oasis. why empty from FL up to NJ?

[luckyinpa]

wouldnt a few day short repo cruise be more revenue generating than an empty ship?  i'm on the 1st trip out of NJ in 2 weeks so i'm happy we wont have any delays getting on at least though 🙂

 

i'm assuming the workers get full run of the ship and stay in the suites when the ships are empty!

[Ourusualbeach]

3 minutes ago, luckyinpa said:

wouldnt a few day short repo cruise be more revenue generating than an empty ship?  i'm on the 1st trip out of NJ in 2 weeks so i'm happy we wont have any delays getting on at least though 🙂

 

i'm assuming the workers get full run of the ship and stay in the suites when the ships are empty!

Ships cannot travel from one US port to another without visiting a distant foreign port (Aruba is the closest) as that would be a violation of the PVSA.(Passenger Vessel Service Act)

Edited April 18, 2022 by Ourusualbeach

[twangster]

The good news is that cabins should be ready as soon as you board since there were no guests in them that morning.

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, luckyinpa said:

i'm assuming the workers get full run of the ship and stay in the suites when the ships are empty!

Not even close.

[shipgeeks]

In 2023, Enchantment of the Seas will be repositioning from Baltimore to AK, but boarding will begin in FL, not Baltimore.  I'm curious why this is done.  Are those couple of days used for working on the ship?

[chengkp75]

2 minutes ago, shipgeeks said:

In 2023, Enchantment of the Seas will be repositioning from Baltimore to AK, but boarding will begin in FL, not Baltimore.  I'm curious why this is done.  Are those couple of days used for working on the ship?

Could be, could be that sales demographic is better with a Florida embarkation, lots of variables.

[Joseph2017China]

It is done because it is illegal to sail from US port to another US port without a visit to another country.  

[Ourusualbeach]

2 minutes ago, Joseph2017China said:

It is done because it is illegal to sail from US port to another US port without a visit to another country.  

It cannot just be to another country.  It must be to a distant foreign port and those are clearly spelled out in the PVSA.

[Jasukkie]

Why not Florida to the Bahamas and then NJ? We do the reverse trip all the time. nvm, those are roundtrips, I get it.

Edited April 19, 2022 by Jasukkie

[shof515]

1 hour ago, shipgeeks said:

In 2023, Enchantment of the Seas will be repositioning from Baltimore to AK, but boarding will begin in FL, not Baltimore.  I'm curious why this is done.  Are those couple of days used for working on the ship?

they could be working on the ship or it could be an issue with fuel and provisions for food and supplies. The cost of fuel and food might be cheaper in Florida then Baltimore. For a longer journey like that, it kind of make sense to start the trip from Florida to reduce costs 

 

This is why on most of the NJ to Bahamas cruises when the ship stops in Florida, they resupply the ship and just do the bare minimum needed in NJ

[Lane Hog]

1 hour ago, Jasukkie said:

Why not Florida to the Bahamas and then NJ? We do the reverse trip all the time. nvm, those are roundtrips, I get it.

 

Yup. Round trips can be to any country.

 

For PVSA compliance, the port must be outside geographic North America which includes all of the Caribbean ports except for Aruba/Bonaire/Curacao as they're geographically South America.  Not sure where Trinidad or Tobago fall - I've always considered that South America as well.

 

Both the Jones Act and PVSA seem ripe for some degree of reform considering there are not any remaining US flagged passenger lines sailing on either coast and cruising is arguably entertainment now and not transportation.

 

 

Edited April 19, 2022 by Lane Hog

[time4u2go]

5 minutes ago, Lane Hog said:

Both the Jones Act and PVSA seem ripe for some degree of reform considering there are not any remaining US flagged passenger lines sailing on either coast and cruising is arguably entertainment now and not transportation.

Yes there are.  See American Cruise Lines.

[chengkp75]

39 minutes ago, Lane Hog said:

Both the Jones Act and PVSA seem ripe for some degree of reform considering there are not any remaining US flagged passenger lines sailing on either coast and cruising is arguably entertainment now and not transportation.

 

33 minutes ago, time4u2go said:

Yes there are.  See American Cruise Lines.

And, Uncruise, Alaska Dream Cruise, Lindblad Nat Geo, along with all the other Passenger vessels operating domestically in the US like whale watching, sight seeing, casino, dinner cruise boats (all of which would be in your "entertainment" category), along with ferries, water taxis, commuter boats and any other vessel that carries "more than 12 persons for hire" (the legal definition of "passenger vessel".

 

So, since "cruising is arguably entertainment and not transportation", should the ships meet the building codes in their respective countries, instead of SOLAS, MARPOL and the other international conventions that they do now?  If it moves from one place to another, it is transportation. 

[leaveitallbehind]

3 hours ago, shof515 said:

they could be working on the ship or it could be an issue with fuel and provisions for food and supplies. The cost of fuel and food might be cheaper in Florida then Baltimore.

