POLL (US Cruisers): Would you prefer to sail an international cruise that departs from the US vs. taking an int'l flight?

[Hlitner]

We just completed a two week crossing on the Seabourn Ovation and are now cruising in the Canaries.  Eventually we will debark in Monte Carlo where we plan on spending a few weeks traveling within Europe.  We did not answer the poll because we simply view crossings (Atlantic or Pacific) as an option.  Having done more than 2 dozen crossings we enjoy the option but are also fine with flying.

 

A big issue with crossings is time.  For those of us retired it is a good option while those working may not be able to spare the time.  Keep in mind that crossings involve many sea days and are best for folks happy at sea.  Our cruise had 9 sea days in a row from Miami to Funchal.  For us it is heaven while some others get bored.

 

Hank

[cruizergal70]

47 minutes ago, Hlitner said:

A big issue with crossings is time.  For those of us retired it is a good option while those working may not be able to spare the time.  Keep in mind that crossings involve many sea days and are best for folks happy at sea.  Our cruise had 9 sea days in a row from Miami to Funchal.  For us it is heaven while some others get bored.

 

Hank

Even retirees may not want so many sea days. It's just a waste of time. They would have to market the cruise to people who just enjoy being on a ship regardless of retirement status. 

 

I don't enjoy being on a ship like that.

[navybankerteacher]

13 hours ago, Aquahound said:

I guess I don't really understand this thread.  Most cruises out of US ports are international itineraries.  

 

I also don't understand some of the replies.  Won't sail out of Florida for "obvious reasons"?  Not sure what that means, but ok.    

Are you unaware of the incredible number of closed loop cruises out of US ports?  And a stop in Nassau, for example, does not make a sailing out of Miami, Port Canaveral, Fort Lauderdale or Tampa an "international itinerary by any stretch of the imagination).

[navybankerteacher]

9 minutes ago, cruizergal70 said:

Even retirees may not want so many sea days. It's just a waste of time. They would have to market the cruise to people who just enjoy being on a ship regardless of retirement status. 

 

...

I think there are a lot of people who enjoy being on a ship at sea -- granted:  being retired gives you the time to spend a week crossing the Atlantic, but the fares for QM2 T/A's indicate that there is ample demand from people who think that a week at sea is hardly wasted -- even though it is likely to cost twice (or more) what a week on a Carnival or NCL ship on a closed  loop out of a Florida port would cost.

Edited April 12, 2022 by navybankerteacher

[Aquahound]

2 hours ago, navybankerteacher said:

Are you unaware of the incredible number of closed loop cruises out of US ports?  And a stop in Nassau, for example, does not make a sailing out of Miami, Port Canaveral, Fort Lauderdale or Tampa an "international itinerary by any stretch of the imagination).

It doesn’t?  Ok. I guess I missed the news that the Bahamas is now part of the US. 🙄

[sparks1093]

2 hours ago, navybankerteacher said:

Are you unaware of the incredible number of closed loop cruises out of US ports?  And a stop in Nassau, for example, does not make a sailing out of Miami, Port Canaveral, Fort Lauderdale or Tampa an "international itinerary by any stretch of the imagination).

Just as travel to Canada and Mexico meets the definition of "international travel" so too does travel to the Bahamas. It isn't exotic and it isn't far, but it still meets the definition. 

[sparks1093]

2 hours ago, cruizergal70 said:

Even retirees may not want so many sea days. It's just a waste of time. They would have to market the cruise to people who just enjoy being on a ship regardless of retirement status. 

 

I don't enjoy being on a ship like that.

There are plenty of itineraries out there for people that don't like sea days. Since I cruise just as much for sea days as I do port days I would relish being at sea for that long and wouldn't consider it a waste of time at all.

[chengkp75]

2 hours ago, navybankerteacher said:

Are you unaware of the incredible number of closed loop cruises out of US ports?  And a stop in Nassau, for example, does not make a sailing out of Miami, Port Canaveral, Fort Lauderdale or Tampa an "international itinerary by any stretch of the imagination).

