why I ALWAYS book with a travel agent. Mine would fight for this for me like there was no tomorrow. In fact mine did once before. Got me a complete refund. Still don't understand why people don't use TAs. They cost nothing to you and if you have a good one, you have a great advocate. 

Not so fast.  Working now with a large experience travel agency which has apparently switched loyalties from the customer to the cruise line.  They work on commission and canceled cruises mean no commission.  FCC is the name of the game today - keeps the cruise line and the TA with money on the books.  And FCC keeps the customer in limbo, especially with the current guidance from CLAI and CDC.  Like a cruise line, a TA can financially restructure or just cease operations.  You monies are lost to creditors.  Caveat Emptor with TAs just as with cruise lines.

21 hours ago, pris993 said:

We are long term Princess cruisers, next cruise we will have 30 cruises.  In all the time we have cruised we have only used the medical center on board 2 times.  Once for a insect bite and another for an ear infection, even though we are both over 70.   We are both in good health with well managed health issues.  No problem getting a doctor letter.  Regardless, I don't see us cruising til maybe 2022... we will wait to see what happens to the cruise experience.  If it changes too much, we may just opt out because we want to avoid the hassle.  Traveling through airports has already gotten to the point we resist flying as much as possible.    The money we use to travel we can stay home and live very well.  We have well over 60 cruises on 9 different lines over the years.. so we have seen what we wanted already.  Cruising need to be a pleasant experience for us to continue going. 

Exactly.

Cruise lines are businesses.  They will make it "safe" for them before they do that for paying passengers.  If anyone believes that the recent experiences with at least ten ships involved in various ways with coronavirus hasn't changed the way they will embark passengers again, please think again.  The CLIA/CDC guidance is just a start.  Cruise lines will do what they need to protect themselves from litigation to include requiring health certifications and establishing age requirements.  Ports will do the same.  It will be the "new normal."  

Like you, I have been "cruising" since age 5.  The old Cunard Queens, SS America and United States, Independence, and the last 20 years RCI, X, Princess, Azamara and river cruising.  Have set foot on all 7 continents, experienced the fascination of the Galapagos and African safaris.  I am very comfortable, having lived in Europe as a teen and later lived in eastern Europe, to independently travel anywhere in the world.  Spouse mumbling that she wants to see Mongolia (!) and cruising won't get us there.  In the process of battling our TA and Uniworld over a fully paid for cruise originally scheduled for this June and pushed, via FCC, into 2021.  However, CLIA and CDC guidance suggests we will not qualify (both of us north of 75).  Wakeup call to look elsewhere.  Likely, cruising as we have known it, is over.

Princess is a CLIA member:

On 4/19/2020 at 2:48 PM, TFree said:

I am puzzled by some of the inconsistent responses Uniworld has given, according to things posted on this thread.  I think we were treated pretty fairly, although I do tend to agree that Uniworld (by now) should have cancelled more cruises than they have done.  I still see European cruises scheduled in the second week of May on their website, and it must be obvious to everybody that they are not actually happening.

 

In our case, we had an individual TA affiliated with a big company, who managed to negotiate a discount for us on our June 7 Enchanting Danube cruise equivalent to the "cash card" discount we would have gotten if we had used the big box TA.  That was a significant discount, especially added on to the discount for paying in advance, and for being a prior Uniworld customer.  So we were very happy with our French balcony cabin fare. 

When we decided to cancel this cruise 61 days out (when there was a 35% penalty, as opposed to the 50% penalty that would apply 59 days out), our options were (a) to take the 35% penalty hit and get the 65% back in cash, with the 35% hit usable for a future booking; or (b) to price match to a later comparable cruise (which would have had the effect of locking in the various discounts, including the one designed to "price match" the big box TA).  We said, OK, but what if we wanted to take the 10 day version of this itinerary (Delightful Danube & Prague), including a hotel stay in Prague and a transfer to the ship, rather than the 8 day version we had booked for this year, which would have left us to deal with Prague hotels and a transfer ourselves.  The cash difference in base price for a French balcony on the 10 day cruise for the date we selected in May, 2021, as compared to the base price for our existing 8 day cruise, was $1500 pp.  They agreed to give it to us for an extra $500 pp, with the $1000 not due until January.  We thought this was a great offer, and we took it, which had the effect of locking in all the prior discounts and only charging 1/3 of what should have been the price difference.

So why have some others had so much trouble?  I don't know if this can all be attributable to the quality of the TA, but if not, I am not sure what it is.  If you are determined not to cruise with Uniworld again, then I understand the problem, because they are not offering full cash refunds for cruises they have not yet cancelled (and from the revised terms, they may not offer full cash refunds even if they cancel the cruise between now and the embarkation date).  So for some people, that is a deal-breaker.  But if you are prepared to cruise with them again, our experience has been that they will offer some attractive options.

