CDC should stop punishing cruisers

[BirdTravels]

3 hours ago, BermudaBound2014 said:

Of course supply chain shortages and staffing issues also play a part, but I'm of the belief that if cruise ships could sail full, they would. Example: Carnival is moving crew from its lower occupancy itineraries to ships that are sailing at high capacity. They don't care about occupancy rates being at 100% as long as they can staff the ship.

Our recent cruise on the Encore was near 100% double occupancy capacity (near 3900ish/3998 double occupancy capacity). And our other recent cruise on the Quantum of the Seas was near 100% capacity (4095 onboard/4180 double occupancy capacity). So, does that mean that NCL and Royal don't care about capacity?

[BermudaBound2014]

54 minutes ago, BirdTravels said:

Our recent cruise on the Encore was near 100% double occupancy capacity (near 3900ish/3998 double occupancy capacity). And our other recent cruise on the Quantum of the Seas was near 100% capacity (4095 onboard/4180 double occupancy capacity). So, does that mean that NCL and Royal don't care about capacity?

How silly. Reread my statement and pay attention to the word “example”.  
 

There was an article written in financial news quoting Arnold Donald about carnival moving crew to accommodate the more popular sailings. The article didn’t mention Royal or NcL. Hence the EXAMPLE 😉

 

 

Edited July 8, 2022 by BermudaBound2014

[PATRLR]

1 hour ago, The Shrike said:

A few people on this forum point at the 100 who popped positive and say "This is proof that testing is keeping us safe!!!"

Isn't the ship at least some degree safer without those 100 people?  

I don't know of anyone who believes the testing is an absolute solution.  I think most people recognize that it helps and it's better than not doing anything at all.

[BermudaBound2014]

1 hour ago, ChiefMateJRK said:

None of knows how many people are testing positive and cancelling their cruise.  Only the cruise lines know and I'm sure that is very useful data.  If a ship sails with 3000 passengers and there were 10 cancellations due to positive Covid tests, then it is a much different scenario than if there were 100 cancellations.  Allowing 10 people on the ship that "had" Covid a few days prior may not be worth the testing challenges.  100?  Sure, maybe....

Sure we don’t know the exact number of people being denied boarding due to a positive text. However; given that the CLIA has asked the cdc to reevaluate on behalf of the entire industry, it’s safe to deduce that the number is low. 

[BermudaBound2014]

3 minutes ago, PATRLR said:

I don't know of anyone who believes the testing is an absolute solution.  I think most people recognize that it helps and it's better than not doing anything at all.

 

Cruise lines do not have the luxury of testing because it's 'better than not doing anything at all". Cruise lines are racking up billions in debt each quarter. What they need is to do whatever it takes to get bodies onboard.

 

As I mentioned in the above post, the CLIA (who represents the industry) has petitioned the CDC to reconsider the testing requirement. From that, I deduce that the cruise lines have crunched the numbers and believe that less testing will bring more bodies.

 

I'm not sure you realize just how dire the financial state of the industry is.

[The Shrike]

15 minutes ago, PATRLR said:

Isn't the ship at least some degree safer without those 100 people?  

 

Without knowing how many are not sailing due to positive tests, I can't say.  If 10 people popped positive and didn't sail, would I feel safer?  No, that's an insignificant amount, especially given the 2000 people that DID sail with a negative test from three days prior.  100?  Maybe a little, I couldn't say.  I choose not to live in fear, so honestly I don't care if the other folks on the cruise are even vaccinated, let alone tested before boarding.

[The Shrike]

--duplicate--

Edited July 8, 2022 by The Shrike

[BermudaBound2014]

29 minutes ago, PATRLR said:

Isn't the ship at least some degree safer without those 100 people?  

 

Ships are not "safe" from covid regardless of protocols. They never have been and they never will be. Mandatory vaccine, pre testing, and masks and covid still managed to sneak about every vessel sailing.

 

 

[ChiefMateJRK]

19 minutes ago, BermudaBound2014 said:

 

Ships are not "safe" from covid regardless of protocols. They never have been and they never will be. Mandatory vaccine, pre testing, and masks and covid still managed to sneak about every vessel sailing.

 

 

Yeah.  People worried about being "safe" from the awful Covid should probably just stay home.  

[BermudaBound2014]

8 minutes ago, ChiefMateJRK said:

Yeah.  People worried about being "safe" from the awful Covid should probably just stay home.  

 

I don't mean this to sound callous, but for those with serious comorbidities and/or those truly "afraid" of the virus, staying off a cruise ship should be blatantly obvious. 

 

 

[HowardK]

On 7/2/2022 at 2:26 PM, CrazyTrain2 said:

I can confirm - you need a PCR Covid test to board a spaceship.

 

 

I concur had to get one for all 3 planets and both universes I visited last weekend.

