No More Pre-Cruise Testing for Vaccinated guests on voyages less than 6 nights starting August 8th!

[hazeleyes46]

19 minutes ago, RedIguana said:

Considering that day 4-5 is when those contracting the the virus day 1-2 become contagious, Yes.

That's an assumption and the majority of people on the ship are not getting sick. This all needs to end.

[Blue Eyed Belfast Belle]

6 minutes ago, BND said:

They no longer test for b2b's onboard.  

 

Thank you.  I was trying to find it in the FAQs but I found it posted elsewhere

 

[mrpayroll]

9 minutes ago, cwtravel said:

Could the less than 6 night cruises be no testing (for fully vaccinated guest) because the majority of those sailings go to The Bahamas or Mexico? I believe neither countries require a negative test while other countries still require the tests?

I believe it has a lot to do with it. 

[S.A.M.J.R.]

This thread is a prime example (IMO) of what's wrong with society today.  Everyone wants what's "theirs".  If I don't get what someone else gets, that's not fair, is stupid, worthy of complaint.  

 

Everyone around the world at this point in time with a cruise booked KNEW they had to test before getting on the ship.  Is it stressful not knowing if you're going to be able to board until two days before?  Sure.  But what if there's a major flight delay/cancellation like has happened multiple times this year?  For those driving, what if there's a major traffic tie up (that could be a result of everyone trying to drive when their flights are cancelled)?

 

This doesn't change a thing for those booked on 6+ day cruises.  But because "someone else" gets a benefit, break out the pitchforks!

    

[rudeney]

13 minutes ago, mitz18 said:

 

Actually the majority of the group's cruises are indeed less than 6 days.
"With the majority of cruises for Royal Caribbean International shorter than six days, the new requirement will significantly impact the pre-cruise preparation for guests."

 

It may seem surprising, but it's simple math.  During a given week, a single ship can make 2 cruises that are 3-4 days but only one 7-day cruise.

[pyrateslife4me84]

26 minutes ago, Blue Eyed Belfast Belle said:

Since majority of European cruises are 7+ days (with the exception on a few on Vision and Rhapsody in Sept/Oct) this announcement has absolutely no impact on us in Europe - same old, same old.

 

I am on a B-2-B in Oct/Nov - does anyone know how much it is to test on board for B-2-Bs?

Today’s update is specifically for US sailings. Nothing has been said about Europe. 

[Ret MP]

5 minutes ago, S.A.M.J.R. said:

Is it stressful not knowing if you're going to be able to board until two days before?  Sure.  But what if there's a major flight delay/cancellation like has happened multiple times this year?  For those driving, what if there's a major traffic tie up (that could be a result of everyone trying to drive when their flights are cancelled)?

 

    

This has always been a part of cruising, long before COVID, it isn't a cruise line/governmental self imposed stress, though.  So, adding or continuing another self (cruise industry or governmental) imposed stress is Okay with you?  Not me!  

Look, I am a citizen of the world, I will test at home before I do a lot of things.  I test before traveling to visit with my kids/grandkids, I'll test before going to a lot of things, including cruising.  But, I don't think it should be mandated, anymore!  I fully understand that not everybody is as responsible as your or I.  But, I also don't think COVID is the issue it used to be.  I've been jabbed 3 times, no more!  And I've had COVID at least twice, I think maybe 3 times.  All after the 3 jabs.  All of my bouts with COVID have been nothing more than the common cold or less.  

 

As someone already said, it's time for all of this pre-cruise testing nonsense to end.

[swmichigan cruiser]

We have two 7 night B2B Alaskan cruises booked on the Quantum of the Seas starting August 29 I might just cancel both of them under the Cruise with Confidence program. I have a 21 night Panama Canal already booked with NCL from Seattle I might just add a 7 night Alaskan cruise on the same ship just before the Panama Canal cruise and not worry about testing and flying to Seattle twice.. I do realize NCL does still require testing at this point  but that way only have to do it once compared to doing it for Royal and later for NCL. Not sure what I am going to do but still good to have options to consider.

[rudeney]

12 minutes ago, S.A.M.J.R. said:

This thread is a prime example (IMO) of what's wrong with society today.  Everyone wants what's "theirs".  If I don't get what someone else gets, that's not fair, is stupid, worthy of complaint.  

 

Everyone around the world at this point in time with a cruise booked KNEW they had to test before getting on the ship.  Is it stressful not knowing if you're going to be able to board until two days before?  Sure.  But what if there's a major flight delay/cancellation like has happened multiple times this year?  For those driving, what if there's a major traffic tie up (that could be a result of everyone trying to drive when their flights are cancelled)?

 

This doesn't change a thing for those booked on 6+ day cruises.  But because "someone else" gets a benefit, break out the pitchforks!

