The Cruise and Travel Industry is in a very bad place!

[chipmaster]

6 hours ago, Hlitner said:

Whenever anything bad happens we all have this tendency to find a scapegoat.  The government often gets the blame.  In the case of COVID it is just against the trend to accept that any virus goes wherever it pleases and there is little any government can do unless you are on an island that can be isolated from earth (like New Zealand).  If you look around the world none of the other approaches (lock downs, no lock downs, more testing, etc) has done much good.  The various efforts only seem to delay or shift the inevitable coming of COVID.   The blame game makes us all feel a little better (it is always somebody else's fault) but does little to forestall the fact that the virus wins.  

 

I have suggested from last March that we must learn how to live with COVID just like we have learned to live with other bugs.  With COVID not only do we have to deal with the virus but now must deal with the fallout from letting the world economy go to hell.  So here we are more then 10 months into this pandemic with many ruined economies and we still have the virus!  Whether any of what society has done really saved any lives is a question for historians.  But much of what we do now is so silly as to defy logic...and yet most do it without question.  Take masks.  Wearing a N95 or KN95 mask does help prevent the spread of any virus.  Wearing these silly single layer fabric masks are near worthless (viruses can go through that stuff without any problem).  Social distancing is fine, but 6 feet of separation is not nearly enough (this has been proven by real experiments and tests) but even the authorities cannot figure out how to run the world if we had to keep 15 feet from all souls.  

 

How can we possibly have a safe cruise environment?  Social distancing (to the extent necessary) is impossible on a large cruise ship.  The only certain way would be to somehow be 100% sure that everyone was virus free when they boarded and then not allow anyone off the ship anywhere.   Everything else is high risk and we can see the result in Europe where just about every cruise ship that is operating has had instances of COVID.  

 

So now, most of us must wait patiently for a safe/effective vaccine.  The anti-vaxers also wait for a safe/effective vaccine and pray that everyone else gets it and they reap the benefit.  If there is never a safe/effective vaccine the world will ultimately have no choice but to adjust to a COVID world and most of us will get on with our lives.  Actually, many of us have already gotten on with our lives while others continue to "hide in their basements" until there is a vaccine or they finally get tired of their basements.   DW and I do live our life but we also follow the crowd and wear our masks (which are either N95 or KN95), social distance, and also use a lot of common sense.  Going out to restaurants where we live is quite safe (plenty of social distancing) and we can enjoy those moments while feeling bad for places like NYC where the government attitude is to bankrupt 10s of thousands of restaurants, their owners, and their employees.   Some travel is fine as long as folks use lots of common sense, follow the rules, avoid the demonstrators (who never follow any rules), etc.  But I do think that cruises are a big no-no until (and if) there is a decent vaccine.

 

Speaking of masks (keep in mind that we do wear them per requirements) there apparently is a very interesting study (done in Denmark) that calls into question all the mask wearing standards.  But this particular study has been rejected by all the major medical publications (JAMA, Lancet, etc) without comment.  This seems to be another case where a few have decided that "they know best" and "censorship is good." and the public needs to be kept in the dark.  Assuming this study shows that most mask wearing is worthless the publication of the study would cause a worldwide fiasco.  So when we finally get a real scientific study that information is withheld (for now) from the world.  Go figure.https://www.rt.com/news/504219-danish-mask-study-rejected-coronavirus/ .  To be very blunt, what scares me a lot more then COVID is this international trend towards censorship and the rejection of debate/discussion and anyone with whom we disagree  (i.e. cancel culture).  

 

Hank

 

[ilikeanswers]

7 hours ago, Hlitner said:

 there is little any government can do unless you are on an island that can be isolated from earth (like New Zealand).  

 

Uruguay, Vietnam, Botswana and South Korea are not islands and from the data it seems they are doing pretty well🤔 And while Taiwan is an island I still reckon for a country with one of the highest population densities it was pretty impressive how they contained their community spread. 

[Cruzaholic41]

1 hour ago, chipmaster said:

 

That’s a pointless chart. It only says they know people, but it doesn’t take in to account where the people are with symptoms. I live in FL and always wear my mask in public, but all the people I know with symptoms are in other states (CA, NY, and OH). I don’t know anyone in FL with symptoms. 
 