I believe what the OP was struggling for was the term "a cruise that is not home ported in the US", as opposed to "international" cruise.  I.e., if a cruise line were to take a cruise that does not traditionally home port in the US, like an Antarctic or Australian cruise, and extend it to include the transit from the US, would you be more likely to book that cruise, rather than flying.  As stated by others, virtually all cruises from the US are "international", just as most cruises everywhere are, since the EU, China, Japan, Russia, Brazil, and a host of other countries require foreign flag cruise ships to sail an "international" voyage.

18 minutes ago, Aquahound said:

It doesn’t?  Ok. I guess I missed the news that the Bahamas is now part of the US. 🙄

Yeah, and he chimes in on PVSA threads to tell people the cruise has to call at a "foreign" port.

[navybankerteacher]

4 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

I believe what the OP was struggling for was the term "a cruise that is not home ported in the US", as opposed to "international" cruise.  I.e., if a cruise line were to take a cruise that does not traditionally home port in the US, like an Antarctic or Australian cruise, and extend it to include the transit from the US, would you be more likely to book that cruise, rather than flying.  As stated by others, virtually all cruises from the US are "international", just as most cruises everywhere are, since the EU, China, Japan, Russia, Brazil, and a host of other countries require foreign flag cruise ships to sail an "international" voyage.

Yeah, and he chimes in on PVSA threads to tell people the cruise has to call at a "foreign" port.

OP was clearly trying to talk about a real “international itinerary” - and not some closed loop out of a US port because a key part of his post used the alternative of “flying to an international departure port” .

[AmazedByCruising]

I'm Dutch so I didn't answer the poll, but I certainly don't like flying. If that means 9 sea days extra, I wouldn't care at all 🙂 I'm not retired but I've been working from home for more than 2 years now, certainly I could work from a ship. 

[chengkp75]

58 minutes ago, navybankerteacher said:

OP was clearly trying to talk about a real “international itinerary” - and not some closed loop out of a US port because a key part of his post used the alternative of “flying to an international departure port” .

See, you continue the confusion.  What is an "international departure port"?  Isn't NYC an "international departure port"?  Now, if he said a "foreign" departure port, and spoke of a cruise departing from a "foreign" departure port, rather than an "international itinerary", a whole lot of misunderstanding would have been avoided.

[kochleffel]

24 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Now, if he said a "foreign" departure port, and spoke of a cruise departing from a "foreign" departure port, rather than an "international itinerary", a whole lot of misunderstanding would have been avoided.

But a cruise from a foreign departure port, and there are plenty of them, wouldn't be departing from the US!

 

The practical issue involved is that a cruise from a US port to distant places is going to be a long cruise. I'm puzzled by the posts that don't seem to consider Canada, Bermuda, the Bahamas, Mexico, or the nearer Caribbean island to be foreign. For legal purposes, the ABC islands and all of South America are "distant foreign ports," but far enough from the Florida ports as to make a cruise to them too long for many travelers. NCL has its cruises to the ABC islands embark from San Juan instead of the mainland. Holland America offers long itineraries that originate from US ports, but that's a specialized market.

 

I'm beginning to think that the original post might have had a trolling intent.

[navybankerteacher]

1 hour ago, chengkp75 said:

See, you continue the confusion.  What is an "international departure port"?  Isn't NYC an "international departure port"?  Now, if he said a "foreign" departure port, and spoke of a cruise departing from a "foreign" departure port, rather than an "international itinerary", a whole lot of misunderstanding would have been avoided.

The confusion and misunderstanding arises from not paying attention to the context and not thinking about the OP's question.

 

We are talking about "international itineraries" here, not international departure ports. While NYC is the departure port and a ship which stops in Nassau after leaving New York and before returning to New York will have called at an "international" port, only a pettifogger would insist, in the context of a discussion which included the alternative of an international flight to a foreign port, that a seven day closed loop itinerary to a nearby island is really an "international itinerary".  If you wind up back where you started, how "international" was the itinerary really?