    

 

I understand what you are saying, and I agree that those of us who booked knowing that testing was required shouldn't expect anything different.  The issue is that we know this is a political/marketing ploy and it's aggravating.  There is zero scientific evidence that sailing without testing on a 5-day cruise is any safer than on a longer cruise.  It's a two-fold tactic for for RCCL.  First, they can appear to be responding positively to the CDC changes and maybe get some extra business from those who refuse to sail with testing.  Second, they are looking at the number of required quarantines and find that there are fewer on the 5-night and less cruises.  Just remember, this is never about passenger comfort and convenience - it is always about money.  

[S.A.M.J.R.]

8 minutes ago, Ret MP said:

This has always been a part of cruising, long before COVID, it isn't a cruise line/governmental self imposed stress, though.  So, adding or continuing another self (cruise industry or governmental) imposed stress is Okay with you?  Not me!  

And there's nothing wrong with that.  If you don't want to test, don't cruise.  

[mitz18]

11 minutes ago, rudeney said:

 

It may seem surprising, but it's simple math.  During a given week, a single ship can make 2 cruises that are 3-4 days but only one 7-day cruise.

Of course and not surprising to me.  I was simply replying to an incorrect post.

[wingatesl]

33 minutes ago, BND said:

They no longer test for b2b's onboard.  

 

That is the part that bugs me about this. You could b2b 2 or more 3 and 4 day cruises without testing. 

[S.A.M.J.R.]

1 minute ago, rudeney said:

 

I understand what you are saying, and I agree that those of us who booked knowing that testing was required shouldn't expect anything different.  The issue is that we know this is a political/marketing ploy and it's aggravating.  There is zero scientific evidence that sailing without testing on a 5-day cruise is any safer than on a longer cruise.  It's a two-fold tactic for for RCCL.  First, they can appear to be responding positively to the CDC changes and maybe get some extra business from those who refuse to sail with testing.  Second, they are looking at the number of required quarantines and find that there are fewer on the 5-night and less cruises.  Just remember, this is never about passenger comfort and convenience - it is always about money.  

Honestly, I agree with you.  I'm not confident the testing helps anyone.  But it's a simple solution... if you don't want to test, don't book the cruise.  It's the "I booked a cruise KNOWING I'll have to test, but now 'Joe Smith' doesn't have to test, I should get what he has!"  

[molly361]

I'm surprised that Royal was the first of the mainstream US lines to make this announcement.  Now I am curious if the others will be the same policy

[hazeleyes46]

25 minutes ago, S.A.M.J.R. said:

This thread is a prime example (IMO) of what's wrong with society today.  Everyone wants what's "theirs".  If I don't get what someone else gets, that's not fair, is stupid, worthy of complaint.  

 

Everyone around the world at this point in time with a cruise booked KNEW they had to test before getting on the ship.  Is it stressful not knowing if you're going to be able to board until two days before?  Sure.  But what if there's a major flight delay/cancellation like has happened multiple times this year?  For those driving, what if there's a major traffic tie up (that could be a result of everyone trying to drive when their flights are cancelled)?

 

This doesn't change a thing for those booked on 6+ day cruises.  But because "someone else" gets a benefit, break out the pitchforks!

    

Not all of us booked after covid so we did not know we needed to do so back then. We also got bumped up a few times and would lose all our money if not rebooking.

 

Life has gone on elsewhere and no place else do I need to vaccinate or test to do things. 

[S.A.M.J.R.]

Just now, hazeleyes46 said:

Not all of us booked after covid so we did not know we needed to do so back then. We also got bumped up a few times and would lose all our money if not rebooking.

 

Life has gone on elsewhere and no place else do I need to vaccinate or test to do things. 

So once Royal announced testing was required, did you contact them to get a refund since they've changed the terms?  Or postpone your booking?  You've KNOWN for well over a year you'd have to test.  Apparently you still do.  

 

I get it, I wish we didn't have to test.  But it's a part of some cruising (currently).  

[BND]

6 minutes ago, molly361 said:

I'm surprised that Royal was the first of the mainstream US lines to make this announcement.  Now I am curious if the others will be the same policy

Celebrity announced the same today.  Yeah, they're under the same umbrella but still...

I think Carnival will be right behind them.

[hazeleyes46]

1 minute ago, S.A.M.J.R. said:

So once Royal announced testing was required, did you contact them to get a refund since they've changed the terms?  Or postpone your booking?  You've KNOWN for well over a year you'd have to test.  Apparently you still do.  

 

I get it, I wish we didn't have to test.  But it's a part of some cruising (currently).  