And even so, it just says symptoms. That could mean anything. Again, pointless chart. 

Edited October 28, 2020 by Cruzaholic41

[Hlitner]

2 minutes ago, ilikeanswers said:

 

Uruguay, Vietnam, Botswana and South Korea are not islands and from the data it seems they are doing pretty well🤔 And while Taiwan is an island I still reckon for a country with one of the highest population densities it was pretty impressive how they contained their community spread. 

I cannot speak to Botswana or Uraguay, but Korea and Vietnam are essentially like islands because of their geography.  Consider that the only land border with South Korean is North Korea and this is closed!  Any other access must be via air or sea.  Vietnam does have more land borders but strictly controls those borders (unlike here in the USA).

 

What is interesting (to me) is that a few weeks/months ago we would hear a lot of criticism of the USA from countries that told us everything was under control.  But now, many of those countries are having a resurgence.  This just speaks to the my comment that ultimately the virus goes where the virus wants to go.  It is the nature of many diseases that are highly communicable.    And yes, Taiwan is an island and one with a people that are very obedient to their government.  

 

Just keep in mind that the we are still in the early chapters of this COVID nightmare.  Places that thought they finally had this virus under control (such as Italy) are now finding that control is fleeting.  Personally I accept that the virus is going to be a major risk until a decent vaccine, and we (my family) take many common sense precautions to protect ourselves (that is called personal responsibility).  That being said, I do not believe that locking ourselves in the basement for the next few years is a good option.  Like many others, we are trying to find the common sense balance between caution and living.  

 

Hank

[Hlitner]

5 minutes ago, Cruzaholic41 said:

That’s a pointless chart. It only says they know people, but it doesn’t take in to account where the people are with symptoms. I live in FL and always wear my mask in public, but all the people I know with symptoms are in other states (CA, NY, and OH). I don’t know anyone in FL with symptoms. 
 

And even so, it just says symptoms. That could mean anything. Again, pointless chart. 

I realize this sounds hopeless but I still think that "the virus goes where the virus wants" and most of what we do for mitigation only delays (at best) the virus.  Folks should be listening to the logical recommendations of our experts and also using some common sense when it comes to self-protection.   But more and more we hear folks making excuses and trying to shift blame which is not helpful.   Just consider the Governor of NY who thought it was a good idea to send folks with COVID back to nursing homes.  While his motives were well intentioned and he obviously got some bad advice from his advisors, he has since tried to shift blame to everyone but himself.  He was not alone.  We had a similar situation in PA where our own Secretary of Health insisted that our nursing homes were safe...shortly after he moved his own mother out of facility and into a hotel!   The one common theme among nearly all politicians is to never accept responsibility, always blame somebody else, and rewrite history.

 

Hank

[ilikeanswers]

11 minutes ago, Hlitner said:

Consider that the only land border with South Korean is North Korea and this is closed!  Any other access must be via air or sea.

 

Personally I think their epidemic emergency response plan had more to do with it than their borders as they have a pretty good handle of community transmission.

 

11 minutes ago, Hlitner said:

But now, many of those countries are having a resurgence.  

 

Yes there is a resurgence but there are countries whose second wave are not as bad so you have to wonder what they are doing differently. Studies into the 1918 Flu Pandemic responses have shown places who went long and hard with the first lock down had the effect of decreasing the severity of the second and third wave on top of that those places had a better economic bounce back. So I think to say everything is inevitable and we can't mitigate the damage is not entirely true either. 

[SelectSys]

35 minutes ago, Hlitner said:

I cannot speak to Botswana or Uraguay, but Korea and Vietnam are essentially like islands because of their geography.  Consider that the only land border with South Korean is North Korea and this is closed!  Any other access must be via air or sea.  Vietnam does have more land borders but strictly controls those borders (unlike here in the USA).

