Has Ship Building Finally 'Jumped the Shark'? Cruising?

[MaryPoppinz]

I would cruise on a ship like Oasis of the Seas, with a balcony cabin and if the itinerary weren't so tied to the few ports that can accommodate her. I wouldn't mind having a cupcake on a cruise and doing some designer shopping and using the zipline and.....

 

But...there has been one consistent complaint about this ship that would be an absolute dealbreaker for me, and that is the problem with poorly-insulated cabins. I have seen several reviews in several places and they are all in agreement -- conversations from one cabin carry into the next cabin. That is totally unacceptable -- I don't want to hear your "stuff" and I don't want you hearing mine. Whatever the size of the ship and whatever the cost, a peaceful trip with a view of the sea is something I have got to have.

[flynrph]

If Disney World is finding it tough to attract families in this economy with all of their innovation the executives at NCL have to be a little nervous.

That, too!

(Help me out here, I don't follow NCL that well. Have they recently added capacity?)

[CruzVinnieCruz]

That, too!

(Help me out here, I don't follow NCL that well. Have they recently added capacity?)

 

That was a typo I meant RCL..........

[Crown Prince]

But to get to the original questions of "jumping the shark", this target market is hurting real bad during this recession, and therefore, the prime target is temporarily off the scope, in terms of non essential disposable income. Unfortunate timing for RCI, fostering a high risk of "sinking the corporate ship", might be the pivotal question, as opposed to "jumping the shark". Bottom line, again, time will tell, but I for one, would not like to see RCI go under, as they provide valuable competition.

 

Take the Dubai track and defer your payments for a few months - or years. Make the Stock Market drop. How does the AE get away with this ???

 

:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:

[flynrph]

Take the Dubai track and defer your payments for a few months - or years. Make the Stock Market drop. How does the AE get away with this ???

 

:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:

Voodoo accounting?????? Come to think about it, This has the potential of taking down the the financial system.... again..... ahhhhhhhhh...........

[CaribbeanIsland]

Has anyone noticed the price of the cabins on the smaller ships have skyrocketed lately? Coincidence?

[Colo Cruiser]

Has anyone noticed the price of the cabins on the smaller ships have skyrocketed lately? Coincidence?

 

They have always been expensive in my book.

[Cruisin' Chick]

I'm wondering if port fees (taxes, whatever) are higher too. Consider that the size of the Island Princess is about 80 percent the size of the Oasis (and the Ocean Princess is about 1/2 the length of the Oasis). If there's limited space at the berths, any additional ships would have to anchor away from the pier. If you're in port on the same day of the Oasis, it'll be like having two other ships in port with you.

 

For me, I can do without the ice rink, rock climbing wall and all those shops or whatever is in those "neighborhoods." There's not a self-service laundromat, which is something my family definitely uses on any cruise we do that's longer than four days.

 

I'll be happy if Princess sticks with the current size ships.

 

It'll be interesting to see how the Oasis and Allure do in the coming years when it comes to filling the ships.

[RickEk]

I'm wondering if port fees (taxes' date=' whatever) are higher too. Consider that the size of the Island Princess is about 80 percent the size of the Oasis (and the Ocean Princess is about 1/2 the length of the Oasis). If there's limited space at the berths, any additional ships would have to anchor away from the pier. If you're in port on the same day of the Oasis, it'll be like having two other ships in port with you.

 

For me, I can do without the ice rink, rock climbing wall and all those shops or whatever is in those "neighborhoods." There's not a self-service laundromat, which is something my family definitely uses on any cruise we do that's longer than four days.

 

I'll be happy if Princess sticks with the current size ships.

 

It'll be interesting to see how the Oasis and Allure do in the coming years when it comes to filling the ships.[/quote']

 

FYI...The Island Princess is about 42% of the Oasis (91,627 vs. 220,000 GRT)

[TorontoTL]

FYI...The Island Princess is about 42% of the Oasis (91,627 vs. 220,000 GRT)

 

I think she was referring to the length of the ships and how much space it would take at a dock.

[Cruisin' Chick]

Oops, sorry, I was referring to the length and not the gross tonage.

