What Needs To Happen For Me To Regain Confidence In Cruising-A Comprehensive Approach

[npcl]

1 hour ago, AF-1 said:

The news just reported this morning that cruise bookings for 2021 are up 8%

However, put it into context.  How many of the cruises are booked a year in advance?  Now take a look at how many cruises have been canceled and FCC's awarded that need to be used.  Not surprised that you are seeing a bump in 2021 cruises compared to 2020 cruises booked by March of the previous year.

[LACruiser88]

Questionnaires are useless because people don't fill them out truthfully.  It's a shame, but it's reality.

[Level six]

18 minutes ago, LACruiser88 said:

Questionnaires are useless because people don't fill them out truthfully.  It's a shame, but it's reality.

 

I agree completely.  Just look at these boards.  People will go on a cruise even if they are near death it seems.  

[npcl]

1 hour ago, LACruiser88 said:

Questionnaires are useless because people don't fill them out truthfully.  It's a shame, but it's reality.

That is why the cruise lines must train the check in staff to look for people showing any visible symptoms of illness and direct them to medical discussion.  As well as do temperature checks on everyone.

 

Should do this with or without Covid.

[WmFCoyote]

1 hour ago, LACruiser88 said:

Questionnaires are useless because people don't fill them out truthfully.  It's a shame, but it's reality.

And the reason most will not truthfully fill out the form is Monetary. As long as the cruisers face heavy penalties for cancellations made within 15 days of sailing, as it is human nature to try to minimize their loss. Unless the cruiser knows they have a communicable issue they will try and work through it. If all people with allergies or common colds were to cancel their cruise ships would sail with 80% (my guestimate) occupancy. 

[npcl]

2 hours ago, WmFCoyote said:

And the reason most will not truthfully fill out the form is Monetary. As long as the cruisers face heavy penalties for cancellations made within 15 days of sailing, as it is human nature to try to minimize their loss. Unless the cruiser knows they have a communicable issue they will try and work through it. If all people with allergies or common colds were to cancel their cruise ships would sail with 80% (my guestimate) occupancy. 

The cruise lines could make part of their travel insurance mandatory (cancel for any reason) and price it into the fare giving FCCs for illness at port.  The other aspects of travel insurance, medical, trip delay, cash refund for covered reason could still remain optional.

[Aus Traveller]

13 hours ago, gmjc2 said:

Which cruise lines have you been using? We have never been on a cruise without the health question form! Our last cruise was Celebrity in October.

 

Maureen.

We usually cruise on Princess (this is the Princess forum 🙂) and occasionally on P&O Australia. On these cruises in the last couple of years, we have not seen health questionnaires until this February on Princess when we were given one that had questions relating to travel in Asia, as well as flu/cold symptoms.

[oskidunker]

Princess stopped requiring the medical questionnaire because peoples lied and it wasn't a valuable tool. 

[sewingmolly]

Since at least 20% of people with Covid have no symptoms and apparently almost everyone with it is contagious for several days before having symptoms, checking for symptoms or taking people's temperature would just be for show and would not have much impact.  Also washing your hands is good, but since covid is a respiratory disease the greatest danger is breathing in the germs the person next to you  just exhaled.  So I don't think I'll be cruising until there's a vaccine.  As far as the next pandemic is concerned, I would hope that we will all pay more attention to what's happening in far corners of the world that we don't think will affect us.

[OceanPatter]

Always appreciate your comments, Chengkp75, which are always a fresh air, objective and balanced. Thank you.

[gmjc2]

It must be up to the individual ship because we filled out the questionnaire last April on Princess for the transatlantic sailing.

 

Maureen.

[dog]

11 hours ago, oskidunker said:

Princess stopped requiring the medical questionnaire because peoples lied and it wasn't a valuable tool. 

No we filled it out 2 cruises in 2019

[G&T Cruisers]

We were on the Sky Princess Dec22-Jan6 and we never filled out a health card this was our 14th cruise and we have filled them out on other cruises.

It never fails to blow my mind that people lick there fingers as they go through the buffet or eat as the go through,touch food and then put it back, I sanitize my hands before and after going through the buffet and always carry a small bottle of sanitizer on me.