 

 

Both Botswana and Uruguay are large, low population, low population density countries.  Uruguay has about the same population - 3.4 million as San Diego County.  Outside of Montevideo, the country really doesn't have any large population center and its border with Argentina is separated by water.  The northern border into Brazil doesn't have much in the way of population.  Only time I went was via the ferry from Buenos Aires for the day which is probably one of the busiest ways into the country.  

 

Botswana is about 2.5 million and is one of the richest countries in Africa on a per capita basis and is highly developed in relation to most other African countries.   I have never been.

 

Both of these countries would be much easier to manage than say continental Europe or the US with much high levels of population to manage and mobility across states.

 

You are certainly correct about the border were I live.  It's now much better than it was a couple of years ago, but it is by no means fully controlled.  Sometimes we take house guests down to see the "wall" from the Mexican side.  Invariably they are amazed at all the commotion and people looking to cross in an informal manner.

 

27 minutes ago, Hlitner said:

Just consider the Governor of NY who thought it was a good idea to send folks with COVID back to nursing homes.  While his motives were well intentioned and he obviously got some bad advice from his advisors, he has since tried to shift blame to everyone but himself.  He was not alone.  We had a similar situation in PA where our own Secretary of Health insisted that our nursing homes were safe...shortly after he moved his own mother out of facility and into a hotel!   The one common theme among nearly all politicians is to never accept responsibility, always blame somebody else, and rewrite history.

 

I believe the Governor of NY was simply following the "best science" or opinion available.  Amazing how the science tends to evolve over time as we learn new things. 

Edited October 28, 2020 by SelectSys

[ilikeanswers]

15 minutes ago, SelectSys said:

Both Botswana and Uruguay are large, low population, low population density countries.  Uruguay has about the same population - 3.4 million as San Diego County.  

 

Population is an advantage but I think one shouldn't outright dismiss the  tactics employed by Uruguay either :

Uruguay Emerges as a Rare Pandemic Winner in Latin America

[Hlitner]

1 hour ago, SelectSys said:

 

Both Botswana and Uruguay are large, low population, low population density countries.  Uruguay has about the same population - 3.4 million as San Diego County.  Outside of Montevideo, the country really doesn't have any large population center and its border with Argentina is separated by water.  The northern border into Brazil doesn't have much in the way of population.  Only time I went was via the ferry from Buenos Aires for the day which is probably one of the busiest ways into the country.  

 

Botswana is about 2.5 million and is one of the richest countries in Africa on a per capita basis and is highly developed in relation to most other African countries.   I have never been.

 

Both of these countries would be much easier to manage than say continental Europe or the US with much high levels of population to manage and mobility across states.

 

You are certainly correct about the border were I live.  It's now much better than it was a couple of years ago, but it is by no means fully controlled.  Sometimes we take house guests down to see the "wall" from the Mexican side.  Invariably they are amazed at all the commotion and people looking to cross in an informal manner.

 

 

I believe the Governor of NY was simply following the "best science" or opinion available.  Amazing how the science tends to evolve over time as we learn new things. 

Actually that would be wrong which is why only a very few States (all controlled by Democratic Governors) decided to insist that Long Term Care Facilities (primarily nursing homes) be mandated to readmit residents who were being discharged from hospitals with COVID.  In the case of NY (and my own PA) the rules (set forth by the Governors) refused to require further testing of those folks.  In my early government life I was involved in regulating both nursing homes and hospitals and understand the reasoning behind the Governor's orders.  But the reasoning was obviously wrong when applied to a highly contagious disease (i.e. Covid) and it should not have happened.  You could compare that to the policy followed in Florida where letting folks, who might be contagious with COVID, into any nursing home.  

 

I do not want to play politics but it is what it is!  The facts are in the public arena for anyone that wants to do research.  How does this apply to cruising?  Just like COVID quickly spread through nursing homes it also quickly spread through the Diamond Princess and a few other ships.  We can all debate the best way to deal with COVID, but one thing that is not debatable is that it is a highly contagious disease with most of the spread through the air.

 

Hank

[ontheweb]

2 hours ago, SelectSys said:

 

 

 

I believe the Governor of NY was simply following the "best science" or opinion available.  Amazing how the science tends to evolve over time as we learn new things. 

