Once CDC gives approval to sail, lines will need 90 days to start

[KirkNC]

At least that’s what NCL says.  

 

https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/02/26/norwegian-cruise-line-90-day-window-still-needed-a/?source=eptyholnk0000202&utm_source=yahoo-host&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=article&yptr=yahoo

 

its unclear to me if the test cruises would have to take place before the 90 day clock starts or if that’s included in the 90 days.

Edited February 26, 2021 by KirkNC

[Hlitner]

You could go back and read some of my older posts about the the current CDC Guidelines being carefully crafted to make the restart of cruising (involving US Ports) very onerous.  The 90 day issue (which is just an estimate) is just part of the process.  At this point no cruise line has even gotten to the so-called "test cruise" planning level as they are still waiting for more guidance from the CDC.  I do believe a cruise line could certainly reduce the time required to restart (assuming the CDC cooperates) but it is going to be very expensive.  Consider the logistics of putting together a crew from around the world and just getting them to a single location (to join a vessel).  The normal method of flying each crew member to the embarkation port is not possible in today's world....because of so many travel restrictions and airline route cut-backs.  Sending a few cruise ships around the world to pick up crew members is possible, but logistically challenging and would likely take months.    But all this is very expensive (for the cruise lines) at a time when they have little incoming revenue.  And they would need to make this investment without any guarantee that the CDC would ultimately allow them to operate cruises involving US ports.

 

If the CDC does not modify their Guidelines it is going to be a very long and slow process to get cruises restarted in North America.  The CDC Guidelines require that each individual ship move through the various steps to get approval although written agreements with various ports could certainly apply to an entire fleet.    But here we are over 3 months into the Guidelines and we do not seem to be any closer to the resumption of operations.  If anything, we may be further away from restarts because many governments have increased their COVID restrictions and airlines keep cutting-back on flights.

 

Hank

[KirkNC]

You have consistently said that CDC was doing everything they can to thwart cruising and you appear to be right.  I am still amazed how laid back the industry appears to be with it.

[groundloop]

1 hour ago, KirkNC said:

You have consistently said that CDC was doing everything they can to thwart cruising and you appear to be right.  I am still amazed how laid back the industry appears to be with it.

CDC has their hands full trying to help get this pandemic under control, they're not going to go out of their way to 'thwart' the cruise industry.  All they care about is the safest way for the world to get back to a state of normalcy.  It just happens that cruise ships are a special challenge for a number of reasons, especially because of the number of people crammed into a relatively small space.

[Horizon chaser 1957]

So much for the furious debate over the loss of the Alaska cruise season being Canada’s fault or the PVSA’s fault. The CDC makes that whole topic completely pointless, but no less popular.

[nocl]

4 hours ago, Hlitner said:

You could go back and read some of my older posts about the the current CDC Guidelines being carefully crafted to make the restart of cruising (involving US Ports) very onerous.  The 90 day issue (which is just an estimate) is just part of the process.  At this point no cruise line has even gotten to the so-called "test cruise" planning level as they are still waiting for more guidance from the CDC.  I do believe a cruise line could certainly reduce the time required to restart (assuming the CDC cooperates) but it is going to be very expensive.  Consider the logistics of putting together a crew from around the world and just getting them to a single location (to join a vessel).  The normal method of flying each crew member to the embarkation port is not possible in today's world....because of so many travel restrictions and airline route cut-backs.  Sending a few cruise ships around the world to pick up crew members is possible, but logistically challenging and would likely take months.    But all this is very expensive (for the cruise lines) at a time when they have little incoming revenue.  And they would need to make this investment without any guarantee that the CDC would ultimately allow them to operate cruises involving US ports.

 

If the CDC does not modify their Guidelines it is going to be a very long and slow process to get cruises restarted in North America.  The CDC Guidelines require that each individual ship move through the various steps to get approval although written agreements with various ports could certainly apply to an entire fleet.    But here we are over 3 months into the Guidelines and we do not seem to be any closer to the resumption of operations.  If anything, we may be further away from restarts because many governments have increased their COVID restrictions and airlines keep cutting-back on flights.

