Welcome to Cruise Talk the Internet's most popular discussion forum dedicated to cruising. Stop by Cruise Talk anytime to post a message or find out what your fellow passengers and industry insiders are saying about a particular ship, cruise line or destination.
>>> Reader Reviews >>> CruisePage.com Photo Gallery >>> Join Our Cruise Club.
Latest News...Norwegian Cruise Line celebrated the debut of the all-new Norwegian Aqua to Port Canaveral, Fla. on Saturday, April 26, 2025, where she commenced her inaugural season of round-trip Caribbean cruises as the newest ship in port. This past weekend, approximately 3,700 guests embarked on Norwegian Aqua's first week-long voyage to the Caribbean from Port Canaveral, Fla., her initial homeport ...
Latest News...Royal Caribbean Group (NYSE: RCL) today reported first quarter Earnings per Share ("EPS") of $2.70 and Adjusted EPS of $2.71. These results were better than the company's guidance due to stronger than expected pricing on close-in demand and lower costs mainly due to timing. Royal Caribbean said that it is increasing its full year 2025 Adjusted EPS guidance to $14.55 to $15.55...
Latest News...Holland America Line announced itineraries for its two Grand Voyages sailing in 2027, offering guests the choice to embark on an ambitious 129-day circumnavigation of the globe on the 2027 Grand World Voyage or a 70-day, region-specific in-depth exploration on the Grand South America & Antarctica Voyage. As revealed today by the cruise line's president Beth Bodensteiner to guests on board...
You have to be slightly impressed considering where they came from. As recently as the late 80s they were still considered by many to be the bottom feeders.................I'm now going to get my share certs out of the safe and hug them a bit !!!!!
quote:Originally posted by Fairsky:No one can deny that CCL is a smart and profitable company. When I consider them through the lens of business, I respect them. It's when I consider them through the lens of a ship enthusiast, cruise lover, and design buff that they fail miserably.
Someone here is looking at this like an adult, I see.
quote:Originally posted by mike sa:But it did strike me, Carnival made a big enough net profit this last quarter (yes get it in 3 months) to outright pay for Oasis of the Seas CASH ! No loans nothing, so in 2 years they could afford a fleet of 8 of the buggers - in middle of a recession with swine flu etc thrown in !You have to be slightly impressed considering where they came from. As recently as the late 80s they were still considered by many to be the bottom feeders.................I'm now going to get my share certs out of the safe and hug them a bit !!!!!
Your statistics are very interesting Mike. In fact they are astonishing. Yet they are unsuprising.
Cam J
Pointing out the obvious, the tens of thousands of guests that cruise in their ships every month are more than likely not any of the above except maybe cruise lovers. I gave Carnival my business for the best part of ten years and couldn't have cared less about their ship design, although I did/do love cruise ships. I never had a single problem with the Fantasy- or Destiny-class in their layout or decor. After a decade I just moved on to another cruise line, tried out the rest, and never looked back.
quote:Originally posted by Rex:Someone here is looking at this like an adult, I see.
Lets hope they do not end up like General Motors. They were at the top of the game from 1946 till 1980 and then lost a %point of market share every year until bankruptcy. Meanwhile competitors outdid them as they got complacent and former customers would never go back.
Well, none of the mainstream lines is really attractive 'trough the lens of a ship enthusiast'. However, don't forget that Carnival has - compared to the other mainstream operators - it's fair share of 'interesting' designs. They built QM2, the new Seabourn ships and don't forget that Aida is now also part of Carnival.
Carnival runs a tight ship, and they insulate themselves from the economy due to that. How they do business is in no small part because of who runs it, and the institutional memory he brings with it.
I think Carnival could design different ships, and they have, if they are so motivated. But it is a business more than a cruise line, odd as it sounds. Their motivations are firmly rooted in the bottom line.
QM2? She is a demonstration of sorts. A pure bred Ocean Liner, a good exercise to conduct. A ship that basically carries the credentials of the brand associated with ocean travel. And from a long-term perspective, a perfectly justifiable ship to build given how they'll use her.
