chengkp75

100 shares.

Having used Sysco for years on the ships, I know their order forms. You can specify something like "sliced pepperoni" and get generic, or if you specify a specific brand, they will buy that and charge you an upcharge for it. This is what is called "pasteurized egg product", and is what is almost universally used in the food service industry, not "powdered eggs" that most complain about in the ship's buffet line. These are used for scrambled eggs, omelets, hollandaise sauces, etc. The eggs are shelled, scrambled, an emulsifier is added to keep it from separating, and then pasteurized, so that it can be served in a raw condition (like hollandaise, cheesecake, eggnog, etc).

To the best of my knowledge, Sysco does not "make" anything, they are a wholesaler and distributor. They do sell prepared products, but those are bought from "partners" who produce them.

Why? The stock price is based on what someone is willing to pay another shareholder for that stock. If there are assets, but no confidence that a shareholder would get anything out of a liquidation, then there might be no buyers at any price. Share price drops to zero. Share price is not determined by company assets, but by investor confidence that they will get a return on their investment. And, you said that the company would be bankrupt if the share price went to zero, which it wouldn't necessarily. I agree that if the company went bankrupt, there would be no assets left, after liquidation, but you know what? Even if the share price is zero, and the company goes into liquidation, and there is any shareholder equity left over after paying the creditors, the shareholders would get some of the assets. Assets and share price are not conjoined.

Andy; When I started out, oh those many years ago, the USCG inspectors were all retired merchant ship Captains and Chiefs, with a sprinkling of very senior USCG Warrant Officers (almost all had over 20 years in the CG, the majority in marine inspection). You used to have one deck and one engine inspector, now there are about 6 or so, and each one is only "qualified" to inspect certain things. I've seen a marked downturn in competence of ABS surveyors as well. DNV has impressed me for the most part, during my time with NCL.

And that has dropped from $8.9 billion in 9 months, or about $200k/month. That's about 3 years of cash, provided fuel costs (and they don't control these with futures contracts) don't drive them to spend much faster. Revenues have been dropping the last few months, so the cash flow out will increase. Those 90 ships are valued at $38 billion, with a long term debt against them of $28 billion. That $7 billion in cash is balanced against current liabilities of $12.9 billion. So, of that $8.4 billion in shareholder equity that ledges1 posted, all of that is from the equity in the ships. Don't kid yourself that Carnival is in a good place.

Hate to pick nits, but Allagash is 7.5 miles from the cruise terminal, while the Bear is only 2.5. And, the Bear carries several Allagash brews, including the flagship White. I know one of the brewers at Allagash, and he would be laughing at the "pilgrimage" label. I'm very spoiled, as my sons in Boston bring the craft brews from there, and most of the hundreds of brews made in New England are for sale here in Portland. I am very encouraged by the trend in New England breweries to experiment outside the IPA genre, as it is getting a little old, and I prefer a "malty" beer over a "hoppy" one.

Hate to disagree with you after approving of your previous posts on this thread, but here goes. All of SOLAS has been incorporated into USC, as is required of all signatory nations. However, SOLAS also states that the only time a signatory nation can impose stricter regulations on ships is for ships of its own flag. As "Port State Control" agency for the US, the USCG is only allowed to ensure that SOLAS requirements are met, not any more restrictive USCG requirements. So, no, the USCG cannot enforce the "enhancements" in the USC. As for the cruise line that doesn't wish to call on US ports, I would suspect that is more to do with the USPH VSP sanitation program, and its strict requirements, than any problem with USCG inspections. And, while I agree that enforcement is different in different countries (one of the reasons for using flags of convenience), if a flag state does not wish to have a maritime inspection service of its own, it is allowed under SOLAS to delegate that authority to a classification society, who have many surveyors, all around the globe, not just in the flag nation. Now, again, I will agree that enforcement is variable depending on the class society, they generally do the "easy stuff" like SOLAS compliance well. And, just to be fair, while I believe US flag vessels to be among the safest in the world, I have seen a drastic reduction in competency in USCG inspectors over the last 3 decades, as you find young inspectors with no knowledge of merchant ship operations or equipment. And, the USCG is desperately trying to get out of the marine inspection business, as their funding and focus moves more towards border security and drug interdiction, and are more and more leaning on the same class societies as other nations to inspect the ships. The USCG has also looked at outsourcing licensing US mariners, to of all things, the maritime unions! As an example of how a USCG inspector had no clue what he was looking at, on a twin screw, twin rudder RO/RO ship, the engine inspector asked me "why are the two steering gears so far apart?" I had to explain that there were in fact 4 steering motors, and there were two on each rudder, and those rudders had to be that far apart. In the same inspection, the deck inspectors tested the two steering motors on the starboard rudder, and none on the port rudder, and when I questioned this, they said "they'd seen all they need". This was nearly 30 years ago, and it hasn't gotten better.

Yes, if a majority vote cannot force bankruptcy, the only thing that could force on is if the company can no longer meet it's debts, and the creditors file for involuntary bankruptcy. If there are 12 or more unsecured creditors, and their claims total more than $15,775 (don't ask me why that number), then they can file a petition for bankruptcy.