The Governor of NY wanted to lower the curve to hospitals, and to do this he sacrificed the lives of the most vulnerable of the elderly.

[sfaaa]

4 hours ago, ilikeanswers said:

 

And while Taiwan is an island I still reckon for a country with one of the highest population densities it was pretty impressive how they contained their community spread. 

Yes and without assistance from WHO. Quite remarkable indeed.

[Hlitner]

In keeping with the spirit of this topic I will toss out another thought.  Many of the discussions here on CC have been about the CDC No sail orders, when will cruising resume, where will cruises go, etc.  I think an under-discussed topic has been "will the cruise line's be able to attract enough customers when cruising does resume?"  So I will offer up DW and myself as the poster children (senior children) for cruising.  We have been frequent cruisers (70-110 days a year) for many years and have been cruising since the mid 70s.  We love to be on ships and that has not changed!

 

When COVID first became an issue last February our initial attitude was "we hope this does not impact any of our cruises/trips."  As time went on we had 4 cruises cancelled and we also cancelled related trips.  Like many, we figured this would all blow over by now and things would get back to normal.  But as we learned more about COVID and started to face reality we realized that this virus is a game changer....for the long haul.  Now our attitude has completely changed.  While we still have future cruises booked we are skeptical that we will be on any ship for a long time...if ever!  We no longer think that a mass market cruise ship is the place to be during the COVID pandemic.  In the past 2 months we have come to the conclusion that cruising in the era of COVID is not a good idea until there is a safe/effective vaccine and it is mandated for everyone on a ship.  We also think that some land-based travel can be accomplished in a relatively safe manner.  Small ship cruising on luxury lines might also be reasonable under COVID...but we would need more convincing that this is a good idea.

 

So, the cruise lines will eventually need to find ways to attract more (and new) customers.  While future bookings are said to be strong, we should understand that much of that is the result of cruisers looking for ways to use lots of big Future Cruise Credits.  We have one 30 day HAL cruise (April 2021) booked because of having received a generous FCC.  But that cruise is unlikely to happen and we have our doubts if we will ever use the FCCs given to us by both HAL and Princess.    The 

 

The bottom line for us is that as much as we love being on ships, the cruise industry must now convince us that their product is both safe and fun.  The proposals to cruise during COVID do make an attempt (we think it is a lame attempt) to be safe, but at the sacrifice of much of what makes cruises fun and special.  While there will be plenty of folks willing to go back to cruising on short Caribbean or Alaskan cruises (assuming that Canada and Alaska open) but I think that will likely get "old" once folks realize how much has been stripped from a traditional cruise vacation in the interests of COVID mitigation.  It could be a long time before most folks are ready to hop on a long plane to go to Europe, Asia, South America, etc. to get on a cruise.

 

Hank

[ilikeanswers]

7 minutes ago, Hlitner said:

While there will be plenty of folks willing to go back to cruising on short Caribbean or Alaskan cruises (assuming that Canada and Alaska open) but I think that will likely get "old" once folks realize how much has been stripped from a traditional cruise vacation in the interests of COVID mitigation.

 

But cruising has been changing even without COVID. I'm always reading people lamenting the so called "golden age" of cruising. People complaining about degrading quality and how it is not what it use to be and despite those who don't like the changes more people have adapted to the changes just fine and of course there is a whole generation who don't know any different. Cruising with COVID protocols might become the norm and while there will be a cohort of no more cruising for us plently will just accept it as the new normal. There will be growing pains like any changes but eventually people won't know any different. It is like all the protocols that came after 9/11. Everyone complained about the hassle, people lamented on how it use to be but eventually we all adapted, moved on and travel even grew.

[navybankerteacher]

From what a lot of posters here have indicated,, and from the fact that there are very many throughout the US who seem to deny the reality of COVID (as evidenced by reluctance to wear masks or practice social distancing) I believe that with attractive pricing many cruise ships could sail next week as fully loaded as might be permitted.

 

I personally believe that such sailings would lead to further spread - but that only a massive uptick in hospitalizations and deaths (as might already be coming)  will change the minds of COVID-deniers on a large scale.

