Captain_Morgan

so 13 total across 9 brands....

Oceana and Costa Victoria already gone so that's 2 off the list which leaves 11 more not including those already sent to CMV

best guess is the remaining Sun class from Princess will be on the block

1 minute ago, wowzz said:

That was my thought as well. There has been discussion about moving a Princess ship to the ME as a substitute,  but I can't see the point of disrupting another ship's schedule.

Of course my comment was tongue in cheek, but when you consider the fact that October resumption was the last 'plan' and is subject to change I can't see things improving enough by then to allow for a full ME season to happen under the current fly-cruising model.  Sure there's a chance they borrow a Princess ship to offset the shortfall but as I said before it would require a dry dock to, at the very least change the paint scheme and thats not something that is arranged in short order.

3 minutes ago, wowzz said:

As a matter of interest, does anyone think that P&O will actually run any cruises in the ME this winter?

 

I think that's about as likely as the industry resuming full service next week...

4 minutes ago, Adawn47 said:

If that's the case then , what's going on with Oceana? 

Avril  

I think its safer to say that Oceana is on her way out based on the recent events  including but not limited to the move from a perfectly adequate berth back to her 'home' port in conjunction with the rumours and article suggesting the same.

Anything else being said at this point is pure speculation and/or desire for an alternate outcome IMO and with all due respect to whomever is referring to a 'cruise insider' unless there's more to their information than that, I equate titles like those with ' expert only on social media' 

8 minutes ago, majortom10 said:

Sorry but if they do get rid of Oceana I think they will just cancel all cruises on her and offer cruises on other P&O ships with perhaps a small amount of obc as compensation or able to cancel altogether at no cost. Cannot see transfers from Oceana to a Princess cruise because of difference in ship and costs especially to the fact that P&O is inclusive of tips and Princess is not and at $15pppd is a considerable cost extra to customer and Princess cruises are generally dearer than P&O.

The comment about a Princess ship was not to say that Princess would be operating it under their T&C's but more like P&O making use of a Princess ship to make up for the itinerary shortfall once Oceana departs.

10 minutes ago, molecrochip said:

I try not to post pure rumour but will share this. I'm told that 'one option' is for Princess to move a ship to cover the middle east cruises 'on behalf of P&O' for the next two winters, with possibly them covering a summer season from Southampton in between. This would bridge the gap to Gala2 arriving.

 

There is precedent for this to happen with Sea Princess becoming Adonia between 2003 and 2005. Princess are expecting too much capacity a) because American, Australia and Asia markets are expected to be dampened and b) due to the the damage to their reputation due to Covid-19. 

 

The speculation suggested either Crown, Emerald or Ruby princess as the likely culprits.

I would think it would make more sense for immediate deployment to send Azura or Ventura to the middle east (same model as the Princess ships mentioned) and then 'cold lease' a Princess ship for the period of time required to send it into dry dock for the necessary changes (i.e. paint job) to reflect the brand a little better

14 minutes ago, molecrochip said:

I've not been able to pin down where she could be off to. Favorite options appears to be Greece for Astro Ocean (same cruise line which bought Oriana) or Italy for scrap.

 

Astro Ocean have big expansion plans so its not beyond possible that a deal had been done to sell Oceana / other small ships from P&O to them last year when the deal was done for Oriana. What may have changed is the timescale for such transfers. Only issue is that Oriana has not sailed full under the Piano Land name yet.

 

What you often find is that the ships were sold months/years before they transfer and leased back on a maintenance agreement to fulfill a certain proportion of voyages. 

If i were betting, I would put money on this as being the most logical destination/outcome as I'm sure when Astro Ocean purchased Oriana they likely put in an offer for Oceana/Aurora/Arcadia on a long term plan.  This long term plan of course was obviously sped up considerably under the current circumstances and with Carnival needing capital or at the very least trying to stem the outward flow of cost versus (non) revenue they saw an opportunity to shed some tonnage sooner rather than later.

With that said, I wouldn't be surprised either to hear during the upcoming corporate call tomorrow if they announce more than Oceana's departure...

