It's even worse than we thought

[Mackenzie1]

57 minutes ago, bluesea321 said:

 

Yeap, and please see the PDF, it provides a dire summary of the cruise ship situation around US ports and the difficulties in tending to ill crew members on board.  From Page 5:

 

"If unrestricted cruise ship passenger operations were permitted to resume, infected and exposed cruise ship cases would place healthcare workers at substantial increased risk. Specifically, these cases would divert medical resources away from persons with other medical problems and other COVID-19 cases, consuming precious diagnostics, therapeutics, and protective equipment. Ongoing concerns with cruise ship transmission would further draw valuable resources away from the immense Federal, State, and local effort to contain and mitigate the spread of COVID- 19. Further, the current ongoing non-passenger operation of cruise ships has not sufficiently abated the public health concern, as ship crew become sick and require medical care drawing on otherwise engaged Federal, State, and local resources. As operators of non-U.S. flagged vessels sailing in international waters, it is imperative that the cruise ship industry and cruise lines themselves take responsibility for the care of their crew and do not further tax limited U.S. resources during a public health emergency."

 

This is just so sad. I keep hoping we are getting through all of this, but this notice is just so dire. 

[bluesea321]

13 minutes ago, Mackenzie1 said:

This is just so sad. I keep hoping we are getting through all of this, but this notice is just so dire. 

 

Yes indeed.  A ray of hope however, maybe the industry and the CDC can come up with a suitable plan.

[AF-1]

I just woke up and started reading all your replies.  Then I think how many shore excursion operators around the world may go out of business.  Alaska shore excursions live for the summer cruise lines.  Wow that is a lot of money and all those european companies.  Devastating.  

[Bigdogwon]

After all of this passes (hopefully) will it be enjoyable to go on a cruise?  Can or will the cruise lines expect to sail with half their ships full to ease congestion?  

[Thrak]

Gotta love this part of the document...

 

[chipmaster]

On 4/3/2020 at 11:09 AM, Cruise Raider said:

Well, some of you all have been stating that cruises won't be back until next year ... and yikes, this article kind of supports that theory!  It just hit me like a ton of bricks.  If true, that will be 4 canceled cruises for us in one year ... and the one in January, I took a move over offer ... so basically, it could be five!  

Well, it's just safer to stay at home and hope for next year.  I will keep a sliver of hope for the end of the year but won't expect too much.  

 

https://thepointsguy.com/news/cruise-lines-could-store-ships-months-coronavirus/?fbclid=IwAR0MJH0DVWblYbRwDRqxf6dHCLh71H14KsCEvYl-glSi0QUSqnJUOyOd6ko

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-52182509

[Bgwest]

The CDC announcement is dated 3/9/20 with the statement the "100 day clock will start" 100 days from the date of publication in the Federal Register.

 

Does anyone have any thoughts when said publication has/will occur? 

 

100 days from 3/9 is 7/18. 

 

[fishin' musician]

11 minutes ago, chipmaster said:

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-52182509

 

This seems like a reasonable assessment. Although I disagree with:

 

... they contribute very little to the local economy.

 

"Cruise ships are notorious for depositing thousands of tourists in crowded cities who, Prof Agarwal says "spend very little, look around the place for five or six hours with a packed lunch, and then go back on board for dinner".

 

There are many destinations/ports that would barely exist if weren't for the influx of cash provided by cruise ship passengers.

[chipmaster]

3 minutes ago, fishin' musician said:

 

This seems like a reasonable assessment. Although I disagree with:

 

... they contribute very little to the local economy.

 

"Cruise ships are notorious for depositing thousands of tourists in crowded cities who, Prof Agarwal says "spend very little, look around the place for five or six hours with a packed lunch, and then go back on board for dinner".

 

There are many destinations/ports that would barely exist if weren't for the influx of cash provided by cruise ship passengers.

 

Agreed, some places have had a rebirth, one could argue if it was good / bad.   Cruiselines look for interesting both natural and historical that people want to see, then make it so easy to deposit them by the thousands.   For those places it can be a boom with valuable tourist dollars for tours, trinkets, food but the downside it often ruins the very reason it was so special.

 

 

[npcl]

13 minutes ago, fishin' musician said:

 

This seems like a reasonable assessment. Although I disagree with:

 

... they contribute very little to the local economy.

 

"Cruise ships are notorious for depositing thousands of tourists in crowded cities who, Prof Agarwal says "spend very little, look around the place for five or six hours with a packed lunch, and then go back on board for dinner".

 

There are many destinations/ports that would barely exist if weren't for the influx of cash provided by cruise ship passengers.

Actually quite a few.  Which specific ones would you think would as you put it "barely exist"

 

I suspect one of the biggest impacts of the ships being shut down is that many cruise ports might just find that they like it better without cruise ships.

 

 

Edited April 10, 2020 by npcl

[Hlitner]

16 minutes ago, fishin' musician said:

 

This seems like a reasonable assessment. Although I disagree with:

 

... they contribute very little to the local economy.

