Splendor Delay....AGAIN

[MrPete]

What's with the fore thruster????

[DesertArtist1345]

WOW - that's amazing to watch live!! Thanks for the link!!!

[Shadwick]

Yes!! That live link if fabulous!!! Thanks for sharing. I hope everything is back on track for everyone's cruises. I'm not sailing on her until May, but I know how I would feel if my cruise were to be canceled. :( I am so happy to see her on her way to San Fran to get the rest of the repairs done! Here's to hoping all goes well for us all! :D

[Clar5]

What was with all that brown floor on the deck? Is that how she normally is?

[Cushing985]

Just took a look at the video and the ship is gone....it either sank or it's underway!

[BlendedFamily]

Track her out of the harbor and....

 

http://www.marinetraffic.com/ais/#

[MrPete]

Well, I finally see a wake!

[mgm61]

also in port

[mgm61]

http://www.signonsandiego.com/

 

 

refresh with F5

[mgm61]

thats it. on the way. I wonder how long it will take to get to SF?

[gatour]

Thanks! But in the end it's not going to cost Carnival much at all. This whole Splendor snafu can (and will) be written off under various categories of "loss" on their corporate taxes... if anything it may HELP their bottom line depending on how creative their accountants are.

 

So I'm not naive enough to think that they're doing the work to try and save money. They don't care. They're not having to "operate" the Splendor or fill her full of fuel every week like when she's running. So they're not losing money, really.

 

The only way this would make sense is if the Spender was not making a profit whenever it left port for a cruise.

 

While I am sure the accountants are working the angles to minimize the impact to the bottom line of the Corporation, I am sure the the stockholders would prefer a profit of $500,000 for each successful sailing than a lose of $100,000 for each missed sailing. The figures of 500,000 and 100,000 were for illustrative purposes only but get my point across.

[Hurry&Wait]

The only way this would make sense is if the Spender was not making a profit whenever it left port for a cruise.

 

While I am sure the accountants are working the angles to minimize the impact to the bottom line of the Corporation, I am sure the the stockholders would prefer a profit of $500,000 for each successful sailing than a lose of $100,000 for each missed sailing. The figures of 500,000 and 100,000 were for illustrative purposes only but get my point across.

 

I have posted about this before when the Splendor was first towed back to San Diego. The loss is insured. The business interruption is part of the overall insurance coverage on the ship. Carnival will have the deductible cost along with the mechanical costs, most of which is insurable and some of which is not (too long to explain before I would bore you to death):eek:

 

Carnival and its insurers will have some attorneys fees issues going back after the shipbuilder and related subcontractors. Other than that, this is not going to be a large bottom line hit. Hence the reason why their stock price has not tumbled:cool:

 

I am sure the insurers are pushing harder than anyone to get this ship back into service. Glad I don' work for that Syndicate/insurer!