[chipmaster]

17 hours ago, Cruzaholic41 said:

That’s a pointless chart. It only says they know people, but it doesn’t take in to account where the people are with symptoms. I live in FL and always wear my mask in public, but all the people I know with symptoms are in other states (CA, NY, and OH). I don’t know anyone in FL with symptoms. 
 

And even so, it just says symptoms. That could mean anything. Again, pointless chart. 

I leave it to the readers ability to think and deduce, your concusion is interesting and says it all, LOL

Edited October 29, 2020 by chipmaster

[chipmaster]

47 minutes ago, navybankerteacher said:

From what a lot of posters here have indicated,, and from the fact that there are very many throughout the US who seem to deny the reality of COVID (as evidenced by reluctance to wear masks or practice social distancing) I believe that with attractive pricing many cruise ships could sail next week as fully loaded as might be permitted.

 

I personally believe that such sailings would lead to further spread - but that only a massive uptick in hospitalizations and deaths (as might already be coming)  will change the minds of COVID-deniers on a large scale.

 

The overflowing hospital during the first half of the year along the East coast and Southern US, and now Mid-West, hmm all made up   

 

Who needs test to see the impact, amazing lack of deduction, people are like mushrooms.

[Joebucks]

On 10/28/2020 at 11:38 AM, navybankerteacher said:

It takes a while for the results to come in after a “spreader event” .  People who attend eithe get infected or they don’t, then over a couple of weeks they develop the viruses in quantity to spread, then the people they expose do the same.  A good example of the time lag involved after the big motor cycle in Sturgis, SD before South Dakota - an area  largely spared previously - is now a hot spot.

 

I hope that you do not seriously believe that having a large number of people in close proximity, without masks or taking other precautions, is virtually certain to lead to wider spread.

 

Are some people spreading these at "spreader events?" Sure are. Same with any large gathering of people. Amazing that different causes are completely safe from spreading. Again, you need to lay off the news a bit. These events are not in any way significant to where deaths are coming from. Some of the states with the tightest restrictions and lack of "super spreader events" are some of the worst offenders.

 

https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/public-health/us-coronavirus-deaths-by-state-july-1.html

 

New Jersey: 183 per 100,000 people
Population: 8.9 million residents

 

New York: 170
Population: 19.4 million

 

Massachusetts: 143
Population: 6.9 million

 

Connecticut: 128
Population: 3.6 million

 

Louisiana: 126
Population: 4.6 million

 

Rhode Island: 111
Population: 1.1 million 
 

Mississippi: 109
Population: 3 million

 

Washington, D.C.: 91
Population: 705,749

 

Arizona: 81
Population: 7.3 million

 

Illinois: 77
Population: 12.7 million 
 

Florida: 76
Population: 21.5 million

 

Michigan: 75
Population: 10 million 

 

South Carolina: 74
Population: 5.1 million

 

Georgia: 72
Population: 10.6 million

 

Delaware: 70
Population: 973,764

 

Pennsylvania: 68
Population: 12.8 million

[SelectSys]

19 hours ago, ilikeanswers said:

 

Population is an advantage but I think one shouldn't outright dismiss the  tactics employed by Uruguay either :

Uruguay Emerges as a Rare Pandemic Winner in Latin America

 

One factor among many but a big one I am sure.  A small population just makes it easier to develop a response.  Another advantage of Uruguay does not have a large underclass and a large middle class.  

https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/uruguay/overview

 

Compare Uruguay to their northern neighbors in Brazil and its teaming favelas to say nothing of rural poetry and the scale of problem is quite a bit different.  

 

18 hours ago, Hlitner said:

...  In my early government life I was involved in regulating both nursing homes and hospitals and understand the reasoning behind the Governor's orders.  But the reasoning was obviously wrong when applied to a highly contagious disease (i.e. Covid) and it should not have happened...  

 

Seems that way.  The Governor said he had the "best" experts advising him on this policy.  I guess even his scientists and experts can be wrong from time to time.  It reminds me of the saying that people plan for the last war rather than the next.

