iannovich
Mouseketeer
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2017
I think Disney intends to sail to Mexico as planned (although possibly modified). Mexico is open and they've got port time scheduled. They *might* shorten the cruises to a 4 or 5 night max. If they cap at 5, it would only impact the 7 night (if you exclude the EBPC, which is a whole different kettle).
the 2 night only goes to Ensenada (only 1 scheduled sailing)
the 3 nights only go to Cabo (2 scheduled)
the 4 nights only go to Cabo (3 scheduled)
the 5 nights (here's where it gets dodgy) go to Cabo and Ensenada (3 scheduled)
The 7 night goes to Cabo, Puerto Vallarta and Mazatlan (just the one scheduled)
The 2, 3 and 4 night sailings are one single port. You embark in San Diego and you're back off the ship before you can say "Welcome Aboard! See ya real soon!" It is certainly less 'safe' than double dips at Castaway, but I don't think Disney will have ANY problem with those short sailings.
On the 5 night sailings, they could decide to either shorten to 4, or roll the dice on the extra night (and the extra port). There's time for symptoms to show up, but really if you don't board with cooties, and you catch cooties while one the ship or in port, you're probably going to be off again before they have to go into any kind of real damage control/protocol implementation.
I could see them still doing the 5 nights, but eliminating a port, and then having that single port later in the voyage so any wayward cooties have less time to come aboard and play. They'd probably rather do that than refund a night and shorten it from 5 nights. And it is completely fine for DCL to add an "if you're eligible for a vaccine, you're going to need one" rule in California. So it's a mix and match game of more risk due to more time on board and actual real live foreign port stops, but then possible less risk if they can implement a 'vaccinated wherever possible' clause.
The 7 night is where you really start to put your Gambling Pants on. 3 different ports, even more time on board with a thousand or so of your closest pals. Now that they've set a precedent with modified Fantasy sailings, I could see them doing the same with the Wonder Baja sailings. The 7 night could become a 5 night.
As for the EBPC, my guess would be that they've absolutely got their Gambling Pants™ on (and have decided to add a swanky Gambling Spirit-Jersey™ into the ensemble). It's still months away and plenty of time to refine protocols, test the waters (literally? Figuratively?) and decide how they might be able to make that one go (including where they can stop to satisfy the distant port requirements. Worst case is they have to scrap that one too and end up sailing through the PC twice with no passengers. Those costs are offset by the Baja cruises that do sail and all the money that they get from selling me the Drink of the Day (cause I love me a Sunken Treasure). I'd say it's way better than break even and way way better than sitting empty and paying crew to upkeep an empty ship.
In the end, I think Disney will do what they can to make money (or at least stop losing money). They've proven that time and again. We've seen the erosion of benefits from DCL, DVC, APs, RunDisney, and all while prices increase. We love the Magic and that's why we hold on and suck it up, because it is still magical for us.
Every bit of speculation I do comes from me putting myself in Disney's shoes and saying "how can I keep the money they've already given me, refund as little back as necessary, give out as few FCCs as possible, stop paying to maintain an empty ship, and then make even more money from onboard activities, services and merch that I'm not currently getting while we're 'at anchorage off Port Canaveral? Oh, and we should make some Magic for Guests too."
the 2 night only goes to Ensenada (only 1 scheduled sailing)
the 3 nights only go to Cabo (2 scheduled)
the 4 nights only go to Cabo (3 scheduled)
the 5 nights (here's where it gets dodgy) go to Cabo and Ensenada (3 scheduled)
The 7 night goes to Cabo, Puerto Vallarta and Mazatlan (just the one scheduled)
The 2, 3 and 4 night sailings are one single port. You embark in San Diego and you're back off the ship before you can say "Welcome Aboard! See ya real soon!" It is certainly less 'safe' than double dips at Castaway, but I don't think Disney will have ANY problem with those short sailings.
On the 5 night sailings, they could decide to either shorten to 4, or roll the dice on the extra night (and the extra port). There's time for symptoms to show up, but really if you don't board with cooties, and you catch cooties while one the ship or in port, you're probably going to be off again before they have to go into any kind of real damage control/protocol implementation.
I could see them still doing the 5 nights, but eliminating a port, and then having that single port later in the voyage so any wayward cooties have less time to come aboard and play. They'd probably rather do that than refund a night and shorten it from 5 nights. And it is completely fine for DCL to add an "if you're eligible for a vaccine, you're going to need one" rule in California. So it's a mix and match game of more risk due to more time on board and actual real live foreign port stops, but then possible less risk if they can implement a 'vaccinated wherever possible' clause.
The 7 night is where you really start to put your Gambling Pants on. 3 different ports, even more time on board with a thousand or so of your closest pals. Now that they've set a precedent with modified Fantasy sailings, I could see them doing the same with the Wonder Baja sailings. The 7 night could become a 5 night.
As for the EBPC, my guess would be that they've absolutely got their Gambling Pants™ on (and have decided to add a swanky Gambling Spirit-Jersey™ into the ensemble). It's still months away and plenty of time to refine protocols, test the waters (literally? Figuratively?) and decide how they might be able to make that one go (including where they can stop to satisfy the distant port requirements. Worst case is they have to scrap that one too and end up sailing through the PC twice with no passengers. Those costs are offset by the Baja cruises that do sail and all the money that they get from selling me the Drink of the Day (cause I love me a Sunken Treasure). I'd say it's way better than break even and way way better than sitting empty and paying crew to upkeep an empty ship.
In the end, I think Disney will do what they can to make money (or at least stop losing money). They've proven that time and again. We've seen the erosion of benefits from DCL, DVC, APs, RunDisney, and all while prices increase. We love the Magic and that's why we hold on and suck it up, because it is still magical for us.
Every bit of speculation I do comes from me putting myself in Disney's shoes and saying "how can I keep the money they've already given me, refund as little back as necessary, give out as few FCCs as possible, stop paying to maintain an empty ship, and then make even more money from onboard activities, services and merch that I'm not currently getting while we're 'at anchorage off Port Canaveral? Oh, and we should make some Magic for Guests too."
Last edited:
