Ideas to restart people cruising over coming months

[npcl]

3 hours ago, cruisemom42 said:

 

Exactly, which is why I posted above -- 'under control' is not the same as eradication.

 

At some point I think cruise ships will restart (as will most other things) as I do not think we are going to eradicate COVID-19 and not see any more cases. But that's not certain, of course...

At some point yes, but those countries with some degree of control are still limiting large gatherings, and still banning cruise ships.  Until we have treatment that reduces hospital stay duration, reduces the need for advanced support, reduces mortality such that the medical systems can deal with it without overload some controls will remain. Basically until the threat is reduced to the standard of the flu. The first stage of recovery will be for factories and offices to re-open, then restaurants, then increasing gathering sizes, then you might see ports re-open to cruise ships.  For all of that to happen we will need therapies, to reduce symptoms and duration.  For all restrictions to go away we will need a vaccine.

 

 

[npcl]

34 minutes ago, cruisemom42 said:

 

With the virus now present in 183 countries and territories globally, there will come a point after which quarantining will serve no purpose. Who are they protecting if the infection is already there? I could understand maybe a small Polynesian island without COVID-19 cases saying no, but major ports will have no good reason unless there is a raging infection aboard the ship (a la certain % of norovirus impacted cruises).

 

After we (hopefully) flatten the curve, coronavirus will still be present but presumably will become much more like flu -- e.g., we cannot stop it but we can control its effects via immunity (previous cases, vaccines) and better treatments.

The problem is that cruise ships, with the number of people, the constant intermingling at the various venues, the number of days on board, the transition to and from the ship at ports, make a near perfect environment for URIs to spread.   So until we have the therapies and vaccine the outlook for cruising is not good.

[iancal]

Agree.  We enjoy cruising but I simply cannot see us booking anything for a long time. Same with AI's.  We will probably stick to independent travels, smaller family run hotels, etc.

 

I think this current environment will have a long lasting negative impact on cruising.  Most especially for the older demographic who have the highest risk....like us two oldies. 

 

We spent the last five nights of our eight weeks in Mexico at an AI in PV.  Even with all the media attention I saw a gentleman reach into the biscuit tray, take out three biscuits with his bare hands and place them atop his hamburger (no space on his plate).  The serving utensils were right there beside him.  Another proof point that you cannot fix stupid.   

Edited March 20, 2020 by iancal

[cbr663]

4 hours ago, Doubt It said:

cbr663, excellent analysis.

 

The cruise line trend towards huge ships amplifies the venue density risk for all infectious diseases, not just the current virus.  This is a deliberate decision by cruise lines to increase their profit.

 

The flag of convenience is also an excellent recommendation - shipping companies have made deliberate decisions to use this to avoid the more stringent requirements of more westernized democratic countries.

 

I would suggest the chicken is coming home to roost for the cruise lines.

 

When a passenger has a less than stellar experience on a cruise ship, often their response is - they hide behind the contract and maybe, provide only FCC.  The guest relations staff on cruise ships are among the least helpful customer service staff in the world to be frank.

 

In contrast, the occasional time I have had a poor hotel visit - I  have generally received the night at no charge or part charge ie cash is returned to me.

 

I am not the only poster on these boards who have observed that the customer service of cruise lines is significantly worse than the customer service of land based companies like hotels etc. That is one reason our large group has moved much of our business away from cruise lines.

 

 

 

 

I hope that the chicken is coming home to roost for the cruise lines also.

 

I really liked my wife's idea regarding ship registration and flags of convenience.  If the changes require mean that these countries must now build up certain infrastructure to support these cruise ships then so be it.  I can't imagine the horror of being out on the open sea and repeatedly being denied docking privileges.

 

This isn't a customer/passenger service issue for cruise lines.  And right now I am not seeing any indication that the cruise lines aren't treating it as anything but a customer service issue.  I laughed out loud yesterday when I received the email from HAL asking us to demonstrate our confidence with HAL by going ahead and booking cruises.  This is a clear indication to me that the cruise line has learned very little from this crisis and thinks this too will pass and everything will go back to the way it is.  Well, the cruise lines may very well want this, and it may very well get its wish - but I won't be sailing with the way it is.  It is actual emails like this that continue to erode my confidence in HAL.

