Jump to content

Crystal is now allowing embarkation in Miami, as well as unvaccinated guests


Richk582
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, pnsnkr said:

 

There's a threat of contempt of court already in place if CDC tries to invoke violations of CSO as reasons for punitive actions against Crystal.  CDC will most likely not act until there's an actionable event like an outbreak that is covered by other statutes.

That would have to play out in court.  The CDC has full congressionally authorized power to enforce all aspects of the PHA.  Meanwhile, Crystal passengers making a port call or embarking in Miami are guinea pigs to how this pans out.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Até said:

That would have to play out in court.  The CDC has full congressionally authorized power to enforce all aspects of the PHA.  Meanwhile, Crystal passengers making a port call or embarking in Miami are guinea pigs to how this pans out.

Every single person whom chooses to cruise is a guinea pig.  The folks that went on the first five Crystal Cruises have been Guinea Pigs.  Same as Royal and Celebrity.  None of this is perfect at all. So lets just make the best of it and hope for the best.  I am going out of Miami and really looking forward to it.  We have to know the risks, be willing to take them and deal with any consequences. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Sthrngary said:

We have to know the risks, be willing to take them and deal with any consequences. 

Agree.  I've considered Crystal long before COVID-19 and have been watching this forum for some time.  I'm not trying to scare people away from booking these cruises but have noticed much more concern over the potential of non-vaccinated passengers and that people paid much more to sail from the Bahamas but very little discussion about this CSO aspect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Até said:

Agree.  I've considered Crystal long before COVID-19 and have been watching this forum for some time.  I'm not trying to scare people away from booking these cruises but have noticed much more concern over the potential of non-vaccinated passengers and that people paid much more to sail from the Bahamas but very little discussion about this CSO aspect.

You are accurate on all fronts.  All any client can do is trust that a vendor knows what they are doing.  On the topic of following or not following the CDC or any other guidelines, I am quite sure the Crystal Lawyer are advising them. Nice of you to comment back to me.  Much appreciated.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Sthrngary said:

Every single person whom chooses to cruise is a guinea pig.  The folks that went on the first five Crystal Cruises have been Guinea Pigs.  Same as Royal and Celebrity.  None of this is perfect at all. So lets just make the best of it and hope for the best.  I am going out of Miami and really looking forward to it.  We have to know the risks, be willing to take them and deal with any consequences. 

I totally agree with you. I have been flying in and out of Mexico. Wore masks everywhere. I just will wear one more on ship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Sthrngary said:

When You go to your online American Express Account, below your most recent purchases are 100 benefits which are time based.

 

Note that the various offers are different for the various credit/charge cards that Amex offers.  Also, they vary from customer to customer -- some offers will go to everyone, some are tailored offers.  In addition, even if you have multiple Amex cards and see the same merchant on several offers, know that you can only use one card per merchant (no stacking).  So pick the best offer you find and keep track of what card has what bonus,

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Sthrngary said:

Every single person whom chooses to cruise is a guinea pig.  The folks that went on the first five Crystal Cruises have been Guinea Pigs.  Same as Royal and Celebrity.  None of this is perfect at all. So lets just make the best of it and hope for the best.  I am going out of Miami and really looking forward to it.  We have to know the risks, be willing to take them and deal with any consequences. 

 

Wishing safe travels to you, your wife and everyone else.  FL just posted record number of cases since the beginning of the pandemic.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We were considering one of these Bahamas cruises for early October, r/t Bimini. But now with a embarkation option in Miami for unvaccinated guests from Florida (now the Covid hotspot of the nation for unvaccinated people), there's no way I'd consider that cruise. Pity.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I notice that most of the discussions of "risk" of coronavirus infection has been in regard to the risk to individual passengers.  Of course that's an important factor to consider.  However, we should also be concerned about what we should be doing to better contain this outbreak.   I have a real problem with how Crystal took advantage of the possible legal loophole in Florida to load up its ship with more passengers (or at least that's what Crystal is hoping to do) in Miami.  Actions like this can only make this outbreak worse and last even longer.   I am afraid Crystal has clearly declared itself to be an enabler of this outbreak by making this decision to board both vaccinated and unvaccinated passengers in Miami.