[RickEk]

Oops' date=' sorry, I was referring to the length and not the gross tonage.[/quote']

 

No, no, no... my bad... I'll try to read more carefully next time!:)

[woodofpine]

Isn't that the term market analysts have used to describe investor sentiment during bubbles. It will be interesting to see if Oasis and Allure go down as examples of that sentiment in ship building - since this 'worm turned' economy is not in for a quick rebound. The Dubai default only high lights that there are still major finance issues to be absorbed and resolved in global finance. I have to believe that ship financing will be more expensive. Epic size ship financing may not be unavailable for a while.

 

Worrisome for RCI is that among the 'hoopla' of Oasis' introduction are persistent industry commentaries of 'not for everyone'. I'm sure that concern's the finance department which was hoping to hear a chorus of 'something for everyone'.

 

Personally, I thought Oasis and Allure were 'a tough sell' when the cruise market was ever inflating in a good time economy. In my view, these ships crossed an invisible line of something... As others have said, the timing was really unfortunate for RCI. This ship purportedly needs to command a fare premium and sell out. Disney has commanded a fare premium in the 'family market' but it has a unique pull. Disney's history was pretty conservative too in originally attaching its cruise product to its Florida theme parks for half n' half short cruise/park holidays. Trying to sell ships with double Disney's ship capacity (Oasis) at Disney prices in this market when families are in generally a severe pinch... It's going to interesting to see the 'ripple effect' and position of RCI in a couple of years. Maybe they're 'smarter than all of us' but this economy was being driven by that exuberant mentality so I'm a doubter.

 

There's nothing wrong with SHIPS and cruising. There is a 'failure point' when one tries to mimic a land resort theme park on a hull; THAT ain't cruising!

[Maraprince]

Isn't that the term market analysts have used to describe investor sentiment during bubbles. It will be interesting to see if Oasis and Allure go down as examples of that sentiment in ship building - since this 'worm turned' economy is not in for a quick rebound. The Dubai default only high lights that there are still major finance issues to be absorbed and resolved in global finance. I have to believe that ship financing will be more expensive. Epic size ship financing may not be unavailable for a while.

 

Worrisome for RCI is that among the 'hoopla' of Oasis' introduction are persistent industry commentaries of 'not for everyone'. I'm sure that concern's the finance department which was hoping to hear a chorus of 'something for everyone'.

 

Personally, I thought Oasis and Allure were 'a tough sell' when the cruise market was ever inflating in a good time economy. In my view, these ships crossed an invisible line of something... As others have said, the timing was really unfortunate for RCI. This ship purportedly needs to command a fare premium and sell out. Disney has commanded a fare premium in the 'family market' but it has a unique pull. Disney's history was pretty conservative too in originally attaching its cruise product to its Florida theme parks for half n' half short cruise/park holidays. Trying to sell ships with double Disney's ship capacity (Oasis) at Disney prices in this market when families are in generally a severe pinch... It's going to interesting to see the 'ripple effect' and position of RCI in a couple of years. Maybe they're 'smarter than all of us' but this economy was being driven by that exuberant mentality so I'm a doubter.

 

There's nothing wrong with SHIPS and cruising. There is a 'failure point' when one tries to mimic a land resort theme park on a hull; THAT ain't cruising!

 

 

 

RCL's aim in marketing the Oasis and the Allure is to go after the first time cruisers who will be "impressed" by the size of the ships and what it is on it -- they are marketing the ship as a destination in itself rather than the limited number of ports where the Oasis can fit. They are also going after the European/Asian markets who by comparison to the US dollar, have more money to spend since their currencies haven't taken the big hit as the US money has. Also, Carnival has dropped Europe from their 2010 sailings since their passengers do not want to pay the higher prices they would be charged. Once you get to Europe, you have the Euro which is a killer for anything you wish to purchase. By comparison, it is a real bargain for someone coming over from Europe or Asia to purchase things using US dollars vs. their currencies. Even adding in the air fare to take a cruise out of the US, they are still saving tremendously while we take a big, big hit on everything.:(

 

Like anything else, once the novelty wears off and the competition has less problems filling up their smaller ships, RCL will start to see a drop off in bookings and shareholder profits. This will translate to more extra charges being added to things on board that currently are free. They have to make up the loss revenue somehow and you can count on it being passed along to the passengers. 5000 passengers = a lot of cabins/beds to fill up on every sailing to make a profit or just break even. A lot is riding on the on-board sales revenue since the ship is the destination. More drinks, extra charge items, merchandise, beauty treatments, etc. must be sold on every sailing.