[npcl]

1 hour ago, iancal said:

Agree.  We enjoy cruising but I simply cannot see us booking anything for a long time. Same with AI's.  We will probably stick to independent travels, smaller family run hotels, etc.

 

I think this current environment will have a long lasting negative impact on cruising.  Most especially for the older demographic who have the highest risk....like us two oldies. 

 

We spent the last five nights of our eight weeks in Mexico at an AI in PV.  Even with all the media attention I saw a gentleman reach into the biscuit tray, take out three biscuits with his bare hands and place them atop his hamburger (no space on his plate).  The serving utensils were right there beside him.  Another proof point that you cannot fix stupid.   

We spent 100 days on a cruise ship last year.  We had planned to do the same this year. Now all cruises canceled. No intention to book another until either 1. The virus vanishes or 2. Adequate therapies are develop to greatly modify the impact.

 

Banning cruise ships was the first thing many places did when this started, I suspect those bans will be the last thing taken off.

[iancal]

A cruise ship, no matter what size, is like a petri dish to us.   It does not matter to us 700 or 3000 plus cruisers.  It is the same to us.  Does not matter if it is noro or c virus, all the same in terms of transmission. We feel the same about AI's.  We tend to avoid risk if there are alternatives.  Cannot see us picking up a late booking cruise well into to the future and into next year.  IF then.

 

We feel sorry for those whose only realistic choice for vacation travel is a cruise ship.  I do not think that this will be a viable, safe choice for quite a long time.   Public health authorities are anticipating waves of c virus over the next 12 months.  

[cbr663]

35 minutes ago, iancal said:

A cruise ship, no matter what size, is like a petri dish to us.   It does not matter to us 700 or 3000 plus cruisers.  It is the same to us.  Does not matter if it is noro or c virus, all the same in terms of transmission. We feel the same about AI's.  We tend to avoid risk if there are alternatives.  Cannot see us picking up a late booking cruise well into to the future and into next year.  IF then.

 

We feel sorry for those whose only realistic choice for vacation travel is a cruise ship.  I do not think that this will be a viable, safe choice for quite a long time.   Public health authorities are anticipating waves of c virus over the next 12 months.  

 

I also do not think that this will be a safe choice for a long time.  We cannot eradicate all viruses and bacteria.  There will always be new threats.  Scientists are raising the alarm for instance on the ice caps melting and the risk that we simply do not know what bacteria or threats may be released during the thaw.  Yet, we hop onto cruise ships and sail to the very areas where this is happening.

 

Anyone who thinks that once we have a vaccine for COV19 that it safe to cruise again is naive.  We may be protected from COV19, but cruising as it is today will always be a risk from the next virus/bacterial outbreak.

[dockman]

8 minutes ago, cbr663 said:

 

I also do not think that this will be a safe choice for a long time.  We cannot eradicate all viruses and bacteria.  There will always be new threats.  Scientists are raising the alarm for instance on the ice caps melting and the risk that we simply do not know what bacteria or threats may be released during the thaw.  Yet, we hop onto cruise ships and sail to the very areas where this is happening.

 

Anyone who thinks that once we have a vaccine for COV19 that it safe to cruise again is naive.  We may be protected from COV19, but cruising as it is today will always be a risk from the next virus/bacterial outbreak.

 

 Life is full of risks.  Some can be avoided, many can not.  It's up to each person to decide his/her tolerance levels.

I would never again ride a motorcycle but millions do it every day.  I never ever cross a street without looking both ways twice but many do it every day.  I don't eat meat, drink and drive, etc.

 

Personally I have always felt safer on a cruise ship than most other places.  But that is just me.  I don't think i am any more "naive" about cruising than I am  about many other risks.  To each his/her own.