 

This is why on most of the NJ to Bahamas cruises when the ship stops in Florida, they resupply the ship and just do the bare minimum needed in NJ

Fuel costs, at least, are fixed by contract.  Pretty sure it is the same with most provisions.

 

Not sure your FL resupply rationale is accurate.  A fair amount of resupply was taking place in NJ on Anthem last week and nothing in Port Canaveral.  Same with Oasis last October.

Edited April 19, 2022 by leaveitallbehind

[chengkp75]

15 minutes ago, leaveitallbehind said:

Fuel costs, at least, are fixed by contract.  Pretty sure it is the same with most provisions.

 

Not sure your FL resupply rationale is accurate.  A fair amount of resupply was taking place in NJ on Anthem last week and nothing in Port Canaveral.  Same with Oasis last October.

Fuel contracts are not quite that simple.  The futures contract is written so that the fuel broker (who actually owns no fuel, no refinery, no terminal, and no trucks/barges/tankers) agrees to deliver a quantity of fuel, at a given price range, during a fixed time period, at a number of named ports.  For example "Shyster Fuels agrees to deliver to RCI the amount of 100,000 metric tons of low sulfur IF380 fuel oil, over the period of 1/1/22 to 12/31/22, for the price of $650-$680 per metric ton, at the following ports:  NY/NJ, Baltimore, Miami, FLL, Galveston, and Seattle."

 

For the cruise line, this allows flexibility in fuel demand, since itineraries are set after fuel contracts are negotiated.  Now, when RCI notifies the broker that they need 2000 tons of fuel in Baltimore, the broker goes shopping.  He calls all the refineries and storage facilities in the Baltimore area, looking to buy the required fuel amount at a price that makes him money, after selling it at the contract price.  Sometimes the fuel is not available in the Baltimore area for a reasonable price, so the broker looks further afield and will factor in barging fees to bring the fuel to the ship, when looking at the fuel price he is being charged, again, looking to make a profit.  So, if the broker finds fuel in Florida cheaper than Baltimore, but the barging cost would make it financially unsound, he will suggest to RCI that they bunker in Florida instead, and the broker will sweeten the contract price.

 

Additionally, there is the fee for the delivery barge/tanker, which is not part of the fuel price contract, and which can vary widely between ports, barging companies, and times.  Much of this fee is port use tax on the barging company, which is of course passed to the customer, RCI.  So, wide variances in local barging costs can affect the decision of where to bunker.

 

As for provisions, RCI contracts with various Sysco suppliers, in various ports, but always looking for the best deal.  So, perhaps, if food cost in Miami is less than Baltimore (or by ordering for the entire fleet from Miami gets an "economy of scale" discount), then RCI would contract with Sysco Miami, and truck the stores to Baltimore for provisioning the ship.  In a case where there are two or more US ports, when the ship sends in an order for provisions, the RCI buyers will go out for quotes to say Sysco Baltimore, Miami, and FLL, and take the best price and truck it wherever needed.  RCI's contract with Sysco basically binds them to ordering a minimum amount of provisions (typically a dollar amount) over the year, and RCI can freely choose which of the contracted port cities they want to get their provisions from.

[mac_tlc]

19 hours ago, twangster said:

The good news is that cabins should be ready as soon as you board since there were no guests in them that morning.

I'll let you know we board 5/1 @ 11:30 -- or maybe a wee bit before . 😉

 

mac_tlc

Edited April 19, 2022 by mac_tlc

[leaveitallbehind]

40 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Fuel contracts are not quite that simple.  The futures contract is written so that the fuel broker (who actually owns no fuel, no refinery, no terminal, and no trucks/barges/tankers) agrees to deliver a quantity of fuel, at a given price range, during a fixed time period, at a number of named ports.  For example "Shyster Fuels agrees to deliver to RCI the amount of 100,000 metric tons of low sulfur IF380 fuel oil, over the period of 1/1/22 to 12/31/22, for the price of $650-$680 per metric ton, at the following ports:  NY/NJ, Baltimore, Miami, FLL, Galveston, and Seattle."

 

For the cruise line, this allows flexibility in fuel demand, since itineraries are set after fuel contracts are negotiated.  Now, when RCI notifies the broker that they need 2000 tons of fuel in Baltimore, the broker goes shopping.  He calls all the refineries and storage facilities in the Baltimore area, looking to buy the required fuel amount at a price that makes him money, after selling it at the contract price.  Sometimes the fuel is not available in the Baltimore area for a reasonable price, so the broker looks further afield and will factor in barging fees to bring the fuel to the ship, when looking at the fuel price he is being charged, again, looking to make a profit.  So, if the broker finds fuel in Florida cheaper than Baltimore, but the barging cost would make it financially unsound, he will suggest to RCI that they bunker in Florida instead, and the broker will sweeten the contract price.

 

Additionally, there is the fee for the delivery barge/tanker, which is not part of the fuel price contract, and which can vary widely between ports, barging companies, and times.  Much of this fee is port use tax on the barging company, which is of course passed to the customer, RCI.  So, wide variances in local barging costs can affect the decision of where to bunker.