 

MARAPRINCE

[flynrph]

Isn't that the term market analysts have used to describe investor sentiment during bubbles. It will be interesting to see if Oasis and Allure go down as examples of that sentiment in ship building - since this 'worm turned' economy is not in for a quick rebound. The Dubai default only high lights that there are still major finance issues to be absorbed and resolved in global finance. I have to believe that ship financing will be more expensive. Epic size ship financing may not be unavailable for a while.

There seems to be some historical evidence of what happens when you seriously increase capacity related to travel conveyance.

Say, for a relatively recent example, the 747. Real big airship with a real big increase in capacity. Initially, was a quasi success, but nowadays, shunned by airlines because "they can't fill it!" and fuel costs vs efficiency make for bad operating economics. The A380, which isn't selling well to begin with, may very well reinforce the 747 lesson. So, did RCI just build / write a new chapter of irrational exuberance?

[Thumper69]

My biggest concern with these mega everything planes, ships is. What happens in an emergency? Trying to get 6000 people off a ship quickly. Trying to get 600+ passengers off an aircraft very quickly, only time will tell. Already an Air France A380 had to return to JFK with problems. I hope they didn't fast track it and will turn out to be another DC10. They were a disaster waiting to happen.:eek:

 

 

Anthony

[Katie333]

Right now they are charging the inflated 'new ship' prices to sail on Oasis. It's a big novelty and newer ships tend to command a premium regardless. RCI will probably get a short term boost from their loyal fans, and those curious wanting to try an impressive (I say scary) huge vessel. After the fanfare dies off and Allure hits the waters, time will tell if RCI can keep those ships profitable.

 

With that said, I doubt they would build them without having a long term vision for profitability.

[bbqbrad]

Enough with the wringing of the hands and bemoaning the inevitible progression in ship size and amenities.:rolleyes: I have heard the same moaning everytime a cruiseline comes up with a new innovation or practice. Many act like it is going to be the death of cruising and it never is.

 

If you don't like bigger ships, don't book them, it is that simple. Crusing will go on with or without you. If the demand wasn't there they wouldn't build them.

 

Worried that the mega ships will cause the smaller ships to be underbooked??? Wooo Hooo! Let's go bargin hunting!!!

 

For those who are upset at the premium price for the Oasis, wait about a year or two down the road and the novelty wears off.

 

Looking into the future from a post on Cruise Critic from November 25, 2019:

 

"You can have the newer mega-ships. I prefer the smaller ones like the Oasis of the Seas." :eek:

 

Amen

[tntornadox]

It seems the newbuild for 2012 was another vessel variant of the Dream Class to be built for Carnival Cruise Line.

[Maraprince]

My biggest concern with these mega everything planes, ships is. What happens in an emergency? Trying to get 6000 people off a ship quickly. Trying to get 600+ passengers off an aircraft very quickly, only time will tell. Already an Air France A380 had to return to JFK with problems. I hope they didn't fast track it and will turn out to be another DC10. They were a disaster waiting to happen.:eek:

 

 

Anthony

 

 

The more interesting obersevation is that the Oasis has more passengers on board than the residents in her port of calls!

 

Also, it has expressed by some that they would not want to be in port at the same time the Oasis. Wonder why?

 

Until the Oasis has completed several revenue cruises no one really knows how smoothly things will go. Right now, the Oasis is enjoying the "honeymoon" period with TA industry invited guests on CTN. All of the venues were not fully at their normal speed. No reserving of deck chairs by the pool (only in your dreams!), no crowds at the shows, dining rooms, etc. due to sailing at less that maximum passenger capcity.

 

The real test will come if there is any type of delay in boarding or enroute to a port and how the passengers react.

 

MARAPRINCE

[azdmelani]

I was on the Oasis Monday-Tuesday for the naming cruise.

 

The ship is gorgeous. Central park is awesome, a great place to hang out. Boardwalk is cute if you are into beach like areas. Cupcakes were yummy.

 

However, the ship felt crowded (that was with only 1000 out of 2700 cabins booked). The food at dinner was horrible, as was the service.

 

When building such a large floating sea, it's important not to lose sight of the basics, and it seems to me that is exactly what RCCL did.

 

We both agreed it's Princess for our next cruise.

[terrierjohn]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug R.