 

"Cruise ships are notorious for depositing thousands of tourists in crowded cities who, Prof Agarwal says "spend very little, look around the place for five or six hours with a packed lunch, and then go back on board for dinner".

 

There are many destinations/ports that would barely exist if weren't for the influx of cash provided by cruise ship passengers.

It is not just Dr. Argarwal who has reached that conclusion.  It has also been studied by some academics in the USA that have reached the same conclusion.   We also have some first hand experience since we live in a cruise port during the winter and see how little the passengers contribute to the local economy other then supporting one major local tour company who has a near monopoly on all cruise excursions.  

 

But your comment about places that would barely exist without cruise ship passengers got my interest.  DW and I have probably been to over 150 cruise destinations, over more then forty years, and we have yet to see any port or surrounding region that has benefited from the cruise influx.  Can you site some places that would "barely exist" without cruise ship passengers?

 

I will tell you that we are very aware of some major European ports that would be very happy to see the demise of cruise visits.  And we have watched cruise ship visits all but destroy the charm of several Caribbean islands.....as some others continue to do their utmost to keep ships out (St Barts and Anguilla are two good examples).

 

Hank

[fishin' musician]

I'm thinking places like Skagway, Costa Maya, various Jamaican ports, Progresso, Icey Strait Point/Hoonah and to a lesser extent Ketchikan, Philipsburg, Cozumel, Havensight, Barbados, Antiqua, Curacao, Aruba, etc.  It's often seems like a love/hate relationship.  They love the influx of cash, but not necessarily the source.

[Thrak]

We always support the local brew pubs wherever we go. 😄

As for "packed lunches" passengers are pretty much prohibited from taking things of that sort ashore in most ports.

[npcl]

5 hours ago, fishin' musician said:

I'm thinking places like Skagway, Costa Maya, various Jamaican ports, Progresso, Icey Strait Point/Hoonah and to a lesser extent Ketchikan, Philipsburg, Cozumel, Havensight, Barbados, Antiqua, Curacao, Aruba, etc.  It's often seems like a love/hate relationship.  They love the influx of cash, but not necessarily the source.

Skagway   would be impacted.  Of course the port and the Railway is mostly owned by CCL these days.  A lot of the businesses are owned and staffed by seasonal employees. (the winter time population for Skagway is less than 100).  The cruise oriented Jewelry stores (most of whats there these days) will certainly suffer.

 

Costa Maya - The pier and the port building was built for the cruise business.  The shops are mostly owned by non-locals, though some locals do work there.  Very few of the passengers from ships there go into the local town.  most stay around the port or use cruise ship excursions.  The port would be impacted, the town of Costa Maya not much.

 

Progresso -never been there no comment

 

Icey Strait Point - Only started as a cruise port a couple of years ago.  It would just go back to what it was then.  Mostly the fish cannery.

 

Ketchikan would probably change for the better.  There is a fair amount of ferry and air traffic in and out of there.  Over the past few years the shop have changed from local owned to out of town owners.  More cruise ship related jewelry shops and few focused on locals.  I have relatives in Ketchikan.

 

Most of your second group are large enough and have tourist traffic for local resorts that they would survive just fine. specially  Cozumel, Barbados, Antigua (lets see wasn;t that the one that CCL was going to boycott because they awarded a contract for their port management to a competing group and not the consortium of US lines?). Curacao, Aruba.

 

The cruise ship focused business would suffer a bit, diamond international and the other similar companies that are all over the Caribbean and Alaska as well as Boss Frogs would certainly suffer.  But over all impact not that much.

[caribill]

2 hours ago, npcl said:

Skagway   --  The cruise oriented Jewelry stores (most of whats there these days) will certainly suffer.

 

Ketchikan -- More cruise ship related jewelry shops and few focused on locals. 

 

I have yet to figure out why a top priority of many who cruise to Alaska is to purchase diamond jewelry and European watches.

[Cruise Raider]

9 hours ago, Bgwest said:

The CDC announcement is dated 3/9/20 with the statement the "100 day clock will start" 100 days from the date of publication in the Federal Register.

 

Does anyone have any thoughts when said publication has/will occur? 

 

100 days from 3/9 is 7/18. 

 

 I’ve read from many people it starts from the March date but every single article I’ve read lists it as starting from the current date.  As a matter of fact, even though this appears to be an extension of the March order,  it appears that the filing of order into the Federal Register may be April 10th.  
Rumor has it (so many rumors on these boards ... so, sorry about that), is that there will be an announcement from the cruiselines that all sailings at least through June will be cancelled.  

[AF-1]

Yea,  I don't see cruise lines getting back into the cruising mode until late summer early fall.  I think most  lines should be back by Sep/Oct.  Let's see what happens

[subaru94]

14 hours ago, Hlitner said:

It is not just Dr. Argarwal who has reached that conclusion.  It has also been studied by some academics in the USA that have reached the same conclusion.   We also have some first hand experience since we live in a cruise port during the winter and see how little the passengers contribute to the local economy other then supporting one major local tour company who has a near monopoly on all cruise excursions.  

