Since Carnival Took Over HAL....

[mariner]

The problem is fairly complex.

 

In order for HAL to regain 5-star status, the line would have to charge what Oceania, Regent and Crystal charge for their cruises.

 

The cry from this board would be loud and many who keep notching cruises up on their avatars would most likely be back to one cruise a year or every two.

 

HAL's managers understand this, so they must discount to fill their bigger ships in the rough-and-tumble Caribbean and Alaska markets. I rarely hear people in St. Thomas say, ``I booked HAL cause I love it.'' I do hear, ``Princess has a great discount.''

 

My NOORDAM cruise has dropped nearly $3000 since we booked in April.

 

Then there are the passengers who, having paid a discounted fare, look for ways to spend little, if any, money aboard.

 

Couple that with the discounts, and the line must cut somewhere to boost the bottom line for the shareholders, who want to see a dividend.

 

Blaming Carnival is not accurate. If anything, the blame lies with Carnival falling in love with the Princess business plan, which seems to have permeated the company's entire fleet. It has benefitted Carnival passengers with better food and service. It hasn't with HAL.

 

I also think Carnival now considers Cunard its ``Tiffany'' line instead of HAL, which was a major reason for Carnival wanting HAL in the first place.

[PRINSENDAM]

 

If it had not been for Carnival HAL would probably not exist today. They would have probably been absorped like Sitmar or Home Line.

 

 

Don't forget that it was HAL that absorbed Home Lines! Carnival got two for one!

 

I for one, was rather sad that HAL took over Home Lines. It was a first class company with well run, beautiful ships. In a way HAL and Home Lines complemented each other perfectly, one being Dutch and the other Italian.

 

I have to admit that when I was making a decision on my first cruise I had a choice between the old ROTTERDAM or the OCEANIC... I decided on OCEANIC! Eventually I went to the ROTTERDAM... and loved every second of the 336 days I spent on board, but I sure missed the OCEANIC!

 

Stephen

[PRINSENDAM]

''

 

My NOORDAM cruise has dropped nearly $3000 since we booked in April.

.

 

 

 

 

Yep. But what they have not told you is that your 'suite' is now above the propellers and your 'suite perk' is to have tea in the Crew Mess!

 

The good news is that the drinks are cheaper in the Crew Bar!!! :-)

 

Stephen

[cruisnfool]

I have sailed 26 times since 1986....many things have changed over the years and I don'y blame any "company" but rather two reasons

1....a reponse to market cost escalations

2....a response to passenger comments

 

Cruise lines must change the bottom line like any other business and they also want to give passengers what they want.........isn't that the reason we have all these dining options now......It was sure simple when you atr at the same table for all three meals!

 

Brian........do you belive Celebrity is not a cost effecient line? Seems to have a lot of loyal customers. Maybe the propulsion problems have hurt them financially.

 

To the poster that said people complain about what a line doesn't do something like another line.....I like the differance.

Example:

If I want fresh water pools and great priced mini suites...go on Princess

If I want ships with a WOW facor and high energy....RCI

Good Italian food, ambiance and toga parties...Costa

Great service and food..Celebrity

Can't bring myself back to NCL or Carnival as yet

First HAl coming up...will see where she fits

 

If all the lines became cookie cutter ships what fun would that be.....plus what would everyone complain about.

 

Great thread!

[xpcdoojk]

I think that's the point--there are no longer 31 flavors.

 

Despots in charge of corporations like General Motors , forget their customers and get enticed by accountants and others into believing they can make more money by "mushing the brands together". Putting Olds engines in Chevy's--Olds went from the leading brand in USA to out of business.

 

Similarly-- Changing the tipping policy on HAL to match Carnival & Princess--- Changing the carry on liquor policy --etc-etc-etc, will eventually make all 3 lines seem pretty much the same.

 

As long as they keep Carnival out of the 10+ day cruise business , there will continue be a HAL that we recognize.

 

We all have to continue to stress to Carnival Corp that we like HAL and want a HAL that isn't a twin to Carnival or Princess.

 

The world is not this simple. Despots is one of the dumbest things I have ever read in this forum. Step away from the TV and open a book, please.

 

Economics and competition are where answers to why companies are where they are today, not the control of despotic rulers. :rolleyes:

 

Sorry, but sometimes when you type things you hear listening to air America you appear silly. Just trying to help you out here.