Our cruises were for May 2021 and then pushed to August 2021. Both were cancelled and RCCL did not start sailing until September of 2021. The last time we re-booked was the last time we could do so before losing all our money. All the mandates did not come out at that time, if I remember correctly. We also thought after another year, things would be lifted. I will test as I have had to do for work but it is very stressful to have to test 4 people and hope we are all fine. I made the choice to get vaccinated when I didn't want to and was perfectly fine without a vaccine. No other vacation or places to go have these requirements and hopefully they all will be lifted soon for another cruise in our future 🙂

[BND]

38 minutes ago, S.A.M.J.R. said:

This thread is a prime example (IMO) of what's wrong with society today.  Everyone wants what's "theirs".  If I don't get what someone else gets, that's not fair, is stupid, worthy of complaint.  

  

There is absolutely nothing wrong with anyone wanting testing to go away for all cruises.  This is the next step in that direction.  It is kind of stupid when you can go on a b2b2b2b2b or more of 3 or 4 night cruises without testing, but you can't go on a 7 night one.  See the lack of logic in this?  That's what makes it "stupid, not fair, etc"  Because it is.

Edited July 28, 2022 by BND

[letstrythisplace]

I think its a good first step and i can understand them starting off with easing up rules on shorter cruises when in the past we have seen outbreaks happen on long haul cruises like panama canal crossings. It is less days to see multiple cruises develop symptoms if they do catch covid or board while already infected. If this first phase works out well for however long it is then they'll move on to phase two of relaxing the rules whatever that is.  

[S.A.M.J.R.]

1 minute ago, BND said:

There is absolutely nothing wrong with anyone wanting testing to go away for all cruises.  This is the next step in that direction.  It is kind of stupid when you can go on a b2b2b2b2b or more of 3 or 4 night cruises without testing, but you can't go on a 7 night one.  See the lack of logic in this?  That's what makes it "stupid, not fair, etc"  Because it is.

As I said multiple times, I have no problem with wanting testing to go away.  I did/do too.   

 

My comment was more about people being upset because they eliminated the testing for the shorter cruises.  I guess it would be better if they keep testing for everyone? 

[RedIguana]

2 minutes ago, BND said:

There is absolutely nothing wrong with anyone wanting testing to go away for all cruises.  This is the next step in that direction.  It is kind of stupid when you can go on a b2b2b2b2b or more of 3 or 4 night cruises without testing, but you can't go on a 7 night one.  See the lack of logic in this?

R naught and statistics. There is perfect logic in this. 

[molly361]

4 minutes ago, BND said:

There is absolutely nothing wrong with anyone wanting testing to go away for all cruises.  This is the next step in that direction.  It is kind of stupid when you can go on a b2b2b2b2b or more of 3 or 4 night cruises without testing, but you can't go on a 7 night one.  See the lack of logic in this?  That's what makes it "stupid, not fair, etc"  Because it is.

That surprised me as well.  Maybe they will close that loophole when they release more info next week

[binro01]

13 minutes ago, rudeney said:

 

I understand what you are saying, and I agree that those of us who booked knowing that testing was required shouldn't expect anything different.  The issue is that we know this is a political/marketing ploy and it's aggravating.  There is zero scientific evidence that sailing without testing on a 5-day cruise is any safer than on a longer cruise.  It's a two-fold tactic for for RCCL.  First, they can appear to be responding positively to the CDC changes and maybe get some extra business from those who refuse to sail with testing.  Second, they are looking at the number of required quarantines and find that there are fewer on the 5-night and less cruises.  Just remember, this is never about passenger comfort and convenience - it is always about money.  

I understand that it's aggravating. I have a 7N cruise coming up at the end of October and I still hold out hope that testing will not be required. I have done 3 cruises with required testing and it is stressful.

 

But this is not based on weather it's safer. Its purely based on the fact that once exposed to the virus, it can take up to 5 days for symptoms to show. They probably have tons of evidence from their sailings that number of cases on board is significantly higher on the 5th night vs nights 1-4. They probably simply do not want to deal with that number becoming higher right now, especially since they want to get at 100% capacity and not have to worry too much about blocking out more rooms on a 6N+ cruise if they drop testing. It's a money/logistics choice and once they get a better feel from their new protocol we will see things change again. They want to make sure they don't have a marketing fiasco if something goes south. They are very vulnerable financially right now.    

[Husky1987]

2 minutes ago, S.A.M.J.R. said:

As I said multiple times, I have no problem with wanting testing to go away.  I did/do too.   

 

My comment was more about people being upset because they eliminated the testing for the shorter cruises.  I guess it would be better if they keep testing for everyone? 

This.

 

It's not like they're adding any requirements for the 7 day cruisers.  So the 3/4 day folks don't have to test.  Good for them.  The 7 day cruisers should be happy that it's a step in the right direction.  Let it go.  Whining that it isn't fair just makes one a crybaby.