Jump to content

Breakaway to your Getaway...


RYMOMA

Recommended Posts

Good Point ;)

 

A little off topic, but the Sky is not a good ship to use as an example. NCL only leases this ship from Star Cruises as she did not have a buyer after her Pride of Aloha days. It doesn't make good business sense to invest too much money on her. She is still for sale based on listings found on various ship broker sites.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i agree that the names are horrible but the fact that they are 4,000 passenger ships is more horrifying to me. sorry but i will stick with the smaller ncl ships that allow you and the staff to get to know each other and where you always can see that your on a ship on the ocean and not just a hotel. i will stop sailing with ncl when they growtoo big and lose that smaller personal feel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i agree that the names are horrible but the fact that they are 4,000 passenger ships is more horrifying to me. sorry but i will stick with the smaller ncl ships that allow you and the staff to get to know each other and where you always can see that your on a ship on the ocean and not just a hotel. i will stop sailing with ncl when they growtoo big and lose that smaller personal feel.

Huh?...I think 3-4 thousand pax on a cruise ships is a good size for modern cruises...A floating hotel is more like the oasis , allure and parts of the epic. If you want a small ship, then you might need to find something that only holds about 1500-2000 pax

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A little off topic, but the Sky is not a good ship to use as an example. NCL only leases this ship from Star Cruises as she did not have a buyer after her Pride of Aloha days. It doesn't make good business sense to invest too much money on her. She is still for sale based on listings found on various ship broker sites.

 

Says who...you? It's a fine example. It's part of NCL's fleet of ships that they book cruises on. They are the one's who chose to put hull art on it. If the hull art doesn't match the current designation of the ship, it should be changed IMO. How much money can it be? They just built the Epic and are about to build 2 new ships, but they can't cough up some money for clouds? Give me a break...I mean breakaway...LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

gimme a break...

gimme a break...

break me off a piece of that...

 

oh wait, wrong slogan song :p

 

I guess I really need a getaway soon

 

 

Lol. :) How about this for a slogan song?

 

You deserve a Breakaway!

So get up and Getaway. . . .

 

Think of the promotional tie-ins. A specialty restaurant with golden arches over the door. Ronald MacDonald instead of Sponge Bob. And the hull art possibilities are simply mind-boggling.

 

:D:D:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...that NCL PR feels bad. No one wants to encounter such a uniformly negative response, I'm sure.:(

 

But here's the thing: most of us NCL afficionados (new and old) appreciate what NCL already does well with its brand and with Freestyle Cruising. We have lots of choices; the crew are fun and friendly; and NCL ships are sexy, flashy and hip (and a little brash), but still romantic. And that's the key: we love NCL and the NCL fleet.

 

By contrast, these new names are none of the above. They aren't fun, friendly, sexy or in any way romantic. Rather, they are clunky, literalistic, mechanical, and obvious. They might as well be called "Norwegian Breakaway-Style Floating Resort Complex A" and "Norwegian Breakaway-Style Floating Resort Complex B."

 

Ultimately, our disappointment stems from the fact that our expectations were really high. And NCL shouldn't be disappointed in that, at all. But remember, Freestyle Cruising is still cruising, and we ultimately love it so much because we love cruise ships. And cruise ships, no matter how hip, deserve some dignity, because when we sail on them they are our entire universe.

I pray NCL will find a way to back away from this decision and come up with some names that folks will embrace with joy, rather than simply shrugging with disappointment and resignation, as we're going to be sailing on them for a long time. Thanks for listening.

 

Beautifully put. My sentiments exactly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Cruise Critic members,

We are sorry that you are disappointed with the names for our new ships. We want you to know that we are really excited about our new ship names and we had hoped that you would be too.

 

We thank everyone who entered the contest for their time and for their suggestions. There were a lot of names that have been used by competitors and we did not want to use those. We wanted original names that defined our new class of ships. We thank Kim Powell and Dennis Hultman for suggesting these names. If you haven't seen it, check out Kim's post on our Facebook page.

 

Norwegian Cruise Line has always been an innovator and these ships are unlike any other in the industry; therefore we chose names that were unlike any other ship names out there. We really felt these names embodied the unique aspects of these ships. As more details about the ships are revealed, we hope you will see how fitting these names are.

 

Regards,

Norwegian Cruise Line Public Relations

 

Dear NCL Public Relations,

 

Please be aware that the negativity is not coming from all the CC members. I for one don't mind the new names. The names will remind me that I am breaking away and getting away from the daily grind that caused me to go on vacation in the first place!

 

I will take a cruise on NCL Breakaway or NCL Getaway ANY time over having to go to work everyday!