Whether it be NCL or MSC, both seem to be heavy on marketing and light on proven result...lots of well intended wording but nothing in my mind in either of their models is convincing that they will somehow prevent cases onboard.

Sure you can sanitize more, and take temperatures but who is going to police the new policies?  Sorry to use the terminology but i can't think of any better way to describe it as if there are enough issues trying to get people to wash their hands to prevent noro, who honestly thinks clever marketing gimics will prevent COVID?

14 minutes ago, molecrochip said:

Interestingly, RCI have found that China wasn’t ready for their biggest ships. Princess are doing better with their Royal class ships. It appears that Chinese passengers quite like the smaller ships!

Absolutely a big gamble that failed for the likes of RCL, NCL, and Princess when it comes to deploying their mega ships to the Asian market as none of them have succeeded there despite the likes of Majestic Princess and Norwegian Joy being geared toward the Asian market....bet someone had some explaining to do on that one!!

11 minutes ago, cruisenewbie1976 said:

The current worldwide picture might not be improving, mainly because of the Americas as already discussed. But the crisis across Europe is hugely improved and getting better. 3 months is a long time and a lot can happen between now and then but we could be in a much better position by then (equally we could be in a worse position too!). 

I agree the European situation is improving, but if the Hurtigruten model is what lines are working toward its hardly something to get excited about.....30% capacity, coastal cruises with no shore leave....what's the point unless there's immense value for price paid?  Add to the fact the proposed changes as outlined in other threads and it doesn't sound like cruising as it will be known in the future is anything to get excited about

8 minutes ago, molecrochip said:

As harsh as it is, I see a staggered start come October which means not every itinerary is going to sail. I don’t think we’ve see the last cancellations. Sadly, some people will get caught.

I think even October is 'early' to begin cruising even with a staggered start as lets face it the current situation isn't improving apart from pubs reopening 🍺 and the weather getting better but the industry is still in disarray and likely won't improve in the coming months.

As for speculation of where Oceana is off to, my first guess is always China because they buy everything 😆 and pandemic aside, they've still got the world's largest population and by extension more opportunities for revenue generation given global travel restrictions.

I was of the impression that if the company cancels they provide a full refund or give you the option of taking a future credit in excess of what is owed (i.e. 125%), so are you saying they've not refunded you anything?  Or were you expecting the 125% credit but instead only received your cash refund?

If the current Hurtigruten model is any indication of how things will go, I can't see the industry surviving in its current form.  From what I've read they're only sailing 30% capacity on coastal Norwegian routes (based on being a Norwegian company) and those people onboard cannot go ashore but can make use of peripheral activities (i.e. kayaks, boat trips, etc) so long as they don't go ashore.

That says to me they (Hurtigruten) must be pretty desperate to either get some revenue or want to be the first to claim they re-started cruising as i fail to see the point of operating that way but that's just my opinion and i'm sure others wouldn't mind sailing around the UK going nowhere but the ship so long as they were onboard?

7 hours ago, DS_Dean said:

However.. the North Shields berth has me a little worried. She is due to stay for 3 months (source) and incidentally Carnival announced the six ships would be leaving the fleet within 90 days. 😕 Other ships seem to be on the move a bit more whereas Oceana seems to be in a more significant cold lay up than the rest of the fleet. Do we know if Oceana has left the port at all?

none of the P&O ships are in ‘cold’ layup as that would infer the ships are effectively ‘turned off’ with a handful of people or less onboard for the sole purpose of keeping a few lights on.  If the ship were to go ‘cold’ it would shut down all non essential services and be tied up somewhere less public like a cargo berth in the middle of nowhere.

the fact Oceana is berthed in an accessible location would indicate they are still in ‘warm’ layup meaning they still have enough essential crew to sail on short notice and all of the internal aspects are running (ie. lights and water).  If the ship weren’t close to an international airport I would hazard a guess that the numbers of people onboard was in the dozens as opposed to hundreds.  

3 hours ago, bee-ess said:

I think that from Carnival's perspective the amount of on-board spent generated by the bigger ships must be a big factor. Apart from the fact that the larger ships carry more passengers I would think that the amount of spend per person is probably higher than on the smaller ships. On the larger ships there are more opportunities to spend with more eating venues and especially so when the 2 Gala class ships are part of the fleet and I also think that they sell more £40pppd drinks packages on the larger family ships than the smaller ships. We went on Oceana in Feb and did not see people spending in the bars like we do on Britannia in the Caribbean.

You've hit the nail on the head here as I've spoken to many senior managers on the ships we've sailed across a variety of brands and they've more or less all said the same thing.

When comparing large (3000+ pax) ships to smaller (1800+ pax) ships the larger inevitably generate more onboard revenues for the obvious reasons of having more bodies, but more importantly because they tend to do shorter cruises where the unconscious pressure is on people to spend because they have a limited amount of time, hence the reason there is typically a sea day before turnaround for all the last minute buying, whereas the long drawn out trips lull people into a sense of feeling no pressure to do anything apart from eat and sleep.

Naturally this is not an absolute concept across all ships/brands, but there is a reason for example that Princess has done away with 2/3 of their small R-class ships which typically did longer cruises and replaced them with massive ships doing the bog standard 7 day runs.  As it relates to P&O, we had a conversation with a manager onboard last year who said specifically that long trans-Atlantic cruises to the Caribbean and back from Southampton might cost more in the initial fare, but the majority of people once onboard barely spend anything, whereas a trip down to the Canaries or a quick run around the Med will be a guaranteed revenue generator every time.

13 minutes ago, terrierjohn said:

Your points are valid from your perspective, but since P&O manage to fill the big ships it's clearly not a universal view.  We have a special requirement, we need an accessible cabin, so the newer bigger ships ideally fit our cruising template.  Saga sounds nice but they don't seem to have many accessible cabins, and because my wife cannot board a normal coach the included tours would be pointless.

I cannot see Carnival allowing P&O to spend what would be needed to bring Aurora and Ardadia up to a modern standard, the return just would not be there.  We actually took our first trip on Aurora last Spring, not long after an extensive refit, the result in our opinion was that it was still an old ship and new carpets and furnishings only partly hid the tired and worn out feel of the ship.

I expect Gala 2 will go ahead, but will be delayed, and the 3 smaller ships will gradually be phased out over the next 4 or 5 years.  There are IMO enough P&O stalwarts who are happy enough with big ships to enable P&O to continue running full, even outside peak season, and possibly Gala 2 will be tweaked to offer families a little of the excitement that RCI, NCL and Carnival ships provide, giving P&O some extra younger clientele for the future. 

It would be unwise to write them off just yet.

Definitely not writing anything off, just saying that they run the risk of alienating a large portion of their clientele in favor of trying to woo younger and comparitively un-seasoned cruisers to the market.

I agree as well that an old ship won't change despite new carpet and furnishings...as they, you can put lipstick on a pig but it will always be a pig!  By the same rationale, large ships are less likely to do longer more dynamic cruises because it would be cost prohibitive to keep such a large asset away from 'home' for the amount of time required to do a long voyage when it could be used on a 'bus route' of 7-14 days instead.

Also, your estimate of the smaller ships being phased out over the coming 4-5 years I think is liberal thinking at best as i wouldn't be surprised if 2 of the 3 weren't axed inside the next 6-9 months if not put into 'cold storage' with a skeleton crew keeping the lights on.

I think the best way to describe P&O at present is they seem to be in a situation where they want to have their cake and eat it too...in one breath they want to be considered 'Britain's best cruise line' or at the very least the best vacation option for the British public, yet on the other hand they're being forced into falling down the black hole that is American-izing their fleet with bigger, more obnoxious ships which don't appeal to the majority of the British cruising public unless the price is right, and even then many would think twice i'm sure.

