Why no outcry from fans of Royal?

[whiterose]

I'm surprised at the lack of concern, except for one thread, or even comments about the loss of our favorite ship the Royal Princess. I guess those of us who love a classic ship and exotic itineries really are a minority. The Royal always seem to sell out so it hurts that Princess thinks the British will appreciate her more.

[derf5585]

Royal Princess will become a P&O Cruises ship serving the British cruise market

from

http://www.princess.com/news/article.jsp?newsArticleId=na668

 

USS Chilton APA-38 1966-1968

USS Guam LPH-9 1968-1970

Pacific Princess Oct 21 2001 Bermuda

Golden Princess Dec 7 2002 "Eastern Caribbean"

Coral Princess Dec 9 2003 "Panama Canal"

 

Carnival Miracle 17 Oct 2004

 

NOT UPDATED again 25 Feb www.geocities.com/fsbsdel

 

 

[katisdale]

I will sail on her for the first time this May. What I would like to know is which ship is doing her itineraries in 2005. Which ship will go around the horn or up the amazon?

[GottoCruise]

Hi Whiterose ---OK - here is my cry ---Sob, Sob ! --but what good will it do? We, the lovers of smaller ships, longer, more exotic cruises with Sea Days, are in the MINORITY! Waiting for the Regal postings for Summer 2005 and also the Pacific Princess - hope they are interesting or else I will be stuck with back to back to Europe on the Golden (7/31/05 & 8/10/05) regards to Neil....Renee

 

Until PACIFIC PRINCESS Islands of the Pacific Theater

<IMG SRC="http://escati.linkopp.net/cgi-bin/countdown.cgi?trgb=000000&srgb=00ff00&prgb=0000ff&cdt=2004;7;25;12;0;00&timezone=GMT

[Rusty]

Have never been on her, but will be sailing this August on the Royal. I'm looking forward to it.

[FredS]

My understanding is that she will go to P&O in May 2005. Perhaps after her April 21 trip from Manaus to Rome. We are planning on taking that cruise which may be her last with Princess. Carnival PLC is moving ships around among the lines they oversee. Will be interesting to see what happens to the quality and style of each line.

 

Sent off a message to a TA online and got this response about the Manaus to Rome cruise next year on the Royal Princess

"Hi,

I received your quote request form re: the Royal Princess. The sailing on

4/21/05 has been closed. They are sending the ship back to P & O and are

making some sort of change on the sailing requested.

Thank you,

Kim Chuning

Kims' Kruises

4/5/2004"

 

[This message was edited by FredS on 04-11-04 at 12:37 AM.]

[usavvy2]

sob sob ...

so what's the Regal like????

 

usavvy2

 

Royal Princess 9/04/04 - "Europe or Bust!" 

[Coral]

If you look back to Monday's postings - there was an outcry from several people about the Royal. And others were thrilled that the Sea Princess is coming back.

[GottoCruise]

usnavy2 - Regal is good - great "coffee bar" and a good N/C alternative to eating in the dinning room - you can make reservations in a separate section from the buffet - waiter service etc. - very nice service - menu choices - not as extensive as the dining room - but good choices and you can eat (dinner) anytime, I think after 7 or so - I don't remember??- Anyway -while we were onboard we saw the Capt. eat there many times (late) I like this choice better than what they call "Personal Choice" on the bigger ships, and of course there is always the buffet.

Great space for dancing - better than any other ship in the fleet --and if you are lucky and on a long cruise, you may have the McVickers as Dance instructers onboard - they are the best in the business!

I was in a mini-suite and it was large and comfortable - I don't know about the other cabins...I think it's a big jump, however, to a Mini-suite - I would look into the space & amenities in a balcony cabin, if I wanted to budget.

If the Regal does interesting itineraries I would book her in a heartbeat over the Grand Class ships or the other new HUGE ships.

I did find a drawback in that there was no Internet Cafe - only laptops given out to a waitlist at the Purser's Desk - this was a Royal Pain - very limited for use time... maybe they will fix this??? The show lounge was good - the library was AWFUL (bring your own reading material)- this too needs fixing.....

