AL3XCruise

20 minutes ago, ilikeanswers said:

if you are going to argue the benefits of cruising it should be based on what they enjoy not what you enjoy.

To me this is the key point in this discussion. 

I know people who have chosen not to cruise because there personal interests and desires on vacation simply don't align with what most cruises offer.  For instance, one couple wants to do a deep cultural dive into wherever they go: local hotels, local food, etc.  Though there are many things they would like on a cruise, they are of the opinion they have good piano bars, theaters, and a variety of restaurants in their home city that will rival anything on a cruise ship.  So while they enjoy those things, they wouldn't necessarily be looking for them on a vacation.  The chance to eat at a shack on the side of the street in some town whose name I couldn't pronounce let alone spell... that is vacation to them. 

I'm not quite as adventurous, so cruising is a more appealing way for me to visit exciting locations.  Though I'd enjoy going on a cruise with them, I wouldn't try to convince them to use limited time and money on one unless I knew it would give them what they want.

HOWEVER, I also know people who are confused by rumors and myths.  Just look how often you see threads about clothing optional decks and raunchy parties on family focused cruise ships!  People who claim they would be board because there is nothing to do persist despite modern megaships having more activity and entertainment options than a lot of smaller cities!

And of course, there are people that just choose not listen.  They may have a reason they don't want to reveal to you, or they might just be stubborn.  Who knows...

So, at least for me, I try to clear up misconceptions and give someone an accurate picture.  They can use that information to decide what works best for them.  Though there are friends and family I'd like to spend time with on a cruise, it is important to me not to influence someone into a vacation that doesn't give them what they want!

The OP obviously knows these folks well, so I'm just adding my two cents as a fan of cruising with pro and anti cruising friends I discuss vacations with.  Every situation is unique.

On 1/30/2019 at 1:44 PM, Saab4444 said:

I believe she is not different from other ships this size.

I'm not a Naval Architect, but as I understand it the design of the Edge's bow should slightly reduce discomfort related to pitching (I don't recall if it is reducing amplitude, rate, or both).  That said, I have no idea if the effect is noticeable to passengers and there could be other design factors that have a bigger impact.  

On 1/28/2019 at 12:21 PM, Hlitner said:

The further forward the less foot traffic.  In fact, on a recent Emerald Princess cruise we had a the 2nd cabin behind the bridge and it was always quiet because there was no foot traffic.  One other advantage is that those forward cabins are often less costly (and less popular).   Forward cabins are also quiet because the heaviest and noisiest machinery (engines) are arrayed around the center of the ship (center of gravity) and the props or azipods are towards the aft (except on the new Celebrity Edge).

I agree this is a good location... slightly forward of the forward-most elevator can still be convenient yet limits the number of people walking by.  On some ships corridors farther aft can become quite busy.  On some ships, for example, there is no enclosed access for and aft past the main pool area, so the hallway below the pool deck can suddenly become quite busy in bad weather!

Also, just to avoid confusion, the Edge has conventional, rear mounted azipods.  A while back Fain said "The propellers are forward not back, so there’s nothing to interrupt the water coming into the propeller."  Some reporters assumed this meant they were mounted near the bow and published articles explicitly stating that.  He was simply saying the props were on the front of the azipods.  Just like most pod arrangements.

5 hours ago, bambiying said:

You may also want to take a look at the Celebrity Summit.  It goes to Bermuda from Bayonne.  I know some people here will argue with me because they say that the Summit is a little past it's prime, but I love it so much more than the Escape.  The Escape is too big, too noisy, and has way too many people.  I find the Summit to be a perfect sized ship and way more enjoyable.

I've been on both, and would take either again.  To be fair, my Summit experience is a few years old but at that time there were no age issues.  It just wasn't as flashy as the new megaships.  I'd probably lean towards the Summit on summer sailings; the BA-class ships get really crowded with a lot of third and forth guests (mainly kids) and the experience is impacted for people who don't enjoy that.  Summit has plenty of families too, but its not to the same extent.   In the winter I'd probably lean towards the Escape or another BA/BA+ ship.  Escape and the other BA/BA+ ships offer a lot of amenities you won't find on Summit, but not all of these will be important to everyone.  

6 hours ago, lneilan said:

Thanks so  much - I love that kind of get to know the island drive. The name of the tour did not show up in the post.

I wouldn't discourage a tour if you enjoy that kind of overview, but I'll second (third?) the folks here who mention the excellent public transit.  A robust bus and ferry service that is convenient for visitors.  One of the things I love about Bermuda is that between the multi-night itinerary and the public transit you can see a lot relatively affordably.  But if a tour helps you get your bearings, go for it!