Which of course then brings the next point of loyalty which has been mentioned at times...the reality is that the majority of the cruising public is loyal to the lowest price and nothing more.  Sure they might enjoy cruising with a specific brand because they had a memorable trip or enjoyed the ports, or maybe they even feel they're given some form of preferred treatment due to their days sailed but if there were a deal to be had elsewhere and it lined up with their holiday schedule I can guarantee they'd be on it like a rat up a drain pipe. 

I remember not that many years ago we sailed on Seabourn because all of the factors lined up for us at the time and although its not now or likely to ever be our regular choice it was nice to try something different and I recall speaking with multiple other guests who outright said they only booked because there was a 'too good to lose' deal so as I say, loyalty is limited in most cases to the bottom line.

I think if P&O continue down the road of alienating the 'small ship' clientele they will find it increasingly more difficult to fill the mega ships week in and week out during off-peak holiday times which will fall nicely into the hands of the competition.  As has been said, you might pay more for Saga but when you factor in the value it ends up being the same if not perhaps cheaper in some cases due to the lack of added extra costs, and they will have brand new ships with a fraction of the number of guests as Iona, etc.

For all the talk of P&O morphing into RCCL or NCL with the water slides, rock climbing walls, etc. there is a reason that the industry has evolved into a niche travel option, and quite simply that is because if you want all the bells and whistles you can find it on a specific brand or a specific ship.  I really dislike the idea of larger and larger ships all being expected to follow the trend of the tacky American brands with giant television screens blasting out of date action movies and repeated children's animated films throughout the day, or mile long queues for burgers and ice cream on deck, which then get deposited around the ship on over-sized platters.

Again, if you want the holiday camp atmosphere at sea there are plenty of options for that, but if you want a grown-up or adult oriented holiday at sea you should be able to get that as well, even on the scale of Iona despite the likes of Arcadia and Aurora being more synonymous with that atmosphere.  Sadly however, the model of bigger and bigger ships is to fill them to capacity which means lower comparable cost per person in the hopes that translates into onboard spend (i.e. drinks packages, specialty dining, souvenirs, etc) and to turn them around on shorter (7 day) trips and then rinse, wash, repeat which will inevitably dilute the experience IMO.

10 minutes ago, molecrochip said:

Interestingly I think you imply that the older clientel will have the funds whilst the younger working age won't.

 

A lot of working age families have found that, with no childcare fees, no extra school uniforms, trips, working from home meaning no commuting costs or bought lunches and with less opportunity to buy takeaways/cinema trips/football matches etc. etc. they are actually better off. Look at the NHS/Care/supermarket staff working overtime but with nothing to spend their extra cash on.

 

Yes, I agree that those in the creative or hospitality & leisure sectors have been hit hard, but they are not the ones who typically buy cruise holidays.

What i'm saying is that the older clientele are more likely to have expendable income due to the fact that they've not had the same employment concerns as many working families.  Sure many have taken advantage of the gov't furlough program which is wonderful but that's not a bottomless pit of never-ending income and when you consider that as it stands the expectation is for the furlough program to possibly come to a conclusion at the end of October so what happens then?  

I just think its too much of an American driven mentality for a UK market to dispose of smaller ships in favor of monsters which won't be filled to capacity for a very long time, especially in the current climate of social distancing and the like.

2 minutes ago, molecrochip said:

 

A few points here, originally, P&O would have had a second Royal Class ship. The last 3 were not yet designated for Princess at the point they were confirmed. I believe that the new ship would have been last year. Princess were originally due to get Iona with Gala 2 going to P&O with then the expectation of a following on order if P&O grew quick enough.

 

Along the way, it was decided that P&O's market was not growing quick enough for a second Royal class ship in 2019. It was also decided that given both Iona and Gala 2 to P&O would make more sense.  Hence why Princess are not getting any Excellence class ships.

 

Things change... originally there was the expectation that Azura would do a world cruise in 2021. She was even booked in at certain points in Oz/Asia. Instead, she is now being designated a sunshine ship so will sail from Malta/Barbados. Gala 2 is also not due to homeport in the UK after its initial entry to service. I'm therefore expecting Gala 2 to pick up Dubai/canary islands 7 day-fly cruise. Families seem to prefer a fly-cruise than spending two days each way with worse weather as you head around the channel and Biscay.

