• Controversial Topics
    Several months ago, I added a private sub-forum to allow members to discuss these topics without fear of infractions or banning. It's opt-in, opt-out. Corey Click Here

Safely returning to sailing: "Healthy Sail Panel" recommendations

This is silly. Test results take longer than 5 days in some places and who knows if there will be even worse supply shortages for tests months from now after a bad cold/flu season has everyone with cold symptoms seeking tests. I guess we’ll be rescheduling AGAIN and hold out for a vaccine. Ugh.
 
Nothing will ever be 100%. Nothing ever has been. I think it comes down to the individual If taking a cruise is worth the risk or not. These new policies will reduce that risk. I am just happy that if the CDC is OK with this that businesses are allowed to open again. Let the consumer make that choice.
 
People are going to complain about any safety guidelines. There are people who want Disney World to overturn the mask mandate right now. But this is the only way to return to cruising safely. We can't just resume the way things were before. Thankfully, people have the option of canceling.
 


Just a note: you're saying two different things here. Cash positive means they're not losing money. But being better (financially) for (parks/ships/whatever) to be open than closed doesn't necessarily mean they'd be in a cash positive position. It would mean that they'd lose LESS money by operating than they are by not operating.

I have no idea what those numbers would look like, how much they're losing with the boats not running at all, vs how much it costs to pay to staff & run a cruise, but it's entirely plausible that DCL (or any other such company) would choose to start running at a low percentage if it means that they'd be losing LESS money than they are not running.

(I work at some such business, but on a MUCH smaller scale. Our options were basically: keep paying employees something/anything and run out of cash money very quickly, get rid of the entire part of our business that was shut down and have to fire all the employees, or open partially, whereupon we're still losing money, but not as much as we would be by keeping that part closed but employing people, because we didn't want to get rid of that part of our business altogether. I realize the costs involved in employing individuals don't get accounted for in quite the same manner as payments to builders and port fees and such, but just trying to give a more real-world example.)

Technically, you are correct - I am. However, Disney has stated that the parks are actually generating money (that is at the end of the day, having the park open adds to the bottom line - it doesn't just mean they are losing less money).

Cruise ships are a more complicated animal. I have absolutely no idea the fixed costs of the ship floating in the middle of the ocean vs the fixed costs of the ship on active passenger duty.

What we do know is that Disney has stated they would not open the parks to simply lose less money (or they at least implied it), so I assume the same to be true of the ships.
 
The real phony documents will start flying around when they require a vaccine. A portion of the population will be distrustful of a new vaccine and will want to see it's effects on others prior to taking it themselves. If ships go to a requirement to show proof of vaccination once the vaccine comes out, I think you will see a lot of questionable documents claiming to be vaccinated. The issue is DCL has no way to call your doctor and verify your vaccination records because your doctor cannot even legally admit that they've even seen you, yet alone release any info on treatment. So DCL will have to take your word that you've been vaccinated, making the proof of vaccine more of an effort on their part to reduce liability rather than an actual attempt to ensure you are vaccinated.
Of course the doctor can--with the passenger's permission.
 
People are going to complain about any safety guidelines. There are people who want Disney World to overturn the mask mandate right now. But this is the only way to return to cruising safely. We can't just resume the way things were before. Thankfully, people have the option of canceling.

I agree and hope people understand that even if they do not agree with the guidelines, without them we will have no cruising for even longer. I would hope there are not people out there that feel we can just go right back to the way things were. If we start back up wrong and get a bunch of people hurt or worse, they will never let cruising get going again and the ban will go on much longer. I rather cruise safe with restrictions than no cruising at all. Baby steps. We have to prove first that cruising can be done safely so that the first few boats don't come back full of sick people and give the "I told you so's" a bunch of ammo for endless ban renewals.
 


Of course the doctor can--with the passenger's permission.

That would be one workaround they could enact. If you want to get on the boat, you got to sign a release. Don't want to sign a release? Then you ain't getting on the boat. Our boat, our rules.
 
It’s only a matter of time before someone shows up at the port without a mask and starts screaming about their constitutional rights being violated. They will call everyone sheeple and possibly be physicially violent to the cast members on top of their verbal violence. Scientific policies like these are guaranteed to cause outbursts and aggressive responses.
 
