What Criteria Will You Use to Conclude It Is Safe To Cruise Again

[Got2Cruise]

I will make my decision based on science, not conspiracy theories. 

[Pcardad]

2 minutes ago, Got2Cruise said:

I will make my decision based on science, not conspiracy theories. 

 

Good idea. Me too.

[greykitty]

MSC sounds like they're trying to do everything possible to have a successful trial, including denial of boarding and really cracking down on pax going off on their own.   I'm sure every cruise exec in the world, as well as regulators, are watching carefully for lessons learned.  For me, with controlled T2 diabetes, I'm thinking any cruises are a long way off, even with pretty severe protocols in place - until/unless a highly effective vaccine or treatment options are available globally.

 

https://www.cruisecritic.com/news/5540/

 

[pappy1022]

27 minutes ago, Got2Cruise said:

I will make my decision based on science, not conspiracy theories. 

There is plenty of scientific disagreement about this virus so I guess you can find one to support any opinion that one may have.

[wcsdkqh]

10 minutes ago, pappy1022 said:

There is plenty of scientific disagreement about this virus so I guess you can find one to support any opinion that one may have.

 

Bingo.

[jjs217]

1 hour ago, Pcardad said:

 

Good idea. Me too.

 

1 hour ago, Pcardad said:

 

And that's your choice. I respect it.

 

But when cruising re-opens, anyone who goes does so with the understanding that it is probably not as safe as being at home.

 

Evacuation insurance is available...via private medical plane.

 

I will add that as much as no person WANTS to get sick....the cruise lines want that outcome even less than we do. I expect they will be extremely careful when re-opening....far more so than most of us are in our daily lives (unless you live as a shut-in).

 You get it!!!   Yay!!!!   I thought I was one of the few on this board who is ready to get out there as soon as possible, but I was looking for an alternative cruise if my Seabourn Antarctica Expedition Dec 2020 is cancelled.  I found a Regent cruise I would love to go on Mar 2021 Singapore to Dubai, but every category was wait-listed.  So, I guess there are a lot of us who want to get this show on the road.  Also, the cruise lines can't make assurances against every illness, or injury.  Stuff happens.

[mrlevin]

3 minutes ago, jjs217 said:

I would love to go on Mar 2021 Singapore to Dubai, but every category was wait-listed.  So, I guess there are a lot of us who want to get this show on the road.  Also, the cruise lines can't make assurances against every illness, or injury.  Stuff happens.

 

That cruise is part of the Mariner World Cruise so it is waitlisted in advance of cancellation.

 

Marc

[RJ2002]

2 hours ago, Pcardad said:

Evacuation insurance is available...via private medical plane.

 

Thanks for mentioning this, because we will certainly want to re-examine our travel insurance arrangements when we start traveling again.  Several of the travel insurance broker websites have specific pages and Q&A's regarding Covid-19 - all very helpful.

 

I also took a look at MedJet, as we've had their coverage in the past for some of our more remote travel locations, like Africa.  Interestingly, MedJet has a specific mention that they will not transport someone with an active Covid-19 infection per this blog entry.  So, the usual advice we often read on CC (to consult with knowledgeable sources when obtaining travel insurance) is particularly relevant now.

 

 

[SusieQft]

2 hours ago, Pcardad said:

Evacuation insurance is available...via private medical plane.

Insurance policies will vary, but here are some key phrases from the Medjet T&Cs:

 

"A member with tuberculosis or other chronic airborne pathogens will not be transported."

and

"Due to the high risk of sending registered aircraft and personnel into countries where the United States Department of State has issued a travel advisory of level 3 or 4, membership services are subject to exclusion or limitation in these areas."

 

Insurance can be useful sometimes, but in my experience it is often carefully designed to not cover what actually happens.  And it is the insurance company, not the insured, who gets to interpret ambiguities.  Insurance is not a panacea.

