Cruiselines bringing toys for around the ship

[AmazedByCruising]

This page makes me wonder if mainstream cruise lines will also come up with "toys at sea".

 

When the ship is anchored in a sunny bay, possibly but not necessarily one bought by the company, I can totally see all the things listed but this time next to a 1000 passenger ship. Inflatables, waterslides, snorkelling, scuba diving, kayaks, water-skis. Deck A, port side would have tenders to the island for guests who just want to have a martini on a boring beach. Starboard though would have a huge inflatable dock tied next to the ship to get to the real fun. (Some waivers need to be signed to exit starboard side).

 

The ship wouldn't have to bring the toys, or the dock, which are stored on the island and towed to the ship, but just provide access to them directly from the ship. Somehow, but not sure why, I feel that a banana ride straight from the ship is far better than a tender to the beach and renting one there.

[sail7seas]

ulv Soundsawilf'll definitely pass on that, thank you.

Edited June 6, 2016 by sail7seas

[cb at sea]

The more than can charge your for, the better they like it!

[OCruisers]

Not so sure what you're suggesting would realistically be possible. :o

[zqvol]

It works great on the luxury lines. Nothing more fun than riding the jet skis or the banana boat when you are anchored far away from shore. It is also wonderful to swim off the stern when you are out there, the water is amazing. (BTW it is included in your fare on the luxury lines, so no costs involved)

Edited June 7, 2016 by zqvol

[CantanaLobo]

The more than can charge your for, the better they like it!

Skip the 'huge inflatable dock'. Float a Bouncy Castle up next to the ship and charge for going on it :)

 

I seem to remember the captain on one cruise tried to orient the ship so that the tender platform being used was somewhat protected from the wind. Hard to do that if you want to protect both sides of the ship - one for the tenders, and one for the 'bouncy dock'.

[fishywood]

National Geographic/Linblad Expeditions, Paul Gaugin Cruises, and Windstar Cruises are among the lines with similar offerings on some of their ships. But you will have only 200-odd (or even significantly less) fellow passengers. Paying $8-10K for a one week cruise.

[CaveDiving]

This page makes me wonder if mainstream cruise lines will also come up with "toys at sea".

 

When the ship is anchored in a sunny bay, possibly but not necessarily one bought by the company, I can totally see all the things listed but this time next to a 1000 passenger ship. Inflatables, waterslides, snorkelling, scuba diving, kayaks, water-skis. Deck A, port side would have tenders to the island for guests who just want to have a martini on a boring beach. Starboard though would have a huge inflatable dock tied next to the ship to get to the real fun. (Some waivers need to be signed to exit starboard side).

 

The ship wouldn't have to bring the toys, or the dock, which are stored on the island and towed to the ship, but just provide access to them directly from the ship. Somehow, but not sure why, I feel that a banana ride straight from the ship is far better than a tender to the beach and renting one there.

 

And from where would the lifeguard appear? and how would the ship clear any stinging jellyfish and other little beasties. and assure no fire coral was in the vicinity? I don't think the ship's insurance carrier would like the situation (except only in certain predefined locations.)IMHO this might be a situation simply yelling "Lawsuit...Lawsuit)

[kitty9]

And from where would the lifeguard appear? and how would the ship clear any stinging jellyfish and other little beasties. and assure no fire coral was in the vicinity? I don't think the ship's insurance carrier would like the situation (except only in certain predefined locations.)IMHO this might be a situation simply yelling "Lawsuit...Lawsuit)

 

Some of the luxury ships have a floating dock with a mesh lining that keeps the critters out if you just want to swim in the ocean. The same luxury lines have two person Sailfish boats, banana boats, pedal boats, jet skis, kayaks and other water toys, and I haven't heard of any problems. We did the banana boat, jet ski and kayaks on Seabourn in the Med. No problems whatsoever.

[Krazy Kruizers]

Ships with 5000 - 6000 people on them could not handle those "toys" like a small ship with less then 200 people on them.

[navybankerteacher]

Absurd notion.

[spookwife]

not absurd. ridiculous. Logistics alone are a nightmare for larger ships.

 

that's why only the very small ships on high end premium lines can offer this.

[NLH Arizona]

I thought I read that Crystal's new yacht ship has toys, but the cost to sail with them is HUGE! But if someone wants to play with them, at least this is an option. I don't think we need them on the mass market cruise lines, because it will just raise the price to sail on them.

[Flatbush Flyer]

Absurd notion.

 

 

"Amazed" is back with yet another inane idea showing little understanding of the nature of the sea (remember the drone rescue scheme?)

[AmazedByCruising]

"Amazed" is back with yet another inane idea showing little understanding of the nature of the sea (remember the drone rescue scheme?)

 

Certainly I do remember the "drone rescue scheme", and at the time I proposed using drones to find missing passengers even I thought it might be a bit far stretched, but thought it would be a possibility. Now multi billion companies like Amazon are investing into the idea that drones could deliver books, which certainly is a lot harder than using drones to locate a missing passenger.

 

So, I do not think a big ship having toys is an inane idea. Especially because the luxury lines already implemented it. All the fun things started with rich people having it first. Similar to flying, having a personal car, or even having a computer at home just to reply at CC. All of those would have been an inane idea 10 years before suddenly a lot of people could afford them.

 

National Geographic/Linblad Expeditions, Paul Gaugin Cruises, and Windstar Cruises are among the lines with similar offerings on some of their ships. But you will have only 200-odd (or even significantly less) fellow passengers. Paying $8-10K for a one week cruise.

 

So, the rich can afford it and like it. History tells me that one day there will be an entrepreneur thinking about the rest of us. Especially 5000 passengers instead of 200 must draw some interest.

 

It works great on the luxury lines. Nothing more fun than riding the jet skis or the banana boat when you are anchored far away from shore. It is also wonderful to swim off the stern when you are out there, the water is amazing. (BTW it is included in your fare on the luxury lines, so no costs involved)

 

This is the reply I was hoping for, someone acknowledging that it really is great fun. Thanks!:)

Edited June 8, 2016 by AmazedByCruising

[navybankerteacher]

certainly i do remember the "drone rescue scheme", and at the time i proposed using drones to find missing passengers even i thought it might be a bit far stretched, but thought it would be a possibility. Now multi billion companies like amazon are investing into the idea that drones could deliver books, which certainly is a lot harder than using drones to locate a missing passenger.

 

In what universe is it harder to deliver something to a known address than to search hundreds or thousands of square miles of open sea - probably at night?

 

 

So, i do not think a big ship having toys is an inane idea. Especially because the luxury lines already implemented it. All the fun things started with rich people having it first. Similar to flying, having a personal car, or even having a computer at home just to reply at cc. All of those would have been an inane idea 10 years before suddenly a lot of people could afford them.

 

What works on a luxury line for a few hundred passengers willing to pay premium fares is going to be far more problematic on a ship carrying thousands of passengers interested in the lowest fare possible.

 

So, the rich can afford it and like it. History tells me that one day there will be an entrepreneur thinking about the rest of us. Especially 5000 passengers instead of 200 must draw some interest.

 

The rich can still afford things that the "rest of us" might like, but have clearly demonstrated an inability and/or an unwillingness to pay for.

 

 

This is the reply i was hoping for, someone acknowledging that it really is great fun. Thanks!:)

 

it remains an absurd idea.

[iheartbda]

I can just see all the people in line wanting to play with those toys. Add in suite people who, at times, get priority and others will get their noses bent out of shape since they don't get the same perk. Just problematic all around on a large ship with thousands of passengers.

Edited June 8, 2016 by iheartbda