Maverick61

3 minutes ago, K.T.B. said:

 

Requesting the help of the passengers' countries perhaps?  Or even asking for help from WHO or any other health organization?  Instead, they keep it "in country" and thousands on board are put at risk because Japan refused to use whatever detection kits they had on the passengers by making sure they had them for their own citizens.

 

All Japan truly did is prevent the passengers from getting assistance while keeping their own citizens "safe". A fat lot of good that did them because they have 74 cases, of which, as far as I have read, only 1 came from the ship.

 

I'm not saying they should have released the passengers, I'm saying they should have looked for outside help from the very beginning in some way.  Regardless, hindsight is 20/20.  But, IMO, Japan made matters worse for nearly 4,000 people needlessly.

How do you even know when Japan started contacting other governments  or agencies for assistance / guidance?

Do you know the logistics involved in what you are suggesting dealing with 4000 people?

As to test kits, you do realize there is a shortage of them.  You don't just use them on people willy nilly.  Nor would it have made sense to test everyone early on given the incubation period of the virus.

5 hours ago, K.T.B. said:

 

 

I think by now, most rational people realize that the quarantine was pretty much a dramatic failure in preventing the disease from spreading on the ship.  Yeah, it prevented the disease from spreading on land, but it put nearly 4,000 people at risk for a potentially deadly disease.  After a couple of days, plans should have been in place to remove passengers and place them in isolation.  Instead a couple of weeks go by and we all see more and more getting sick.

 

Needs of the many vs. needs of the few I suppose...  Regardless, I really feel that Japan screwed up by taking the "wait and see" method, while passengers' own countries couldn't interfere in this process.  I'm just glad that people are finally being removed, but is it "too little, too late"?  We shall see.

 

Overall, I really do have to commend the Princess crew and company in how they handled it.  They were stuck between a rock and hard place and did the best they could.  I've yet to sail on a Princess ship (not until 2021), but the way they handled things makes me lean a lot more to sailing with them for future cruises.

Ummm yeah - sorry this may come across as harsh but Japan had to concern themselves more with the needs of the 126 million people than 4000 people on a ship.  

And just where would Japan or any country for that matter have 4,000 ready to go isolation spaces at the drop of a hat.  Ever consider the fast moving and unknown nature of this,  The logistic involved in doing what you suggested.  All those things take time.  Which is why sadly, keeping the passengers on board in isolation was the best option available at that time.  Since then the situation evolved, other governments agreed to fly home their citizens and out them in isolation in their home country, etc.  But again, all of that takes time and planning

7 hours ago, kathy49 said:

As I said “the quarantine failed these passengers” and I would add the crew too...!

Incorrect.  But I know what you meant.

Quarantine accomplished its goal so far of not spreading the virus to shore.

What failed the passengers is the isolation measures implemented on board the ship

9 hours ago, em-sk said:

 

What is odd about all of this is for the US and Canada they are requiring an additional 14 day quarantine away from the ship.  Sounds like that is not a requirement if staying in Japan.  

 

 

Japan is crazy and negligent if they don't require additional quarantine on land given all the recent cases diagnosed.

They run a huge risk of it spreading on land if they just let people loose

10 hours ago, ceilidh1 said:

And to clarify, I’m not saying passengers should have been released to go about regular business. I’m saying governments should have stepped in on day 1 and got their people out and into a real quarantine. THAT is why the past 11 days have been for nothing!

Really???  Day 1 ???

Do you not understand that the authorities are dealing with a new virus and still trying to more fully understand it and how best to counteract it?

Do you not understand based on the data known at the time about the virus, the Japanese made the best decision at the time and the quarantine has been effective in what it was designed to do ?

Do you not understand the logistics involved in moving people off the ship to their own home countries in a safe manner without putting other people involved at risk?

Do you not understand you need to arrange busses, plane,  drivers, pilots, doctors and other medical personnel, suitable housing, etc, etc ?

All of this takes a lot of time and planning

11 hours ago, caribill said:

 

Still better than 14 days quarantine away from home in California or Texas.

 

Guess who will pay to get to their homes after the USA 14 day quarantine period is over. That certainly would not be Princess.

You are missing the point.  They are going to be quarantined in the US or elsewhere for at least another 14 days whenever they come

They will not be allowed back in the US for "some time" if they are not on the charter flights

"Should you choose not to return on this charter flight, you will be unable to return to the United
States for a period of time. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention will make a final
determination on this matter."

5 hours ago, Aus Traveller said:

No. The opposite has been announced. For example, Mr David Abel has said that after he and his wife has finished their 14 day quarantine, provided they don't test positive, they will not have to go into further quarantine.

Don't count on it.

Unless the quarantine on the ship is extended until there are at least a full 14 days of no new cases presenting, Japan would be negligent to let them loose in their country without some additional quarantine period off the ship.

And if Japan lets them off without that additional quarantine period to go to a flight home, there probably is a strong likelihood of a quarantine period in their home country when they land 

22 minutes ago, bluesea321 said:

 

One has to question whether the quarantine is working or not. "

Asked and answered.   Do you understand what a quarantine is supposed to accomplish?  This was asked just yesterday and I responded to you and another person

The quarantine for the Diamond is doing what it is intended to do - keep the virus outbreak from passengers on the ship limited to those on the ship and not spread it beyond the ship.

14 hours ago, Ourusualbeach said:

As was discussed earlier it is a different situation.

 

On the Carnival cruise it was someone who was travelling who was ill.  On the Royal cruise the ill person was not travelling.

 

I have read of and personally been involved with situations where Royal did exactly as Carnival in the same situation.

This, this, this !!!!!

Royal is far from a heartless corporation

Speaking from personal experience, we have gone on a large number of cruises with various lines and never bought insurance.  This fall we were scheduled to go on a Royal cruise and a  few weeks before the cruise, I had an unexpected medical issue arise and was scheduled for two surgeries that could not be delayed until after the cruise and which would require a lengthy hospital stay.  Knowing Royal's policy and the fact we did not purchase insurance, I was likely out the full fare.  I did reach out to Royal nicely explaining my situation and asking if there was anything they could do.  They talked about me not taking the travel insurance which I understood.  But in the end, Royal gave me a partial FCC.  I was very grateful as they did not have to do so.  Sure, I still lost money but not as much as I could have.  And given it was two weeks out, Royal probably was able to resell my cabin and make out on the deal - but if so good for them.  They went above and beyond their policy because of my (the passengers) medical condition just like the OP quoted Carnival doing for them and I will always appreciate it and remember it when I book future cruises and choose which line to sail with.  But that was a medical situation directly impacting me as a passenger - not a family member not booked on the cruise.

Bottom line is perhaps I got lucky.  Royal certainly did not have to do what they did nor was I going to be upset if they didn't do anything.  I knew the risk of not taking insurance.  But they helped some.  And now that I have recovered, I have booked a new cruise on Royal (I was able to apply the partial FCC I had and pay the difference) - and this time, having learned my lesson, I purchased the travel insurance.

So again, to those people complaining - Royal is far from heartless.  

Now as to the OP - the question I have for him is why did he not learn his lesson from his incident with Carnival?  After experiencing an issue once and getting lucky, why did he not learn from it and buy insurance this time?  Was he really expecting that everyone will take care of him and all those people buying insurance are suckers?  I know myself, after my experience, I won't cruise again without travel insurance - or if by some chance I decide to - say for a very last minute cruise - I will do so knowing the risk.  And I would never think of asking Royal or some other cruise line for another exception to the rule.  Once is more than fair.  If you can't learn your lesson after the first incident, don't come looking for accommodation on future incidents.

1 hour ago, zonacruiser25 said:

Is the quarantine having the desired effect or has the Diamond become an incubator? 

56 minutes ago, bluesea321 said:

 

That is the 64,000 dollar question, they just don't know. They have tested a very small number of pax/crew and everyday we get new infections. Not encouraging. 

The answer is YES - the quarantine IS having the desired effect.  Other than the one healthcare worker who has come down with coronavirus, it has NOT passed to the rest of Japan.  And by not sending potential carriers on a bunch of flights all over the globe, it has not passed from these specific passengers to the rest of the world.

The quarantine for the Diamond is doing what it is intended to do - keep the virus outbreak from passengers on the ship limited to those on the ship and not spread it beyond the ship.

53 minutes ago, kathy49 said:

boy i don't think extending this quarantine is really the solution  here...what are they just going to wait until everyone gets it? That meal prep not being handled off ship was a bad mistake.

That is where this is headed.  I would wager people are not getting off the ship on 2/19

3 hours ago, NorthwestCruiser said:

 "What happens in China and their hospitals does not necessarily represent "our" cruising world"

 

Let's not fool ourselves.   The hospitals in Wuhan are (were) excellent and on par with anything in the United States, except probably newer than most.   China hasn't just been sitting on all of the money that they have been making from world trade, and if you think that Chinese people are not just as smart, dedicated, and just as likely to be good doctors as people in any other country, well I don't know what to say.    I'd like to see the state of Washington employees try to build a working hospital in 10 days...

 

  

Not necessarily true at all.  Most of what they are calling hospitals for people with the corona virus are nothing more than converted warehouses / arenas with beds 2 feet apart and no sophisticated medical equipment.  The "hospital" they built in 10 days is essentially the same thing - a warehousing facility to house everyone who is sick in order to try and contain the disease.  That 10 day "hospital" has no equipment / etc like a regular hospital

3 hours ago, K.T.B. said:

 

 At this point, I wonder if the quarantine is more to keep the passengers from possibly infecting anyone on shore, rather than those on board.  It's as if the Japanese government is more than willing to sacrifice all 3,700 people on board to this virus and let the chips fall where they may. 

Ummm that is exactly what a quarantine is and does.  It is designed to protect the overall public from a contagious disease.  In this case, Japan does not want those individuals on board infecting people in Japan - and then having the disease spread even further.   The object is to contain the virus and unfortunately, in this case that means those on board have to suffer through this for the greater good.  

This concept is why China has quarantined entire cities - or welded shut apartment buildings where someone is infected.  They are trying to contain it and stop it from spreading.  And unfortunately, if that means some suffer because of it, the alternative is far worse

15 hours ago, The_Big_M said:

 

Yes. Doesn't make fearmongering right.

Ummm there is fearmongering and there is being prudent

The official numbers being reported by the communist government in China is less than a very small fraction of how widespread this outbreak is in China right now

The last leak showed 25,000 deaths and over 150,000 people infected.  Cremetoriums report receiving hundreds of bodies a day

This isn't normal behavior:

https://twitter.com/sotiridi/status/1225169999884640256?s=20

https://twitter.com/sotiridi/status/1225927124638408708?s=20

https://twitter.com/sotiridi/status/1224659425711067136?s=20

https://twitter.com/sotiridi/status/1225927726160400385?s=20

https://twitter.com/sotiridi/status/1226192467097214976?s=20

https://twitter.com/sotiridi/status/1225545188279537665?s=20

Look at more of the videos this foreign journalist has posted (he has a ton of them) showing what is really going on

On 2/7/2020 at 2:05 PM, taglovestocruise said:

Coronavirus stats.. 24000 infected, 500 deaths... Flu stats.. 26 million infected and this season 10,000 deaths in the US.  Worry about the flu not corona. 

Those numbers from the Chinese government are pure make believe.  While China controls most of the media and tries to control social media in China, there have been leaks and the actual number of cases and deaths are massive.  The last one showed 154023 infections and 24589 deaths from Wuhan

https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/3871594

This is backed up by a number of stories leaked out of Wuhan about morgues dealing with 100's of bodies a day

9 hours ago, kruzerci said:

We and most of our friends and family do beef tenderloin or rib roasts on Christmas. Thanksgiving is too close for Turkey again. 

The same here.  Turkey at Thanksgiving, Prime Rib Roast on Christmas

Ahhh - might be some metal on the one side but nothing like a fix of a lot of plastic tarps and duct tape on the back

https://www.facebook.com/FOX8NOLA/videos/2783065891736462/

1 hour ago, CruiseKeeper said:

I need some of that OBC!  Had high anxiety watching out for the Oasis.  We have several cruises booked on her.  
 

Why is it when there is a crash of cruise ships, Carnival always seems to be involved.  

Carnival's new slogan:

Carnival, where even our Captain gets plastered !!!

8 hours ago, papaflamingo said:

Talk about "jumping to conclusions."  According to the OP the bracelet was "found."  That means someone lost it. Does it really matter if it was in or out of the water? Does it really matter if it was 5 minutes ago or 5 weeks ago?  How would one know?  You seem to be excusing behavior that is wrong. 

Nope - you are the one jumping to conclusions.  I said no one knows the facts here.  No one knows the full story.  A whole host of things could have happened, I simply posted a few hypotheticals.  Others in the thread have posted other potential scenarios clearly pointing out that no one knows - and no one like you and the OP should jump to conclusions

1 hour ago, BirdTravels said:

should have snapped a picture with your phone and turned them into security. 

Why?  You are assuming they were thieves.

No one knows the full story.  Where did they find the bracelet?  The OP mentions they talked to the person working the scuba hut.  Did they find it while scuba diving or just on the ground by a chair ?  If it was the former, who knows how long it could have been in the ocean - it could have been from multiple cruises ago.  If it was the latter, then yes I believe the right thing to do was check with Royal onboard to see if anyone lost it.    Does Royal even have a lost and found onboard?  Anyway, my point is before jumping to conclusions, we really need more details

All that said, why would someone wear any valuable bracelet to the beach / ocean to begin with?  They are just asking for trouble.  That is the real lesson here

18 hours ago, Host Clarea said:

 

From my point of view, if the TA does not know that a refundable deposit is very important, then I don't want them as my TA anymore.

I disagree.  That may be important to some people and not to others.  One should never assume

Case in point - I recently booked a cruise for May.  Ended up getting a Refundable Deposit, not because I wanted it or asked for it but because it was the lowest rate available.  I saved several hundred over the lowest NRD rate.  But again, whether it was refundable or non refundable did not matter to me at all.  When I book, I do so planning to go.  I don't book on a whim.  I simply want the best price.  So the deposit status means nothing to people like me - and I am sure TAs have encountered this.

So my point again is simple, never assume.  If the deposit structure is important to you, make sure you mention that to your TA when you ask them to reprice your cruise to a lower rate

12 hours ago, tomservo said:

 

Exactly. I know a lot of people are blaming me for requesting the price drop without explicitly asking her not to change the deposit type, but I assumed that it was obvious that I did not want to change the deposit/booking type.

 

 

Never assume.  I know you don't like being told you are partially to blame her but IMO you are.  You should have made it known to the TA - and the TA should have told you to get the lower price you requested the deposit was changing.  You were BOTH at fault.

And as someone else pointed out, given the amount your TA is kicking back to you, you seem to be expecting stellar service for a pittance in commission

14 hours ago, Host Clarea said:

 

Because the TA was the one who made the change without keeping a basic and very important principle of the booking the same.

That doesn't absolve the OP of his responsibility.  He never stated to the TA that this was a very important aspect he did not want changed when he called her to get the price drop.  He has responsibility too.  The TA is not a mind reader

1 hour ago, tomservo said:

She asked me what to tell the resolutions department when they ask why didn't I upgrade with her. I told her to just tell them that I booked it late at night, didn't want to wake her up, and was worried that I would miss out on the sale. I'm still annoyed that she's been so defensive on this. Again, the fact that I didn't upgrade with her is moot. I always book my own then transfer to her - I prefer to do my own research and make my own reservations.

I believe you are both at fault.  She should have told you to reprice it at a lower rate, you were changing from refundable to non refundable.

That said, you were at fault booking a second cabin with a non refundable deposit on your own without checking with her first to just update your booking.

You both have fault here

1 hour ago, GeezerCouple said:

 

Chances are that OP should have waited until closer to sailing, when it was more likely to be known to interfere with Feb travel.

.

.

.

It's not at all clear that this IS the case here, but my point is that *we* cannot know all of this, and shouldn't be so specific in telling OP what to do.

 

 

 If If and buts were  . . . .  well no one is telling the OP what to do.  People were simply trying to answer the question the OP posed.  My response specifically stated what is the "likely" way the insurance company will look at it.  But until the OP files a claim, they won't know for sure

But in general, it is highly unlikely any reputable doctor will say that having an outbreak of Shingles in early December will definitively impact your ability to travel at least 2 months later.  But the insurance company is the one who will determine that.