 

 

Edited by Psoque
corrected typo
  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Psoque said:

I notice that most of the discussions of "risk" of coronavirus infection has been in regard to the risk to individual passengers.  Of course that's an important factor to consider.  However, should also be concerned about what we as a society should do to contain this outbreak better.   I have a real problem with how Crystal took advantage of the possible legal loophole in Florida to load up its ship with more passengers (or at least that's what Crystal is hoping to do) in Miami.  Actions like this can only make this outbreak worse and last even longer.   I am afraid Crystal has clearly declared itself to be an enabler of this outbreak by making this decision to board both vaccinated and unvaccinated passengers in Miami.

 

 

@Psoque , I really enjoy your posts, so thank you.  I also think you want other views on the subject.  I was having a nice conversation with my wife this morning.  The subject was, this virus is here to stay.  That the world will never be quite the same.  What will happen is we will all adapt or we will get sick or worse. 

 

When I post I have a common thread motto.  All I want to know is, "What are the rules to the game." If the rules change in mid-game, I have to change my strategy.  This is kind of like what happened with the Virus from early on to today.  Science got more information and their recommendations changed as information came in.  For them and us, the rules changed in the middle of the game.

 

Crystal did what they did for reason we can debate.  So did other brands.  Not saying it is right just saying, those are the facts.  Facts that change the game.  I can't blame any company, person or government agency for some of the decision they make.  When they do, I can't change them  anyway. So all I can do is adjust my personal strategy and those I can influence around me. 

 

IMHO, Crystal is no more of an enabler then any other corporate entity wanting to survive.  It is up to me to make decisions based on my own personal beliefs.  The day I let Corporate American influence me is the day I might as well throw in the towel.  Just my two cents.

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Sthrngary said:

@Psoque , I really enjoy your posts, so thank you.  I also think you want other views on the subject.  I was having a nice conversation with my wife this morning.  The subject was, this virus is here to stay.  That the world will never be quite the same.  What will happen is we will all adapt or we will get sick or worse. 

 

When I post I have a common thread motto.  All I want to know is, "What are the rules to the game." If the rules change in mid-game, I have to change my strategy.  This is kind of like what happened with the Virus from early on to today.  Science got more information and their recommendations changed as information came in.  For them and us, the rules changed in the middle of the game.

 

Crystal did what they did for reason we can debate.  So did other brands.  Not saying it is right just saying, those are the facts.  Facts that change the game.  I can't blame any company, person or government agency for some of the decision they make.  When they do, I can't change them  anyway. So all I can do is adjust my personal strategy and those I can influence around me. 

 

IMHO, Crystal is no more of an enabler then any other corporate entity wanting to survive.  It is up to me to make decisions based on my own personal beliefs.  The day I let Corporate American influence me is the day I might as well throw in the towel.  Just my two cents.

Our complete sentiments. Those who choose not to go for whatever reason has that choice. Wife and I had safety conversations this morning for our 9 Aug embarkation and will practice every precaution possible to stay safe. We won't blame anyone else for our choice.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Sthrngary said:

@Psoque , I really enjoy your posts, so thank you.  I also think you want other views on the subject.  I was having a nice conversation with my wife this morning.  The subject was, this virus is here to stay.  That the world will never be quite the same.  What will happen is we will all adapt or we will get sick or worse. 

 

When I post I have a common thread motto.  All I want to know is, "What are the rules to the game." If the rules change in mid-game, I have to change my strategy.  This is kind of like what happened with the Virus from early on to today.  Science got more information and their recommendations changed as information came in.  For them and us, the rules changed in the middle of the game.

 

Crystal did what they did for reason we can debate.  So did other brands.  Not saying it is right just saying, those are the facts.  Facts that change the game.  I can't blame any company, person or government agency for some of the decision they make.  When they do, I can't change them  anyway. So all I can do is adjust my personal strategy and those I can influence around me. 

 

IMHO, Crystal is no more of an enabler then any other corporate entity wanting to survive.  It is up to me to make decisions based on my own personal beliefs.  The day I let Corporate American influence me is the day I might as well throw in the towel.  Just my two cents.

So what you are saying, if I understand you correctly, is that any corporation can do whatever they wish, as long as it is legal.  Okay then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Psoque said:

So what you are saying, if I understand you correctly, is that any corporation can do whatever they wish, as long as it is legal.  Okay then.