 

But your comment about places that would barely exist without cruise ship passengers got my interest.  DW and I have probably been to over 150 cruise destinations, over more then forty years, and we have yet to see any port or surrounding region that has benefited from the cruise influx.  Can you site some places that would "barely exist" without cruise ship passengers?

 

I will tell you that we are very aware of some major European ports that would be very happy to see the demise of cruise visits.  And we have watched cruise ship visits all but destroy the charm of several Caribbean islands.....as some others continue to do their utmost to keep ships out (St Barts and Anguilla are two good examples).

 

Hank

I have to disagree with you in regards to $$ value the cruise ship passengers bring into the ports,  tour companies, hotels, cafes, clothing all benefit, some countries wineries. Along with people who find a place they like go back there for a land holiday.   People are not allowed to take food off the ship either.

[bluesea321]

9 hours ago, Cruise Raider said:

I’ve read from many people it starts from the March date but every single article I’ve read lists it as starting from the current date.  As a matter of fact, even though this appears to be an extension of the March order,  it appears that the filing of order into the Federal Register may be April 10th.  
Rumor has it (so many rumors on these boards ... so, sorry about that), is that there will be an announcement from the cruiselines that all sailings at least through June will be cancelled.  

 

Hi Cruise Raider.  The new CDC Order is now scheduled for publication on the Federal Register on April 15 and the old Order is being removed.

https://www.federalregister.gov/agencies/centers-for-disease-control-and-prevention

 

[Cruise Raider]

4 minutes ago, bluesea321 said:

 

Hi Cruise Raider.  The new CDC Order is now scheduled for publication on the Federal Register on April 15 and the old Order is being removed.

https://www.federalregister.gov/agencies/centers-for-disease-control-and-prevention

 

 

Thanks!! I see that the one posted back on the 9th may have had some errors (identified through public inspection).  Looks like the 100 days starts up on the 15th unless one of their other requirements is met before that. 

 

[deadzone1003]

Sometimes, I wonder what is the supporting evidence for many of the early resumption of cruising.  Every cruise port will have to decide if the benefits of cruising is enough to offset the expected cost of fighting this disease.  Right now, there may be some cruise ports willing to open up to cruise ships because it really benefits them, but I having difficulty of coming up with even one example.  I could see Panama allowing canal transiting, but no ship may stop at any Panama cities.  We may have to wait until there is a vaccine for this disease before cruising will even begin to get back to normal.

[voljeep]

18 minutes ago, deadzone1003 said:

Sometimes, I wonder what is the supporting evidence for many of the early resumption of cruising.  Every cruise port will have to decide if the benefits of cruising is enough to offset the expected cost of fighting this disease.  Right now, there may be some cruise ports willing to open up to cruise ships because it really benefits them, but I having difficulty of coming up with even one example.  I could see Panama allowing canal transiting, but no ship may stop at any Panama cities.  We may have to wait until there is a vaccine for this disease before cruising will even begin to get back to normal.

I'm thinking that the cruise lines will have to put up some kind of bond that the cruise ports could go against to insure that the cruise lines themselves bare this cost, not the cruise ports

 

How much of a bond ??? - I'd guess it would state in the $50 million minimum - or is that too low  ?

[Bgwest]

2 hours ago, Cruise Raider said:

 

Thanks!! I see that the one posted back on the 9th may have had some errors (identified through public inspection).  Looks like the 100 days starts up on the 15th unless one of their other requirements is met before that. 

 

That would push 100 days out to July 24. 

[Cruise Raider]

24 minutes ago, Bgwest said:

That would push 100 days out to July 24. 

 

Yes ... if the state of emergency is not lifted or if the other conditions are not met first. The list of conditions that need to be met are quite onerous, including almost having an ICU ward onboard, with isolation rooms, ventilators, physicians trained in critical care medicine.  I expect they will be cancelling a couple of months at a time to get a handle on the compensation packages offered for booked passengers.  I'm starting to this my end of August cruise may not happen.  I was to be disembarking from the Royal today, have a booking for next month that will be canceled and now my August cruise is also very questionable.  I'm not complaining, mind you, I'm just thinking they are cancelling well into the end of summer, if not for the entire year.  Of interest, I am not able to check pricing on my Hawaii sailing for next year ... they may be looking to cancel these longer cruises, too ... sometime in the future. 

This virus just caught the whole world by storm.  Stay healthy everyone!!  

[Bgwest]

1 hour ago, Cruise Raider said:

 I was to be disembarking from the Royal today,

There's another thread discussing "number of cruises sailed" and "number of days sailed "still being credited into Captain Circle accounts for sailings cancelled by Princess. Wonder how they handled your sailing. If you would please, add how they handled this for you.