Carnival and the Numbers Game

[richfret]

Since I can't cruise, I got out my I-Pad to keep busy.   You may be amazed by the results.   I had heard that Carnival has 33 active ships but will dispose of 6 leaving 27 ships.  Let's say the average total passenger count per ship is 3,000 cruisers.  (Not counting the crew).   So take 3,000 passengers times 27 ships and you get 81,000 cruisers out on the sea.  Now take 3 meals a day times 81,000 passengers and that equals 243,000  total meals a day.  So for a week, take 243,000 times 7 days equals 1,701,000 meals.  So for the year take 50 weeks  (2 weeks for repairs or dry dock)  times 1,701,000 and you get 85,050,000  total meals for the year.  This is a wild guess but let's just say that the cost of a meal  for Carnival  is $6.00.  So 85,050,000 times $6.00 equals $510,300,000 or over half a billion.   So if we do not cruise for a year, just in food alone, that is what the economy would be losing assuming most of the food is bought in the US.   And that is just Carnival.  You also need to add in many ships from the other lines.   Then add in air flights (to and from) and motels and hotels.  They can say all they want about staying home and wearing masks but if you do not have cruises, you may not have money to buy the masks.  

 

Lots of if's, and's and but's, but had fun doing the numbers.  Bound to bring some rebuttals.  

[shof515]

10 minutes ago, richfret said:

Since I can't cruise, I got out my I-Pad to keep busy.   You may be amazed by the results.   I had heard that Carnival has 33 active ships but will dispose of 6 leaving 27 ships.

 

Carnival corporation which is Holland, Princess, Carnival Cruises, Seabourn, Costa and a dozen more will be reducing the ship fleet size.  It was rumor one of the Costa ships is leaving the fleet. Most likely what i think is going to happen is each brand is going to lose 1 or 2 ships

Edited June 21, 2020 by shof515

[Garf]

4 minutes ago, richfret said:

Since I can't cruise, I got out my I-Pad to keep busy.   You may be amazed by the results.   I had heard that Carnival has 33 active ships but will dispose of 6 leaving 27 ships.  Let's say the average total passenger count per ship is 3,000 cruisers.  (Not counting the crew).   So take 3,000 passengers times 27 ships and you get 81,000 cruisers out on the sea.  Now take 3 meals a day times 81,000 passengers and that equals 243,000  total meals a day.  So for a week, take 243,000 times 7 days equals 1,701,000 meals.  So for the year take 50 weeks  (2 weeks for repairs or dry dock)  times 1,701,000 and you get 85,050,000  total meals for the year.  This is a wild guess but let's just say that the cost of a meal  for Carnival  is $6.00.  So 85,050,000 times $6.00 equals $510,300,000 or over half a billion.   So if we do not cruise for a year, just in food alone, that is what the economy would be losing assuming most of the food is bought in the US.   And that is just Carnival.  You also need to add in many ships from the other lines.   Then add in air flights (to and from) and motels and hotels.  They can say all they want about staying home and wearing masks but if you do not have cruises, you may not have money to buy the masks.  

 

Lots of if's, and's and but's, but had fun doing the numbers.  Bound to bring some rebuttals.  

Also you going to have cruise lines going out of business in the next couple of months too. That's why the cruise lines wants you to keep re-booking.Over 50% of cruisers are now asking for refunds instead.Just think also about all the different suppliers to these cruise line too and employees.

[Purvis1231]

Carnival Corporation has 104 ships. They have not announced which ships will be sold.  Cruising does have a positive impact on the world's economy but for some reason there are those who hate cruising and relish the idea of ending cruising.  I imagine the ships that are sold will end up in the Chinese market. 

[Lottacruises]

1 hour ago, Purvis1231 said:

I imagine the ships that are sold will end up in the Chinese market. 