 

jc

[RedmondCruiser]

To Brian and Stephan --- I know that HAL absorped Home Line but my point is that HAL could have been absorped and dismembered just as easily. At the time they were bought by CCL they only had four ships - two dissimilar ships being the aged Rotterdam, the Westerdam and the two 1983 - 1984 sister ships Noordam and NiewAmsterdam.-- a bit of a mixed bag. --- Today lines seem to buy another line and keep the name but when the line only has a few ships they get eaten.

[bepsf]

Brian........do you belive Celebrity is not a cost effecient line? Seems to have a lot of loyal customers. Maybe the propulsion problems have hurt them financially.

 

Great thread!

 

Cost-Efficiency and Customer Loyalty aren't necessarily related.

 

Crystal has rarely made any money for NYK, and Cunard has been a perennial money-loser since paying off QE2 in the 70's but they both have a great many very loyal passengers.* On the other hand, HAL has almost always made a profit and has the greatest customer-loyalty in the business.

 

Celebrity was making OK money, then over-extended itself in building the Century/Galaxy/Mercury trio which is why it offered itself to RCCL so it wouldn't go under.* X also has some very loyal passengers, but are losing many along the way due to the poor service and cost-cutting RCCL has been doing since their takeover in efforts to make it a profitable division again.* Of course, the pod problems don't help X's profitability but many die-hard X fans are still willing to look past those issues...

[bepsf]

To Brian and Stephan --- I know that HAL absorped Home Line but my point is that HAL could have been absorped and dismembered just as easily. At the time they were bought by CCL they only had four ships - two dissimilar ships being the aged Rotterdam, the Westerdam and the two 1983 - 1984 sister ships Noordam and NiewAmsterdam.-- a bit of a mixed bag. --- Today lines seem to buy another line and keep the name but when the line only has a few ships they get eaten.

 

Yes, but CCL has made it a business practice to leave well-enough alone when the line they are buying is profitable (like HAL & Princess) and just add their financial backing for added growth potential.

 

Cunard has rarely made a profit since the 60's, which is why CCL has infused their management with expertise from P&O/Princess:* another British division who already know how to make a profit.

[DFD1]

Interesting discussion. Thank you all.

 

In my opinion, we probably would not have HAL in its present configuration...if at all...were it not for the aquisition by Carnival Corporation.

 

The cruise business is not unlike any other.....it must change and evolve to survive. That's the nature of almost all living things....including businesses.

[Islandbuoy]

Guess I struck a nerve with you.(What company are you a despot with?)

 

One of the other guys said it so well ,when he said that they should spend (at least some of)their marketing money trying to differentiate the various lines( to the buying public).

 

I wanted Olds to be Olds not Chevy or Cadillac. The stakeholders should have also.

Some how Toyota is making money and gaining ground while keeping Toyota and Lexus brands separate.

 

Same with Hal, I don't want HAL to be Carnival or Princess.

 

Doesn't mean that I'm against progress!!!

[PRINSENDAM]

To Brian and Stephan --- I know that HAL absorped Home Line but my point is that HAL could have been absorped and dismembered just as easily. At the time they were bought by CCL they only had four ships - two dissimilar ships being the aged Rotterdam, the Westerdam and the two 1983 - 1984 sister ships Noordam and NiewAmsterdam.-- a bit of a mixed bag. --- Today lines seem to buy another line and keep the name but when the line only has a few ships they get eaten.

 

 

Quite right. They were ripe for picking but at the time there were no big players out there with the money to do so.

 

We shouldn't forget that HAL were working on the 'Tiffany Project' at the time the company was purchased by Carnival. They would have been two 60,000 ton ships. Quite nice from the renderings I've seen.... no balconies! Had they been built, I wonder if HAL might have grown quite successfully on their own. In any event the project was cancelled and instead the S class were built.

 

Stephen

[billsrobb]

Hear, hear!!

 

 

 

I live in Peoria, AZ

 

Robb

[hammybee]

YES, and another point: when Carnival bought HAL we were all of us younger, and now we have succumbed to the dreaded aging process. The aging process, for me, has increased exponentially since HAL and Carnival became one in 1989 (the year my oldest child was born!!) All of us posting on this board are older than the oldest HAL ship:eek: See what horrors are released when corporations tamper with the fabric of existence!!:) ;) Karin

 

Yikes Karin. My DD is as old as the oldest HAL ship and I am an older mom.

 

I am now going out to make "snow angels" ( 12" and counting)and pretend that I am the same age as HAL's youngest ship.