Menus for the dinning room should be on our phones so we don't have to handle a hard cover one that has been passed from table to table.

 

[chipmaster]

On 4/1/2020 at 9:00 AM, Cruiseathoning said:

I love to cruise.  Wife and I both do.  Look at my userid!  But for the foreseeable future, if there is such a thing, we will not be.

Many of our friends are from cruising.  Both passengers and crew.  The human toll this monster is leaving in its wake is staggering.

Yesterday I woke up to the thought that the infrastructure of cruising as a whole could be in liquidation by the end of the year.

 

But it may not have to go down like this.  The primary concern I have is not just the virus itself, but getting home.  I had no idea that a ship could float indefinitely with no 

system in place for emergency disembarkation.  This must change.  There has to be an international treaty, agreed upon by the participating nations, for emergency evacuation and medical care, at whatever port the emergency arises.  Of course this would cost, and I expect it would raise costs of cruising.  Also ok.  But these nations have to partner to protect their people and they are not doing so.  This agreement would look like this:

 

1.  Evacuation, containment, treatment, and return home guaranteed to every cruiser based on their national origin.  To pay for this, both the lines and the cruisers would have to pay into a secondary pandemic insurance fund, beyond the normal insurance, and this to me is going to be nearly $100 per person.  In the event of such an emergency, of course that would barely cover a soda, but the idea is that it is an international fund pool that is constantly added to by ships and passengers that do not have such problems.  

 

2.  All participating countries would be refunded from this fund according to personnel and passengers handled not from port nation.  In other words-if the United States handles 17 Mexicans, 37 Australians, and 1500 Americans, then it would "bill" for 54 accommodations.  The international fund would dole out the taxpayer compensation and then collect from the partner nations.

 

3.  All participating countries should develop a portside infrastructure of hospitals and containment at every port.  ALL.  Yes again, costs should be mutually shared.  ALL participating countries must protect the employment and residential status of any passenger quarantined in such a scenario where it is warranted.  This also protects the port nation at large.  Rather than a piecemeal approach we would then have a firm mechanical protocol to rely upon.

 

Vaccines are a must.  Goes without saying.

 

Sanitation should be improved particularly in crew areas.

 

Now some of you will balk because this will raise the cost of cruising.  Well get used to that.  Cruising will probably increase in pricing, perhaps drastically.  Besides any potential commitment to a potential cost sharing treaty, the extra costs for sanitation, perhaps HVAC redevelopment, and a complete restructure of the check-in process, along with a need for full-mini hospitals onboard, and you can expect higher costs.  But you can also expect safer ships in this scenario.

 

One of the options cruise lines can look into, is the "hotel" model.  If a ship does not leave port, or at least american waters, then it is my understanding that the passenger has not left the country itself and thus has not given up an automatic right to re-enter the port.  This is important.  Cruisers have to be confident that if they get on a ship, they will someday be able to get off of it.  The situation the people on the Zaandam and Princess ships were and are facing is a waking nightmare.  The idea that a virulent contagion can spread in a ship with no mechanism for evacuation or treatment is enough to terrify consumers into abandoning the concept altogether.

 

The hotel model allows passengers to embark, drive out a few miles, see a pretty view, enjoy the entertainment, food, and camaraderie and then leave according to more personalized schedule.  This could even be done by tendering.  This way the ships could gain some revenue without being completely out of the ballgame.  Los Angelenos, for example, could do a long weekend for $199 pp, for example, and for these purposes I would highly recommend state legislatures and Feds waive the casino rules so the people can play.  If the passengers could do so knowing their re-entry to the port is not a matter for debate, even if they were to fall ill, the infrastructure to handle the illnesses would already be in place.

 

But for these purposes, it is hard to imagine any line not requiring a certificate of whatever Covid vaccination eventually becomes part of the solution.

 

Because the USA is a configuration of fifty kingdoms, and we now see how truly de-centralized its governance is, Governors themselves will have to cede to Federal authority if my hypothetical treaty were to work.  Will it?  I don't know.  All of these states face particular challenges none of us can really understand, and therefore we can't really justify a critique on their response.  So I am careful not to judge any of these people responsible for decision making in a real life game theory few hypothesized.  The best we can do is learn from this.