 

Ironic

[SeaShark]

2 hours ago, richfret said:

Since I can't cruise, I got out my I-Pad to keep busy.   You may be amazed by the results.   I had heard that Carnival has 33 active ships but will dispose of 6 leaving 27 ships.  Let's say the average total passenger count per ship is 3,000 cruisers.  (Not counting the crew).   So take 3,000 passengers times 27 ships and you get 81,000 cruisers out on the sea.  Now take 3 meals a day times 81,000 passengers and that equals 243,000  total meals a day.  So for a week, take 243,000 times 7 days equals 1,701,000 meals.  So for the year take 50 weeks  (2 weeks for repairs or dry dock)  times 1,701,000 and you get 85,050,000  total meals for the year.  This is a wild guess but let's just say that the cost of a meal  for Carnival  is $6.00.  So 85,050,000 times $6.00 equals $510,300,000 or over half a billion.   So if we do not cruise for a year, just in food alone, that is what the economy would be losing assuming most of the food is bought in the US.   And that is just Carnival.  You also need to add in many ships from the other lines.   Then add in air flights (to and from) and motels and hotels.  They can say all they want about staying home and wearing masks but if you do not have cruises, you may not have money to buy the masks.  

 

Lots of if's, and's and but's, but had fun doing the numbers.  Bound to bring some rebuttals.  

 

Those are some interesting calculations, but you seem to have missed a rather important point.

 

If people don't eat those 85,050,000 meals on the cruise ship they will just eat them elsewhere...whether at home or at a local restaurant. The economy would only be losing if those people didn't eat. Instead of getting those meals from Carnival they will just get them somewhere else.

[BlerkOne]

2 hours ago, richfret said:

  I had heard that Carnival has 33 active ships but will dispose of 6 leaving 27 ships.

 

Counting Mardi Gras and Radiance, Carnival doesn't have 33 ships.

 

Carnival Corp has over 100 ships and six will be leaving soon (allegedly). At least 3 have been sold and they weren't Carnival Cruise Line ships.

[drsel]

 
Counting Mardi Gras and Radiance, Carnival doesn't have 33 ships.
 
Carnival Corp has over 100 ships and six will be leaving soon (allegedly). At least 3 have been sold and they weren't Carnival Cruise Line ships.

Besides Costa Victoria, which other ships of carnival corporation have been sold or are likely to be sold?

[richfret]

8 hours ago, BlerkOne said:

 

Counting Mardi Gras and Radiance, Carnival doesn't have 33 ships.

 

Carnival Corp has over 100 ships and six will be leaving soon (allegedly). At least 3 have been sold and they weren't Carnival Cruise Line ships.

I was only considering those ships that have the Red Carnival funnel.  

[richfret]

8 hours ago, SeaShark said:

 

Those are some interesting calculations, but you seem to have missed a rather important point.

 

If people don't eat those 85,050,000 meals on the cruise ship they will just eat them elsewhere...whether at home or at a local restaurant. The economy would only be losing if those people didn't eat. Instead of getting those meals from Carnival they will just get them somewhere else.

Well you certainly got me there!  On the other hand, their meals are better.  You get more to eat.  There is more variety.  It's already paid for.  No lines.  Meet other cruisers.  Eat when you want.  Some times table clothes. 

 

As you can see, I am trying to save face. 

[PhillyFan33579]

9 hours ago, BlerkOne said:

 

Counting Mardi Gras and Radiance, Carnival doesn't have 33 ships.

 

Carnival Corp has over 100 ships and six will be leaving soon (allegedly). At least 3 have been sold and they weren't Carnival Cruise Line ships.

 
What are the other two ships? Only one I have heard is Costa Victoria. 

[PhillyFan33579]

10 hours ago, SeaShark said:

 

Those are some interesting calculations, but you seem to have missed a rather important point.

 

If people don't eat those 85,050,000 meals on the cruise ship they will just eat them elsewhere...whether at home or at a local restaurant. The economy would only be losing if those people didn't eat. Instead of getting those meals from Carnival they will just get them somewhere else.

Your comment is exactly what I was thinking when reading that post. 

[richfret]

1 hour ago, richfret said:

Well you certainly got me there!  On the other hand, their meals are better.  You get more to eat.  There is more variety.  It's already paid for.  No lines.  Meet other cruisers.  Eat when you want.  Some times table clothes. 

