Pride of Aloha & Pride of Hawaii

[smrtypnts]

Why did NCL take these ships out of Hawaii?

[mbisson]

To many cabins to fill meant the prices got too low. (supply & demand)

 

Check out what the price is now with only one ship :eek:. I'm glad we sailed Hawaii while the Aloha was still there

[hawaiilvr]

$$$ (or lack thereof)

[byucougs]

Well, it's complicated. Filling cabins in the Hawaii market was one thing. I think the ships were pretty full, but it did drive the prices to a reasonable cost. But NCL(A) was required to use mostly American crew, with a high turnover, higher employee/ship costs and questionable service issues. Other cruiselines have tried and failed to stay in this market. Thus why current non-ncl cruiselines start from the "mainland" and combine it with a Mexico or Canada port.

 

We were on the Pride of Hawaii Dec 07. The crew worked very hard. It was an amazing, convenient way to see the most of the islands for our family. In fact we are going back for a land vacation to Maui in December 09.

[Don Haynes]

Simply put, too much supply and too little demand for the Hawaiian market. Therefore, the ships were moved to other more lucrative markets.

[smrtypnts]

Makes sense. I don't know why I didn't realize that myself, but I'm glad I asked. It makes sense that before I cancelled my summer 2008 booking I was getting a balcony cabin and an inside for a $4500 total and now just the balcony is costing that much. :cool:

[veggie59]

We cruised on the NCL Star in Hawaii in 2002. The Star was built for Hawaii,......I loved that ship. Not long after they pulled it....put in a casino and sent it to do Mexico and Alaska....I think. Then they refurbed some other ships for Hawaii.....I never understood why they didnt leave the Star there....and send the others else where.

[mbisson]

I never understood why they didnt leave the Star there....and send the others else where.

 

I think it was because the Star wasn't American Flagged, meaning it would have to continue making a Fanning Island run. (to me Fanning would be a plus but I guess to many it isn't/wasn't.

 

The US flagged ships didn't have to make a foreign stop and could do the port intensive inter island itineraries. (but I couldn't quite figure out why they did a reflag on the Sky instead of the Star)

 

One little sidebar that many have forgotten or didn't realize---the original plan for the aloha was to have it do 3 & 4 day cruises. I still think that may have been successful for vacationers who wanted to do some time in the islands and a cruise, but didn't have time for a full week (or more) on a ship. Of course, that's just a guess but right or wrong I wish they would have tried it.

[flag fan]

I loved my trip on the Pride of Hawaii and was really sorry to see her go. The crew was great and it was a fantastic way to see Hawaii. I suspect one of the main factors was the higher cost of running a ship with an American crew and, thus, higher personnel costs and without a casino--so less revenue. If they can make more money with the same ship in foreign waters, they'll do it; hence, the repositioning of the Pride of Hawaii to Europe (as the Norwegian Jade). I've seen a lot of cruise line flyers on big discounts for European trips, to I wonder if that market is declining as a revenue source and we see more ships move back to cruises from U.S. ports--less expensive and, therefore, more popular as the economy declines. At least, this is my scenario for a return of the Pride of Hawaii to the U.S.