John Lawrence was the Cruise Directer when we were on - I don't know if he stays on the Regal --but he is an "oldtimer" and one of the BEST in the fleet. Oh yes -- if you like to work out - the gym was in the "basement" not very nice....but adequate for my "aerobic classes". What else can I tell you? Perhaps someone else will "jump in" here.....

 

Until PACIFIC PRINCESS Islands of the Pacific Theater

<IMG SRC="http://escati.linkopp.net/cgi-bin/countdown.cgi?trgb=000000&srgb=00ff00&prgb=0000ff&cdt=2004;7;25;12;0;00&timezone=GMT

[usavvy2]

gottocruise - thanks for an insiders view. We were on the Royal to Norway last summer and loved it's size and ease of navigating the ship. Glad to hear the Regal isn't as big as those Grand class ships!

 

usavvy2

 

Royal Princess 9/04/04 - "Europe or Bust!" 

[Guest]

My personal outcry is that I feel duped - along with the fact that I had a chance to sail Royal Princess a couple of years ago and had to cancel in the end due to work reasons - now I'm kicking myself.

 

Why do I feel duped? Last summer on Pacific Princess, two conversations occured - one by the Captain at the Captain's Circle gathering, the other with the Future Cruise Sales guy. Both indicated that Carnival Corp./Princess valued those passengers who were "mature" cruisers and who preferred the smaller ships and more exotic itineraries. Princess realized this was part of their market and would respond to that market as the smaller ships were incredibly popular and profitable.

 

So what do we get? Royal Princess going to P&O and really-big screen TV on Grand Class...at least we get Sea Princess back, but I really feel mislead.

 

-------------------------

Sun Princess, 03/2004; Pacific Princess, 07/2003; Star Princess, 05/2003; Grand Princess, 10/2002; Grand Princess, 10/2002; Sun Princess, 05/2001; Sun Princess, 04/2001; Sun Princess, 09/2000; Sun Princess, 09/2000; Regal Princess, 10/1999; Sun Princess, 08/1998; Holiday, 05/1998; Westerdam, 09/1997; Regal Princess, 11/1996; Royal Odyssey, 09/1995; Starward, 11/1993

 

 

[Tania]

I posted the same thing as bdjam on another thread. ...that, during a CC party on the ROyal, the Captain said that Princess recognized that many of its loyal followers preferred smaller ships and that was why they acquired the Tahitian and the Pacific....the applause was loud and vigorous...so much for that ... yadda, yadda, yadda...

 

Pure rhetoric!

 

Theoretically, we can sail the Royal again, if we're willing to pay the outrageous prices from P & O.

 

Diamond Princess 03/04

Sun Princess 12/03

Grand Princess 12/02

Royal Princess 08/02

Ocean Princess 08/01

Pacific Princess 12/00

Carla C. 03/83

[Guest]

I think I posted this on another thread as well - maybe a few well placed letters to the new President of Princess Cruises would get the point across - it probably won't change anything, but might make people think a little...

 

-------------------------

Sun Princess, 03/2004; Pacific Princess, 07/2003; Star Princess, 05/2003; Grand Princess, 10/2002; Grand Princess, 10/2002; Sun Princess, 05/2001; Sun Princess, 04/2001; Sun Princess, 09/2000; Sun Princess, 09/2000; Regal Princess, 10/1999; Sun Princess, 08/1998; Holiday, 05/1998; Westerdam, 09/1997; Regal Princess, 11/1996; Royal Odyssey, 09/1995; Starward, 11/1993

 

 

[PARNAMI]

You forget, Carnival is now in control..and you can throw away any plans created before them. This is NOT the Princess we know! Caribbean Princess, as an example, is now with Princess because Carnival took it from P & O for which it WAS being built.

 

Hopefully, when Carnival is done with them, we'll still be able to recognize the line as Princess. (Don't bother giving me the company spouted line that "they've left HAL and Cunard alone....they haven't! Every HAL ship built from Statendam on, is Carnival, NOT HAL designed. Same goes for Cunard.)

 

Before the advent of nickel and diming, Cruising USED TO BE like being wide awake......and dreaming!

Now..it's just another vacation!!

 

Check out my cruise site -

<A HREF="http://parnami.tripod.com" TARGET=_blank>

http://parnami.tripod.com</A>

 

Every night after 10 eastern time, I can be found in AOL keyword: "Cruise Cafe". Let's talk CRUISING!!!

