USA-West Coast

[Gail C]

Why has Seabourn chosen to eschew the west coast? Am I correct that they do not offer any cruises out of the left coast?

[Roxburgh]

Why has Seabourn chosen to eschew the west coast? Am I correct that they do not offer any cruises out of the left coast?

 

Odyssey is doing Los Angeles - New Zealand - Australia - Hawaii - Los Angeles leaving in January 2012.

[Gail C]

Thanks Rox. I guess I missed that one.

[San Jose King]

One of the most underused, but most beautiful ports, is San Francisco.

Other than trips to Alaska there is very little activity using the upscale ships, Regent, Seabourn or Silversea. Last year we were invited by our travel agent to attend a dinner in San Francisco hosted by one of the above cruise lines.

One of the questions was why there were not more cruises out of San Francisco. Their response was that San francisco had one of the highest docking

fees of any port. In addition, because of it's geographic location it was only good for cruises with extended itineraries, which of course were more costly.

[oregon50]

San Francisco....you're kidding, or did you not notice the crappy terminal you walked thru to get on the ship? Unions have destroyed this market. Even getting off the ship at the end of a cruise has been a nightmare. Silversea had quite a few seasonal departures to Alaska in past years and I've done at least five. I'm thinking Princess is only company with a steady schedule from San Francisco. What a waste in so many ways, but the city has invested zero (for good reason).

[NEOPHYTUS]

San Francisco....you're kidding, or did you not notice the crappy terminal you walked thru to get on the ship? Unions have destroyed this market. Even getting off the ship at the end of a cruise has been a nightmare. Silversea had quite a few seasonal departures to Alaska in past years and I've done at least five. I'm thinking Princess is only company with a steady schedule from San Francisco. What a waste in so many ways, but the city has invested zero (for good reason).

 

Incorrect, has absolutely nothing to do with organized labor "destroying the market ". Port of NY/NJ has one of the USA's most highly and powerful unionized work forces and enjoys a robust cruise line presence.

[Roxburgh]

I only cruised into San Francisco once - on Regent :eek:

 

On the plus side, the pier was very handy for walking either towards Embarcadero or towards Fisherman's wharf. On the negative side, the cruise terminal was just a shed which does not compare too well with other ports.

[johnnycruise]

San Francisco is also poorly situated to serve as a port for non-US flagged ships due to the Jones Act.

[Gail C]

Aside from the Jones Act should it apply, I wonder if we just don't have the passenger base here? I'm sure it's a money issue of some sort.

Also, it's not just SF, but Los Angeles and San Diego, Seattle...

[Roxburgh]

Aside from the Jones Act should it apply, I wonder if we just don't have the passenger base here? I'm sure it's a money issue of some sort.

Also, it's not just SF, but Los Angeles and San Diego, Seattle...

 

Always plenty of Californians on-board when I cruise with Seabourn.

[Gail C]

Regarding the money issue, I am referring to the cruiseline, not the passengers. Maybe many west coast people don't mind flying great distances to meet the ship. My husband and I spent our working life on planes and consequently try to avoid them in retirement.

[oregon50]

Incorrect, has absolutely nothing to do with organized labor "destroying the market ". Port of NY/NJ has one of the USA's most highly and powerful unionized work forces and enjoys a robust cruise line presence.

 

I'll stand by my original statement, thank you. Perhaps you wanted to say highly organized and that might be the missing ingredient in San Francisco. We waited 35 minutes for some fat assed immigration employee to waddle up the structure before we could get off the boat.

Ship had been cleared, just some formality that an officer had to be at gangway before we could depart. There is nothing pleasant about the operations at this port. A shame because location is best in the west.

[1938]

From this thread, it appears that San Francisco has two main drawbacks as a cruise port: cruise terminal and geographic location. As to the first, this will be addressed big time and soon. As part of the Port's deal with SF resident Larry Ellison for staging the America's Cup Races on the Bay, the Port of SF will convert the newly-renovated Cup headquarters finger pier into a state of the art cruise terminal upon completion of the competition. This pier is on the Northern Waterfront, near the existing shed and close to Fisherman's Wharf, the Ferry Building, etc. :) As to the second, San Francisco is located too far from "foreign" ports, e.g. Vancouver or Mexican ports for short cruises that comply with the Jones Act. Location of course cannot be changed, but the Jones Act could be modified as to passenger ships, to permit short trips to LA, etc. This is a sensible solution since the American flagged passenger ships that the Jones Act was enacted to protect no longer exist - all major cruise lines, including Seabourn and the Carnival family are foreign flagged. But as Seattle previously learned, this is a political hornets nest and has little chance of happening.:mad:

[wripro]

Lots of complaints about San Francisco as a port but there are other ports on the West coast...San Pedro, Long Beach, San Diego. The fact is that unless they are sailing to Alaska or Mexico there is no other itinerary from the West Coast that does not involve several sea days to get there unless they head back to the East coast through the Panama Canal. That's probably the reason there aren't more cruises from California. Seabourn's stop in L.A. in January is part of the world cruise so that's a case on its own.

[Gail C]

Question then is, why don't they offer a trans Panama Canal voyage? I think it must be a "follow the money" Seabourn disadvantage or they would add it to their itinerary.

[Roxburgh]

Question then is, why don't they offer a trans Panama Canal voyage? I think it must be a "follow the money" Seabourn disadvantage or they would add it to their itinerary.

 

That was the cruise I went on with Regent. Fort Lauderdale - San Francisco. That ship went on to Sydney.

[Roxburgh]

Lots of complaints about San Francisco as a port but there are other ports on the West coast...San Pedro, Long Beach, San Diego. The fact is that unless they are sailing to Alaska or Mexico there is no other itinerary from the West Coast that does not involve several sea days to get there unless they head back to the East coast through the Panama Canal. That's probably the reason there aren't more cruises from California. Seabourn's stop in L.A. in January is part of the world cruise so that's a case on its own.

 

You make a good point. LA to Hawaii is 5 sea days.

[wripro]

Roxburgh,

 

If your Ft. Lauderdale-L.A. cruise continued on to Sydney, it too was probably part of a world cruise. Seabourn did that as well as part of its first two world cruises.

[Roxburgh]

Roxburgh,

 

If your Ft. Lauderdale-L.A. cruise continued on to Sydney, it too was probably part of a world cruise. Seabourn did that as well as part of its first two world cruises.

 

Yes, you are correct.

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

Maybe the hordes of bums, drug-addicts, and hookers roaming (and urinating on) the streets of San Fran has something to do with it...:eek: Last time I was there I swore I would never go back. Just one pirate's opinion.

[Winner]

You really need a better tour guide. Los Angeles has the same type per capita and most tourists prefer SF to LA.

[johnnycruise]

Maybe the hordes of bums, drug-addicts, and hookers roaming (and urinating on) the streets of San Fran has something to do with it...:eek: Last time I was there I swore I would never go back. Just one pirate's opinion.

 

Methinks you haven't been to the City by the Bay since Dirty Harry patrolled its streets.:rolleyes: