Cruise critic article..Royal C may have re start announcement

[hcat]

https://www.cruisecritic.com/news/5661/?et_cid=3368333&et_rid=16760876&et_referrer=NULL

 

Article suggests Royal C may have an announcement  next week about cruise start ups.

One possibility is Mexican Riviera itin.   Guess it would be a start,  but we have been there and done that...some ports were nice, some  less than ideal..safety issues too. Guess we'll see what they say...any guesses on ships?

[frankdp]

Certainly very soon, likely very limited.  My thought is that if everything goes very well on start up, it will take 3 to 6 months before more normal, regularly scheduled cruises begin.   Just one guy’s opinion...

[cl.klink]

25 minutes ago, hcat said:

https://www.cruisecritic.com/news/5661/?et_cid=3368333&et_rid=16760876&et_referrer=NULL

 

Article suggests Royal C may have an announcement  next week about cruise start ups.

One possibility is Mexican Riviera itin.   Guess it would be a start,  but we have been there and done that...some ports were nice, some  less than ideal..safety issues too. Guess we'll see what they say...any guesses on ships?

 

Will look forward to this

- Joel

[LGW59]

8 minutes ago, frankdp said:

Certainly very soon, likely very limited.  My thought is that if everything goes very well on start up, it will take 3 to 6 months before more normal, regularly scheduled cruises begin.   Just one guy’s opinion...

Good, I hope they can work it all out so that my May 1 Apex can sail away!

[Schmoe38]

Perhaps an early launch of the Celebrity itineraries after May 2022? (other than Galapagos)
 

Randy

Edited October 15, 2020 by Schmoe38

[coastcat]

In 2021 NCL and Carnival will continue to run big ships (Bliss and Panorama) along the Mexican Riviera routes, plus each line will sail a second smaller ship there. Princess is moving Majestic Princess, which is a little smaller than Bliss & Panorama, to that region for the winter of 2021-2022. There's definitely a market. Heck, I have two Mexican Riviera cruises booked for next winter because it's an easy "just gimme some sunshine" trip from the Pacific Northwest.

 

Ovation has to be on the west coast next year for the Alaska season, and it seems unlikely that she'll get to do any of her scheduled Australia cruises this winter. Could RCL move Ovation to San Pedro in the next couple months to sail the Mexican Riviera until it's time to move northward?

 

Meanwhile, it looks like Solstice, Millennium, and Eclipse will all be looking for somewhere to go before the Alaska season next year.

Edited October 16, 2020 by coastcat

[hcat]

I wish they'd do a few  short Western Carib itins from Tampa (easy to drive to and fly to for many and there is a market there too)

 

Not sure why Ca  would be  a  more preferable place to re-start than Florida, but there must be some basis for this decision, if it comes to be. Perhaps proximity to Ca Coastal areas and Alaska

[EatonDoolittle]

22 minutes ago, hcat said:

I wish they'd do a few  short Western Carib itins from Tampa (easy to drive to and fly to for many and there is a market there too)

 

 

RC has 2 ships out of Tampa  doing just that, starting in Dec. of this year. 

Scheduled as of now,  anyway. 

4, 5, or 7 days to Cozumel and a few other stops. 

 

 

[Ashland]

Celebrity and most certainly RCI is very welcome back here on my coast especially sailing from San Pedro.

[Arizona Wildcat]

21 hours ago, hcat said:

https://www.cruisecritic.com/news/5661/?et_cid=3368333&et_rid=16760876&et_referrer=NULL

 

Article suggests Royal C may have an announcement  next week about cruise start ups.

One possibility is Mexican Riviera itin.   Guess it would be a start,  but we have been there and done that...some ports were nice, some  less than ideal..safety issues too. Guess we'll see what they say...any guesses on ships?

Ok.  How do they start Mexican Riviera cruises before that season ends about May 1st?  They are not likely to be able to sail out of any California port due to COVID.  Can they cruise out of Panama or ???

Also where to you cruise? Acapulco is not a safe place to visit.  Zihuatanejo is a beautiful tender port during the day, but gangs run wild after dark.

[ECCruise]

25 minutes ago, Arizona Wildcat said:

Ok.  How do they start Mexican Riviera cruises before that season ends about May 1st?  They are not likely to be able to sail out of any California port due to COVID.  Can they cruise out of Panama or ???

Also where to you cruise? Acapulco is not a safe place to visit.  Zihuatanejo is a beautiful tender port during the day, but gangs run wild after dark.

Ships aren't in Zihua after dark.

Been there many times including in February this year.  Zero problems. Great people, great food.

[coastcat]

4 hours ago, Arizona Wildcat said:

Ok.  How do they start Mexican Riviera cruises before that season ends about May 1st?  They are not likely to be able to sail out of any California port due to COVID.  Can they cruise out of Panama or ???

Also where to you cruise? Acapulco is not a safe place to visit.  Zihuatanejo is a beautiful tender port during the day, but gangs run wild after dark.

The standard ports are Cabo San Lucas, Puerto Vallarta, and Mazatlán, with Ensenada serving as a useful PVSA compliance port when needed. They’re all safe tourist destinations. 
 

Funny you should mention Panama. NCL recently announced itineraries sailing out of there starting in November 2021. 
 

Well, let’s see what they reveal next week. 

[WonderMan3]

Meanwhile the U.S. is reporting more than 65,000 new COVID cases in one day, the most since the end of July and only about 10,000 away from our single highest number day which was around 75,000. Not sure what country would welcome cruises originating in the U.S. with U.S. passengers right now with our viral explosion but that's just me...

Edited October 17, 2020 by WonderMan3

[Yoshikitty]

...and with those - just imagine a small or larger outbreak ( because people screw up) on one larger ships.

 

I can‘t imagine that anyone is willing to make that gamble.

My personal opinion is that cruising won‘t be starting before next summer.

Edited October 17, 2020 by Yoshikitty

[downsmead]

6 hours ago, coastcat said:

The standard ports are Cabo San Lucas, Puerto Vallarta, and Mazatlán, with Ensenada serving as a useful PVSA compliance port when needed. They’re all safe tourist destinations. 
 

We like the trips that call at La Paz and Loreto,  prefer those ports to Mazatlan.

[jg51]

9 hours ago, WonderMan3 said:

Meanwhile the U.S. is reporting more than 65,000 new COVID cases in one day, the most since the end of July and only about 10,000 away from our single highest number day which was around 75,000. Not sure what country would welcome cruises originating in the U.S. with U.S. passengers right now with our viral explosion but that's just me...

 

We have been watching the numbers of newly reported virus "cases" and "deaths" at the CDC site daily since April, and we have voraciously read a great deal about this subject.  We have concluded the following: There is probably no genuine "viral explosion" taking place.  Instead, one or both of the following two things is probably true:

 

EITHER

1 -- The higher numbers come from the fact that much more testing -- and more accurate testing -- is being done now than in the past.

 

AND/OR

2 -- Millions of people have finally learned that only a small percentage of people who become infected have symptoms -- that very many of those who have symptoms have only mild ones -- and that not everyone who has the worst symptoms dies.  Therefore, far more people than before are taking risks (doing more shopping, going back to work, going to church/synagogue, associating with unmasked friends, etc.).  In other words, millions of Americans -- and people in many other nations -- are no longer as terrified as 90% of the media, certain politicians, and certain other hand-wringing folks had long persuaded them to be.

 

If option 2 is playing a part, as we believe it is, the (now better-informed) risk-takers also know that they must continue to protect the elderly and other vulnerable people, so they are not endangering them.  That is why, despite the increase in the number of cases diagnosed, the MUCH MORE IMPORTANT number -- the number of deaths from the virus -- continues to decrease slightly, week by week, in the U.S..

 

None of us needs to live in fear.  "All things must pass." 

Let us all, please, be optimistic!

.

Edited October 17, 2020 by jg51

[TeeRick]

52 minutes ago, jg51 said:

 

We have been watching the numbers of newly reported virus "cases" and "deaths" at the CDC site daily since April, and we have voraciously read a great deal about this subject.  We have concluded the following: There is probably no genuine "viral explosion" taking place.  Instead, one or both of the following two things is probably true:

 

EITHER

1 -- The higher numbers come from the fact that much more testing -- and more accurate testing -- is being done now than in the past.

 

AND/OR

2 -- Millions of people have finally learned that only a small percentage of people who become infected have symptoms -- that very many of those who have symptoms have only mild ones -- and that not everyone who has the worst symptoms dies.  Therefore, far more people than before are taking risks (doing more shopping, going back to work, going to church/synagogue, associating with unmasked friends, etc.).  In other words, millions of Americans -- and people in many other nations -- are no longer as terrified as 90% of the media, certain politicians, and certain other hand-wringing folks had long persuaded them to be.

 

If option 2 is playing a part, as we believe it is, the (now better-informed) risk-takers also know that they must continue to protect the elderly and other vulnerable people, so they are not endangering them.  That is why, despite the increase in the number of cases diagnosed, the MUCH MORE IMPORTANT number -- the number of deaths from the virus -- continues to decrease slightly, week by week, in the U.S..

 

None of us needs to live in fear.  "All things must pass." 

Let us all, please, be optimistic!

.

jg51 you have put forward a well worded response and it is your perspective and a very interesting one.   I appreciate different perspectives and particularly ones that are expressed so clearly.   I am sure that some will take issue with it but thank you for optimism.

Edited October 17, 2020 by TeeRick

[phoenix_dream]

5 minutes ago, TeeRick said:

jg51 you have pit forward a well worded response and it is your perspective and a very interesting one.   I appreciate different perspectives and particularly ones that are expressed so clearly.   I am sure that some will take issue with it but thank you for optimism.

I agree that at least this argument, much of which I do happen to disagree with, was well written and put forth with reason.  I appreciate optimism as well. 

 

Unfortunately, some of the statements expressed as facts are not.  At least not yet.  I googled how many people do not show symptoms.  From reliable news sources, I found every percentage from 20% to 86%.  So the facts are, we just do not yet know.  I do agree that the death numbers are very important, and they have in fact been going down, primarily I suspect due to better knowledge of treatment.  But event those who do not die can be very, very sick and may need to be hospitalized.  And many of us, like me, know people personally who have died of the virus.  That's enough to up my fear factor for sure!

[PTC DAWG]

10 hours ago, WonderMan3 said:

Meanwhile the U.S. is reporting more than 65,000 new COVID cases in one day, the most since the end of July and only about 10,000 away from our single highest number day which was around 75,000. Not sure what country would welcome cruises originating in the U.S. with U.S. passengers right now with our viral explosion but that's just me...

False positives abound...no symptoms, think about it..

[TeeRick]

26 minutes ago, phoenix_dream said:

I agree that at least this argument, much of which I do happen to disagree with, was well written and put forth with reason.  I appreciate optimism as well. 

 

Unfortunately, some of the statements expressed as facts are not.  At least not yet.  I googled how many people do not show symptoms.  From reliable news sources, I found every percentage from 20% to 86%.  So the facts are, we just do not yet know.  I do agree that the death numbers are very important, and they have in fact been going down, primarily I suspect due to better knowledge of treatment.  But event those who do not die can be very, very sick and may need to be hospitalized.  And many of us, like me, know people personally who have died of the virus.  That's enough to up my fear factor for sure!

phoenix_dream,

I have one very close relative (65 y) with every health problem imaginable (both heart and lung issues and diabetes) and became virus positive but amazingly never had a symptom.  But also 4 family friends in their mid to late 80's with Alzheimer's in different Assisted Care facilities.  Two of them died and two of them were asymptomatic.  A lot has to do with individual immune systems and genes I am guessing.  So much still unknown really.  I mourn the 2 deaths but also am very happy that the others did not even become sick.  So confounding a virus!  Many of us have these very inconsistent type scenarios in our lives and that is why among other things there is so much controversy and debate on how to proceed forward at this point.  It is human nature for us to extrapolate from our personal experiences.  At least in my case I could not even begin to do that!

 

Here is a summary from the CDC on COVID pandemic planning scenarios.  As you state the numbers are still very uncertain but the best estimate of the CDC is seen in Table 1.  About 40% asymptomatic which seems to be the number most commonly thrown about these days.  But nowhere near a well founded fact yet.

 https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scenarios.html

Edited October 17, 2020 by TeeRick

[WonderMan3]

5 hours ago, phoenix_dream said:

I agree that at least this argument, much of which I do happen to disagree with, was well written and put forth with reason.  I appreciate optimism as well. 

 

Unfortunately, some of the statements expressed as facts are not.  At least not yet.  I googled how many people do not show symptoms.  From reliable news sources, I found every percentage from 20% to 86%.  So the facts are, we just do not yet know.  I do agree that the death numbers are very important, and they have in fact been going down, primarily I suspect due to better knowledge of treatment.  But event those who do not die can be very, very sick and may need to be hospitalized.  And many of us, like me, know people personally who have died of the virus.  That's enough to up my fear factor for sure!

Exactly. Deaths have decreased because when the virus initially took hold here in the States it essentially took us off guard and before strict protocols could be implemented at nursing homes and rehab hospitals. It swept through those facilities like wildfire and killed many. Since then those facilities have either been totally locked down or have added guidelines to keep residents safe. In addition, as more has been learned about the virus, treatments have evolved that have helped to either reduce symptoms or in some cases prevent some people from dying.

 

There have also been studies indicating that the amount of virus you are exposed to (depending on proximity and length of time you are exposed to viral particles) can affect the severity of your symptoms. Wearing masks can significantly decrease the amount of virus you can be exposed to. Since mask wearing has increased overall since the spring (despite the minority of crazies who refuse to wear a mask that social media likes to show) that has likely diminished the amount of virus people have been exposed to and decreased severity of symptoms and deaths.

 

But we are still having around 900-1000 deaths per day. Not sure how that can just be spun away positively in any sort of rational manner but people are certainly giving it the old college try...

[WonderMan3]

5 hours ago, PTC DAWG said:

False positives abound...no symptoms, think about it..

People having no symptoms doesn’t mean they have no virus. In fact, asymptomatic people are the greatest cause of spread of this virus presently (people showing symptoms generally stay home and away from people). And the false positives primarily stem from the antigen tests which are the rapid result test. In order for a positive antigen test to be counted in total case numbers the person must be displaying symptoms or have been exposed to someone with the virus. This article debunks some of these myths: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cleveland.com/coronavirus/2020/08/are-false-positives-from-antigen-tests-ratcheting-up-ohio-coronavirus-case-numbers-doctors-correct-testing-myths.html%3foutputType=amp

[hcat]

Mazatlan was not very impressive.. if we  cruised there  again,  it would be a ahip day. Let's see what they announce, if anything.

[hcat]

On 10/16/2020 at 1:28 PM, EatonDoolittle said:

 

RC has 2 ships out of Tampa  doing just that, starting in Dec. of this year. 

Scheduled as of now,  anyway. 

4, 5, or 7 days to Cozumel and a few other stops. 

 

 

Have to check that out...thanks.