Last edited:
Scott Gottlieb (one of the co-chairs of the panel that submitted the recommendations) seems to be sparring with CDC in media. Yes, he has a good point (and he writes for CNBC for a living), but he might want to be discrete about it. Unless, of course, his contract with the cruise lines ended yesterday, and now its time to remove the shackles.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/09/22/thi...fda-chief-says-of-cdc-coronavirus-errors.html

Oh great. Right in the middle of trying to get a concession from the CDC and you go out and try to publicly humiliate them. They hold all the marbles and hopefully he doesn't put them in a "we'll show you" position. The CDC no cruise order is the largest hurdle for the cruise line's to overcome. Everything else is irrelevant as long as there is a CDC no sail order. You can get deals for ports, bubble excursions, clean the ships, implement safety/Covid protocols, require negative tests but none of it matters if CDC says you can't sail. He's got to play nice unless he knows they've already decided to renew the ban.
 
I agree and hope people understand that even if they do not agree with the guidelines, without them we will have no cruising for even longer. I would hope there are not people out there that feel we can just go right back to the way things were. If we start back up wrong and get a bunch of people hurt or worse, they will never let cruising get going again and the ban will go on much longer. I rather cruise safe with restrictions than no cruising at all. Baby steps. We have to prove first that cruising can be done safely so that the first few boats don't come back full of sick people and give the "I told you so's" a bunch of ammo for endless ban renewals.
That'd be fine, if what they were proposing were actually possible. Anyone can get a mask. But getting testing on a tight timeframe isn't something you can just order on Amazon prime--it simply doesn't exist for a lot of people right now.
 
DCL actually told Port of Galveston it was around 30%. Now, nothing proves or disproves that statement, but it'd be hazardous to make that kind of statement from an SEC perspective if it were wildly inaccurate (ie, a lie).

According to Robert Rees, DCL never said they need to operate at 30% to break even. He stated that he has heard differing break even numbers from people and "people" have told him 30% is break even.

DCL has never given us their cost structure. However, RCL HAS.
https://www.royalcaribbeanblog.com/...ns-newer-ships-break-even-quicker-older-ships
The minimum for an RCL ship is 30%, but that only applies to the newer ships (presumably the quantum class only). The older ships scales to almost 50% occupancy in order to break even. What goes into that number is a large number of factors, so it's impossible to translate that to DCL, but it's a combination of the power system and fuel requirements, the propulsion (the quantum class uses ALS which has a significant impact) to much more difficult things to measure - such as staffing requirements per passenger, number of passengers per ton, increased efficiency in food preparation, waste, emissions and carbon offset credits, etc, etc.

The statements from RCL has also implied that the 30% figure applies only to the ship itself. The impression they gave the shareholders is that 1 ship running at 30% is not profitable for RCL as they still have to cover a lot of company costs (such as Cococay, the home offices and staffing, logistics and all the other things that go into running a cruise line).

We can make a wild guess that DCL is not around 30% at this time. The Wish (Triton class) will be more efficient since it uses LNG as fuel compared to the Dream class and the Magic class (Diesel in both cases). We can presume there are many other enhancements and efficiencies as well which are not present in these older ships.

Plus, as mentioned, this would not cover the costs of the changes needed to run Castaway Cay, or any of the other ancillary costs required to keep Magical Cruise Company's doors open.

I suspect when you add all those things together, DCL has a break even point closer to 50-60%.
 
That'd be fine, if what they were proposing were actually possible. Anyone can get a mask. But getting testing on a tight timeframe isn't something you can just order on Amazon prime--it simply doesn't exist for a lot of people right now.

No, but there are some real possibilities on this front. The Abbot BinaxNow test is a 15 minute no special equipment test that can be issued at port, and the FDA gave it an emergency approval.

https://www.royalcaribbeanblog.com/...sy-covid-19-test-drives-royal-caribbean-stockhttps://www.kinyradio.com/news/news-of-the-north/norwegian-cruise-lines-welcomes-new-covid-19-test/
 
That would be one workaround they could enact. If you want to get on the boat, you got to sign a release. Don't want to sign a release? Then you ain't getting on the boat. Our boat, our rules.

Here is the problem, and it's a lot more complicated than that. In fact, it's a problem with the vaccine as a whole. You do not have to get it from your Doctor. In fact, you may not be able to get it from your doctor as some of the vaccines require specialized conditions to store which most doctor's can not accommodate.