 

Hank

Notice that it is not just CDC.  Technically Royal could do cruises out of Barbados today.  But they announced that they are not planning to start those until November (which just happens to be when the current CDC guidance expires) even though they are outside of CDC restrictions.

 

I think that there is far more than the CDC impacting cruise line decisions.

[nocl]

1 hour ago, groundloop said:

CDC has their hands full trying to help get this pandemic under control, they're not going to go out of their way to 'thwart' the cruise industry.  All they care about is the safest way for the world to get back to a state of normalcy.  It just happens that cruise ships are a special challenge for a number of reasons, especially because of the number of people crammed into a relatively small space.

As well as the fact the cruise ships contain all of the elements that are impacted or restricted on land as well  Indoor dining - Yes, Lounges - Yes, Theaters and live performances - Yes.

[KirkNC]

2 hours ago, groundloop said:

CDC has their hands full trying to help get this pandemic under control, they're not going to go out of their way to 'thwart' the cruise industry.  All they care about is the safest way for the world to get back to a state of normalcy.  It just happens that cruise ships are a special challenge for a number of reasons, especially because of the number of people crammed into a relatively small space.

I agree that cruise ships are probably the worst place to try and prevent the spread of an infectious disease, maybe on the level of nursing homes.  I don’t buy the hypothesis that CDC is incapable of multitasking.  

 

 

 

 

[Hlitner]

1 hour ago, nocl said:

Notice that it is not just CDC.  Technically Royal could do cruises out of Barbados today.  But they announced that they are not planning to start those until November (which just happens to be when the current CDC guidance expires) even though they are outside of CDC restrictions.

 

I think that there is far more than the CDC impacting cruise line decisions.

What ports will they visit?    And do you think Barbados will agree to handle any COVID outbreaks that would happen on a ship?

[nocl]

19 minutes ago, Hlitner said:

What ports will they visit?    And do you think Barbados will agree to handle any COVID outbreaks that would happen on a ship?

Barbados was where Royal owned lines disembarked their crew members to fly home, when they would not sign the documents that the CDC required for them to transit through the US.

 

If it just the CDC keeping the cruise lines from sailing then it would not matter, after all there would not be a requirement for the handling of patients.

 

If it was just the CDC then if there were any ports to go to would not matter.

 

Since they are not sailing it must be a lot more keeping them from sailing than just the CDC.  Which is exactly my point.

[KirkNC]

14 minutes ago, nocl said:

Barbados was where Royal owned lines disembarked their crew members to fly home, when they would not sign the documents that the CDC required for them to transit through the US.

 

If it just the CDC keeping the cruise lines from sailing then it would not matter, after all there would not be a requirement for the handling of patients.

 

If it was just the CDC then if there were any ports to go to would not matter.

 

Since they are not sailing it must be a lot more keeping them from sailing than just the CDC.  Which is exactly my point.

So what is the mystery reason keeping them from sailing?

[nocl]

6 minutes ago, KirkNC said:

So what is the mystery reason keeping them from sailing?

No mystery.

 

The incidence rate of COVID is a clear one.  The lack of ports to sail to is another.  The lack of ability to guarantee a port will accept infected passengers. So on and so on.

 

Many are assuming that if it wasn't for the CDC restrictions that the ships would sail.  The CDC (and other similar national organizations in various countries) restrictions merely represent reality and the cruise lines do realize that to sail they do have to answer many of the questions CDC has raised so that they can sail safely and be able to deal with the issues.  Even if they are in an area that is not covered by the CDC.

 

Bottom line the cruise lines need to be able to come to the US in case of an outbreak because they cannot count on any other port in the Caribbean or most other places.  That is why the only place you see cruises is where you have that guaranteed place of return (Singapore, a couple of European countries, etc).  Remove that and no sailing.

[Tampa Girl]

16 hours ago, nocl said:

No mystery.

 

The incidence rate of COVID is a clear one.  The lack of ports to sail to is another.  The lack of ability to guarantee a port will accept infected passengers. So on and so on.

 

Many are assuming that if it wasn't for the CDC restrictions that the ships would sail.  The CDC (and other similar national organizations in various countries) restrictions merely represent reality and the cruise lines do realize that to sail they do have to answer many of the questions CDC has raised so that they can sail safely and be able to deal with the issues.  Even if they are in an area that is not covered by the CDC.