[Guest]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> You forget, Carnival is now in control..and you can throw away any plans created before them. This is NOT the Princess we know! Caribbean Princess, as an example, is now with Princess because Carnival took it from P & O for which it WAS being built.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Sorry, I have to disagree with you...again. I don't doubt that Carnival Corporation has had an effect on Princess Cruises, but in this case, I was told that Carnival Corporation and the management of Princess Cruises recognized the need at Princess for the smaller ships.

 

Either way, its not the case, but given what was told to me, I don't believe the issue can be laid at the Carnival Corporation doorstep. Now, the origins of the new President of the line may mean something...

 

-------------------------

Sun Princess, 03/2004; Pacific Princess, 07/2003; Star Princess, 05/2003; Grand Princess, 10/2002; Grand Princess, 10/2002; Sun Princess, 05/2001; Sun Princess, 04/2001; Sun Princess, 09/2000; Sun Princess, 09/2000; Regal Princess, 10/1999; Sun Princess, 08/1998; Holiday, 05/1998; Westerdam, 09/1997; Regal Princess, 11/1996; Royal Odyssey, 09/1995; Starward, 11/1993

 

 

[pmcrusta]

We really enjoyed the Royal. Sometime back I'd read in a cruise magazine article that because of the amount of people that liked the Royal's

size that there had been some consideration about making another smaller ship in the future.

Sounded good at the time. It dose not seem likely at this point. Which is to bad.

She will be missed

[Rdabadie]

The trend at princess to mega ships started way before Carnival purchase. Princess bought Sitmar specifically to obtain the mega ships they had in progress at the time. All the classes of ships Princess is having come online were designed and purchased prior to Carnival deal.

 

Princess has been trying to bring a "intimate" feel to mega ships, and they have largely suceeded. But saddly the economics for smaller ships are not that good. There are definite economies of scale in larger ships, and I doubt we'll see smaller ships except in the luxury lines (none of which are growing by leaps and bounds)

 

And saddly for the fans of smaller ships, rumor has it that carnival is designing a ship larger than RCCL's ultra-voyager class and intends to share that design platform with Princess. So I think we'll likely be seeing a ship close to twice the size of the grand class long before we see something the size of the Royal.

 

Rob

 

Regal Empress 7/97, Nordic Empress 10/97, Sensation 11/98, Paradise 11/99, Ecstasy 11/00, Norway 5/01, Triumph 11/01, Explorer of the Seas 9/02, Paradise 5/03, Victory 4/04

[Rdabadie]

The trend at princess to mega ships started way before Carnival purchase. Princess bought Sitmar specifically to obtain the mega ships they had in progress at the time. All the classes of ships Princess is having come online were designed and purchased prior to Carnival deal.

 

Princess has been trying to bring a "intimate" feel to mega ships, and they have largely suceeded. But saddly the economics for smaller ships are not that good. There are definite economies of scale in larger ships, and I doubt we'll see smaller ships except in the luxury lines (none of which are growing by leaps and bounds)

 

And saddly for the fans of smaller ships, rumor has it that carnival is designing a ship larger than RCCL's ultra-voyager class and intends to share that design platform with Princess. So I think we'll likely be seeing a ship close to twice the size of the grand class long before we see something the size of the Royal.

[PARNAMI]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> All the classes of ships Princess is having come online were designed and purchased prior to Carnival deal.

 

.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

 

The order for Caribbean Princess was placed AFTER the merger agreement between RCCL and Princess was signed, as a result of meetings between the two lines as to the future structure and growth of the new company. It was intended for P & O NOT Princess!!

 

It wasn't until shortly after Carnival once again, as they habitually do, got involved, squashed the RCCL/Princess deal and acquired Princess/P & O for themselves, that the announcment was made that Caribbean Princess was being moved to Princess NOT P & O as intended.

 

There's no question, this was a result of Carnival interference and NOT Princess! Carnival very actively gets involved in the runing, (and ruining), of their member cruise lines!

 

Before the advent of nickel and diming, Cruising USED TO BE like being wide awake......and dreaming!

Now..it's just another vacation!!