Even worse, there are going to be multiple types, and most of them require 2 doses. So, imagine the general public going to place A to get their first shot, then place B to get their second. Are they going to remember which one they took? Are they going to remember to carry the card that tells them which one they took? How are you going to insure that the person who got type 1 of the vaccine gets the second dose of type 1 without any kind of national database (or at least a state database)?

then, who is the cruise line going to call? I didn't get it from my Doctor. I got my vaccine at Walgreens. Or CVS. Or in the case of specialized storage requirements, I got it at the temporary tractor-trailer outside of Walmart which was operated by some contracting company hired by the CDC.
 
People are going to complain about any safety guidelines. There are people who want Disney World to overturn the mask mandate right now. But this is the only way to return to cruising safely. We can't just resume the way things were before. Thankfully, people have the option of canceling.


People will complain either way. Like its been said you can make some people happy all of the time or all the people happy some of the time. Take your pick. Been there done that.

I wouldn't say it's the only way to cruise safely, but its better then nothing at the moment.
 
Here is the problem, and it's a lot more complicated than that. In fact, it's a problem with the vaccine as a whole. You do not have to get it from your Doctor. In fact, you may not be able to get it from your doctor as some of the vaccines require specialized conditions to store which most doctor's can not accommodate.

Even worse, there are going to be multiple types, and most of them require 2 doses. So, imagine the general public going to place A to get their first shot, then place B to get their second. Are they going to remember which one they took? Are they going to remember to carry the card that tells them which one they took? How are you going to insure that the person who got type 1 of the vaccine gets the second dose of type 1 without any kind of national database (or at least a state database)?

then, who is the cruise line going to call? I didn't get it from my Doctor. I got my vaccine at Walgreens. Or CVS. Or in the case of specialized storage requirements, I got it at the temporary tractor-trailer outside of Walmart which was operated by some contracting company hired by the CDC.
I very much highly doubt that they'll require specific locations for the vaccine, once it becomes widely available (whether its 1 or 2 doses) I am pretty sure they'll have a uniform documentation system set up to either give to the patient or for the gov't records. Once they start dispensing the vaccine I have a feeling that doctors offices might be a central point for vaccinations OR they'll set up community inoculation centers to facilitate the process. I don't see this as something Walgreens or CVS can handle considering the sheer numbers of people that would want to get it done, while still conducting retail business on the same location. I suspect it will be set up in a more organized fashion. But I do wonder about them issuing a "Vaccination Certification" document to each person that gets it. that seems like it might be cumbersome and create a LOT of paperwork.
 
I agree with what your saying. Theres still a lot of unknown with the anti-virus etc. I would assume,, and I know this is asking a lot from a goverment entity, that they would do a titre test after the anti vac. I know I had to have 1 for several vaccines I got when I was on the line. One of the things I was referencing is that there's no mention on how to deal with it. There's things in the package I dont see that means either a they don't know they don't know, or b its deliberately vague for CDC to fill in the gaps. Which based on somethings im not seeing there either, leads me to believe that there's things they don't know they don't know also.

I've seen more then a few conflicting accounts on herd immunity and the anti virus In general. So it's still a huge grey area.

Something else that isn't addressed is what states have a quarantine in place order for other states. How does that factor in to their plan? I think Hawaii is one for example. Florida, the cruise capital of the world had a ban on NY and some other travelers for while, as another example.

Its a good start from what I'm seeing but this is all up to the CDC and when they decide to do something. Even then it won't be instantaneous as I think it was Royal that said it will take at least 30 days if not longer to get full crews back to the ships, the ships themselves ready, and this is also assuming the Coast Guard doesn't get involved, as there certain time frames that may get exceeded and then they have to physically inspect every ship, and credentials of every mariner to make sure they still meet or exceed the requirements. The longer a ship is idled, the longer it takes to get them back in service. What there doing now, running them to the islands will help but if they park them, 90 days just for the CG side wouldn't be out of the equation.

Some of the reporting coming out reporting on the progress of the clinical trials for some of the candidate vaccines speaks to the vaccine producing antibodies in the volunteers, and how strong those antibodies are, etc. i.e. that the person appears responsive to the vaccine. So that is one aspect of work being done in the clinical trials underway. Presumably it would be one of a set of a pre-determined set of criteria that would need to be met before a vaccine could be considered for approval.