[gatour]

7 hours ago, cbr663 said:

 

Yesterday my wife and I completed HAL's questionnaire about our ideas about cruising, and for me, one of the sticking points is the densely populated venues.  The whole industry has been moving toward larger ships with more and more people and this very business model increases the risk for all who sail.  The industry has to move away from this business model in order to reduce this risk.  Flash sales, increasing screening prior to boarding and implementing different cleaning protocols onboard will not address the core risk issue - too many people in one area.

 

My wife also told HAL in her response that flags of convenience need to change.  Laws need to be changed so that if a ship is registered in a particular country that country must allow that ship to dock.  That would be one of the requirements of allowing a ship to register in a particular country.  That way, when this happens again, and it will happen again, passengers know that at the very least the ship can sail to its flag county and passengers can disembark.

I have been cruising since 1981.  There have always been people packed into close proximity.  For example standing in line to be seated for the fixed MDR seatings,  attending shows in the main show rooms, going to the disco.  Oh yes don't forget the lines to check in at embarkation and disembarkation times.

 

In regards to flags of convenience.  Since some ships are flagged Liberia a western African country, how will that go over when a ship has to sail thousands of miles to Liberia to disembark passengers.

[cbr663]

19 minutes ago, gatour said:

....

 

In regards to flags of convenience.  Since some ships are flagged Liberia a western African country, how will that go over when a ship has to sail thousands of miles to Liberia to disembark passengers.

 

If the distance to sail is too great then perhaps the cruise line simply shouldn't flag their ships in Liberia.

[cruisemom42]

1 hour ago, cbr663 said:

 

Anyone who thinks that once we have a vaccine for COV19 that it safe to cruise again is naive.  We may be protected from COV19, but cruising as it is today will always be a risk from the next virus/bacterial outbreak.

 

Before or after COVID-19, there were and will continue to be risks in traveling in groups, working in groups, attending school in groups. New diseases crop up every so often, some more dangerous/more communicable than others dependi,ng on your age and overall health/immune function.

 

As I am not yet in a particularly high-risk group, I will continue to work and travel once this pandemic recedes. Taking appropriate precautions of course. As I get older, my choices might become more cautious but I am not there yet.

 

 

[cruisemom42]

3 minutes ago, cbr663 said:

 

If the distance to sail is too great then perhaps the cruise line simply shouldn't flag their ships in Liberia.

 

Cruise lines (and other ships) choose to register their ships using 'flags of convenience' because doing so enables them to a) pay lower or no taxes; b) skirt certain regulations regarding hiring and salary of workers, and c) sorry to say, it also enables them to skirt certain types of inspections that might be required were they flagged in their home countries.

 

Now strangely enough, in the past I feel a great many cruisers on these boards would have said, GREAT, that means more profit, and I am a shareholder so -- go ahead. 

 

 

[cbr663]

56 minutes ago, dockman said:

 

 Life is full of risks.  Some can be avoided, many can not.  It's up to each person to decide his/her tolerance levels.

I would never again ride a motorcycle but millions do it every day.  I never ever cross a street without looking both ways twice but many do it every day.  I don't eat meat, drink and drive, etc.

 

Personally I have always felt safer on a cruise ship than most other places.  But that is just me.  I don't think i am any more "naive" about cruising than I am  about many other risks.  To each his/her own.

I have felt safer on cruise ships in the past also.  Now I am not feeling that way.  I also realize that millions of people will go back to cruising without giving it another thought.  As you say, to each its own.

 

After this world wide crisis is over, there will be a lot of organizations reviewing what went right, what went wrong and what the gaps were.  Lots of commentators are stating now that the cruise lines did not take decisive action early enough.  The CDC has concluded that with the Grand Princess, the virus most likely was from two passengers and then spread quickly by crew and food service crew members.  And we all know that when defending itself against noro, cruise lines love to state that cruise does not get sick.  I have left to wonder again whether this is another case of flawed thinking by the cruise industry that added to the outbreak on the ship?

 

I question how does this thinking affect my safety when I sail?  Perhaps for you it gives you little concern.  Obviously for me it raises great concern.