[hammybee]

Crystal has rarely made any money for NYK, and Cunard has been a perennial money-loser since paying off QE2 in the 70's but they both have a great many very loyal passengers.* On the other hand, HAL has almost always made a profit and has the greatest customer-loyalty in the business.

 

Brian, How do you know that HAL is profitable? I am not doubting you, just curious.

[kryos]

Most recently we have noticed a lot of changes -- some good and some bad.

 

HAL is trying to get more younger people to cruise on them -- thus changes are being made to attrack the new generation of cruisers.

HAL is trying to get more PEOPLE period to cruise with them, and I think that regardless of who owned HAL, the changes we are seeing would happen either way.

 

HAL's passenger demographic has tended toward the upper ages for many years. But that number is being eroded as people die, or become too ill to cruise any longer ... things that sadly happen as we get older. HAL is merely trying to fill the hole being created by that dwindling number of older passengers, and to do this they are targeting the younger, family market.

 

While HAL has changed, and I am sure will continue to change, I don't believe this is necessarily a bad thing. If HAL didn't change, we wouldn't have a HAL ship left to sail on ten, twenty years from now ... and then we would all be forced to look at lines like Carnival or RCCL.

 

As long as HAL keeps the longer voyages on their itinerary list, those old staples of cruising will always be available onboard. But, if you opt for the shorter seven-day cruises, you will lose them.

 

True, HAL has probably cut some things out that once were available ... without extra fee ... but when you consider that the cost of cruising has actually come down ... in both real dollars and value of money ... you have to see that any company operating HAL would have to cut some things out in order to make a profit. If the cruise lines upped the cost of a cruise in order to keep those former things in place, then less people would cruise because they would be priced out of it. By cutting out these things, and keeping the price low, however, more people can board their boats. Once HAL (or any cruise line) gets them onboard, the hope obviously is that they spend a lot of money paying for all those extra charge items that they want, and thus wind up taking a far more expensive cruise than they would have if the charge had been upfront.

 

My take on this? Stick with the longer, more "exotic" itineraries and you will continue to pretty much enjoy the HAL of old. Sure, you'll pay for some things that maybe you didn't pay for ten years ago ... but you'll enjoy all the ammenities of an elegant cruising experience.

 

Blue skies ...

 

--rita

[bepsf]

Brian, How do you know that HAL is profitable? I am not doubting you, just curious.

 

Ya know, I remember that it's what I've been told - but for the life of me I can't remember who told me!

:o

[happy cruzer]

I looked at the new builds HAL is planning and they are pretty big. I think it says the future of HAL is to be mass market.

 

I'm sad. I can be happy on the mass market style cuises but I do love traditional style the best. I think we will all have to pay more to get the traditional style soon. I loved my last cruise on the Volendam; I certainly hope that formula can go forward but I am not all sure it will be. But trying to predict the future is good for us, it will keep us humble.

[Opinions]

Don't forget that it was HAL that absorbed Home Lines! Carnival got two for one!

 

/QUOTE]

 

My recollection is that HAl only bought 2 ships from Home Lines...The "Homeric" which they renamed the "Westerdam" and the "Atlantic" which they sold...I thought "Home Lines" just went out of business rather than being absorbed...Is this correct?

[fcorey]

There was a post earlier in this thread bemoaning the loss of 5 star status. There have been many changes that I have read about here. It seems that many were done for financial reasons rather than Carnivalization. The only area that Carnival has influence on HAL ships is the casino. The manager on Oosterdam told me that all casino staff were trained by Carnival, not HAL. I am sure that they benefit from being part of a larger buying group for a number of things.

 

The HAL brand identity is what makes it special. It does seem that the attempt to appeal to a broader audience is offending the long time HAL diehards. I dont think that this is an attempt to change themselves into a massmarket line but rather lure those who like the more elegant understated nature of HAL as compared to others like Princess, RCCL etc. Lure those of us who are younger than the average HAL cruiser, win us over with some compromises, with the hope of us being customers who have 30 yrs of cruising ahead.

 

One thing I have noticed is that the HAL prices really are nowhere near those charged for 5 star. Heck, they arent even close in some cases to what RCCL or Celebrity charge for equivalent rooms. Holland America is actually a great value. I know that the diehards here would probably be willing to pay 10% more for their cruise if HAL were to reinstate some of the perks or services eliminated over the years. I know I would. The only catch is that they may not be able to fill ships at that higher rate. Its a tough balance. The important thing is to be vocal about your likes and dislikes. They do listen. I recently got a call about a comment card that I had filled out on Oosterdam with comments, some negative some positive.