No, it just does not matter.  We can't change that.  We just need to adapt and make what ever decision we want with our pocket book.  We can have open debate, even lively open debate.  What we can't do is blame one brand.  This is a industry issue, it is based on the present rules.  Corporations are designed and motivated to work within the rules.  If we don't like it, we book else where or don't book at all.  

 

The question you should be asking if you don't mind me saying so is, "Why is this legal to do.  Why is there a loop hole?"  I hope I clarified.  Before I leave.  I again want to make clear.  I am expressing an opinion. I am NOT "Crystalized".  I am new to Crystal.  I would say the same thing for the brands I have used so many times in the past.  I also appreciate you looking for clarification.  THAT is the way to debate a point.  Thank you.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Psoque said:

I have a real problem with how Crystal took advantage of the possible legal loophole in Florida to load up its ship with more passengers (or at least that's what Crystal is hoping to do) in Miami.


Im confused, how is that a loophole?  Crystal’s fleetwide corporate policy is MORE restrictive, requiring vaccinations in ports where it’s not required (everywhere but Florida), but they’ve had to LOWER the policy to conform with Florida state law.  
 

What am I missing?  I don’t see a loophole, I see a state that is making a company lower safety standards in order to access its core customer base.

 

Vince

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, BWIVince said:


Im confused, how is that a loophole?  Crystal’s fleetwide corporate policy is MORE restrictive, requiring vaccinations in ports where it’s not required (everywhere but Florida), but they’ve had to LOWER the policy to conform with Florida state law.  
 

What am I missing?  I don’t see a loophole, I see a state that is making a company lower safety standards in order to access its core customer base.

 

Vince

As far as I know, cruise lines are not allowed to require passengers to produce a proof of vaccination on embarkation in Florida.  In stark contrast to, say Bahamas, State of Florida is banning any sort of "vaccine passport" to be issued/required upon embarkation.  That's one thing.  Another is that by creating an adverse cruising condition for unvaccinated passengers who are willing to make that status known to the cruise line, Crystal is, either intentionally or unintentionally encouraging unvaccinated people to book these cruises under the false pretense of being vaccinated.

 

What I am saying that Crystal was never forced to relax its health policies and practices to cruise in Florida, they chose Florida, already knowing that they will have to relax them.  There is a big difference between the two that Crystal is trying to make it unclear in their communication.

Edited by Psoque
typo fixed
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Psoque said:

As far as I know, cruise lines are not allowed to require passengers to produce a proof of vaccination on embarkation in Florida.  In stark contrast to, say Bahamas, State of Florida is banning any sort of "vaccine passport" to be issued/required upon embarkation.  That's one thing.  Another is that by creating an adverse cruising condition for unvaccinated passengers who are willing to make that status known to the cruise line, Crystal is, either intentionally or unintentionally encouraging unvaccinated people to book these cruises under the false pretense of being vaccinated.

 

What I am saying that Crystal was never forced to relax its health policies and practices to cruise in Florida, they chose Florida, already knowing that they will have to relax them.  There is a big difference between the two that Crystal is trying to make it unclear in their communication.


They chose Florida because it’s the only state they could physically add and still abide by their binding Bahamas sponsorship agreement (pending Bahamian approval).  It’s not like they had another choice of US port.  If Virginia had a port as equidistant from the Bahamas as Miami, I have no doubt they would have picked that in a heartbeat.  The fact that they could have based Symphony anywhere in the US and put it nowhere near Florida speaks volumes.

 

Vince

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Sthrngary said:

I figured I would be the one that asked you this first.  Please explain.  Thank you


Definitely…. If you noticed on the press release announcing the addition of Miami, it had an asterisk on there that the new itineraries are pending Bahamian government approval.  Because of their agreement where the Bahamian government is sponsoring these cruises in exchange for the economic benefits to so many ports, there are some changes that the Bahamian government has to ok that they wouldn’t normally have any say in — such as the addition of Miami, which is going to pull travelers out of Nassau hotels and the Nassau airport.  I’m sure the Bahamian government gave them preliminary approval based on the idea that more people on each cruise is an overall win for them even if it’s a hit in Nassau,  it according to the press release this approval wasn’t formal last week…. That’s why I mentioned that, I’m not sure if/when it got the formal blessing of the Bahamas (though I’m sure it’s coming).