Edited April 12, 2022 by navybankerteacher

[chengkp75]

15 minutes ago, navybankerteacher said:

We are talking about "international itineraries" here, not international departure ports. While NYC is the departure port and a ship which stops in Nassau after leaving New York and before returning to New York will have called at an "international" port, only a pettifogger would insist, in the context of a discussion which included the alternative of an international flight to a foreign port, that a seven day closed loop itinerary to a nearby island is really an "international itinerary".  If you wind up back where you started, how "international" was the itinerary really?

Oh, so no one way cruises leave from NYC?  News to Cunard.  And, if I take a Med cruise that "winds up back where you started" (say in Barcelona), is this not an "international" cruise?  Are "international" itineraries only one way?  While this has been fun, I'll leave this convoluted and rather moot thread to you folks who apparently have different definitions of things than others do.

[navybankerteacher]

4 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Oh, so no one way cruises leave from NYC?  News to Cunard.  And, if I take a Med cruise that "winds up back where you started" (say in Barcelona), is this not an "international" cruise?  Are "international" itineraries only one way?  While this has been fun, I'll leave this convoluted and rather moot thread to you folks who apparently have different definitions of things than others do.

Of course one way cruises leave from NYC— those were the sort of itineraries OP was talking about:   travelling internationally by ship as opposed to flying internationally to board a ship.   It helps to try to understand the question being asked before answering it too narrowly.

[slidergirl]

8 hours ago, restasured said:

No doubt, but for a 1 way ticket to an international port costs twice what the cruise does.  I would rather be on the ship for 2 weeks than be in the air for 10 hours, for the same price.

Well, your cruise ports of Frisco and Cali area interesting.  Didn't know Colorado was on the oceanfront and when did we colonize Colombia???   (sorry, I had to.  Neither is acceptable for a Californian,  especially if from San Francisco 😉)

[cruizergal70]

3 hours ago, AmazedByCruising said:

I'm Dutch so I didn't answer the poll, but I certainly don't like flying. If that means 9 sea days extra, I wouldn't care at all 🙂 I'm not retired but I've been working from home for more than 2 years now, certainly I could work from a ship. 

You're rolling the dice with ship internet being 100%  stable for 8 hours a day for mant consecutive days. 😄

[Flatbush Flyer]

7 hours ago, navybankerteacher said:

Are you unaware of the incredible number of closed loop cruises out of US ports?  And a stop in Nassau, for example, does not make a sailing out of Miami, Port Canaveral, Fort Lauderdale or Tampa an "international itinerary by any stretch of the imagination).

Agreed- the initial post was obviously referring to what would be an intercontinental itinerary for the person in question.

[cruisemom42]

After reading all of the comments, I would tend to agree that the survey question was not as clear as the OP probably intended. 

 

I took it to be a question regarding whether we would be interested in doing a far-flung itinerary but one that both began and ended in a US port to avoid the long-haul international flights. Something similar to the Voyage of the Vikings offered by Holland America that (I think) sails R/T from Boston up along Canada and Newfoundland to Greenland, Iceland and ending in Scandinavia. Then it returns. You can opt to do only half of the cruise (e.g., one-way) or the whole enchilada.

 

Fred. Olsen cruises, based in the UK does something similar. Almost all of their itineraries are R/T from various points in the UK. Apparently they have a loyal passenger base, many of whom apparently prefer not to fly. You might think they only cruise in a reasonable vicinity to the UK but in fact they offer some interesting options such as a Black Sea itinerary with many sea days (and a few judicious stops) along the way there and back again.

 

 

[Aquahound]

The poll is from Cruise Critic.  They should probably amend it and ask it a little clearer.  Some seem to know exactly what it meant, but I struggle to understand how a cruise to Canada, Mexico, Bermuda, Bahamas, Caribbean, Central America and/or South America isn't an international itinerary.  I certainly think they are and that's what I think the question was. 

[cruisemom42]

1 hour ago, Aquahound said:

The poll is from Cruise Critic.  They should probably amend it and ask it a little clearer.  Some seem to know exactly what it meant, but I struggle to understand how a cruise to Canada, Mexico, Bermuda, Bahamas, Caribbean, Central America and/or South America isn't an international itinerary.  I certainly think they are and that's what I think the question was. 