On 1/23/2019 at 11:49 AM, Redrobo said:

To stop the shaking it is suggested that you hang something weighty on the tripod under the head where the camera is attached

Thanks for the suggestion!  I think I need a better tripod before I add any more weight to it, but I will give that a try once I do.

Relatively new to photography with anything more than a phone/point and shoot, but decided to try some shot last night despite the sub-zero wind chill.  Sadly I only have a 135mm lens and the wind gusts were shaking the cheap tripod, so the long exposures didn't work to well (I can't imagine the challenge of doing a long exposure from a ship!).

I would be curious what equipment and settings others use/suggest for this type of photo, as I'm trying to learn more.  

10 hours ago, knittinggirl said:

I kept on having issues w/ the tripod and ballhead combo slipping.   But I managed to get a few shots.  Temp was in the upper 40s/lower 50sF.  

Not sure if you meant to post images... they didn't seem to come through.  The site has been glitchy all weekend.

Here are a couple of Eastern US.  It was not nearly as nice as your weather--windchill below 0F.  I'm fairly new to photography and only have a 135mm Kit lens, but it still came out pretty nice and was worth braving the cold.

"We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid."

Benjamin Franklin

From that point of view, shouldn't we be celebrating his achievement?

52 minutes ago, Topsham said:

Happy Nieuw Year!  Hello to many good old friends.  Have been swamped so don't post much.   I read through frequently.  😉

 

Thought you might think about this new ship, due out this June.  Roughly the same as the R Class.... 58,000 tonnes.  Passengers  Max: 999.  No  inside cabins.  ALL balconies. 

It will be interesting to see how that does.  Looks like they currently operate older ships (a la Olsen) but are a tier or two higher; in order to keep that level of service and build a more premium market share they need the new-build vessels.  I don't know much about them, but five minutes on the site I get more Azamara/Oceania vibes than a HAL feeling in terms of offerings and pricing.

1 hour ago, philbob84 said:

I think the 1500-2100 is the new small mass market and frankly i think it is fine.

I'm not sure if there are any mass market lines building new ships in that size range.  The V class ships are just under 2000 at dual occupancy, but over 2200 at maximum occupancy.  Everything I'm aware of from RCI, X, NCL, and the North American Carnival Brands are all over 2000 (except the aforementioned "Xpedition" ships).  Looking at future orders, it seems like there is virtually no interest in the sub 2500 passenger market among those players.  

I believe in terms of Passenger Capacity the smallest ships with a mass market North American line are the S class; the smallest by gross tonnage is the Empress OTS.  For now...

If I had subscribed to the one and done philosophy, my first trip on the Breakaway would have kept me from ever setting foot on an NCL ship again.  Quality has varied a lot on other lines, but nothing ever made me want to get off the ship early until that Breakaway trip!  But I figured the bad service and other issues were likely an anomaly; there is no way NCL would have so many defenders if that was status quo.  A subsequent trip on the Escape was one of the best cruises I've had. 

Now if the issues is identifiable and attached to that ship or line, I get it.  If you don't like the bathroom layout, you go to another ship.  If you think the dining options don't meet your needs, you go to another line.  That makes sense.

Its harder when the issue is service.  Breakaway was at max capacity, Escape was closer to double occupancy.  Were the staff stressed by the number of passengers on the Breakaway?  Did the senior staff on the Breakaway at the time not promote as good of a work environment?  Was it something else?  I don't know, but I doubt it was anything that will impact a cruise two or three years later.

A bad cruise stinks--the time and money invested in them are not trivial--so I understand why people are hesitant to try a line or ship a second time.  But I try to avoid drawing conclusions I can't make based on a single experience.  I would have missed a wonderful NCL cruise if I did!

1 hour ago, OlsSalt said:

Size of ship is absolutely critical when it comes to certain ports and ability to dock in certain locations - I am seeing these continued HAL smaller ships more for the more unique itineraries they still service; not for routine bus trips.  Those are the ports  where size still very much matters. My own sweet spot would be the under 1200 passenger size -like the Maasdam, or the smaller un-altered R class ships - 1400 or so.

 

That is the discussion here. Is there any future for continued mid-market smaller ships, and what would it take to get there to make fiscal sense.