 

Smooth sailing and I wish you the best.

[cbr663]

3 minutes ago, cruisemom42 said:

 

Cruise lines (and other ships) choose to register their ships using 'flags of convenience' because doing so enables them to a) pay lower or no taxes; b) skirt certain regulations regarding hiring and salary of workers, and c) sorry to say, it also enables them to skirt certain types of inspections that might be required were they flagged in their home countries.

 

Now strangely enough, in the past I feel a great many cruisers on these boards would have said, GREAT, that means more profit, and I am a shareholder so -- go ahead. 

 

 

I realize all of this.  But should we continue to allow the cruise lines the privilege of doing this?  What needs to change to ensure that when a cruise ship needs to dock that it actually can?

[iancal]

Changing things like where ships are registered, where cruise lines are based/taxes they pay is a huge issue that I very much doubt the cruise line industry will support.  It touches on key components of their business such a labor laws, litigation, taxes, subsidies, write offs, etc.   Cruise lines spend hundreds of millions of dollars per year on lobbying efforts for. Reason.
 

Such across the board changes could depress the industry even further because it would cause cruise fares to increase substantially IMHO.  

Edited March 20, 2020 by iancal

[npcl]

1 hour ago, cbr663 said:

 

I also do not think that this will be a safe choice for a long time.  We cannot eradicate all viruses and bacteria.  There will always be new threats.  Scientists are raising the alarm for instance on the ice caps melting and the risk that we simply do not know what bacteria or threats may be released during the thaw.  Yet, we hop onto cruise ships and sail to the very areas where this is happening.

 

Anyone who thinks that once we have a vaccine for COV19 that it safe to cruise again is naive.  We may be protected from COV19, but cruising as it is today will always be a risk from the next virus/bacterial outbreak.

Lets see it has been 101 years since the last outbreak of this magnitude.  There have been many smaller, easily contained outbreaks that had lower infection rates, much shorter incubation times, fewer mild cases, that even with higher mortality rates easily contained.

 

Once we have a vaccine for this one, I suspect that we would have enough advance warning on the next one to stop cruising once the signs of a major outbreak are there.  I think I will take my chances.

[Dunelm]

5 hours ago, cruisemom42 said:

 

Worldometer, which I've been following for over a month now and is a highly regarded reference, shows 39 new cases for China reported yesterday. The previous day there were 50-something if I remember correctly.

 

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

 

Not sure where ABC news is getting their info...

I wonder about ABC, too.   They just came out with another poll, not related to the virus, and had polled only 547 people.  I happen to think that such polling is rubbish.

[conwakr]

7 hours ago, kangforpres said:

I think it's very unconscionable for HAL or any line to be selling cruises that sail on 04-15-20, that's obviously not going to happen. California alone is "sheltering in place" until further notice.

 

-Paul

I think it's really going to depend on the port location and what is happening in that region.  I don't think anyone can make blanket predictions right now about what will be going on in 3 weeks.  Northern California has some big problems I do agree . "Shelter in place" is a way to force people to social distance and gives states a way to fine people or businesses who are not in compliance and is helpful if the citizenry is reluctant to follow suggestions or businesses are reluctant to understand the importance of social distancing. 

[kangforpres]

4 minutes ago, conwakr said:

I think it's really going to depend on the port location and what is happening in that region.  I don't think anyone can make blanket predictions right now about what will be going on in 3 weeks.  Northern California has some big problems I do agree . "Shelter in place" is a way to force people to social distance and gives states a way to fine people or businesses who are not in compliance and is helpful if the citizenry is reluctant to follow suggestions or businesses are reluctant to understand the importance of social distancing. 

 

Well in the USA CA, NY and IL are all shelter in place as well as all of EU , the UK tonight and I think Canada and Australia. Those areas I just listed make up the bulk of the World's cruising market. I'm willing to wager a 7 day Alaska cruise, that HAL will not be sailing anywhere on 04-15-20.