Ironic to think that because P&O's market wasn't growing fast enough that instead of getting a 3400 passenger ship they get a 5000 passenger ship?!?  Surely it would have made more sense to delay the introduction of a second Royal class ship for P&O until 2020, send what we now know to be Iona to Aida or Costa given they've already got one of those class and continue to monitor the trends.

1 hour ago, terrierjohn said:

Why do you think P&O will fare worse in restarting after covid than the other Carnival lines.?

I don't think P&O will fare worse in restarting, but I do think to coin an American term they are "swinging for the fences" with Iona given the sheer size and fact that they stopped at 1 x Royal Class (Britannia) when they could have easily continued with that model for at least one more like Ventura & Azura.

Now they're hoping that they can fill 5000+ passengers on a ship for 7 day runs around Norway and the Canaries and somehow that is going to hold the attention of everyone enough to repeat the effort in a couple years' time?

It's no secret that P&O are desperately trying to attract a younger crowd, which is great for them but not if they do so at the expense of alienating their loyal customer base, which as we know has always been in a more mature demographic.

Considering the relatively small market in the UK as compared to North America, the number of ships sailing in/out of the UK is quite staggering, especially when you consider that cruising to somewhere warm is most people's first choice followed by somewhere they don't have to fly to; both of which seemingly all UK based lines are catering to.

If nothing else, this pandemic has surely laid bare a lot of things including but not limited to who still has expendable income and who does not, in both the long and near term and i think its pretty obvious which end of the demographic scale will be able to afford holidays and which will not.

52 minutes ago, AndyMichelle said:

The other surprise was 2 thirds of next years bookings are new bookings??? Really?? Or are a lot of them ones that were already booked at launch? 

I think all of the companies touting 2021 bookings are playing on somewhat of a false narrative as how many here have shifted now cancelled 2020 bookings to next year?  Surely more than 1/3 of next year's bookings are transplanted from 2020 but being classified as 'new' for the sake of investor confidence.

5 hours ago, molecrochip said:

No Cunard ships going. The Costa ship is going early. One P&O Oz ship is likely to go early with talk that a princess Grand class ship will move across to P&O Oz early to compensate.

 

As for Oceana, she was expected to leave the fleet once Gala 2 arrived. 

Golden Princess was planned to go to P&O Oz before the world went to hell, and rumour is that Star Princess will also be on its way time TBD.  
 

If Oceana was pencilled in to depart once the next new build came online, I wonder if they don’t see an option to expedite that idea even though I’m of the mind that the Corp. shifts the plans for the next monster new build to another brand if not delaying it further due to lack of revenue in the near term.  

2 hours ago, grapau27 said:

 

Just to clarify this post, those ships listed were mentioned in an article / interview with Arnold Donald as possible options for fleet reduction due to their age not a list of ships that were due to be sold.  As of right now, only Carnival know what's on the chopping block and what isn't...

I don’t think wowzz is over exaggerating anything as many valid points have been made even if some see it as doom and gloom.  

In no particular order of importance, how can cruising resume when countries are still closed to tourism?  Most countries including the UK have mandatory quarantine measures in place which will curtail most people’s travel plans including itinerary planning.  Given the lack of a proven vaccine and lack of insurance for COVID related claims, this will also be a road block for the industry to get back up and running.  Let’s also not forget the fact that most companies are busy repatriating their crew to far flung places around the globe, all of which have varying degrees of quarantine and travel restrictions which will have an effect on getting crew back to ships.   And let’s not forget the fact ships are not conveniently located near a turnaround port, nor are they presumably in any state to be fully operational and/or compliant with as yet unknown public health regulations?

The list of issues could go on and on but at the risk of also being labeled as ‘doom and gloom’ I will leave it there.  Suffice it to say, I think this year is a write off and if cruising resumes before the Spring it will be a bonus but given the obvious resurgence of virus spread in the US I wouldn’t be surprised if the same happened in the UK.