That is what I understood--we aren't talking about 'slumming it', but there are some who value the options as smaller cruise opens up but are happy with HAL (or Princess or Celebrity) level service.  I know I don't need nor desire to pay for the extras that come with a premium line like Azamara or a luxury line like Seabourn, so missing those amenities doesn't matter to me.  I think we all agree there is a market segment there, the question is how do you get the margins big enough to make it attractive.

36 minutes ago, cruisemom42 said:

Is that HAL?  I'm not really sure that it is.  I think Carnival would be better off creating an entirely new division if that is something they wanted to pursue.

I've never seen HAL as an expedition line, and I agree there are certain destinations where something like that would make sense.  But there are a lot of destinations a 1000 to 2000 passenger can get to that I wouldn't consider "expedition".  For example, Empress OTS used to make runs to Bermuda that included stops in Hamilton and St George.  No other RCI ship could do it, and many of the folks on our voyage selected the vessel for that reason.

It is also worth noting that Celebrity does have an "expedition" division that operates under the same brand.  They actually have a 16 passenger vessel and are building a new 100 passenger ship.  I believe the tiny cruiser was the result of an acquisition that may have included some valuable permits, etc, in the Galapagos, but they have chosen to keep it in operation.  Obviously they charge premium pricing compared to the main brand so its not exactly relevant to the market we have been discussing, but I find it interesting how they have marketed it as a sub-brand of X rather than its own division.

First of all this is a great discussion... it seems like talks about business strategy elsewhere on this board often fall apart fairly quickly due to personal attachment to certain lines.  Here everyone is sharing thoughts and insights in a friendly way.

1 hour ago, RDC1 said:

 

The best source of cruise ship costs out there, showing the cost of most ships, including date built, or acquired, cost and cost per passenger berth is https://www.cruisemapper.com/wiki/759-how-much-does-a-cruise-ship-cost

I looked at that site but was hesitant to post it as I wasn't sure how they sourced there info.  I'm not saying its wrong, I just generally don't like to repost data that I haven't been able to verify from multiple sources or from a primary source, like a annual report.  I'm guessing the information is mostly accurate, but there are some inconsistencies in the presentation.  For example Allure OTS (where it notes maximum passenger capacity) and Oasis OTS (where it notes double occupancy).  That makes Allure's cost per berth far less.  Still, the cost for ship seems to line up anytime I've cross referenced with another source.

I know the focus here is HAL, but it is interesting to note that the Oasis class ships generally cost more per berth than smaller RCI vessels.  I don't know if that is due to the amenities, some technical issues on a ship that large, or something else entirely.  As pointed out by others, luxury ships also tend to be more expensive per berth, and not many small non-luxury ships have been built recently.  In short, while my hunch would be bigger is cheaper per berth all else being equal, its tough to draw broad conclusions about construction costs without more data.  

Operations are different.  I think it is fairly well understood that while hotel staff increases more or less proportionally to passenger count (assuming the same level of service), the rest of the crew only increases slightly as the ship grows.

1 hour ago, OlsSalt said:

Fuzzy math here: 207,000 per passenger new builds divided by 30 year useful life requires 1200 passengers to pay back just $9,000 each year ,just one time a year to pay back the initial capital outlay for the original new build.

 

270,000 per passenger build cost divided by 30 years = $9000 per passenger per year. Let's say HAL makes $5000 per passenger every 30 days.. (average $166 per day fares) or $60,000 a year per passenger

I understand you say the math is fuzzy.  Based on https://cruisemarketwatch.com/financial-breakdown-of-typical-cruiser/, which averages data from several lines annual reports, your revenue number is pretty close.  If you assume that all depreciation and interests expenses are related to ship acquisition (they aren't, but we are being fuzzy), the average is about $455 per week left over for ship acquisition (and profit).  Target returns vary by industry, but if we assume 10% as a typical minimum, you are left with a loss of more than $50,000 over 30 years (assuming operating costs and ticket prices both follow the same inflation curve).

Obviously, a small ship may be able to charge slightly more.  However, it can also be argued that a small ship will see less revenue from onboard spending due to fewer offerings.  Furthermore, a small ship will likely cost more per passenger to operate than the industry average.  I don't have the time or resources to dig into that kind of nitty gritty, but I'm guessing Carnival Corp does it all the time.

I will agree that as the different brands jockey for market segments on the "big watery chess board" it creates some confusion about what they actually are.  I don't have experience with either line HAL or Princess, but as someone who has been looking at them as a possible change from my normal lines they seem to be getting more similar.  I almost wonder if in the long term Carnival sees Princess as following Celebrity's apparent move towards an affluent younger crowd that wants an upscale yet fun alternative to CCL.   HAL then moves into Princess territory to pick up the slack while improving operating margins.  Sadly that likely means certain HAL aspects will be lost.

