Parent Corp RCCL changes name to RCG and new logo

[TeeRick]

Reported on the Royal Caribbean Blog and also on the Wiki page.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Caribbean_Group

 

See this CC thread on the Royal Caribbean Board too.

 

Edited July 11, 2020 by TeeRick

[Denny01]

Royal Caribbean Group - RCG - seems much better since many of us, especially me, kept forgetting ‘is it RCCL or RCL’ for the one Line and the other the overall Corp??

 

And I was wrong anyway. The Line is Royal Caribbean International (RCI) not what I thought as RC Line (RCL) and the Corp was RC Cruises Ltd, not RC Cruises Lines as i thought.  
 

‘’I’m so glad that was all cleared up.....until someone explains I’m all wrong!

 

Den 

Edited July 11, 2020 by Denny01

[C-Dragons]

Yes, the story is certainly making the rounds.  Great minds...😊

Edited July 11, 2020 by C-Dragons

[mnocket]

Disclaimer:  This may have no relevance to RCG

 

That said, one of my observations of corporate leadership is that when they focus on changing their name and/or logo it's often a sign that the company is in trouble and they don't know what to do, so they make this kind of symbolic gesture. 

[excitedofharpenden]

Of more note to me than a name change or fiddling about with the logo is the fact that Royal have bought the remaining stake in Silverseas. 

 

Phil 

[Cruising89143]

I don’t see this as a big deal. Royal has branched out from just cruising to land based investments also. 
 

https://www.caribjournal.com/2020/03/03/royal-caribbean-bahamas-grand-lucayan-hotel/

[govanguy]

One less alphabetical character on their stationary logo. Money saving initiative.

[Oceangoer2]

1 hour ago, excitedofharpenden said:

Of more note to me than a name change or fiddling about with the logo is the fact that Royal have bought the remaining stake in Silverseas. 

 

Phil 

Do you think Silverseas will replace Azamara's cruises?

[excitedofharpenden]

1 minute ago, oceangoer2 said:

Do you think Silverseas will replace Azamara's cruises?

I'm not sure to be honest. Silverseas is a different market to Azamara. Luxury vs Premium. Royal will make their decisions based upon profitability and that they have invested another $245m in Silverseas at this time would indicate that they think can make money from it.

 

I have no knowledge of how profitable Azamara are. I know they've turned it round and are making money, but how much and if it's enough for Royal is another question. There are many of those at the moment in a fast developing situation. 

 

Phil 

[JennAngel9]

43 minutes ago, excitedofharpenden said:

I'm not sure to be honest. Silverseas is a different market to Azamara. Luxury vs Premium. Royal will make their decisions based upon profitability and that they have invested another $245m in Silverseas at this time would indicate that they think can make money from it.

 

I have no knowledge of how profitable Azamara are. I know they've turned it round and are making money, but how much and if it's enough for Royal is another question. There are many of those at the moment in a fast developing situation. 

 

Phil 

I really liked Azamara the one time (admittedly a decade ago) we sailed with them... but having subsequently sailed with Regent and Seabourn, I feel that the Azamara product is (or at least was) much closer to a small Celebrity ship experience, especially with newer luxury ships having bigger more comfortable rooms.  I am not sure the Azamara niche (including higher prices but small cabins) is likely to survive a downturn... but I don't know what the additional costs of maintaining an extra brand are vs. simply calling it a Celebrity Port Intensive itinerary. 

[Cruising89143]

1 hour ago, JennAngel9 said:

I really liked Azamara the one time (admittedly a decade ago) we sailed with them... but having subsequently sailed with Regent and Seabourn, I feel that the Azamara product is (or at least was) much closer to a small Celebrity ship experience, especially with newer luxury ships having bigger more comfortable rooms.  I am not sure the Azamara niche (including higher prices but small cabins) is likely to survive a downturn... but I don't know what the additional costs of maintaining an extra brand are vs. simply calling it a Celebrity Port Intensive itinerary. 