 

You cannot ignore your customer and expect your business to survive.

[kryos]

The problem is fairly complex.

 

In order for HAL to regain 5-star status, the line would have to charge what Oceania, Regent and Crystal charge for their cruises.

 

Exactly. And then many of us on this board would no longer be able to afford to sail HAL at all. Personally, I'd rather lose some of the things I maybe used to get in order to retain the ability to set foot on a HAL ship.

 

Personally, I say that if the loss of five-star status is that troubling to someone, there are alternatives ... i.e., the above-mentioned cruise lines. Go on them and you are likely to find all of those former HAL touches. Of course, you'll pay dearly ... but if you can afford it, why not? But since I can't, I'll gladly take HAL in its current configuration and just pay extra for things that maybe once were provided for free on that line.

 

HAL would have to get a whole lot worse ... take away a whole lot more ... before I would stop sailing the line. Of course, who knows? That day may one day come ... maybe with the advent of the Signature class ships and beyond. But until that time comes, I'll gladly take what I can get on HAL and just pay as I go for the extra stuff I want.

 

Blue skies ...

 

--rita

[cruisnfool]

Again.....Carnival has more to say than just casinos......the ships are built on same bodies, joe farcus helps with designs and management is being shared.......not truly bad things except I don't like the glitzy, plastic neon lights of Carnival and the pictures of the newer Costa ships look just like a Carnival ship...IMHO

My last Costa was the Romantica and it cost 450 millon and was elegaaaant, losts of imported marble etc

 

You better watch out , the next HAL ship may have a gaudy 12 story atrium with lots of plastic trim and ulgy lighting.

 

I also had my neck hairs stand up when Kyros lumped RCI with CArnival.

I would never put those two ships in the same class. Unless Carnival has changed to bring itself UP to RCI than I stand corrected.

It would take an almost free cruise or an itineray that I couldn't pass up to get me back on Carnival.

All my opinions.

 

I don't think any more older people are dying today than years ago its just the younger people are cruising, especially families.

 

Change is unavoidable and it seems that in cruising the bigger the build the better the profit. Not sure why HAL has continued to do well with smaller ships except for the deep pockets of Carnival.

[3Generations]

I haven't sailed HAL since 1980. Went on three sailing forth on January 6th, Noordam.

 

I imagine I am going to see a big change. I was a college student and then

on my honeymoon when I last sailed.

 

Bringing my mother and daughter with me. Just us ladies. My daughter has been on this forum quite a bit.

 

Well, let's see how it goes.

 

Ronnie

[PRINSENDAM]

 

 

Personally, I say that if the loss of five-star status is that troubling to someone, there are alternatives ... --rita

 

 

 

 

Personally, I say that if someone is unwilling or unable to pay the higher rates for five star service, there are alternatives...........

 

 

Stephen

[PRINSENDAM]

Don't forget that it was HAL that absorbed Home Lines! Carnival got two for one!

 

/QUOTE]

 

My recollection is that HAl only bought 2 ships from Home Lines...The "Homeric" which they renamed the "Westerdam" and the "Atlantic" which they sold...I thought "Home Lines" just went out of business rather than being absorbed...Is this correct?

 

 

It amounts to the same thing but in fact HAL assumed full control over Home Lines in March 1988. One ship, HOMERIC was renamed WESTERDAM and transferred to the HAL fleet while the second ship, ATLANTIC, was chartered to Premier Cruise Lines. One year later Premier purchased the ship outright. Also in 1988 HAL acquired the outstanding stock in Windstar Cruises. So in acutal fact, Carnival Corporation acquired three cruise lines!

 

Stephen

[WeLoveCruising]

Again.....Carnival has more to say than just casinos......the ships are built on same bodies, joe farcus helps with designs and management is being shared.......not truly bad things except I don't like the glitzy, plastic neon lights of Carnival and the pictures of the newer Costa ships look just like a Carnival ship

 

Not sure I understand you comment. Are you saying that the Grand Princess / Zaandam / Wind Surf / Carnival Destiny / Seabourn Pride / Queen Mary 2 / Costa Fortuna are all based on the same body and designed by Joe Farcus? How many of these have you been on? (I've been on them all, btw). Even the HAL Vista ships are vastly different than the Carnival ships.