Bad for Business?

[travisschmittdds]

A new cruise line policy of not allowing passengers off the cruise ship unless participating in a cruise sponsored shore excursion seems very problematic.  You want to get off the boat and just wander around a bit, not allowed.  
 

I understand the rationale for safety. However, most people want some level of freedom during vacation while using good judgement.

 

I feel many potential cruise customers will not chose to cruise if this policy stands...a traditional land vacation will be more attractive.

 

I’m curious...What are your thoughts?

[sfaaa]

This was put in place a few months ago as a temporary safety measure before vaccine became available to general public. It will likely be modified once COVID is under control and ship passengers are vaccinated.

[CruiserBruce]

This has been discussed here several times. It is an attempt to maintain a shipwide bubble while ashore, and not have the pax bring Covid back on board from a port, nor take Covid ashore in a country. Some countries may not allow cruise ships to stop without this policy, until Covid is better under control. And CDC may be strongly encouraging this as well. It may be the cruise lines may not have a lot of choice in using or not using this policy.

 

Of course it is not desirable, and people may not like it. But we are in a different world for now.

[clo]

2 minutes ago, sfaaa said:

This was put in place a few months ago as a temporary safety measure before vaccine became available to general public. It will likely be modified once COVID is under control and ship passengers are vaccinated.

I can't remember where it was 'put in place.' Was it only European lines? While there's been a lot of chatter about what people will and won't tolerate, that seems the biggest potential deal breaker IMO.

[Flatbush Flyer]

2 minutes ago, travisschmittdds said:

A new cruise line policy of not allowing passengers off the cruise ship unless participating in a cruise sponsored shore excursion seems very problematic.  You want to get off the boat and just wander around a bit, not allowed.  
 

I understand the rationale for safety. However, most people want some level of freedom during vacation while using good judgement.

 

I feel many potential cruise customers will not chose to cruise if this policy stands...a traditional land vacation will be more attractive.

 

I’m curious...What are your thoughts?

As I've said before regarding the post-Covid future, the cruise lines that stand to lose the most business are those mass market lines with megaships whose clientele include a large percentage of folks for whom the cost of a cruise is a significant financial bite. The  Covid-induced loss-of-employment impact on discretionary spending for many of those folks will have them scrambling to put together a budget. And a "ship tours only" rule squashing DIY (with or without a tour) will become a "deal breaker" for a critical mass of folks.

 

On the other hand, passengers who can still muster a bank of discretionary dollars (including many retirees with fixed pensions) will still cruise - often preferring the smaller ships and premium/luxury lines.

 

We may think that those well-traveled folks will not cruise if they can't have the freedom to pick between/among private tours, ship tours and DIY. 

But, that's going to be a moot issue in many locations, since numerous tour providers will have "gone under" due to Covid repercussions and those who do survive will be vying for a contract with cruise lines and tour-orients travel agencies. Moreover, it may be local government that also restricts unguided DIYs for visitors.

 

So plenty of the well-traveled, financially able folks who love the cruise experience (perhaps even more than the touring) will still fill the small ships and keep them afloat until Covid Is beaten/controlled.

 

Bottom line: Whether it's the cruise lines or the tour operators or local shops at a port, only the strong and flexible will survive.

 

[clo]

3 minutes ago, Flatbush Flyer said:

So plenty of the well-traveled, financially able folks who love the cruise experience (perhaps even more than the touring) will still fill the small ships and keep them afloat until Covid Is beaten/controlled.

 

I think that well describes the ship vs. the ports people. We have a cruise booked for 9/22, Baltic/Scandinavian and I could live with escorted on that. But there are some where I couldn't/wouldn't.

[ontheweb]

1 hour ago, travisschmittdds said:

A new cruise line policy of not allowing passengers off the cruise ship unless participating in a cruise sponsored shore excursion seems very problematic.  You want to get off the boat and just wander around a bit, not allowed.  
 

I understand the rationale for safety. However, most people want some level of freedom during vacation while using good judgement.

 

I feel many potential cruise customers will not chose to cruise if this policy stands...a traditional land vacation will be more attractive.

 

I’m curious...What are your thoughts?

As their potential return customers, we have to let them know we will not tolerate this. My fear is even when, God and the vaccine willing, this pandemic is under control, the cruise lines will want to keep this policy in place. They will cite safety reasons, but the real reason at that point will be that cruise line excursions are a nice profit center for them. 

 

There are other travel alternatives, so we will have to vote with our dollars that this is a deal breaker.

 

To quote the Who from the classic rock opera Tommy, "We are not going to take it."

 

[ontheweb]

1 hour ago, clo said:

I think that well describes the ship vs. the ports people. We have a cruise booked for 9/22, Baltic/Scandinavian and I could live with escorted on that. But there are some where I couldn't/wouldn't.