Enough with the wringing of the hands and bemoaning the inevitible progression in ship size and amenities.:rolleyes: I have heard the same moaning everytime a cruiseline comes up with a new innovation or practice. Many act like it is going to be the death of cruising and it never is.

 

If you don't like bigger ships, don't book them, it is that simple. Crusing will go on with or without you. If the demand wasn't there they wouldn't build them.

 

Worried that the mega ships will cause the smaller ships to be underbooked??? Wooo Hooo! Let's go bargin hunting!!!

 

For those who are upset at the premium price for the Oasis, wait about a year or two down the road and the novelty wears off.

 

Looking into the future from a post on Cruise Critic from November 25, 2019:

 

"You can have the newer mega-ships. I prefer the smaller ones like the Oasis of the Seas." :eek:

 

This is exactly what was said when Princess launched Sun Princess and she is now considered a tiddler.

I imagine that we will probably book an Oasis type cruise sometime in the future, but we are still waiting to sample the Solstice class, and then the "new" Princess ship in 2013, so it may be a tiddler itself by the time I cruise her.

[woodofpine]

I don't know Terrierjohn... Azdmelani's comments are telling. Sure it's just one comment - but... Sure - the ship is gorgeous, it's brand new. Azd's comments are being echoed in different ways by a fair number of Oasis cruisers - and these publicity cruises will be as good as it gets. ('felt crowded' - at less than 40% capacity!)

 

The comment that, "If the demand weren't there they wouldn't build them..." is where 'irrational exuberance' comes in... Management (like Wall St.) is infallible. Like a lot of subdivision developers, RCI conceived this class of ship 5 years ago when the assumptions were, 1) passenger growth was inexhaustible, 2) discretionary leisure spending was inexhaustible, 3) thus, true over capacity was impossible... They considered the vacation economy to be ever inflating and like the Titanic - unsinkable. Now - like the poster's comments about the Boeing 747, RCI's built a ship that deserves a lot of engineering and raw behemoth 'oh wow!'s... but otherwise has a LOT of 'issues'...

[Colo Cruiser]

I don't know Terrierjohn... Azdmelani's comments are telling. Sure it's just one comment - but... Sure - the ship is gorgeous, it's brand new. Azd's comments are being echoed in different ways by a fair number of Oasis cruisers - and these publicity cruises will be as good as it gets. ('felt crowded' - at less than 40% capacity!)

 

The comment that, "If the demand weren't there they wouldn't build them..." is where 'irrational exuberance' comes in... Management (like Wall St.) is infallible. Like a lot of subdivision developers, RCI conceived this class of ship 5 years ago when the assumptions were, 1) passenger growth was inexhaustible, 2) discretionary leisure spending was inexhaustible, 3) thus, true over capacity was impossible... They considered the vacation economy to be ever inflating and like the Titanic - unsinkable. Now - like the poster's comments about the Boeing 747, RCI's built a ship that deserves a lot of engineering and raw behemoth 'oh wow!'s... but otherwise has a LOT of 'issues'...

 

 

QM2 had the same fate the first year at least, the dining-service was horrendus.

They even sent the famed Generoso over to her to straighten it out.

[flynrph]

The comment that, "If the demand weren't there they wouldn't build them..." is where 'irrational exuberance' comes in... Management (like Wall St.) is infallible. Like a lot of subdivision developers, RCI conceived this class of ship 5 years ago when the assumptions were, 1) passenger growth was inexhaustible, 2) discretionary leisure spending was inexhaustible, 3) thus, true over capacity was impossible... They considered the vacation economy to be ever inflating and like the Titanic - unsinkable. Now - like the poster's comments about the Boeing 747, RCI's built a ship that deserves a lot of engineering and raw behemoth 'oh wow!'s... but otherwise has a LOT of 'issues'...

I am with you on this line of thinking.

So let's kick around some thoughts. Let's say the economy didn't tank. Would a new "era" of "the ship is the destination" become the new emerging standard? Fuel for this debate. Vertical atriums. Predominate balcony cabins. Water parks. The next era...........?

Variations. Theme park ships. (Yo, Disney! Where are you?). Replica ships. (Titanic, Santa Maria, for those who like the small ships!). Floating city (Yeah, I know this has been proposed, but is it in our future.?)

What would or will the results be with a stable growing economy with irrational exuberance in ship building?