 

As for provisions, RCI contracts with various Sysco suppliers, in various ports, but always looking for the best deal.  So, perhaps, if food cost in Miami is less than Baltimore (or by ordering for the entire fleet from Miami gets an "economy of scale" discount), then RCI would contract with Sysco Miami, and truck the stores to Baltimore for provisioning the ship.  In a case where there are two or more US ports, when the ship sends in an order for provisions, the RCI buyers will go out for quotes to say Sysco Baltimore, Miami, and FLL, and take the best price and truck it wherever needed.  RCI's contract with Sysco basically binds them to ordering a minimum amount of provisions (typically a dollar amount) over the year, and RCI can freely choose which of the contracted port cities they want to get their provisions from.

Thanks for the detail and clarification.  Always appreciated and always learn something from you!

[Lane Hog]

6 hours ago, time4u2go said:

Yes there are.  See American Cruise Lines.

Overgrown river boats aren't quite the same.  None of those leave US waters.  But... those are also entertainment, not transportation from A to B.

[chengkp75]

13 minutes ago, Lane Hog said:

None of those leave US waters.

Gee, guess what, that is exactly what the PVSA is all about.  It has nothing to do with any ship that calls at a foreign port.  But, technically, you're wrong, because the lines I mention, and even the NCL POA, leave US waters during their voyages, and the lines to Alaska pass through Canadian waters.

[chengkp75]

16 minutes ago, Lane Hog said:

Overgrown river boats aren't quite the same.

You do know what the definition of "passenger" vessel is, don't you?  Isn't it the "Passenger" Vessel Services Act, not the "Cruise" Vessel Services Act?  Oh, how everyone wants large cruise ships to be a "special case" from various laws.  Kind of like everything in the US, it has to be a special case so I get what I want.

[time4u2go]

1 hour ago, Lane Hog said:

Overgrown river boats aren't quite the same.  None of those leave US waters.  But... those are also entertainment, not transportation from A to B.

When you said "US flagged passenger lines" I thought you meant US flagged passenger lines.  I didn't see where you qualified it by the size of the boats.  Silly me!

[Lane Hog]

OK, apparently American Cruise Lines does go to Alaska.  None of their other cruise offerings leave US waters, and I'd be surprised if they leave the Intracoastal when they're going along the southeast coast.

Fact remains that both the Jones Act and PVSA aren't about safety -- they're about keeping out competition.  Cabotage is clearly a threat to the good of the country, right?

Allowing Boston to Florida or Seattle to San Diego isn't a threat to US based operators, considering they've never found a need to serve those markets.  

If the rules are able to be waived during COVID and hurricanes, there's not much justification in keeping them in place at all.

Edited April 20, 2022 by Lane Hog

[SRF]

How do you write the rules to allow Boston to FL and not also cover those routes that are intracoastal only?  Or cruises on SF Bay?

 

That is always the interesting part, people want to allow this or that special interest, but not other things, but there is no easy way of defining things to do what you want and now open HUGE loopholes.

[chengkp75]

47 minutes ago, Lane Hog said:

OK, apparently American Cruise Lines does go to Alaska.  None of their other cruise offerings leave US waters, and I'd be surprised if they leave the Intracoastal when they're going along the southeast coast.

Fact remains that both the Jones Act and PVSA aren't about safety -- they're about keeping out competition.  Cabotage is clearly a threat to the good of the country, right?

Allowing Boston to Florida or Seattle to San Diego isn't a threat to US based operators, considering they've never found a need to serve those markets.  

If the rules are able to be waived during COVID and hurricanes, there's not much justification in keeping them in place at all.

Uncruise also offers Seattle to Alaska cruises.

 

Fact is, the PVSA and Jones Act are about leveling the playing field for competition.  Why should foreign crew take jobs away from US citizens.

 

That's right, no US cruise line offers Boston to Florida or Seattle to San Diego.  Why should a foreign flag operation be allowed to do so?  And, if there is so much demand for this, why haven't the foreign flag cruise lines lobbied for this?  CLIA lobbied for 10 years to get a PVSA exemption for Puerto Rico, and various cruise lines that offered this service as a regular (not repo) itinerary all folded after a year.  CLIA knows that if they are allowed to operate domestically, it will require concessions from them like US crewing, and certainly US taxes.  The ships will also lose their duty free status for spare parts and supplies that they currently bring into the US from overseas without any customs duty.

 

The fines can be waived for conditions outside the control of the cruise line.  And, the waiver for covid was for a defined limited time period, and a limited, specified number of ships.  And, it could just as easily have been challenged in court by the other states where the cruise ships operate in the US, as this was a law giving two states (Washington and Alaska) preference over the other states.

[Lane Hog]

There are no US jobs lost if there's nobody currently operating in those types of markets...

I see little reason not follow the 18 years and running exemption for Puerto Rico, which remains "until such time as U.S.-flag vessels service that route"...

Granted, nobody's asked but that doesn't mean it won't come up eventually.