 

Vince

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
21 minutes ago, BWIVince said:


They chose Florida because it’s the only state they could physically add and still abide by their binding Bahamas sponsorship agreement (pending Bahamian approval).  It’s not like they had another choice of US port.  If Virginia had a port as equidistant from the Bahamas as Miami, I have no doubt they would have picked that in a heartbeat.  The fact that they could have based Symphony anywhere in the US and put it nowhere near Florida speaks volumes.

 

Vince

Regardless of what may have been the reason for Crystal's decisions, Crystal is likely to benefit from the legal and political landscape unique to Florida.  Nobody is being forced to sail out of Miami.  And the fact of the matter is that it is completely insane, from a public health standpoint, to allow embarkation/disembarkation in Miami, where the coronavirus incidence and mortality are exploding right now.  That's really the most important message I am trying to convey.

 

So here's my understanding of what Crystal is doing:  Crystal is having trouble filling its ship on a cruise out of Bahamas, for many reasons too long to list here.  They are running out of money (I'm assuming).  They can possibly sell more berths by embarking/disembarking both vaccinated and unvaccinated passengers in Miami, with a full knowledge that the cases in Miami and rest of Florida is exploding, and that it is so much easier for unvaccinated passengers to board, undetected, in Miami compared to Bahamas.  Crystal also knows that even vaccinated people can contract and spread this disease, both during the after the cruise.

 

I'm not a rocket scientist, but even it was clear to me that Crystal has made a conscious decision to act in a very irresponsible manner, fully under the knowledge that they can get away with this, at least initially.  They are putting their survival as the only priority, regardless of what the consequences of this decision may be.

 

Furthermore, I personally don't buy the argument that the "entire industry" needs to take action.  That would be a wonderful thing, perhaps, but no action would ever happen if none of the individual corporations were interested in doing the right thing.  And in the context of this particular discussion, Crystal is the only cruise line that is (as far as I know) planning to do this.

 

I just screen shot the current coronavirus numbers (August 1, 2021) for US and Florida (Miami-Dade County data is not loading for me.)

 

 

US_Aug1_2021.JPG

FL_Aug1_2021.JPG

Edited by Psoque
added more info
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Psoque said:

Regardless of what may have been the reason for Crystal's decisions, Crystal is likely to benefit from the legal and political landscape unique to Florida.  Nobody is being forced to sail out of Miami.  And the fact of the matter is that it is completely insane, from a public health standpoint, to allow embarkation/disembarkation in Miami, where the coronavirus incidence and mortality are exploding right now.  That's really the most important message I am trying to convey.

 

So here's my understanding of what Crystal is doing:  Crystal is having trouble filling its ship on a cruise out of Bahamas, for many reasons too long to list here.  They are running out of money (I'm assuming).  They can possibly sell more berths by embarking/disembarking both vaccinated and unvaccinated passengers in Miami, with a full knowledge that the cases in Miami and rest of Florida is exploding, and that it is so much easier for unvaccinated passengers to board, undetected, in Miami compared to Bahamas.  Crystal also knows that even vaccinated people can contract and spread this disease, both during the after the cruise.

 

I'm not a rocket scientist, but even it was clear to me that Crystal has made a conscious decision to act in a very irresponsible manner, fully under the knowledge that they can get away with this, at least initially.  They are putting their survival as the only priority, regardless of what the consequences of this decision may be.

 

Furthermore, I personally don't buy the argument that the "entire industry" needs to take action.  That would be a wonderful thing, perhaps, but no action would ever happen if none of the individual corporations were interested in doing the right thing.  And in the context of this particular discussion, Crystal is the only cruise line that is (as far as I know) planning to do this.

 

I just screen shot the current coronavirus numbers (August 1, 2021) for US and Florida (Miami-Dade County data is not loading for me.)

