FigmentSpark
DIS Veteran
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2016
- Messages
- 7,574
Why wouldn't they have one ship on the West Coast? Not Alaska, but Mexico-L.A.? They could feed into DL.
They may give it a try. But, the theory (in the past) was they couldn't fill the ship consistently if it was home ported on the west coast. Plus DCL cruises out of San Diego, not all that convenient to Disneyland.Why wouldn't they have one ship on the West Coast? Not Alaska, but Mexico-L.A.? They could feed into DL.
Asia makes too much sense given the fact of Shanghai Disney Resort, Hong Kong Disneyland, and Tokyo Disney all being located there. Ship could be based out of Singapore and cover Australia, New Zealand, Hong Kong, Korea, Japan, China, maybe even a trek out as far to Hawaii.
Again all speculation![]()
There's a big difference between cruising from Florida and cruising from California in winter just with regard to the number of options. There aren't a bunch of islands around a huge sea off the Pacific coast, as there is off the coast of Florida. Also, what is available a few days cruise from California isn't necessarily resoundingly safe. Baja California Sur, where Cabo is, is under Level 2 warnings from the State Department. Jalisco, where Puerto Vallarta is, and Nayarit are at Level 3. Sinaloa, including Mazatlan, Guerrero, and Colima are at Level 4. There are a few unsafe ports in the Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean, but there are many ports there there that are under no safety warnings whatsoever. In addition, building up a Pacific cruising industry like the one in the Caribbean would call for some private islands - the cruise lines make a lot of money visiting their own private islands. None of the cruise lines have private islands accessible from California. That's probably because there aren't many options, whatever could be found would be incredibly expensive, and they couldn't get much out of an investment like that.Why wouldn't they have one ship on the West Coast?
You have to imagine that DCL won't keep a 7 ship fleet forever, I mean Magic and Wonder have to eventually retire around the 30 year mark which seems to be standard on other cruise lines
I'm so glad you posted this. My husband told me about it, and then he couldn't find the article.
My guess - the Dream & Fantasy will head to Miami after the new ships are in service.
They may give it a try. But, the theory (in the past) was they couldn't fill the ship consistently if it was home ported on the west coast. Plus DCL cruises out of San Diego, not all that convenient to Disneyland.
As I speculated before, I think the Dream & Fantasy may be moved to Miami (if the new terminal thing happens). That would leave them still available for Bahamas, Eastern & Western Caribbean cruises. As well as a slightly better position for Southern Caribbeans, and, possibly, partial Panama Canal cruises.I wonder if this means the Dream or Fantasy will be moved elsewhere? When the Dream/Fantasy came online, the Magic and Wonder were moved out of Port Canaveral. I wonder if the same plan is in place for when the three new ships come online. Just a curious thought.
As I speculated before, I think the Dream & Fantasy may be moved to Miami (if the new terminal thing happens). That would leave them still available for Bahamas, Eastern & Western Caribbean cruises. As well as a slightly better position for Southern Caribbeans, and, possibly, partial Panama Canal cruises.
I am dying to do a southern but they seem to fall in the middle of travel hockey season or summer (too$$).Just love the idea of partial Panama Canal cruises! And longer Southern Caribbean would be great. So many lines now do alternate 10 and 11 night cruises.
Baltimore would be great for us, since we live near DC. We are actually doing a cruise out of San Juan in January because it is a different port/itinerary than we've done before. My wife and I have done several of the non-US based cruises, and if DCL offers new itineraries from new locations we would go on those assuming the times line up with when we can take vacation.I would like more sailings out of the U.S. -- be it PC, Miami, west coast, NYC, Baltimore, rather than sailings out of San Juan because it costs so much to fly there.
I like the NYC, looking forward to our trip in Oct. I think there is room for growth in the Northeast, including NYC & Boston as ports to ship out of. We zeroed in on this cruise as we don't have to fly, that is saving us a ton for a family of 5.
I would like more sailings out of the U.S. -- be it PC, Miami, west coast, NYC, Baltimore, rather than sailings out of San Juan because it costs so much to fly there.
It is the agreement that DCL has had with the port. All new ships have and will be there for 3 years.
I'm so glad you posted this. My husband told me about it, and then he couldn't find the article.
Just as a point of clarification... the Continental US. San Juan, PR is part of the US - just not the Continental US.![]()
There's a big difference between cruising from Florida and cruising from California in winter just with regard to the number of options. There aren't a bunch of islands around a huge sea off the Pacific coast, as there is off the coast of Florida. Also, what is available a few days cruise from California isn't necessarily resoundingly safe. Baja California Sur, where Cabo is, is under Level 2 warnings from the State Department. Jalisco, where Puerto Vallarta is, and Nayarit are at Level 3. Sinaloa, including Mazatlan, Guerrero, and Colima are at Level 4. There are a few unsafe ports in the Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean, but there are many ports there there that are under no safety warnings whatsoever. In addition, building up a Pacific cruising industry like the one in the Caribbean would call for some private islands - the cruise lines make a lot of money visiting their own private islands. None of the cruise lines have private islands accessible from California. That's probably because there aren't many options, whatever could be found would be incredibly expensive, and they couldn't get much out of an investment like that.