 

Check out my cruise site -

<A HREF="http://parnami.tripod.com" TARGET=_blank>

http://parnami.tripod.com</A>

 

Every night after 10 eastern time, I can be found in AOL keyword: "Cruise Cafe". Let's talk CRUISING!!!

[jsea]

If it's any consolation Regal will be a great replacement for Royal on the super-exotics. Royal's a great ship but her cabins are TINY and very claustrophobic (at least for me). Regal has some of the largest standard staterooms in the industry (190 square feet) and they are very well designed with the closet area being separated from the hallway. Nowadays it seems like all standard cabins have the closets in the entrance hall which isn't very nice.

 

Additionally, Regal has incredible high ceilings on the Promenade deck which aren't seen much on ships today. And the 'double' indoor/outdoor promenades, while not very space-efficient, are really nice. Finally, while the atrium on Royal is nice, I think Regal's is even better.

 

Now, The Dome doesn't do much for me and there's no wrap-around promenade, nor Horizon Lounge, but I guess we can't have it all...

[Guest]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> There's no question, this was a result of Carnival interference and NOT Princess! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I think there is question about whether or not Princess would still be an entity if the RCI merger had succeeded. Carnival capital has given Princess the ability to increase the 7-day Caribbean fleet.

 

As stated above, the Princess predilection toward mega-liners started long before there was a hint of ANY merger for the cruise line. Sun Princess was the largest passenger ship in service at her inauguration as was Grand Princess. Crown and Regal were both very large for their time and were only eclipsed by the RCI 70000 tonners of the late ‘80s.

 

And remember, Carnival offered to buy Princess – including a payoff of the $65 million RCI required for that merger to be cancelled – but it was the stockholders that accepted the deal. Whatever their influence, it is a logical step of this stockholder action.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> If it's any consolation Regal will be a great replacement for Royal on the super-exotics. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Excellent point, Jsea...Regal will be a great replacement for Royal. But since she's closer to the traditional cruise experience than fitting in with the Personal Choice aspects, you kind of have to wonder how long they'll keep her in the fleet. Again, if they recognize the value of the "exotic" type cruise, they should.

 

-------------------------

Sun Princess, 03/2004; Pacific Princess, 07/2003; Star Princess, 05/2003; Grand Princess, 10/2002; Grand Princess, 10/2002; Sun Princess, 05/2001; Sun Princess, 04/2001; Sun Princess, 09/2000; Sun Princess, 09/2000; Regal Princess, 10/1999; Sun Princess, 08/1998; Holiday, 05/1998; Westerdam, 09/1997; Regal Princess, 11/1996; Royal Odyssey, 09/1995; Starward, 11/1993

 

 

[PARNAMI]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by bdjam:I think there is question about whether or not Princess would still be an entity if the RCI merger had succeeded. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

 

Princess wasn't going anywhere! RCCL, at the time, was concerned about outstanding debts in view of the monumental downturn in business after the Arab attacks. They weren't about to take any action likely to decrease their cash flow. The goal as well, was to maintain a competitive position with Carnival, something they've now lost forever as a result of Carnival's interference.

 

There's no denying, Princess has been a big ship line. Their sucess with it though, as been minor compared to RCI's. Star/Crown/Regal were what Princess perceived to be quick responses to RCI's Sovereign of the Seas. They never competed! While Sovereign was sailing filled to capacity at near brochure rates from the beginning, from day one, Princess was forced to provide steep discounts to fill Star. Princess stood to benefit from RCI's superior abilty in ship design and managment.

 

You forgot to mention though, that Princess arranged to bring into the fleet the two former Renaissance ships, BOTH committed to under the auspices of the RCCL/Princess merger agreement and subsequent close working relationship. Mickey Arrison went on record saying those ships had no market potential within his organization because they couldn't turn a profit. The 30,000 ton Pacific and Coral Princess exist only because they were contracted for PRIOR to Carnival! Blame the lack of any replacement to Royal Princess directy on Mickey Arison and Carnival!

 

Before the advent of nickel and diming, Cruising USED TO BE like being wide awake......and dreaming!

Now..it's just another vacation!!

 

Check out my cruise site -

<A HREF="http://parnami.tripod.com" TARGET=_blank>

http://parnami.tripod.com</A>

 

Every night after 10 eastern time, I can be found in AOL keyword: "Cruise Cafe". Let's talk CRUISING!!!