 

 

US_Aug1_2021.JPG

FL_Aug1_2021.JPG


I don’t disagree about the risks at ALL, and I don’t think this plan is sustainable in the long term and have said that countless times so far, but you gloss over your preferred alternative like there is some magic silver bullet option that’s supposed to be obvious to all of us.  A quick glance at occupancy rates over the next couple months (from the limited data we could see publicly) had occupancy rates in the 20-40% range.  That’s not sustainable for ANY company in the industry right now.  Consumers voted with their feet, and we can agree or disagree with it, but that’s that, and Miami bookings are up for every other cruise line that had formerly had planned offshore home ports — even if we take Crystal out of the equation.

 

That leaves two options…. Cancel the cruises and lay off the staff supporting those sailings, or modify the itineraries to conform with the Bahamas commitments (and approval).  There are not a lot of US ports within hours of sailing of the Bahamas, and I don’t know of any that aren’t in Florida or have similar restrictions.


Shutdown is an option, but as Jeff mentioned, every other major cruise line conglomerate has sailings planned out of Florida (not to mention hotel chain and airline), so why should Crystal be held to a double standard?  If people want to book these cruises and accept that VERY well known risk, I don’t know why Crystal should be held to some special standard that the other lines aren’t.

 

Just my two cents…

 

Vince

  • Like 8
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Interesting two threads on the Royal Caribbean board concerning what happened when a wife, and the next day her husband (but not others in their party),  tested positive on end of cruise  tests into Nassau.  In summary,   extremely well planned on board procedures carried out with precision,  limo rides to the airport (they were separated because wife was evacuated before husband tested positive), private planes to home airport (not Florida where their car was parked), SUV to home.  She said the cruise line deal with Nassau was that passengers would immediately be removed from the island, and that CDC required the passenger be taken directly to their home. All of this was coordinated and paid for by Royal Caribbean (except retrieval of their car).  These passengers have minimal symptoms (congestion); i have not found any evacuation insurance that would have covered this situation.  

Edited by JFontaine
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, BWIVince said:


I don’t disagree about the risks at ALL, and I don’t think this plan is sustainable in the long term and have said that countless times so far, but you gloss over your preferred alternative like there is some magic silver bullet option that’s supposed to be obvious to all of us.  A quick glance at occupancy rates over the next couple months (from the limited data we could see publicly) had occupancy rates in the 20-40% range.  That’s not sustainable for ANY company in the industry right now.  Consumers voted with their feet, and we can agree or disagree with it, but that’s that, and Miami bookings are up for every other cruise line that had formerly had planned offshore home ports — even if we take Crystal out of the equation.

 

That leaves two options…. Cancel the cruises and lay off the staff supporting those sailings, or modify the itineraries to conform with the Bahamas commitments (and approval).  There are not a lot of US ports within hours of sailing of the Bahamas, and I don’t know of any that aren’t in Florida or have similar restrictions.


Shutdown is an option, but as Jeff mentioned, every other major cruise line conglomerate has sailings planned out of Florida (not to mention hotel chain and airline), so why should Crystal be held to a double standard?  If people want to book these cruises and accept that VERY well known risk, I don’t know why Crystal should be held to some special standard that the other lines aren’t.

 

Just my two cents…

 

Vince

I did not gloss over the alternative.  Actually I did not even bother to offer the alternative, which is for them to accept the loss from the Bahamas cruises.  Or they can modify the cruises somehow, but do so in the way that does not negatively contribute to the outbreak.  If they go out of business because of it, that would be a terrible thing, but in my opinion much better than the outbreak getting worse and prolonged because of it.  I also think the Crystal brand will not go away easily, as long as the current owners of the brand destroys it.

 

In regard to the fact that Crystal is not the only guilty party...I understand that but this is a Crystal Cruises thread.  Also, regardless of what other cruise lines are doing or going to do, what Crystal is planning to do is wrong.  Not everything that people want are good for the society.

 

And I don't think it is necessary to explain (because I am sure you, especially you, actually know this) why cruises pose a very different risk to the population compared to hotel and airlines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone here seems to be assuming that many unvaccinated people will be joining the ship in Miami.  Could be true.  But it could also be mostly fully vaccinated folks like us.   For us, not having to travel to / from Nassau was a game changer.  We booked because we could leave from Miami. 
 

Before everyone goes nuts, let’s wait to hear from those on the first Miami cruises and see how many unvaccinated passengers there are and how it’s all handled. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Forum Assistance
      • Cruise Critic Live Special Event: Q&A with American Queen Voyages
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • Canadian Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...