 

As you can see, I am trying to save face. 

On the other hand, what happened here in Florida is strange.  When the cruises were cancelled, some farmers had had arrangements for shipments to be made to some central locations here in Florida (let's say using 10 trucks).   With the cancellation, they now needed 50 trucks to ship to many locations all over the US.  Now with the virus, they could not make truck arrangements and they ended up leaving their crops in the fields.  Certainly not in all cases but in many.   You would think it would be easy to  change but it did not turn out that way.  Timing is a problem,  availability of the trucks and crops spoiling. 

[sanger727]

First, I think the estimate of $6 per meal is far too high, I would guess closer to $3 with the amount of bulk and frozen purchases.

 

but besides that, yes, I think this whole thing has brought out how closely things run in the American supply chain. A handful of people bought huge amounts of toilet paper, causing a run which causes everyone to buy an extra toilet paper, and suddenly every store is out for months.

 

people suddenly start eating at home instead of eating out and stores have to ration bread, milk, and meat.

 

while at the same time I’m sure tons of food that was in a supply chain for bulk purchases to restaurants, cruise ships, amusement parks, etc went to waste

[Organized Chaos]

19 minutes ago, richfret said:

On the other hand, what happened here in Florida is strange.  When the cruises were cancelled, some farmers had had arrangements for shipments to be made to some central locations here in Florida (let's say using 10 trucks).   With the cancellation, they now needed 50 trucks to ship to many locations all over the US.  Now with the virus, they could not make truck arrangements and they ended up leaving their crops in the fields.  Certainly not in all cases but in many.   You would think it would be easy to  change but it did not turn out that way.  Timing is a problem,  availability of the trucks and crops spoiling. 

 

In regards to food costs, there is some truth to what someone else said that, without cruising, people are still spending that money for food at home and/or restaurants, but it's not the same. First of all, restaurants were also completely closed for 2+ months, so people weren't spending money with them. Many are still only open on a very limited basis, but are only bringing in a fraction of their usual revenue. Financial times have been very hard for millions of people because of this, so they haven't been spending the same amount of money on food as normal. Not to mention restricted supplies or no supplies at all. Also, a single cruise ship has to supply itself with a lot more food than necessary. For one, they prepare to be at sea longer than scheduled in case of a problem. There's also the fact that people tend to eat more during their meals on a cruise than they would at home or in a restaurant. How many people order two meals (or at least the two entrees) when sitting down for a single meal on a cruise? Hundreds? But you can't say the same for a restaurant. One person ordering two meals in a restaurant is rare. So cruise lines have to account for all the extra food on each ship and that comes out to a lot more money spent. You're right, it's an unbelievable hit to economies. Especially to the island nations that already struggle. If Carnival buys a bunch of steaks from Mr. Smith's Wholesale Meats, but Carnival isn't buying them right now, Mr. Smith doesn't recoup that loss through the general public. Maybe partially, but nothing compared to his Carnival contract. Overall, the general public is not feeding these local economies enough to completely make up for the loss of cruise lines.

 

In regards to agriculture, it wasn't just the problem of shipping the crops. All over the country, the crops simply weren't needed because of the lockdowns. The demand was wiped out. I read that schools and restaurants account for around 40% of the nation's milk consumption. Without them, the dairy farmers were devastated. They were dumping milk out in their fields. And because this all hit around springtime, when cows naturally produce more milk (because this is when they have babies), that meant even more milk was wasted. It's happening all across the agricultural industry nationwide. Meat and vegetable.

[Stick93]

11 hours ago, SeaShark said:

 

Those are some interesting calculations, but you seem to have missed a rather important point.

 

If people don't eat those 85,050,000 meals on the cruise ship they will just eat them elsewhere...whether at home or at a local restaurant. The economy would only be losing if those people didn't eat. Instead of getting those meals from Carnival they will just get them somewhere else.