For many of the routine vaccines people get there are titre tests available, but they may not routinely be in use in some places. For example, for me, there is a question about the Hep A and B vaccines I received and whether they were sufficient due to some irregulaties in the series I got. Instead of having my titres measured, my doctor is just having me start over and be revaccinated for Hep A and B as if from scratch.

One can't easily get covid antibody testing here to find out if you were previously infected, but in other areas it is more widely available.

And yep, the state or jurisdictional quarantine issues will be a factor. The US doesn't allow entry at all from certain countries for tourist purposes. Various states have quarantine requirements for visitors from various places. Countries have "avoid all travel" and/or "avoid cruises" advisories in place. All of these will impact passengers' ability to get to the embarkation port and in some cases will outright prevent it.

Compounding the issue is the ability for travellers to obtain travel and/or travel medical insurance that will sufficiently cover them for general travel needs and for covid-related ones specifically. That may be difficult, cost-prohibitive, or impossible to obtain.

And you are quite correct about the issue of getting the ships themselves, including their crews, ready to sail. Beyond the very practical issues of getting the ships ready [they've been closed down for months and it will take time to get them "open" again], there are regulatory hurdles, and the issues of crewing, which has HR, immigration, quarantine, and training, and travel among other issues to navigate. I don't know how crew visas are issued, but US embassies and consulates in many locations are not back to issuing any kind of visas yet, with some barely or only recently open for American Citizen Services; others may still be closed. And some crew members may have their own passports and such they may need to renew and encounter challenges locally with that. Lots of spinning wheels = a good chunk of time.

There is video one of the senior officers of one of the (IIRC Princess) ships took a few months ago. They were waiting at sea with a number of other ships to be able to repatriate crew. He took viewers on a walking tour of the ship, showing how they had closed off many of the different areas: he basically took the camera along as he did his nightly inspection of these areas. They were all passenger areas. So places like the bars, pubs, restaurants, casino. Covers were over things, furniture rearranged, lights off, etc. Kind of spooky. In other areas they had pulled things into them and were using them for storage and such. Needless to say, all that would have to be "undone" to return it to a guest-usable and ready space, in addition to whatever renovations needed to be done as part of new safety protocols.

SW
 
I agree and hope people understand that even if they do not agree with the guidelines, without them we will have no cruising for even longer. I would hope there are not people out there that feel we can just go right back to the way things were. If we start back up wrong and get a bunch of people hurt or worse, they will never let cruising get going again and the ban will go on much longer. I rather cruise safe with restrictions than no cruising at all. Baby steps. We have to prove first that cruising can be done safely so that the first few boats don't come back full of sick people and give the "I told you so's" a bunch of ammo for endless ban renewals.

This.

There has already been the Hurtigruten expedition ship outbreak as fuel for the "told you so" crowd [In total, 29 passengers who had sailed aboard the two cruises and 42 crew members ultimately tested positive: https://www.maritime-executive.com/...authority-releases-hurtigruten-covid-19-audit ]. There have been some smaller instances on other ships as well.

Baby steps and doing it "right" and showing it CAN be doing safely are important.

SW
 
That'd be fine, if what they were proposing were actually possible. Anyone can get a mask. But getting testing on a tight timeframe isn't something you can just order on Amazon prime--it simply doesn't exist for a lot of people right now.

I wonder if they would have a provision to deal with such situations, e.g. two different rapid tests at the port and you would have to take and be negative on both ?
 
That'd be fine, if what they were proposing were actually possible. Anyone can get a mask. But getting testing on a tight timeframe isn't something you can just order on Amazon prime--it simply doesn't exist for a lot of people right now.
I wonder if they would have a provision to deal with such situations, e.g. two different rapid tests at the port and you would have to take and be negative on both ?




isn’t the MSC Cruise Line doing this? There was a report on GMA this morning and it mentioned rapid tests at the port.
 

GET A DISNEY VACATION QUOTE

Dreams Unlimited Travel is committed to providing you with the very best vacation planning experience possible. Our Vacation Planners are experts and will share their honest advice to help you have a magical vacation.

Let us help you with your next Disney Vacation!


GET UP TO A $1000 SHIPBOARD CREDIT AND AN EXCLUSIVE GIFT!

If you make your Disney Cruise Line reservation with Dreams Unlimited Travel you’ll receive these incredible shipboard credits to spend on your cruise!















facebook twitter
Top