[cerise638]

46 minutes ago, jjs217 said:

 

 You get it!!!   Yay!!!!   I thought I was one of the few on this board who is ready to get out there as soon as possible, but I was looking for an alternative cruise if my Seabourn Antarctica Expedition Dec 2020 is cancelled.  I found a Regent cruise I would love to go on Mar 2021 Singapore to Dubai, but every category was wait-listed.  So, I guess there are a lot of us who want to get this show on the road.  Also, the cruise lines can't make assurances against every illness, or injury.  Stuff happens.

Yes "stuff happens". What's your degree of acceptance if that causes you to be locked down in your suite because there is an outbreak on board.  No cocktails, no fine dining just a limited room service menu.  Could be like that for weeks until you find a port which will allow you to disembark

 

Then when you do no government rescue just a cattle class charter flight home with others who may or may not be infected

 

Just one scenario that could happen. For me it's nothing to do with being risk averse. It's just that my scenario has a high likelihood at the moment.  Testing can only show you haven't got the virus today not tomorrow so someone will bring it on board.

 

 

[pappy1022]

For those who want to cruise as soon as their ship sails, I say go for it. You are right in that anyone who cruises before COVID-19 is under reasonable control and/or an effective vaccine is available, assumes the risk associated with cruising. So if they get sick or die then that is the risk they are willing to take. If the worst outcome happens, hopefully they will die with a drink in their hands and a smile on their face. The bottom line is that people will be aware of the risk and willing to take it. I believe that the cruise lines will have good intentions and good protocols and practices in place to maximize a safe environment. I also believe, based on what I’m seeing every day on the news and in person, that some people will not follow the rules and will put others at increased risk. I don’t begrudge anyone from wanting to cruise ASAP. It is a wonderful way to relax, have fun and see the world. Personally, I will wait and see how things shake out and jump back in when I think the risk is reduced and worth it to me. I do appreciate the folks who want to be first in line to cruise because we need some people to test out the safety and quality of cruising because it will certainly be different then what we were accustomed to pre COVID.

[Pcardad]

Respectfully, your scenario is not at all likely at the moment as there is no cruising to speak of. We are discussing going/not going once the industry resumes sailing.

 

Perhaps you feel that it will resume far sooner than I expect it to. I do not think it will resume until there is a viable vaccine and I think you will be REQUIRED to have it and prove it at least 60 days before sailing. Just my opinion.

 

I also think Regent is going to have to re-market itself to a different target market but that's a different discussion.

[rallydave]

8 minutes ago, SusieQft said:

Insurance can be useful sometimes, but in my experience it is often carefully designed to not cover what actually happens.  And it is the insurance company, not the insured, who gets to interpret ambiguities.  Insurance is not a panacea.

Not true Szie,

 

By law at least in the US any ambiguity in a contract is construed against the writer.   So no interpretation, if it is ambiguous the writer loses.

[SusieQft]

2 minutes ago, rallydave said:

By law at least in the US any ambiguity in a contract is construed against the writer.   So no interpretation, if it is ambiguous the writer loses.

Would this be after I hire a lawyer and file suit?  It would seem that up until that point, he who has the money makes the rules.  And maybe what I think is ambiguous is in fact just intentionally (or even unintentionally) confusing to someone who is not well versed in insurance jargon and legalese.

[Wendy The Wanderer]

18 minutes ago, Pcardad said:

I do not think it will resume until there is a viable vaccine and I think you will be REQUIRED to have it and prove it at least 60 days before sailing. Just my opinion.

 

Even with the rush to test vaccines going on in the U.S. and the U.K. (to name two), waiting to start the cruise lines up until they can require a vaccination certificate (and 60 days prior), seems like a losing proposition.  That could be mid-2021.  Just my opinion.

Edited August 19, 2020 by Wendy The Wanderer

[cerise638]

8 minutes ago, Pcardad said:

Respectfully, your scenario is not at all likely at the moment as there is no cruising to speak of. We are discussing going/not going once the industry resumes sailing.

 

Perhaps you feel that it will resume far sooner than I expect it to. I do not think it will resume until there is a viable vaccine and I think you will be REQUIRED to have it and prove it at least 60 days before sailing. Just my opinion.

 

I also think Regent is going to have to re-market itself to a different target market but that's a different discussion.