Two points -

1. people eat differently on a cruise than at home

2. You cannot get the food in bulk like that and eat for that price at home.

 

[Roger88]

44 minutes ago, sanger727 said:

First, I think the estimate of $6 per meal is far too high, I would guess closer to $3 with the amount of bulk and frozen purchases.

 

but besides that, yes, I think this whole thing has brought out how closely things run in the American supply chain. A handful of people bought huge amounts of toilet paper, causing a run which causes everyone to buy an extra toilet paper, and suddenly every store is out for months.

 

people suddenly start eating at home instead of eating out and stores have to ration bread, milk, and meat.

 

while at the same time I’m sure tons of food that was in a supply chain for bulk purchases to restaurants, cruise ships, amusement parks, etc went to waste

People are planning to "save" during traveling will not enjoy their trip believe me. If you have taken with you a certain amount of money you should spend it all and enjoy your cruise. If you will constantly think of how much you are spending, you will not enjoy your trip. 

[dragonfly33478]

https://www.yachtworld.com/boats/1999/cruise-ship--1-432-1-718-passengers-3683905/

[dragonfly33478]

And a second Hal vessel listed $120 million

[drsel]

Which are these ships on sale

[SeaShark]

52 minutes ago, Stick93 said:

Two points -

1. people eat differently on a cruise than at home

2. You cannot get the food in bulk like that and eat for that price at home.

 

 

Well, to be honest the point was that the economy isn't "missing" the meal consumption since the people will still eat whether on a cruise or not.

 

Further,

 

1. People also eat differently at home than on a cruise. So what? They still eat and that still results in economic activity.

2. You aren't getting the food in bulk anyway...they are. And if it costs you MORE to eat at home, then not cruising is actually causing an INCREASE in economic activity (when it comes to meals) not a decrease/loss as the OP originally posted.

[BlerkOne]

2 hours ago, PhillyFan33579 said:

 
What are the other two ships? Only one I have heard is Costa Victoria. 

 

https://www.pocruises.com.au/ships/pacific-aria

https://www.pocruises.com.au/ships/pacific-dawn

 

https://www.cruiseindustrynews.com/cruise-news/22001-pacific-dawn-and-pacific-aria-bought-by-cmv.html

 

 

 

 

[Stick93]

12 minutes ago, SeaShark said:

 

Well, to be honest the point was that the economy isn't "missing" the meal consumption since the people will still eat whether on a cruise or not.

 

Further,

 

1. People also eat differently at home than on a cruise. So what? They still eat and that still results in economic activity.

2. You aren't getting the food in bulk anyway...they are. And if it costs you MORE to eat at home, then not cruising is actually causing an INCREASE in economic activity (when it comes to meals) not a decrease/loss as the OP originally posted.

I'm agreeing with you - The only point I am making is the comparison of being at home and on a ship may be two separate and different entities and markets. May not show up with the same economic results. 

 

According to OP the cruises may not be losing as much money as we think?? I think regardless of the impact on economy and the cruise companies everyone is losing big time. 

[SeaShark]

27 minutes ago, Stick93 said:

I'm agreeing with you - The only point I am making is the comparison of being at home and on a ship may be two separate and different entities and markets. May not show up with the same economic results. 

 

According to OP the cruises may not be losing as much money as we think?? I think regardless of the impact on economy and the cruise companies everyone is losing big time. 

 

I realize you are in agreement. I'm trying to point out (to everyone) that economics doesn't occur in a vacuum. You have to consider the big picture. If I don't spend X on a cruise, then I'm able to spend X on something else...it isn't a "loss", but a shift in economic activity. Sure...it might be a loss strictly in the cruise line vacuum, but it will be a gain somewhere else.

 

I didn't go on three cruises this year, so instead I got a new deck for my home. The cruise line missed out on my money, but the contractor and the lumber yard did not.

[jakeT]

With Carnival older ship what only can hold a little over two thousand people. Going out with 50% of the people.   This ship can not make money.  Exceptionally when there ticket. Prices are low.   Nobody going to pay high ticket prices for. A junk ship