 

Obviously, you can never please everyone, but this is one NCL cruiser who can't wait to book on one of the two new ships! I can't wait to purchase a cruise reward on my upcoming cruise on the Pearl and use it to book my next Getaway!!! (or Breakaway!!!) :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, quiz time everybody!

 

Why nid NCL name the new ships Breakaway and Getaway?

 

Multiple choice here:

 

a) Kevin Sheehan was away on summer vacation.

b) the cool names like Titanic and Bismarck have already been used.

c) NCL brought back Colin Vietch!

d) Somebody is just on drugs.

 

Let's have your choice! :D

 

 

I was hoping you were going to include "(e) all of the above"..... that would have been my answer.

 

 

Seriously, though, could they have chosen more ridiculous names for two ships?!?!

 

Incredible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Says who...you? It's a fine example. It's part of NCL's fleet of ships that they book cruises on. They are the one's who chose to put hull art on it. If the hull art doesn't match the current designation of the ship, it should be changed IMO. How much money can it be? They just built the Epic and are about to build 2 new ships, but they can't cough up some money for clouds? Give me a break...I mean breakaway...LOL

 

Try $200,000 per side. This is what we were told by crew on the Sun. So, at $400,000 to reapply it (not to mention what it would cost to remove the current art) I can see why they haven't changed it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Try $200,000 per side. This is what we were told by crew on the Sun. So, at $400,000 to reapply it (not to mention what it would cost to remove the current art) I can see why they haven't changed it.

 

That just shows me that NCL has become a cheap company. NCL converted the France to the Norway in 1979 for One Hundred Million.

 

It's a clear night here in Jersey.....don't see any flowers in the sky overhead, though maybe I missed them.:rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That just shows me that NCL has become a cheap company. NCL converted the France to the Norway in 1979 for One Hundred Million.

 

It's a clear night here in Jersey.....don't see any flowers in the sky overhead, though maybe I missed them.:rolleyes:

 

 

Ahh, but are you in Norway?

 

It's the NORWEGIAN sky....not the Jersey sky.... :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That just shows me that NCL has become a cheap company. NCL converted the France to the Norway in 1979 for One Hundred Million.

 

It's a clear night here in Jersey.....don't see any flowers in the sky overhead, though maybe I missed them.:rolleyes:

 

The Sky's hull art is unique in the Bahamas and no matter how overserved you are you can still pick out your ship ;). As long as the hull art is still presentable why should they change it? I'm glad they don't waste the $400,000 doing something that doesn't need to be done- that's good business sense (the new names on the other hand...).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That just shows me that NCL has become a cheap company. NCL converted the France to the Norway in 1979 for One Hundred Million.

 

It's a clear night here in Jersey.....don't see any flowers in the sky overhead, though maybe I missed them.:rolleyes:

 

Actually what it shows is good business sense. NCL didn't become No. 3 by throwing money away. When they renovated what became the SS Norway, it was the biggest cruise ship in the world. The Sky is the smallest of the fleet. It sails the less expensive Bahama itineraries exclusively and the hull art, while not themed with clouds or blue skies, is still appropriate for the islands. The other thing to consider is if they were to replace the hull art, the hawaiian themed interior would need updating as well. This takes money and requires taking the ship out of service for dry docking.

 

The hull art obviously has not stopped cruisers from booking the Sky, just as the names of the new ships will not deter people from sailing on them. IMO, it makes absolutely no sense to spend upwards of half a million dollars to replace something that has no impact on sales. NCL agrees.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with 99% that these names sound cheap. Why could they have not honored their most famous ship and called one of them:

 

THE NORWAY II

 

This name would have class but it might copy the Queen Mary and the Queen Mary 2.

 

PLEASE NCL RECONSIDER THESE NAMES. I do not want to sail on the NCL Breakapart.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seeing as it is NCLs largest ship and a one of a kind I think Norway would have been good choice of name for Epic. I do realize Epic was supposed to have a sister, maybe that played into it.

 

I would have been happy with the new ships being named after old ones, maybe Crown and Majesty?

 

As I said before tho, the names will not keep us off them if the price and itinerary are right for us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We agree 100%.

Look at Holland America Line, Cunard, they retire ships but their legenday names live on on newer and grander ships again and again. It's sad how little respect NCL appears to have for their own history.

 

I agree with 99% that these names sound cheap. Why could they have not honored their most famous ship and called one of them:

 

THE NORWAY II

 

This name would have class but it might copy the Queen Mary and the Queen Mary 2.

 

PLEASE NCL RECONSIDER THESE NAMES. I do not want to sail on the NCL Breakapart.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Welcome to Cruise Critic
      • Hurricane Zone 2024
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Cruise Critic News & Features
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • Canadian Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...

If you are already a Cruise Critic member, please log in with your existing account information or your email address and password.