Tom & Judy

Its just not the financial machinations Uniworld is using, but we are also bumping up against their stated (on the website) policy of following CLIA and CDC guidance.  We are both over 65/70 and will now be required to produce a "fit for sailing" certificate.  Which if viewed strictly, will mean no cruising since I have, under control, several of the medical afflictions mentioned by CLIA and CDC.  Uniworld offered (and its offers are vary dependent on date) FCCs at the same price.  Now they say FCC but send us $1,200 to hold the cabins you selected despite that fact they are "holding" over $16,000 in cruise fare, already paid.  FCC is essentially useless if we cannot meet CLIA and CDC guidance today, much less a year from now.  Additionally, I am finding that travel agents, dependent of monies from cruise fares, are now functioning less as advocates of the passenger and more as advocates of the cruise line.  In our case, the TA wants us to take the FCC and they will then "give us" half of their commission as FCC as well.  

Bottom line is that cruise lines and TAs are now in the "so sue us" mode of operating.  Despicable.  The rest of their commission to be paid later...

2 hours ago, Lois220 said:

Princess has cancelled all cruises departing up to June 30th due to the Covid-19 pandemic. I am a travel agent who has two couples scheduled to cruise out of London/Southampton on July 3, for a 12 night British Isles itinerary on the Regal Princess. They wish to cancel for obvious reasons. Bookings are already paid in full. Both bookings have Princess FLEXIBLE air. Princess specifically states: Cancellation: No fee until 45 days prior to departure. Fees apply within 45 days. However, Princess is refusing to refund the air, saying that it will be a "future CRUISE credit" applied to their profile. They refuse to budge. I don't think this is even legal but I'm not sure where to go on it. BUYER BEWARE!

 

 

Its Princess and not the airlines withholding the refund.  Princess/Carnival, along with other cruise lines, are hemorrhaging money.  They will hold on to anything they can and wait until legal action is taken.  Of course, by then they will be in bankruptcy restructuring and  your clients will lose they money.  I'm in the same " boat" in a sense with a Uniworld river cruise.  They have my full payment for a two-week cruise through France starting in June.  Big $$$.  France is closed and will unlikely be open for tourism by June, much less this year.  FCC is offered for next year, but waiting another year under the current CLIA/CDC travel restrictions for those of us over 65/70 is a non-starter.  And the cruise lines know this.  Uniworld is held privately as part of a larger conglomeration of travel, hotel and tour companies - all of, which are likely closed.  In essence, these cruise lines are stealing out monies.  No other way to look at it.  Not the way to encourage cruising following COVID-19 and not the way to attract new passengers.  

6 hours ago, yorky said:

That depends if the criteria is permanent, I highly suspect this will be a shorter term measure in months and not many years.

It took airlines ten (10) years to get back to pre-9/11 levels.  Even posters and pundits on this pro-cruising site will tell you they are not cruising until a vaccine is available and other precautions are in effect.  CLIA, along with the CDC, have advocated for halting cruising to those over 65 (CDC) and 70 (CLIA).  While the cruise industry has been working to find new clientele, the COVID-19 pandemic has put a full stop to anyone who was even remotely thinking about cruising.  And, when it does return it will be different and totally unlike pre-COVID-19.  With about 40 new ships ordered and  building, and hundreds of laid-up ships, returning to any semblance of "easy cruising" is considered dreaming.

On 3/12/2020 at 9:19 PM, MightyMike said:

Who in Celebrity's elderly-skewing demographic *doesn't* have some type of chronic condition? I'm sure there are some, but Celebrity won't be able to get the boats half full anymore if that's the new criteria. 

Agree.  

What this implies is that X will have way too much capacity following the shutdown.  Most likely scenario is that ships will be sold (if possible) and lines will be smaller offering more limited cruising options.

On 4/13/2020 at 6:00 PM, HS2BS said:

First, asking a Celebrity rep a question like that is only going to get you the official company answer - not reliable. The refurb was scheduled for May and has been “postponed” indefinitely at this point; unless they cancel a block of cruises in the future to accommodate the time needed.

We were going to do the b2b 2/5/21 & 2/15/21 prior to this announcement, but are certainly not going on the Constellation without it being refurbished. There were many comments about the condition it was in, and what would be done to bring it up to the refurbished Summit. 
Celebrity did a really nice job in redoing the Summit, we were on it in October & December last year, and frequently cruised on it pre refurb.

 

Hal

We also must remember that two years ago the "M" class ships were on the block to be sold.  Two have since gone through service life extensions / refurbishment.  Do the same with the remaining two (Connie and Infinity) may become a financial reach too far following the shutdown.  Shedding these two ships from X is likely under consideration by RCCL along with deferred payments and a significantly slower new build program.