I'll add to the ancient history. If you look closely at the various "listing" ships, you'll see that as the ship lists more and more, more of the ship below the waterline is now above the waterline. This would not be the case in reality, just in a depiction by someone using "cut and paste". If you look at where the waterline is on the upright ship, at the centerline, and then rotate the ship around this point, you will see that before the ship reaches 45*, the main deck will submerge at the "down" side of the ship, and then water will enter the ship through the non-watertight doors there, and increase flooding, which will move the ship deeper into the water, allowing more to rush in through those doors, and so on. The depictions of the listed ships allows for the weight of the ship to decrease while listing, which is not what happens, the ship weighs the same no matter what angle it lists at, so the waterline at the centerline (the sharp bow in the pictures) will always remain constant. The 15* list depiction is accurate, the others, not so much, but they do illustrate the actual angles. At 15*, you are walking in the corner between the deck and bulkhead, greater than that, and you have difficulty standing at all, if this is rolling and not a constant list.

Anyone who bought cruise line shares for any other reason than buying the minimum for shareholder benefits has always been taking a large risk. Shipping companies, of any type, are one disaster away from folding. The ROI on cruise industry stocks is decidedly middle of the road, there are many better investments out there than shipping stocks.

No, it's not. It still has assets (ships and buildings). Those don't disappear when the stock goes to zero. The shareholders lose everything, but a zero share price does not really affect the daily operation of the company. The company does not have to redeem shares, and never gain money or lose money when share prices go up or down. The only time the company gets money from stock shares is when the share is first issued. Share price is never part of the company's annual balance sheet. Shareholders have no claim to company assets unless the board decides to declare bankruptcy (it is not a mandatory action when the share price reaches zero, but the shareholders can vote for bankruptcy), at which time creditors get first crack at the assets, and then the shareholders.

The area around this is pretty rough, so take care going there. We've been, but we keep a close watch out, especially late. Closer to the port and carrying most of the brews that you would get out in Riverside near Allagash is the Great Lost Bear with 50 local craft beers on tap. It is nearly always mentioned in craft beer reviews nationwide. Bartenders have been trained in beer tasting, attended trade shows and competitions, and are thoroughly knowledgeable about the brews they serve. As a note, Gritty's is the oldest brew pub in Portland, but Geary's (which has nearly increased above "craft brewing" status, IIRC) started 2 years before Gritty's. I do agree that I'd avoid Shipyard, and the places you mention in the Old Port are some of the top ones.

If you are simply looking for a hotel for the night, I would recommend hotels in Brooklyn, those in Carrol Gardens or Park Slope are fine, and significantly cheaper than Manhattan hotels. Agreed that I would avoid Red Hook hotels, but even going to Dumbo or Downtown Brooklyn you are in good areas and inexpensive (for NYC).

Basically, yes. The way the ship worked this when I worked the NCL Hawaii ships is that the bridge notifies the purser's office when the ship leaves the 3 mile limit, and the POS registers are reprogrammed to stop charging tax. And, it's not just drinks that you will pay tax on, it is anything you purchase onboard while within 3 miles.

In port and until the ship gets outside of 3 miles

The USPH VSP requirement to have handwashing sinks at the entry to self-service buffets is only for ships built after May 2018, or that have had the buffet "significantly" modified after this date. So, not sure where the Ruby fits into that scheme. There is no requirement for handwashing sinks at any other dining venues, only self-service ones, and not drink stations. The requirement is to have one station at each entrance, and at least one per hundred seats.

They probably told you it was "Royal Caribbean International Ranch Dressing". But I will just about guarantee that it came from Sysco or other major wholesale distributor, and the RCI label is added. Sysco gets this from various makers, but it is not noted to the cruise line which manufacturer makes it.

The only real problem is whether they are touching both "food contact" surfaces and "non-food contact" surfaces. All food contact surfaces are sanitized frequently.

Even taking the lifeboats off for the transit, she is too wide, since the davits are "fixed" with the boats outside the ship. They used a different davit for these ships, where the davit retracts into the ship, bringing the boat and davit arms closer to the side of the ship.

Slower steaming generally results in less fuel consumption, but reducing by a knot or even two, over the short time spans that cruise ships generally have between ports would not result in a significant savings. Cargo ships have adopted slow steaming, but that is mainly for many day voyages between ports. Shore power is not a savings for the cruise ships, since the rate they pay for electricity, or the "use charge" the port levies has to cover the infrastructure costs from providing the shore power station. Plus the ship needs about a $1 million investment to install the shore power connection. Shore power is forced on the ships in ports that want to reduce emissions. Shore power is rare in the US, and especially for cruise ships, since cargo ships can use 480v power, while cruise ships require 10,000v power.

And, it's been reported in the last two days that NYC an NCL did not reach an agreement on the charter, and NYC is in discussions with other lines.

While bunker prices have started to rise this past week, they are still about 35% lower than in June.

I'm afraid you're right, but my hope is that there are enough calls to muster with the emergency handled quickly and things returned to normal, but with chaos during the musters to bring about a return.

But, getting to your muster station (which you should go to rather than your lifeboat) early does not guarantee that your boat will be loaded and launched first. That would be important if the cruise lines set the requirements. But they don't, and they don't have a vote in the IMO, which does set the requirements, either. Do you think that if the cruise lines had a voice in the safety regulations, that they would have progressed from the Titanic? Safety equipment and compliance costs money. Fortunately, as noted above, the cruise line has no vote in the matter. If the IMO says that ships have to revert to the previous muster system, the cruise lines have to comply, whether their passengers like it or not.