 

He should come clean on this, but he is trying to position himself for higher office and therefore can't have anything on record.

 

Of course he also had a comedy show with his brother to conduct - 

 

4 hours ago, ilikeanswers said:

I'm always reading people lamenting the so called "golden age" of cruising. People complaining about degrading quality and how it is not what it use to be and despite those who don't like the changes more people have adapted to the changes just fine and of course there is a whole generation who don't know any different.

 

Just like with air travel.  What was truly the "golden age" of aviation?  When it was only available to the relatively well off or pre-pandemic when it was affordable to many, many more people?   

 

I am sure a luxury or premium cruise product will remain.  It may just cost more in relation to pre-pandemic pricing.

Edited October 29, 2020 by SelectSys

[SelectSys]

17 hours ago, ontheweb said:

The Governor of NY wanted to lower the curve to hospitals, and to do this he sacrificed the lives of the most vulnerable of the elderly

 

 

Do you think this was intentional in terms of this decision, i.e., he knew that he was sacrificing the elderly?

Edited October 29, 2020 by SelectSys

[Joebucks]

7 minutes ago, SelectSys said:

 

 

Do you think this was intentional in terms of this decision, i.e., he knew that he was sacrificing the elderly?

 

I do not believe that at all. What I do believe, is that this issue is way more political than it needs to be, and that many refuse to acknowledge it. Behind of all of the mud-slinging that this person is inept, my plan is better, we still don't have a magic fix. The fixes proposed are largely things that are already done, things that will never be done (aka expecting everyone to comply with every order on anything EVER), and promises that one person is better than the other.

[Hlitner]

Got a kick out of the "Golden Age of Cruising" comments.  My cruising days go back to what many consider the beginning of modern cruising (in the 70s).  When I first started with the now common Caribbean cruises a 14,000 ton vessel was considered a pretty normal size :).  Now there are lifeboats that carry more then some of the early cruise ships.   I still remember early RCCL cruises (now RCI) when waiters wore white gloves, sides were served from silver serving bowls, our waiters would even cut open the baked potatoes and spoon in whatever add-ins we requested, etc.  It was a different era with amazing service and food that often beats what we get today (this is not always the case).  In those "Golden Days" we also would often get some name entertainers on ships (a friend of ours still raves about meeting Tony Bennett) and I recall seeing Petula Clark (directly from a West End production).   On the other hand, many things have actually improved on cruise ships.  In those "Golden Days" there were few to no balcony cabins and many fun amenities found on today's ships did not exist.

 

And by the way, the "Golden Days" still exist (in modified form) on the luxury ships such as Seabourn, Regent, Crystal, etc.  I do think the luxury cruises will survive in similar form...but likely at higher prices.  It is the so-called mass market cruises that I believe will be forced to make major changes unless our terrific scientists can get us out of this COVID mess and give us confidence that another similar event will not happen for a decent period of time.

 

Hank

 

 

[ontheweb]

1 hour ago, SelectSys said:

 

 

Do you think this was intentional in terms of this decision, i.e., he knew that he was sacrificing the elderly?

I honestly cannot say. The best I can come up with was he had a goal and did not think through the consequences of his actions to reach that goal.

 

But I will say that he did not change the policy after the consequences became evident.

[Roger88]

Cruise industry is literally in a very big  trouble at the moment. Unless something extraordinary happens, we can speak of its recovery next year, otherwise - I wouldn't really hope for anything special right now. I would say that its even dangerous right now to book anything 

[Roger88]

3 hours ago, chipmaster said:

 

The overflowing hospital during the first half of the year along the East coast and Southern US, and now Mid-West, hmm all made up   

 

Who needs test to see the impact, amazing lack of deduction, people are like mushrooms.

The hospitals are totally full with patients and dead people. Doctors cant catch up with the current rising number of patients. No matter what news are out there, you can go and visit a hospital to decide yourself. The situation is very complicated right now 

[sfaaa]

42 minutes ago, Roger88 said:

 I would say that its even dangerous right now to book anything 

Low refundable deposit makes the risk manageable.