Sorry I did not notice that people were assessing the risk based on a vaccine being available and only allowing boarding with a certificate and of course that would reduce the likelihood of the virus being on board

 

It did appear to me that others are willing to cruise without the vaccine which is the only option available at this time

Edited August 19, 2020 by cerise638
Missing word

[Wendy The Wanderer]

6 minutes ago, Pcardad said:

I also think Regent is going to have to re-market itself to a different target market but that's a different discussion.

 

Well perhaps we should have the discussion?  Regent's market are well-heeled middle-aged and older people, predominantly seniors, predominantly Americans.  If they have to eliminate many of their senior customers, that's going to be a huge, and perhaps impossible, change of business plan.

[Pcardad]

Its my opinion as well. I think we are a good year out at this point.

[Snore42]

3 minutes ago, Pcardad said:

Perhaps you feel that it will resume far sooner than I expect it to. I do not think it will resume until there is a viable vaccine and I think you will be REQUIRED to have it and prove it at least 60 days before sailing. Just my opinion.

 

I'm not a doctor or in the medical field, but I've read in several places that for a vaccine to be approved it only needs to be 50% or more effective.   If this is truly the case and with so many different versions coming to market, how do you envision a cruise line implementing this?   Would a line partner with one specific vaccine maker?   

 

 

[Pcardad]

Just now, Wendy The Wanderer said:

 

Well perhaps we should have the discussion?  Regent's market are well-heeled middle-aged and older people, predominantly seniors, predominantly Americans.  If they have to eliminate many of their senior customers, that's going to be a huge, and perhaps impossible, change of business plan.

 

Plenty of people can afford Regent...they just market themselves to a particular subset. Changing a few things on board could attract a younger client...it wouldn't have to be an expensive change.

[Pcardad]

1 minute ago, Snore42 said:

 

I'm not a doctor or in the medical field, but I've read in several places that for a vaccine to be approved it only needs to be 50% or more effective.   If this is truly the case and with so many different versions coming to market, how do you envision a cruise line implementing this?   Would a line partner with one specific vaccine maker?   

 

 

 

I just think, my opinion, that the cruise lines will require proof of vaccine 60 days prior to sailing. It will be the client's responsibility to prove proof from their doctor.

[Snore42]

Just now, Pcardad said:

 

Plenty of people can afford Regent...they just market themselves to a particular subset. Changing a few things on board could attract a younger client...it wouldn't have to be an expensive change.

 

Speaking to an executive at another luxury line recently, this big shift in demographic is very much on their radar.    Especially for getting the boats back out to sail ASAP.     It's unfortunate for all the loyal customers, but as we all know, the cruise companies are in business to make money first and foremost.  

[Pcardad]

4 minutes ago, cerise638 said:

Sorry I did not notice that people were assessing the risk based on a vaccine being available and only allowing boarding with a certificate and of course that would reduce the likelihood of the virus being on board

 

It did appear to me that others are willing to cruise without the vaccine which is the only thing available at the moment

 

Not sure - just thought we were talking about sailing when it became possible. My personal belief is a year and proof of vaccine between today and the resumption of sailing. Having said that, I would go when it resumes.

[Pcardad]

1 minute ago, Snore42 said:

 

Speaking to an executive at another luxury line recently, this big shift in demographic is very much on their radar.    Especially for getting the boats back out to sail ASAP.     It's unfortunate for all the loyal customers, but as we all know, the cruise companies are in business to make money first and foremost.  

 

Crank music by the pool, change the entertainment, put in a dance club - good to go.

[rallydave]

5 minutes ago, SusieQft said:

Would this be after I hire a lawyer and file suit?  It would seem that up until that point, he who has the money makes the rules.  And maybe what I think is ambiguous is in fact just intentionally (or even unintentionally) confusing to someone who is not well versed in insurance jargon and legalese.

Not saying that, you can always represent yourself but, if the words are deemed ambiguous by some type of authority they are construed against the writer.  Really depends on how ambiguous  Contracts are supposed to be written clearly and without wiggle room.  Perhaps a lawyer or perhaps the writer of the ambiguous words will simply agree.  YMMV.