 

Bottom line the cruise lines need to be able to come to the US in case of an outbreak because they cannot count on any other port in the Caribbean or most other places.  That is why the only place you see cruises is where you have that guaranteed place of return (Singapore, a couple of European countries, etc).  Remove that and no sailing.

Good points.  If there are only a handful of countries, or no countries, that a cruise line can be assured that it can get its passengers into or out of, it is not going to sail, regardless of what the CDC says.

[Himself]

I despise what the BureauCrats at CDC are diong to the cruise industry.  They are not doing this to the Hotel industryao the travel industry.  This is shameful. This goes well beyond safety.  This is dictatorial.

[chengkp75]

3 hours ago, Himself said:

I despise what the BureauCrats at CDC are diong to the cruise industry.  They are not doing this to the Hotel industryao the travel industry.  This is shameful. This goes well beyond safety.  This is dictatorial.

Father, could it possibly be that the CDC does not have jurisdiction over the hotel industry?  That there are only a handful of cases of community transmission on airlines?  Why don't you feel the same about the restaurant and bar industries in the US?  And, as others have noted, if it were merely the CDC that was in the way of cruising, why haven't they done it elsewhere?  And, yet, with the agency directed by two different administrations, with polar opposite philosophies, the result is the same?  Maybe because the scientists are right?

Edited February 27, 2021 by chengkp75

[iceman93]

One has only to look at the name of the agency--the Center for DISEASE CONTROL--to know why they are so conservative regarding lockdowns, reopening, etc.  Much like Dr. Fauci himself, their whole reason for existing is to provide the perspective on how best to control infectious diseases.  It's like if we had a government department called the "Center to Prevent Highway Deaths".  Of course they would advocate for onerous safety features on cars, ridiculously lowered speed limits, etc.

 

What we have instead is a Department of Transportation that tries to balance those safety desires with the need to actually transport people and goods.  In the COVID-19 situation, there has been no balance--it's been all control, with reasoned voices calling for balance shamed and told how selfish they are.

[kazu]

13 minutes ago, iceman93 said:

In the COVID-19 situation, there has been no balance--it's been all control, with reasoned voices calling for balance shamed and told how selfish they are.

 

Science prevails.  A pandemic is not the same as transportation - sorry.

None of us like it but if we mask up, physically distance, wash hands, etc that does a lot to stop the spread.  The sooner we stop the spread, the sooner we can move on and avoid more variants.

 

Interestingly enough, there were several primary physicians on the news today who said so far, they have not seen one case of the influenza. Interesting, no? 😉 

[NMTraveller]

Ninety days to start?

 

Figure in the mix that all of the ships will not start sailing at once and they will start under reduced capacity.  More people are currently booked than will likely be allowed to sail.

[DeeDee Groff]

On 2/26/2021 at 12:03 PM, KirkNC said:

You have consistently said that CDC was doing everything they can to thwart cruising and you appear to be right.  I am still amazed how laid back the industry appears to be with it.

 

The key word in your post, for me, is in the second sentence, it's "appears....."

 

I have great respect for your cogent posts, but after reading this one, I'm wondering about the specter of appearance vs. reality.

 

Stay safe!

[nocl]

Finally the head of a cruise line has stated what will it will take for cruise lines to start sailing.

 

"I think the prevalence of the disease in our own country and around the world will be the greatest indicator of when we can resume cruising" Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings president and CEO Frank Del Rio told Wall Street analysts.

 

It all about the case counts

[iancal]

1 hour ago, nocl said:

Finally the head of a cruise line has stated what will it will take for cruise lines to start sailing.

 

"I think the prevalence of the disease in our own country and around the world will be the greatest indicator of when we can resume cruising" Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings president and CEO Frank Del Rio told Wall Street analysts.

 

It all about the case counts

It has always been about the numbers around the world.   Many people were, and still are looking at cruise start up through rose colored glasses that seem to block out the reality of the numbers.   

[KirkNC]

Arnold Donald said, early on in the pandemic, that cruising was a social activity and until there were no restrictions on social activities, cruising won’t work.