 

Will cruising survive?  I think so.  Like any industry it has to adapt and enhance, and it can.  And at some point when we have a vaccine, and ships are improved, and my family can enter a ship knowing there is rock solid international protocol if we face an emergency, I feel we will go back on.  But it won't be soon.

 

And it may not be the brands, or concepts, we once knew.

 

I have seen nothing from the actions of any Nation that gives me confidence that what ever they put down as policy would make me confident that on a cruise if COVID22 happened they wouldn't just toss what they promised into the garbage can.

 

Look how the Florida debated the fate of the HAL ship with so many citizens, look what happened to the Aussie passengers with UA, all thoughts of human decency have been cast to the wind in the inward and selfish policy centered by local city, state, country etc. etc.

[paul28]

Vaccine 

[SargassoPirate]

14 hours ago, paul28 said:

Vaccine 

 

yep, and that looks to be a year to 18 months out.

[ABoatNerd]

Add in cruising's partners in crime, the airlines, and there is a recipe for trip hassle.

 

As a consumer, I spend $ only where I get a consistent high value return. When I see a business starting to lower value while keeping the price the same or increasing (cruising), then they are fired.

 

So now consumers are having trouble getting their funds back from cruising and airlines (airlines in Canada will not give a refund or future credit despite being given a govt (taxpayer) handout) - you are both fired until I see some consumer friendly behavior.

 

My future travel will be in North America in my new Porsche Cayenne paid for via my cruising fund.

[happy cruzer]

The original suggestions might be put in place on some lines.  However, if a line has a lower passenger cruise cost by not doing the suggestions then most consumers might book the lower cost?  There is a very large variety of cruisers out there that with a variety of outlooks that is why there have been so many options to date.  If the exact experience is dictated, then many will not want that experience.

[gmjc2]

57 minutes ago, SargassoPirate said:

 

yep, and that looks to be a year to 18 months out.

The money we spent on these shares was just sitting in the bank earning no or very little interest so we decided to put it to work. If it takes 2 years to give back that is no different than a puny 2% yield CD! Good trading everyone!

[charmed1959]

We have learned a few things during this crises that have less to do specifically with Covid19 and more to do with the way the cruise industry is able to deal with virulent diseases.

 

1) the crew is not immune

 

Though it is probable a crew member originally caught the corona virus, and in the past a norovirus, from a passenger, it is clear to me once the crew is possibly infected there is no plan in place to ensure they won’t infect others.  Crew quarters are close, and there is not a system set up to quarantine possibly infected crew.  From my perspective, it looks like the crew spread the disease to passengers while they were quarantined on the Diamond Princess.  Considering there were more crew with respiratory disease on the Zaandam than passengers it would not surprise me to find passengers were infected by those that cooked their food, plated their trays, or delivered their food.

 

2) medical facilities on board is not sufficient for a large outbreak of infectious disease

 

The shortage amount of supplies and number of personnel meant getting to port was an emergency. To make me feel safe on a cruise ship, I’d like to believe if there was an outbreak the ship’s medical team would be able to handle it.  Right now I’m not convinced that is true.

 

3) love that cabin you pick, you may be spending weeks there.

 

In the past I kept hearing the size of a cabin didn’t matter, you only sleep there. Yeah, no.

 

4) the cruise line may not know what they are talking about when they say it’s safe to travel.

 

There were many people that didn’t cancel cruises because they didn’t want to lose money.  The cruise line said it was safe.  In hindsight, everyone lost money, and no it wasn’t safe.

 

5)Countries will prioritize the safety of their citizens over the safety of those coming in off their shores.

 

This seems to be a surprise to the entire cruise industry. 

 

To get people like me, the occasional cruiser, back on ships, they need to find a way to make it safer.  

 

Change policy to ensure any crew that is possibly sick is not working and not in contact with other crew members or passengers.  Like Viking, quarantine crew members for two weeks before they get on the ship and in between assignments.  

 

Those inside and port hole cabins are going to be a hard sell anyway, convert them to hospital/quarantine/crew quarters to be able to divide out the infected or possibly infected crew.  Quarantining crew might mean they actually need more crew, as backup.  Here is your additional crew quarters.  They could also convert some of the crew quarters to increase the size of the onboard medical center.  Have more room for testing facilities, ICU beds, and common drug storage.