The cruise that we booked on Azamara was less than a comparable X cruise. I don’t see Azamara in the same market with Seabourn or Regent. Two different levels. 

[Redtravel]

Azamara has changed itself many times.  I loved the original Azamara when I sailed in 2009.  The cruises since are still nice, but different.  Each time that I sailed on Azamara, there were changes and higher prices.  They have changed their name and logo 3 or 4 times.  Changing names and reinventing themselves makes me wonder why the changes.  I keep thinking who will Azamara be when they grow up.   They call themselves Celebrity’s little sister.  Time for them to have their own identity.  

[Ride-The-Waves]

The name change is really going to help me forget all the bad things about RCCL...especially Celebrity's inability to provide refunds.

[excitedofharpenden]

4 hours ago, JennAngel9 said:

I really liked Azamara the one time (admittedly a decade ago) we sailed with them... but having subsequently sailed with Regent and Seabourn, I feel that the Azamara product is (or at least was) much closer to a small Celebrity ship experience, especially with newer luxury ships having bigger more comfortable rooms.  I am not sure the Azamara niche (including higher prices but small cabins) is likely to survive a downturn... but I don't know what the additional costs of maintaining an extra brand are vs. simply calling it a Celebrity Port Intensive itinerary. 

I agree.  Azamara is very nice, but not competition for the likes of Seabourn or Regent. What they do have is an extremely loyal following because the onboard experience with everyone (guests and crew) is so friendly.  Remember that whilst they are more port intensive than Celebrity they also have late/overnight stays and because the ships are smaller, access to places the big ships can’t go.  Those things appeal to a lot of people and are a big draw for their followers. Those last two have given me some amazing experiences that I just wouldn’t get on Celebrity.  

 

However, the fact remains I think that finance rather than emotion will rule in these troubled times.  Without detailed financial information for Azamara, knowing how much they made for Royal it’s hard to tell what will happen,  

 

And of course Silverseas had a presence in Galapagos to compete with the likes of Celebrity Flora.

 

Phil

[Denny01]

Funny about the posts about it being a change just to make changes, or they have major issues and they think changing names and logos is the way to go!

 

I was in a major military organization that the new command decided things weren’t working right so they reorganized the teams built around aircraft types to teams being organized around systems such as avionics, engines, weapons and so on. After a few years, a new command took over and they decided things weren’t working so we reorganized to teams around aircraft types......the civilian engineers who had been there for years said this is what new commands did every 3-4 years. I’m sure more than a few of you and seen that too.

 

Den

[ldubs]

12 hours ago, mnocket said:

Disclaimer:  This may have no relevance to RCG

 

That said, one of my observations of corporate leadership is that when they focus on changing their name and/or logo it's often a sign that the company is in trouble and they don't know what to do, so they make this kind of symbolic gesture. 

 

Or as part of a restructure to narrow the trail from subsidiary operations for liability or liquidation reasons.  And, I would have the same disclaimer, except doubled as I'm probably all wet.  haha.   

[ldubs]

15 hours ago, Denny01 said:

Royal Caribbean Group - RCG - seems much better since many of us, especially me, kept forgetting ‘is it RCCL or RCL’ for the one Line and the other the overall Corp??

 

And I was wrong anyway. The Line is Royal Caribbean International (RCI) not what I thought as RC Line (RCL) and the Corp was RC Cruises Ltd, not RC Cruises Lines as i thought.  
 

‘’I’m so glad that was all cleared up.....until someone explains I’m all wrong!

 

Den 

 

Cleared up?   "RCG, RCCL, RCC, RCL, RCI, and RC".  I'm now totally confused.  😄😄😄 

 

(I'm only kidding)

[Oceangoer2]

9 hours ago, excitedofharpenden said:

I agree.  Azamara is very nice, but not competition for the likes of Seabourn or Regent. What they do have is an extremely loyal following because the onboard experience with everyone (guests and crew) is so friendly.  Remember that whilst they are more port intensive than Celebrity they also have late/overnight stays and because the ships are smaller, access to places the big ships can’t go.  Those things appeal to a lot of people and are a big draw for their followers. Those last two have given me some amazing experiences that I just wouldn’t get on Celebrity.  