 

-Paul

[iancal]

It may not be prudent for HAL to be selling cruises that sail 04-15-20 but think about the intelligence of folks who are may be booking those cruises.   You really do have to wonder.   

[TAD2005]

What a depressing bunch of posts.   The regular, seasonal flu kills tens of thousands every year and hardly generates a note on page 20 of the newspapers.    People bemoaning that China had 28 new cases in one day.  OMG !!!!   But remember, China has well over a BILLION people.   I don't know how many zeros after the decimal point we would need to show that percentage.   I'm for a wait and see approach.   

[kazu]

1 hour ago, conwakr said:

I think it's really going to depend on the port location and what is happening in that region.  I don't think anyone can make blanket predictions right now about what will be going on in 3 weeks.  Northern California has some big problems I do agree . "Shelter in place" is a way to force people to social distance and gives states a way to fine people or businesses who are not in compliance and is helpful if the citizenry is reluctant to follow suggestions or businesses are reluctant to understand the importance of social distancing. 

 

Sorry, but I disagree.  It will take at least 3 weeks to get to 0 cases IF everyone follows the rules.  If they don’t it will be tragic story.

 

No way can I see a cruise going on April 15th or 19th (I’m picking on that one as it was mine 😉 😞 ). Our roll call that hasn’t cancelled is still in limbo.  that’s foolish IMO.
 

 

11 minutes ago, iancal said:

It may not be prudent for HAL to be selling cruises that sail 04-15-20 but think about the intelligence of folks who are may be booking those cruises.   You really do have to wonder.   

 

I totally agree with you.  

[kazu]

7 minutes ago, TAD2005 said:

What a depressing bunch of posts.   The regular, seasonal flu kills tens of thousands every year and hardly generates a note on page 20 of the newspapers.    People bemoaning that China had 28 new cases in one day.  OMG !!!!   But remember, China has well over a BILLION people.   I don't know how many zeros after the decimal point we would need to show that percentage.   I'm for a wait and see approach.   

 

The fatality rate of this is at least 10x higher than our regular flu for which we have a vaccine (if people choose to get it).

 

For this, we do not.  

Take a look at Italy.  They don’t have this death toll from the “flu” and it’s pretty sad when  the army has to cart away bodies as the crematoriums, morgues and funeral homes have no rooms.  That doesn’t happen in “influenza season”.  this is not the flu.  

This is worse than the flu and it’s time to realize the severity of what this can do if we don’t move and do the right things and follow the rules.

[slidergirl]

OK.  Allow me to interject a tad of humor to this:

 

All it will take for me to cruise again is:

1) it's safe again to cruise, really, truly safe, not some talking head saying it's OK

2) someone starts a <insert a name of one of those site that let you go and fund someone> to pay for the cruise.

 

Since I'm one of those who has lost their jobs to due this, GFM is going to be the only way I'm doing anything other then staying at home or camping...

Edited March 20, 2020 by slidergirl

[TAD2005]

5 minutes ago, kazu said:

 

The fatality rate of this is at least 10x higher than our regular flu for which we have a vaccine (if people choose to get it).

 

For this, we do not.  

Take a look at Italy.  They don’t have this death toll from the “flu” and it’s pretty sad when  the army has to cart away bodies as the crematoriums, morgues and funeral homes have no rooms.  That doesn’t happen in “influenza season”.  this is not the flu.  

This is worse than the flu and it’s time to realize the severity of what this can do if we don’t move and do the right things and follow the rules.

Yes, the death toll is 10 times higher.  For the seasonal flu, the rate is usually 0.1 %.   So far, for corona, the rate is now 1%, which is 10 times 0.1%.   And that 1% rate keeps falling as more and more people are tested.   The US rate was as high as 4% or 6% only a week ago, because very little testing was being done.   When your base sample of tested persons is very low, and unknown, and that is tallied against the deaths (which are a known number), you get a high percentage.   As more and more are tested, the rate will continue to fall below that 1% present rate.

For some unknown reason, the media has focused like a laser beam on this virus, especially in this politically charged time, unlike they have never done when hundreds of thousands die every year of seasonal flu.