[Guest]

It certainly would be interesting to compare our sources.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Princess wasn't going anywhere! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I was given the impression that Princess was seriously pressed for capital - so much so that even incidentals were carefully policed. One of the reason for that nickle and diming you indicate is the scourge of the industry.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Princess stood to benefit from RCI's superior abilty in ship design and managment.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> It seems that I recall analysts at the time indicating that RCI was not at all a strong company. Given that Carnival Corporation was so much stronger, it makes sense that the stockholders chose the way they did. Excellence in ship design - technical aspects aside - are a personal matter and I really think that Princess has the edge on RCI. Even more, I have personal issues with RCI's style of management and was not enamoured with the thought that Princess would share their resources.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Mickey Arrison went on record saying those ships had no market potential within his organization because they couldn't turn a profit. The 30,000 ton Pacific and Coral Princess exist only because they were contracted for PRIOR to Carnival! Blame the lack of any replacement to Royal Princess directy on Mickey Arison and Carnival! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Don't you mean Pacific and Tahitian? Again, my sources, the Captain of Pacific Princess and the Future Cruise Sales Representative on Pacific Princess both indicated that Carnival Corporation/Princess valued the loyalty of the passengers who preferred the smaller ships. Add to that the fact that they were able to sell them out at higher per diems, and so they were profitable, made the relationship something the Corporation intended to exploit. Whether or not that's still true remains to be seen, but I find it difficult to call them liars given the information they had - post Carnival merge - at the time.

 

-------------------------

Sun Princess, 03/2004; Pacific Princess, 07/2003; Star Princess, 05/2003; Grand Princess, 10/2002; Grand Princess, 10/2002; Sun Princess, 05/2001; Sun Princess, 04/2001; Sun Princess, 09/2000; Sun Princess, 09/2000; Regal Princess, 10/1999; Sun Princess, 08/1998; Holiday, 05/1998; Westerdam, 09/1997; Regal Princess, 11/1996; Royal Odyssey, 09/1995; Starward, 11/1993

 

 

[Guest]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Again, my sources, the Captain of Pacific Princess and the Future Cruise Sales Representative on Pacific Princess both indicated that Carnival Corporation/Princess valued the loyalty of the passengers who preferred the smaller ships. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Aren't these the same "sources" about which you used the terms "duped" and "mislead"?

[Guest]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Aren't these the same "sources" about which you used the terms "duped" and "mislead"? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Besides my desire to include profanity here, I'll say perhaps you're reading into my post...it said:

 

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> My personal outcry is that I feel duped - along with the fact that I had a chance to sail Royal Princess a couple of years ago and had to cancel in the end due to work reasons - now I'm kicking myself.

 

Why do I feel duped? Last summer on Pacific Princess, two conversations occured - one by the Captain at the Captain's Circle gathering, the other with the Future Cruise Sales guy. Both indicated that Carnival Corp./Princess valued those passengers who were "mature" cruisers and who preferred the smaller ships and more exotic itineraries. Princess realized this was part of their market and would respond to that market as the smaller ships were incredibly popular and profitable.

 

So what do we get? Royal Princess going to P&O and really-big screen TV on Grand Class...at least we get Sea Princess back, but I really feel mislead. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> My intent was to say I felt duped and mislead by the decision of the cruise line, not by the Captain or Future Cruise Sales person - both of whom I felt were sincere in their comments at the time.

 

I know you and I don't share "opinions" but I wish you'd offer some insight into the subject rather than trying to denigrate my posts...I don't mind if you disagree with me, but it's not fair in this forum to attempt to make me your fool...and that's all I'll say on that.

 

-------------------------

Sun Princess, 03/2004; Pacific Princess, 07/2003; Star Princess, 05/2003; Grand Princess, 10/2002; Grand Princess, 10/2002; Sun Princess, 05/2001; Sun Princess, 04/2001; Sun Princess, 09/2000; Sun Princess, 09/2000; Regal Princess, 10/1999; Sun Princess, 08/1998; Holiday, 05/1998; Westerdam, 09/1997; Regal Princess, 11/1996; Royal Odyssey, 09/1995; Starward, 11/1993