 

However, the fact remains I think that finance rather than emotion will rule in these troubled times.  Without detailed financial information for Azamara, knowing how much they made for Royal it’s hard to tell what will happen,  

 

And of course Silverseas had a presence in Galapagos to compete with the likes of Celebrity Flora.

 

Phil

Leads to my original question...I can see a reorganization/downsizing coming up....Azamara is a niche line and not one some are drawn to.  Seaborn is the luxury end RCL was trying, in a lesser way, to emulate with Azamara IMO;  they can now divest that line (now own Seaborn to replace A with higher revenue).  Lived through a few reorgs and cruiselines' financial situation seem set for one with RCL and others.

[TeeRick]

7 hours ago, ldubs said:

 

Or as part of a restructure to narrow the trail from subsidiary operations for liability or liquidation reasons.  And, I would have the same disclaimer, except doubled as I'm probably all wet.  haha.   

This is the same thought that I had.

[TeeRick]

23 hours ago, Denny01 said:

Royal Caribbean Group - RCG - seems much better since many of us, especially me, kept forgetting ‘is it RCCL or RCL’ for the one Line and the other the overall Corp??

 

And I was wrong anyway. The Line is Royal Caribbean International (RCI) not what I thought as RC Line (RCL) and the Corp was RC Cruises Ltd, not RC Cruises Lines as i thought.  
 

‘’I’m so glad that was all cleared up.....until someone explains I’m all wrong!

 

Den 

Yes I agree with you.  RCG makes sense and is easy to remember.  Group implies that it has subsidiary companies so that just makes it easier for me anyway.  But the stock symbol is still RCL.  There is another entity (Renn Fund Inc) that uses RCG as a stock symbol.

[nycruiser80]

I have been thinking about how NCL and Royal Caribbean teamed up with the health task force they created. Now with this name change for the parent company of Royal Caribbean, I am wondering if they are considering joining forces with the NCL group (NCL, Oceania, Regent). In my short time as an executive assistant to the CEO of a non-profit company, I was there for a merger and before we merged we created a new name and logo for our company and then proceeded with the merger.

 

This is of course  is speculation, but I could see both lines shedding older tonnage and Royal Caribbean merging with NCL as they both have ships which offer wow factors (especially NCL's newer ships). Azamara could merge with Oceania since they are both a similar line with sister ships held over from Renaissance Cruises  (both Azamara and Oceania are not luxury lines, they are deluxe and do not directly compete with Regent and Silversea), then I could see them merging Regent and Silversea into one brand. Just a thought not trying to start rumors but this has crossed my mind lately.

 

 

Edited July 12, 2020 by nycruiser80

[C-Dragons]

8 hours ago, ldubs said:

 

Or as part of a restructure to narrow the trail from subsidiary operations for liability or liquidation reasons.  And, I would have the same disclaimer, except doubled as I'm probably all wet.  haha.   

The article states that Royal started the process of renaming the company a year ago, before all this mess with the pandemic, so it's more likely coincidence.

[Charles4515]

Leads to my original question...I can see a reorganization/downsizing coming up....Azamara is a niche line and not one some are drawn to.  Seaborn is the luxury end RCL was trying, in a lesser way, to emulate with Azamara IMO;  they can now divest that line (now own Seaborn to replace A with higher revenue).  Lived through a few reorgs and cruiselines' financial situation seem set for one with RCL and others.

The don’t own Seaborn. They own Silversea.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Oceangoer2]

54 minutes ago, Charles4515 said:

 

The don’t own Seaborn. They own Silversea.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

ooops...meant Silversea

[Denny01]

And as to is the change in name/logo an indication of some ‘change’ such as dropping Lines or combining with some other Corp? I take it is as what it is, a change in name and logo.....period, not some indication of what the ‘Group’ is now.

 

Den