Other than St. Petersburg in Russia you do not need any tours on a Baltic cruise. And in St. Petersburg, there are many fine licensed tour operators (who have hopefully survived this destroyed travel season). Do your research and you will find much to do in all the ports without the need for tours.

[clo]

1 minute ago, ontheweb said:

Other than St. Petersburg in Russia you do not need any tours on a Baltic cruise. And in St. Petersburg, there are many fine licensed tour operators (who have hopefully survived this destroyed travel season). Do your research and you will find much to do in all the ports without the need for tours.

Thanks for that. And I will. Later on. But I really appreciate your input.

[CruiserBruce]

7 minutes ago, ontheweb said:

As their potential return customers, we have to let them know we will not tolerate this. My fear is even when, God and the vaccine willing, this pandemic is under control, the cruise lines will want to keep this policy in place. They will cite safety reasons, but the real reason at that point will be that cruise line excursions are a nice profit center for them. 

 

There are other travel alternatives, so we will have to vote with our dollars that this is a deal breaker.

 

To quote the Who from the classic rock opera Tommy, "We are not going to take it."

 

Way over cooked. The cruise lines know the majority will not tolerate cruise line only excursions. Way too easy to vote with our feet.

[ontheweb]

1 minute ago, clo said:

Thanks for that. And I will. Later on. But I really appreciate your input.

We used Alla in St. Petersburg, but you will basically find all the operators, who must be licensed by the government, get good reviews. You never really get a comparison because anyone who does go back ends up using the same agency because they were happy with it. I actually set up our group out of our roll call.

 

We actually did one Princess tour, but only because the ship ported in Gdynia although the city to see was Gdansk. And it just made sense not to have to worry about getting there. (It was actually our 30th anniversary that day.)

 

The one cruise critic  review I ever wrote was about that cruise. You know my cc name and the ship was the Star Princess and it sailed in August 2007. If you cannot find it with that information, if you could somehow get your e-mail address to me, I would gladly send you the link. (our anniversary is August 13, so it is the sailing a few days  before that.)

 

 

[cruisemom42]

3 hours ago, CruiserBruce said:

Some countries may not allow cruise ships to stop without this policy, until Covid is better under control. And CDC may be strongly encouraging this as well. It may be the cruise lines may not have a lot of choice in using or not using this policy.

 

I have my doubts about these statements.

 

I'm certain that the CDC "framework" is mute on the point of whether ships should require passengers to take ship excursions only. I have read it carefully. So we cannot blame them.

 

I have not been able to find anything online regarding the requirements of the European countries visited during the brief season there this summer and fall -- no indication that this is a requirement of those specific countries. I believe they were more concerned with keeping passengers to those nationalities allowed -- e.g., some ships only sailed from Italy, with Italian passengers, and visited Italian ports, with one or two exceptions.

 

Also, I do not see how a country could "require" passengers from cruise ships to only travel on cruise-sponsored excursions assuming that they are otherwise open for tourism. What I mean is:  I can't see a country being willing to welcome US cruise passengers as long as they are on ship excursions only, IF their borders are otherwise closed to US. And if their borders ARE open to US tourists, how could they possibly mandate that cruise passengers (but not other tourists) have to stay within a "bubble"?

[clo]

1 hour ago, ontheweb said:

We used Alla in St. Petersburg, but you will basically find all the operators, who must be licensed by the government, get good reviews. You never really get a comparison because anyone who does go back ends up using the same agency because they were happy with it. I actually set up our group out of our roll call.

 

We actually did one Princess tour, but only because the ship ported in Gdynia although the city to see was Gdansk. And it just made sense not to have to worry about getting there. (It was actually our 30th anniversary that day.)

 

The one cruise critic  review I ever wrote was about that cruise. You know my cc name and the ship was the Star Princess and it sailed in August 2007. If you cannot find it with that information, if you could somehow get your e-mail address to me, I would gladly send you the link. (our anniversary is August 13, so it is the sailing a few days  before that.)

 

 

Rest assured, I'll be looking/reading this. Plenty. Thanks so much.

[donaldsc]

4 hours ago, travisschmittdds said:

A new cruise line policy of not allowing passengers off the cruise ship unless participating in a cruise sponsored shore excursion seems very problematic.  You want to get off the boat and just wander around a bit, not allowed.  
 

I understand the rationale for safety. However, most people want some level of freedom during vacation while using good judgement.

 

I feel many potential cruise customers will not chose to cruise if this policy stands...a traditional land vacation will be more attractive.

 

I’m curious...What are your thoughts?

 

This has been discussed many many times in many many posts on CC.  The threads are always the same.  Some people will accept them to get on a ship and some people won't.  I am in group 2.

 

DON

[Flatbush Flyer]

3 hours ago, ontheweb said:

As their potential return customers, we have to let them know we will not tolerate this. My fear is even when, God and the vaccine willing, this pandemic is under control, the cruise lines will want to keep this policy in place. They will cite safety reasons, but the real reason at that point will be that cruise line excursions are a nice profit center for them. 

