Dan Hanrahan in Travelweekly about Century

[Richard Stein]

In the 1/8/07 eadition of Travelweekly Dan Hanrahan was interviewed about the Century makeover. He said “The difference in ticket price between a balcony and a cabin without one is significant. Celebrity is already seeing a return on its refurbishment investment. The demand is for balcony cabins. That’s the future trend.” Well if that is the case Dan, what about the Mercury and Galaxy next? I hope that someone directs Dan to this site.

[dkjretired]

I doubt they would put any more balconies on Mercury and Galaxy when they go in for major work such as putting in specialty restaurant, etc. They were built with a much larger number of veranda's than the Century was.

[Richard Stein]

I am booked on the Mercury in Feb, 08 to Australia-NZ and wrote them a letter on putting more balconies for Mercury and they called me back. The said my ideas were sound and the Mercury was scheduled for drydock later this year, but were vague on what was being done. All the balconies on my cruise sold out within a month.

[SheilaNC]

Richard,

Although this has been widely discussed (and disputed) on the boards, we were told while onboard in July that there was a substantial drydock planned with lots of upgrades (INTERIOR) but there was little knowledge about balconies. One thing they said was that it would NOT be on the scale of Century. Guess we'll find out in the fall when Mercury begins the Down Under itinerary.

[Rev22:17]

Richard,

 

In the 1/8/07 eadition of Travelweekly Dan Hanrahan was interviewed about the Century makeover. He said “The difference in ticket price between a balcony and a cabin without one is significant. Celebrity is already seeing a return on its refurbishment investment. The demand is for balcony cabins. That’s the future trend.” Well if that is the case Dan, what about the Mercury and Galaxy next? I hope that someone directs Dan to this site.

 

When Celebrity Cruises first ordered MV Century, the line apparently planned to order two more identical ships and thus announced the {i]Century[/i] class. Nonetheless, that did not happen. Rather, the line ordered two vessels that are about 10% larger, built to a completely different design on a different hull. Unfortunately, the company's marketing department never caught up to the change and continues, wrongly, to list MV Galaxy and MV Mercury as "Century class" vessels. In proper maritime usage, MV Century is a single vessel while MV Galaxy and MV Mercury constitute the Galaxy class.

 

It's important to understand this distinction when discussing possible reconfiguration of MV Galaxy and MV Mercury, because the modifications made to MV Century simply will not work on either of the vessels of the Galaxy class due to the differences between the design of these vessels and the design of MV Century. The newer vessels do not have an open deck where MV Century gained new sky suites above the buffet area, for example, so addition of new cabins in this area would require fairly extensive modification including removal of the magrodome and probably also of the pool beneath it.

 

There's also a major difference in the superstructures of these vessels. The original superstructure of MV Century rose straight up from the insides of the promenades, with baclonies overhanging the promenades only on the top level of cabins. As a result, it was possible to hang an additional tier of balconies on the superstructure above the lifeboats without going beyond the width of the hull. On the Galaxy classs, OTOH, the standard cabins on the Vista Deck and the Panorama Deck already extend out to the hull. I suppose that you could add balconies that would extend beyond the hulls of these ships, but that modification would make them too wide to transit the Panama Canal. It also would prevent them from using some pierside berths in some ports of call. The other option would be to make the cabins smaller, but then it might be a problem to fit in all the furniture that passengers would expect. Realistically, I doubt that Celebrity will add balconies to existing cabins on either of the vessels of the Galaxy class due to the complications involved.

 

Norm.

[dkjretired]

Richard,

 

 

 

When Celebrity Cruises first ordered MV Century, the line apparently planned to order two more identical ships and thus announced the {i]Century[/i] class. Nonetheless, that did not happen. Rather, the line ordered two vessels that are about 10% larger, built to a completely different design on a different hull. Unfortunately, the company's marketing department never caught up to the change and continues, wrongly, to list MV Galaxy and MV Mercury as "Century class" vessels. In proper maritime usage, MV Century is a single vessel while MV Galaxy and MV Mercury constitute the Galaxy class.

 

It's important to understand this distinction when discussing possible reconfiguration of MV Galaxy and MV Mercury, because the modifications made to MV Century simply will not work on either of the vessels of the Galaxy class due to the differences between the design of these vessels and the design of MV Century. The newer vessels do not have an open deck where MV Century gained new sky suites above the buffet area, for example, so addition of new cabins in this area would require fairly extensive modification including removal of the magrodome and probably also of the pool beneath it.