21 hours ago, RDC1 said:

What they found was that they can make a profit in the primarily UK market, by not having to outlay substantial amounts of capital to buy new ships. The article you quoted indicates that their complete valuation of all four of their ships is 48,691,000 pounds or about 64 million dollars.  

I think your assessment is spot on.  Neither Olson's parent nor Carnival report detailed financials for operations of specific lines, but some rough numbers for Carnival show an EBITDA of around $4.7 billion USD on $17.5 billion in revenue in 2017.  That gives an EBITDA to revenue ratio of about 27%.  

Olson reports about $40 million USD (using today's exchange rate for 2017 data, but its close) on $252 million in revenue, or about 16%. 

I would have preferred to use NI for comparison but couldn't find a number for Olson that I felt was reliable enough.  The numbers above are out of 2017 annual reports for Carnival and Bonheur ASA.  They are also back of the envelope calculations--but I think enough to be germane to the discussion.

Different business models yield different results, and obviously Olson is profitable in their niche.  As RDC1 notes, they don't need to service debt on multi-hundred-million dollar new ships, which is a big part of that profitability.  But If Carnival can invest in ships offering far higher ROIs and chose to spend money elsewhere they would be crucified by their investors.  

Olson, as a smaller organization and new entrant, is smart to pursue a segment that is of limited interest to their competitors.  If the markets they are currently targeting become saturated, Carnival may very well explore moving HAL or another brand into the Olson territory, but probably not until then.

There isn't much special about the room itself, but the main benefits are location and the included spa passes.  The location is not only near the spa, but makes for easy access to the pool area.  If you plan on spending time at the spa and pool, its a good choice.  If you anticipate being down on decks 6, 7, and 8 most of the day it might not be as good of a fit.

For us, the difference in price between a regular balcony and spa balcony was about the same as two spa passes.  If you have more than two people, the spa balcony may actually be cheaper.

You may want to check out the deckplans; the starboard spa balconies are under the gym and we avoided them for that reason.  I'm not sure how much noise gets down into the cabin, but I didn't want to take the risk!

7 hours ago, Libra1012 said:

I find leaving from Boston easier.  However, leaving from NYC is much more interesting.  

Very true.  I'll admit I haven't sailed from every major cruise port in the world, but I can't imagine many approaching New York.  A few pics taken from the Escape on departure:

4 hours ago, 138east said:

Indoor parking is a huge plus in the winter.  How was the port transfer?  This is a new offering and there is not much feedback yet on it.

 

None of the hotels being discussed are vacation destinations.  Folks who don’t know the area should look at google earth so there are no surprises..  It’s also good to know that the room was quiet and clean.  They must have really good windows.

No issues with the port transfer.  In a related thread I wrote: "Transport was in a Lincoln SUV and worked well, but it was maxed out by five people and bags.  Not sure if the contractor has a larger vehicle or not.  We actually docked the night before due to an emergency, so boarding started earlier than expected.  We called the driver and they were able to pick us up 30 minutes earlier than originally planned which was nice. "

I should point out that even though out room is quiet, we stayed on a Saturday night and were on the side of the building away from the main road.  Changing those factors might change the experience, but I really don't know.

On 9/22/2018 at 6:45 AM, 138east said:

Given a choice, I would not pick the Fairfield Inn because of its location in a more urban area on the route 1/9 truck route.

Not sure if it impacts anyone's' parking plans, but the Fairfield Inn does have indoor parking.  Despite the truck activity the room was quiet, and facility was very clean.

7 hours ago, 138east said:

Someone posted they were going to try it, but they haven’t posted back.  It’s located in a highly urban area on the Route 1&9 truck route.  Take a look at the area on Google Earth.

 

Hilton Gardens is in a corporate park area, but it is next to the NJ Turnpike.  Take a look at that on google earth as well.  IMO this hotel will be easier to get to from the turnpike.

I stayed there.  Very nice hotel.  As you said its an urban area with heavy truck activity, but the room was quiet.  Nice free breakfast.  They do have an indoor parking garage, and it was nice not needing to worry if we'd need to clean snow off the car!

Transport was in a Lincoln SUV and worked well, but it was maxed out by five people and bags.  Not sure if the contractor has a larger vehicle or not.  We actually docked the night before due to an emergency, so boarding started earlier than expected.  We called the driver and they were able to pick us up 30 minutes earlier than originally planned which was nice.  