 

Ease up on the cancellation policies.  If passengers could get a full refund, I’m guessing there would have been very few passengers would have gotten on a cruise ship the first week of March.  By then they knew the Grand had problems stemming from a trip to Mexico,  Northern Italy and Iran had huge outbreaks, and cruise ships were already being denied stops in the Caribbean.  Airfare is a huge issue, and the Airlines should also ease up on cancellation policies.

 

Give sick people full refunds before and cruise credits after they get on the ship.  The present cancellation policies encourage people to coverup flu symptoms before they embark, so they don’t lose all that money.  They lie about symptoms when on the ship because they paid for it and they don’t want to be stuck in their room.

 

Give up on the huge ships.  I’m not getting on anything that has more than 1000 passengers.  When it comes to smaller countries or economies, the difference between helping 800 people and helping 3000 is a big deal.  Those ships with close to 7000 passengers, I’ve been on them, they are cool.  However, in case of an outbreak I can’t see any country offering to take in 1000 sick people at once.  I wouldn’t touch one of those again.

 

Bigger changes in the cruise industry as a whole that would make me feel safer is having the flagged country mean something.  If a ship is flagged to a country that country guarantees them a safe port and medical services to their crew and passengers.  Cruise lines may then chose to flag their ships in countries with a more robust infrastructure.  And there would be somewhere they are sure they can port in a pandemic storm.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Aus Traveller]

9 hours ago, charmed1959 said:

We have learned a few things during this crises that have less to do specifically with Covid19 and more to do with the way the cruise industry is able to deal with virulent diseases.

 

1) the crew is not immune

Though it is probable a crew member originally caught the corona virus, and in the past a norovirus, from a passenger, it is clear to me once the crew is possibly infected there is no plan in place to ensure they won’t infect others.  Crew quarters are close, and there is not a system set up to quarantine possibly infected crew.  From my perspective, it looks like the crew spread the disease to passengers while they were quarantined on the Diamond Princess.  Considering there were more crew with respiratory disease on the Zaandam than passengers it would not surprise me to find passengers were infected by those that cooked their food, plated their trays, or delivered their food.

 

The Japanese investigation into the spread of the virus on the Diamond Princess states that it did NOT spread from passenger to passenger after the quarantine was put in place. BUT that two crew members who worked in the passengers' galley were infected. They suggest this was how additional passengers became infected.

[pris993]

Over 60 cruises, last one was the Grand, got off 2/21... never got the virus... so I am not going to over react to  this situation.  The cruise industry will figure out what they need and should do going in to the future... I am booked again on the Ruby for 2/1/21... if the ship goes, I will go again.  

[SargassoPirate]

8 hours ago, pris993 said:

Over 60 cruises, last one was the Grand, got off 2/21... never got the virus... so I am not going to over react to  this situation.  The cruise industry will figure out what they need and should do going in to the future... I am booked again on the Ruby for 2/1/21... if the ship goes, I will go again.  

 

We are going to wait until there is a vaccine for Covid-19 in use worldwide before we travel outside the U.S. again, and who we travel with depends on how they handle what we have cancelled for the remainder of 2020.  They need us more than we need them!

[Level six]

10 hours ago, pris993 said:

Over 60 cruises, last one was the Grand, got off 2/21... never got the virus... so I am not going to over react to  this situation.  The cruise industry will figure out what they need and should do going in to the future... I am booked again on the Ruby for 2/1/21... if the ship goes, I will go again.  

 

Were you tested for the virus?  OR, you just never got sick?  Just curious.  

[nbsjcruiser]

On 4/3/2020 at 11:19 AM, AF-1 said:

The news just reported this morning that cruise bookings for 2021 are up 8%

My first thought when I saw this was, Nah, can't be but the more I think of it the more I suspect it could be true. We've wanted to do the British Isles cruise for a few years now and its on the back burner for obvious reasons. Having said that, I could see someone booking a cruise because of a great price and then sitting and waiting for a vaccine. If one shows up then they have a cruise with a great price. No vaccine by final payment date? Cancel.