 

There are other travel alternatives, so we will have to vote with our dollars that this is a deal breaker.

 

To quote the Who from the classic rock opera Tommy, "We are not going to take it."

 

"We?"

Tell that to the thousands of folks who have already booked multiple cruises in 2022 with zero knowledge of what policies/restrictions will be in place.

I'm betting the "we" who will "walk" away from cruising just because only ships' tours will be available will amount to a rounding error in the industry's bottom line. 

[sverigecruiser]

I don't think that any cruiselines will choose to require ship only excursions but maybe they will have no choice.

 

I defenitely don't want not to be able to leave the ship unless I'm on a ship excursion but if that is the only way to be able to cruise for a few years I will do it.    

[ontheweb]

6 hours ago, clo said:

Rest assured, I'll be looking/reading this. Plenty. Thanks so much.

Does that mean you found it? Since my e-mail address is in there, you can let me know if you have any questions. (Have clo in the header so I recognize that it is not spam.)

 

And remember, 2007 is quite a while ago. Some things I am sure have changed, for instance DW and I are definitely older than we were then and have gone on more cruises, though I still consider that one the best we ever did.

[sanger727]

7 hours ago, cruisemom42 said:

 

I have my doubts about these statements.

 

I'm certain that the CDC "framework" is mute on the point of whether ships should require passengers to take ship excursions only. I have read it carefully. So we cannot blame them.

 

I have not been able to find anything online regarding the requirements of the European countries visited during the brief season there this summer and fall -- no indication that this is a requirement of those specific countries. I believe they were more concerned with keeping passengers to those nationalities allowed -- e.g., some ships only sailed from Italy, with Italian passengers, and visited Italian ports, with one or two exceptions.

 

Also, I do not see how a country could "require" passengers from cruise ships to only travel on cruise-sponsored excursions assuming that they are otherwise open for tourism. What I mean is:  I can't see a country being willing to welcome US cruise passengers as long as they are on ship excursions only, IF their borders are otherwise closed to US. And if their borders ARE open to US tourists, how could they possibly mandate that cruise passengers (but not other tourists) have to stay within a "bubble"?

there are some countries that may not. But there are plenty of Caribbean islands right now that have strict visitor restrictions due to Covid. Some require a negative test shortly before arrival, a negative test upon arrival, and/or quarantining upon arrival. Unless the cruise ships test passengers every couple of days, cruise ship passengers won’t be able to meet these requirements.

 

so the cruise lines will be stuck with going to countries without them Or working out a waiver program for their customers. As in, normally we require a negative test within 72 hours of arrival but cruise ship passengers can stop without it as long as they get tested before the cruise and stay within the ‘cruise bubble’.

 

so yes, I believe these countries will have the ability to require things like this. Think of a visa. Some countries require visas to stop there but there are times when there is a waiver for cruise ships where their passengers don’t need them since they will not be staying there.

[K32682]

There will be a subset of cruisers who will be in high dudgeon about ANYTHING related to COVID that inconveniences their precious fun. Masks required? This shall not stand!  Social distancing? Not on your life! Cruise line excursions only? Never in a million years! Mandatory tests? No way!

 

These people need to accept that while the pandemic continues they will encounter restrictions on their behavior. If the restrictions are too onerous for you, will limit your fun, offend your dignity or your definition of "freedom" then stay the hell at home.

 

 

Edited December 30, 2020 by K32682

[navybankerteacher]

Restrictions on going ashore would be just one part.   If the COVID situation would require such group tours, it is also highly likely that mask wearing and social distancing (requiring higher fares to make operating at all feasible) on board would also be required.   It simply does not seem likely that any mass market ship would sail in that environment - except, perhaps,  to private island ports of call.

[Joebucks]

Sounds awfully similar to some of our everyday restrictions. Big business purchasing = good. Small business purchasing = bad.

[c-boy]

15 hours ago, sfaaa said:

This was put in place a few months ago as a temporary safety measure before vaccine became available to general public. It will likely be modified once COVID is under control and ship passengers are vaccinated.

I agree with this . I don't think the cruise industry will want anymore liabilities than they all ready have.

Edited December 30, 2020 by c-boy

[c-boy]

double post,  due to coffee jitters . 

Edited December 30, 2020 by c-boy

[jtwind]

Does anyone remember what was happening in Cuba before cruises got shut down there?  Some cruise lines were telling travelers that they had to have a shore excursion from the ship in order to get off the ship.  Folks were waiting until they got into the port and made a stink about being Mericans and that the cruise ship could not hold them 'hostage'.  The cruise ships caved.  I don't see that working with this situation, though.

[sfaaa]

If I recall correctly re: Cuba excursions, cruise lines were just following US government rules. It was not a cruise line's  own internal policy.