Hotel room, breakfast, indoor parking, and transport to/from the pier for less than what parking at the pier would cost.  Not sure how it compares to the other hotel options, but it worked well for us.

Just now, barb65 said:

 

BirdTravels, I enjoy all of your posts! They are always so informative!

While I agree BirdTravels often provides great info, you quoted me :).

1 hour ago, GeezerCouple said:

It is much "safer" for NCL (or any food provider) to do their best to make SURE that there is no cross contamination *IF* that is necessary.  But it isn't always necessary.

<snip>

Best to err on the side of safety.  

 

I agree.  I was the manager of an employee with celiacs, and when we had food for company events we were always careful to either work with someplace that specialized in meals for those with various sensitivities or something he explicitly said was suitable.  "GF" on a menu was not good enough to us as we did not know if that also include dedicated space when the food was prepared.  I'd surmise that NCL has such dedicated space available, but may not be practical to use it unless specifically needed.  Thus, they may have items on the menu that do not contain ingredients with gluten that are prepared alongside items that do unless coordinated.  Rather than make life harder on the chefs by making by preparing all potentially GF meals in a dedicated area, it makes sense to coordinate directly with the customer.  It also gives the most flexibility to meet specific needs and limits any possible miscommunication.

The waterfront was one of my favorite areas of the Escape and Breakaway.  Its quieter and more laid back than the pool deck and closer to the water.  I found it great for sail-aways, especially at the stern where you could easily see everything.  In addition to smaller crowds than the upper decks there are fewer wind-blocks, so it is easier to get good photos.

As mentioned, several restaurants and bars offer service outdoors along the waterfront.  Other areas just have chairs and couches to relax in.

I can't help too much with the Gem, but I recently got back from a trip on the Escape and thought I might be able to add a few of my experiences.

With regard to music:

There were four musicians/bands that rotated through the atrium, bars, etc.  We really enjoyed Chelsea and JR (Guitar and Piano respectively), though I think they will be off the ship by April.  I heard good things about the other groups too, but did not see as much of them.  In general at least three of the four were playing on a given evening.

However, one negative about the BA/BA+ ships is that some of the bars are fairly small.  If the group you want to see is in a small venue, seating gets tight.  This didn't seem to be as big of an issue on Escape as it had been on Breakaway, especially at the District (not every seat was great, but you could get a seat).  Tobacco Road and the atrium were the only places we really had trouble finding a seat.  

In addition to those groups, you have the dinner theater, main theater, and Howl at the Moon (alternating with the comedy club).  Lots of great options there.  We saw Choir of Man, Wine Lovers, and a set by Chelsea in the dinner theater and Brat Pack in the main theater.  I won't make any specific recommendations given that everyone has different tastes, but lots of good options.  There were also a few informal "crossover" shows where multiple artists got together (Such as folks from Choir of Man singing with Chelsea in Margaritville and cast members from Brat Pack joining HATM).

With regard to views:

I saw it mentioned that there are limited options for views.  In NYC most folks want to be able to see out both sides of the ship, as Manhattan is on one and Statue of Liberty on the other.  If the weather permits, the upper decks work (though some of the windblocks might make photos tricky in some areas).  Personally I liked the stern on Deck 8 waterfront--really easy to walk from side to side and a great aft view.  Indoor options are more restrictive.  The spa is a full width forward view, but you'd need a spa pass.  The buffet is full width as well with an aft view, but I'm not sure how crowded it would be. 

With regard to weather:

We sailed in December heading to the southern Caribbean.  It was frigid leaving NYC, and we basically had two seas each way where outdoor time was minimal.  Escape isn't really a "Cold Weather Ship" so the indoor stuff does feel a bit crowded when the weather is bad.  We dealt with that by getting a spa pass, but I believe the spa is 18+ so it may not help the OP.  Once the outdoor temp got into the upper 60s people started moving outside and the ship felt much more spacious.  Even at the worst crowding wasn't too bad, but things may be more packed on an April cruise.

Despite the weather, there was a sail away party--however the ship left late, so the party was over before sail away occurred!  If it had been warmer people might have stuck around...

Bermuda:

I have been to Bermuda several times, and my only suggestion would be to pick an option that maximizes your time in port.  

Summary:

I was very pleased with our experience on Escape; far better than Breakaway a few years before.  I don't think there is a bad option to go to Bermuda, but I hope you find what works best for your family!