 

There's also a major difference in the superstructures of these vessels. The original superstructure of MV Century rose straight up from the insides of the promenades, with baclonies overhanging the promenades only on the top level of cabins. As a result, it was possible to hang an additional tier of balconies on the superstructure above the lifeboats without going beyond the width of the hull. On the Galaxy classs, OTOH, the standard cabins on the Vista Deck and the Panorama Deck already extend out to the hull. I suppose that you could add balconies that would extend beyond the hulls of these ships, but that modification would make them too wide to transit the Panama Canal. It also would prevent them from using some pierside berths in some ports of call. The other option would be to make the cabins smaller, but then it might be a problem to fit in all the furniture that passengers would expect. Realistically, I doubt that Celebrity will add balconies to existing cabins on either of the vessels of the Galaxy class due to the complications involved.

 

Norm.

 

Rev:

 

I believe what you are saying but most people don't understand or care to much about the various superstructures and whatever. Fact is the three ships on the inside where the customers see it are substantially the same in location of public rooms and staterooms. This is what makes the three ships so similiar and is what people see. To try and make two classes of the three Century class ships is confusing to us simply folk out here who don't understand all the intricacies of the construction.

 

Spengle:

 

I wouldn't believe anything I hear on board the ships from anyone including Captains. They have been so wrong in the past. If we believed the previous rumors, Zenith and Horizon would be on board with hundreds of veranda's and the Century would have been stretched as wide and long as the Queen Mary II.

[dkjretired]

I don't know about anyone else but I find the boards horrible today. Taking forever to post or read threads.....

[Sheik]

Rev22:17:

Thanks for your great post. Apparantly, I'm not one of the 'most people' who doesn't care for this information.

 

These posts are informative and I think it's important that people like Rev use this board to share their knowlegde. Thumbs up for your time, I learned a lot.

[dkjretired]

Rev22:17:

Thanks for your great post. Apparantly, I'm not one of the 'most people' who doesn't care for this information.

 

These posts are informative and I think it's important that people like Rev use this board to share their knowlegde. Thumbs up for your time, I learned a lot.

 

I hope you didn't misunderstand me but I find all of Revs posts interesting. What I was trying to say is when you get on the ship you don't see the superstructure or the underlying portions of the ship you see the staterooms and public rooms which are basically the same on all three ships. Sorry for any misunderstanding, Im glad rev came over from the other board.

[tom_uk]

I too hadn't fully appreciated the difference between the structure of Century vs. Galaxy & Mercury - I had thought that the difference was just the extra length.

 

I had already noticed that there were more balcony cabins on Galaxy/Mercury than on pre-refit Century - basically, all the accomodation on the Sky & Penthouse decks, plus about half the cabins on the Vista deck, already have balconies. This leaves the Panorama deck without them, plus the lower decks (Plaza & Continental). There seem to be 160 cabins on Panorama deck on the Port & Starboard sides, and these are the only cabins that could be converted and even then it would have to be by means of a balcony added to the outside. As has pointed out, that might not be sensible.

 

So, as Dan Hanrahan has noted, the extra revenue that X gets from the additional balconies is one of the major benefits that they are getting from Century. In the case of Mercury/Galaxy, however, there are few additional balconies that could be added. I wonder how the cost-benefit equation for a major refit of Galaxy/Mercury looks without them?

[Sheik]

@dkjretired, sorry :)

[dkjretired]

@dkjretired, sorry :)

 

Mostly my fault, didn't write my point real clear...

[Rev22:17]

dkjretired,

 

I believe what you are saying but most people don't understand or care to much about the various superstructures and whatever. Fact is the three ships on the inside where the customers see it are substantially the same in location of public rooms and staterooms. This is what makes the three ships so similiar and is what people see. To try and make two classes of the three Century class ships is confusing to us simply folk out here who don't understand all the intricacies of the construction.

 

I disagree. A lot of people are now expecting that Celebrity will make the same modifications to MV Galaxy and MV Mercury precisely because the line's marketing department has wrongly represented that these vessels are the same class (that is, substantially the same). If the marketing deparmtnet had gotten it right, we would not be having a discussion on this subject. IOW, this thread would not exist in the first place.

 

I also believe very strongly that the best way to address such expectations is to present accurate information, which is what I tried to do in my earlier post.

 

Norm.