[PATRLR]

2 hours ago, BermudaBound2014 said:

 

Cruise lines do not have the luxury of testing because it's 'better than not doing anything at all". Cruise lines are racking up billions in debt each quarter. What they need is to do whatever it takes to get bodies onboard.

 

As I mentioned in the above post, the CLIA (who represents the industry) has petitioned the CDC to reconsider the testing requirement. From that, I deduce that the cruise lines have crunched the numbers and believe that less testing will bring more bodies.

 

I'm not sure you realize just how dire the financial state of the industry is.

 

All those words are completely irrelevant to what I wrote and have nothing to do with what I wrote.

 

1 hour ago, The Shrike said:

Without knowing how many are not sailing due to positive tests, I can't say.  If 10 people popped positive and didn't sail, would I feel safer?  No, that's an insignificant amount, especially given the 2000 people that DID sail with a negative test from three days prior.  100?  Maybe a little, I couldn't say.  I choose not to live in fear, so honestly I don't care if the other folks on the cruise are even vaccinated, let alone tested before boarding.

I didn't ask if you or anyone would "feel safer".  I asked if the ship was some degree safer.  If you can't acknowledge that with 10 (or even 1) fewer positive people on the ship it is at least some degree safer, regardless of how miniscule that degree is, then I'll assume nothing would make the ship safer in your eyes. 

1 hour ago, BermudaBound2014 said:

 

Ships are not "safe" from covid regardless of protocols. They never have been and they never will be. Mandatory vaccine, pre testing, and masks and covid still managed to sneak about every vessel sailing.

 

 

Well there you go, it really doesn't matter to you what anyone does.  By the way, again, I didn't say "safe" as in 100% absolutely safe.  And I don't think anyone is trying to make that claim.

 

[PATRLR]

1 hour ago, ChiefMateJRK said:

Yeah.  People worried about being "safe" from the awful Covid should probably just stay home.  

Is it OK with you for people to desire steps be taken to make the ships at least a little bit safer?

How about Norovirus - is it OK with you for people to desire ships take some steps to help prevent that spread and thereby making their ships at least a little safer?

Or are you like others and feel nothing will make them 100% safe so f-it, no point in taking any of those precautions.  Might as well save water and get rid of sinks in the bathrooms, right?

Ships aren't safe, so, lets get rid of all the SOLAS stuff too.

 

[BermudaBound2014]

10 minutes ago, PATRLR said:

 

All those words are completely irrelevant to what I wrote and have nothing to do with what I wrote.

 

I didn't ask if you or anyone would "feel safer".  I asked if the ship was some degree safer.  If you can't acknowledge that with 10 (or even 1) fewer positive people on the ship it is at least some degree safer, regardless of how miniscule that degree is, then I'll assume nothing would make the ship safer in your eyes. 

Well there you go, it really doesn't matter to you what anyone does.  By the way, again, I didn't say "safe" as in 100% absolutely safe.  And I don't think anyone is trying to make that claim.

 

 

They are not irrelevant.

 

Ships no longer have the luxury of making each sailing a "little bit safer' if it cost them substantial revenue (ie, people won't sail with the pre testing requirement). 

 

For every benefit (ships are a 'little bit safer") there is a Cost (ships are sailing at 65% occupancy).

 

It appears that the CLIA has determined that the cost of pretesting (in terms of passenger capacity) outweighs the benefit (a little bit safer).

 

I don't believe you realize just how much debt NCLH has accumulated. Business 101.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 8, 2022 by BermudaBound2014

[StolidCruiser]

1 hour ago, BermudaBound2014 said:

 

I don't mean this to sound callous, but for those with serious comorbidities and/or those truly "afraid" of the virus, staying off a cruise ship should be blatantly obvious. 

 

 

 

It’s not callous at all.  It’s blatantly obvious.  👍🏻

[ChiefMateJRK]

1 hour ago, PATRLR said:

Is it OK with you for people to desire steps be taken to make the ships at least a little bit safer?

Sure, as long as it doesn't inconvenience me or cost me more money.  Meaningless mandatory testing does both, so while I can certainly live with it, I'm not 100% OK with it.  Probably more like 10% "ok" with it.

[ChiefMateJRK]

1 hour ago, PATRLR said:

Might as well save water and get rid of sinks in the bathrooms, right?

Well, that just sounds plain stupid.

[The Shrike]

42 minutes ago, PATRLR said:

I know you don't care how safe a ship is, or isn't.

More importantly, you don't know the first thing about my requirements for safety, I've never discussed my requirements here in CC.  

I don't care because I know that a ship's "safety" can't be judged merely by testing for one pathogen among millions 48-72 hours before boarding.  I know that people who think it does are fooling themselves.  

As far as knowing your requirements, well, you presumed to claim one of my statements told you everything you need to know about me.  Well, I merely did the same for you. 

At this point, we're just going in circles so I'll say good day, sir.