 

I'm not sure if your interpretation is right or not, but if that was the intent, it seems to me that you could omit the word "international" to describe the cruise as there's no reason to include it:

 

"If you’re a US-based cruiser, would you prefer to book an international cruise that sails from a domestic port vs. flying to an international departure port?"

 

"If you’re a US-based cruiser, would you prefer to book a cruise that sails from a domestic port vs. flying to an international departure port?"

 

The fact that the author did include it is what led me to believe s/he had something different in mind. Otherwise it's redundant. Perhaps they will come back and clarify.

 

  

[Flatbush Flyer]

2 minutes ago, cruisemom42 said:

 

I'm not sure if your interpretation is right or not, but if that was the intent, it seems to me that you could omit the word "international" to describe the cruise as there's no reason to include it:

 

"If you’re a US-based cruiser, would you prefer to book an international cruise that sails from a domestic port vs. flying to an international departure port?"

 

"If you’re a US-based cruiser, would you prefer to book a cruise that sails from a domestic port vs. flying to an international departure port?"

 

The fact that the author did include it is what led me to believe s/he had something different in mind. Otherwise it's redundant. Perhaps they will come back and clarify.

 

  

Gee folks - not rocket science. Clearly, the intent of the question was where someone from the US would prefer to start a cruise that involves a different continent- cruise from US embark OR fly to embark on a different continent. 

[Twickenham]

10 minutes ago, Flatbush Flyer said:

Gee folks - not rocket science. Clearly, the intent of the question was where someone from the US would prefer to start a cruise that involves a different continent- cruise from US embark OR fly to embark on a different continent. 

 

Yeah, but the problem is that isn't what they actually said.

 

Putting on professional translator/proofreader hat here. It is remarkable the number of times that what someone writes differs from what they think they have written. I mean, I've read phrases in environmental reports that said the exact opposite of what the author was trying to say. While this example isn't quite that extreme, this is definitely a case of someone not fully developing in written form the thought as formulated in their head - something that is quite common IME. As previously stated, any foreign-flagged cruise ship sailing out of a US port is, by definition, sailing an international itinerary. Did the OP mean sailing to Europe or Asia from the US? Or were they including all itineraries from the US to other countries? It's impossible to say for sure simply by reading the OP as written.

 

It is interesting to see some posters dismissing itineraries to the Bahamas or Mexico as not being truly international, presumably because they're such common destinations for US travellers. It reminded me of reading a travel article written in Australia, encouraging the reader to look at more exotic destinations rather than the usual trips to Fiji and Vanuatu. Common is a question of perspective...

[Hlitner]

20 hours ago, cruizergal70 said:

Even retirees may not want so many sea days. It's just a waste of time. They would have to market the cruise to people who just enjoy being on a ship regardless of retirement status. 

 

I don't enjoy being on a ship like that.

I get it that some do not enjoy sea days.  But many others find it one of the best kinds of cruising.  Consider that during our recent crossing on the SB Ovation we had about 500 passengers but once we reached Lisbon the passenger count dropped to about 400.  Prior to COVID most of our crossings (on multiple lines) were sold out.  HAL used to do a very popular Grand Med cruise which included round trip crossings from the USA.  
 

DW once suggested that somebody should do a round the world cruise with no ports :). Understand that different folks have different likes and many of us enjoy long cruises as opposed to a ferry boat-like voyage with lots of ports.  We do plenty of both types of cruises because we truly love being on ships.
 

Hank

[sparks1093]

15 hours ago, navybankerteacher said:

OP was clearly trying to talk about a real “international itinerary” - and not some closed loop out of a US port because a key part of his post used the alternative of “flying to an international departure port” .

As Flatbush Flyer pointed out "intercontinental" was probably the most appropriate word to use, but most of us knew what the OP meant. In any event it doesn't change the fact that even a cruise to lowly Canada or the Bahamas is still an international cruise.