I'll be most curious to hear about the Carnival Dream, and see what the real feedback proves to be. If they can continue to up-size their existing designs, they won't budge. If they feel they are getting blow-back, they'll start to innovate. There has to be a money reason before they'll try something.
quote:Originally posted by NWLB:A lot of people eat at McDonalds every day, and think it is just yummy. That doesn't make it the best food even in its segment of the industry. However, it is insanely able to make money and keep folks coming back.Carnival runs a tight ship, a
Carnival runs a tight ship, a
McDonalds is known for its consistency. People who are frightened of the new return for the same experience over again with no surprises. Their costs and operations are down to 1/100 of a cent and 1/10 of a second. Me: I hate it and the food gives me indigestion consistently.
Princess is known for a consistent product, like Carnival and people return since there are no bad surprises. NCL has fallen down in the past since the food, entertainment, and service was sometimes good, sometimes not.
quote:Originally posted by mike sa:You have to be slightly impressed considering where they came from. As recently as the late 80s they were still considered by many to be the bottom feeders
You have to hand it to Carnival, when it comes to making money, there are few companies in the world (in any industry) that know how to do it better.
It is not as though he said Carnival is a terrible company, just that it is not interesting to him as a ship enthusiast. That seems fairly mature to me.
quote:Originally posted by dmwnc1:I never had a single problem with the Fantasy- or Destiny-class in their layout or decor. After a decade I just moved on to another cruise line, tried out the rest, and never looked back.
(Well I have never been on a FANTASY-class ship, but I really do not like the DESTINY-class ships at all, or their offshoots. DREAM might be the first decent 100,000+ GT Carnival ship for me.)
But aren't we talking about more than just Carnival Cruise Lines here, anyway? Carnival is not just about Carnival but about lots of other cruise lines too. I think about 99% of the cruising public should be able to find something to their taste within the Carnival "empire."
quote:Originally posted by Ernst:They built QM2, the new Seabourn ships and don't forget that Aida is now also part of Carnival.
quote:Originally posted by NWLB:QM2? She is a demonstration of sorts. A pure bred Ocean Liner, a good exercise to conduct. A ship that basically carries the credentials of the brand associated with ocean travel. And from a long-term perspective, a perfectly justifiable ship to build given how they'll use her.
Indeed, she came at just the right time - I don't know how much she'd cost to build now but it would be a lot more.
quote:Originally posted by desirod7:Lets hope they do not end up like General Motors. They were at the top of the game from 1946 till 1980 and then lost a %point of market share every year until bankruptcy. Meanwhile competitors outdid them as they got complacent and former customers would never go back.
I don't think Mickey would ever get too complacent, like those idiots who ran GM.
I agree with you to a point, but I do think that Carnival has had some interesting new designs.
quote:Originally posted by Ernst:Well, none of the mainstream lines is really attractive 'trough the lens of a ship enthusiast'.
Well, none of the mainstream lines is really attractive 'trough the lens of a ship enthusiast'.
Isn't that really a matter of opinion?
And playing devils advocate.
The idea that Carnival is not innovative and RCI is, is continually talked about. In my opion RCI builds the innovative ships, not always but fairly often, Carnival does build innovative ships occasionally but is more innovative in terms of itinerarys etc. , Middle East, Far East, Indian Ocean etc etc.
Granted I have only cruised with RCI twice, once on Adventure and once on Brilliance, the actual ships were lovely, the actual cruise expereince was not IMHO as good as you can get elsewhere (food, service, quality of shows, cleanliness etc etc) but the ship itself did make up for some of it, it wasn't bad, just not as good. Celebrity is one of my favourite lines, prior to Mou. Roux parting company the food and service was exceptional (for the price paid) but since it is definately not as good, but love the ships.
But here is thing (SORRY FOR BEING LONGWINDED), does RCI build grand innovative ships because they have to in order to stay in the game ? If they didn't would they simply not be able to compete ? Or be much smaller ? And then hence their current financial position ?
quote:Originally posted by mike sa:We always seem to get back to the RCI vs Carnival thing which wa snot the intention of the post but as we are there already...............And playing devils advocate.The idea that Carnival is not innovative and RCI is, is continually talked about.But here is thing (SORRY FOR BEING LONGWINDED), does RCI build grand innovative ships because they have to in order to stay in the game ? If they didn't would they simply not be able to compete ? Or be much smaller ? And then hence their current financial position ?
The idea that Carnival is not innovative and RCI is, is continually talked about.But here is thing (SORRY FOR BEING LONGWINDED), does RCI build grand innovative ships because they have to in order to stay in the game ? If they didn't would they simply not be able to compete ? Or be much smaller ? And then hence their current financial position ?
Somehow we always get back to this Carnival vs Royal Caribbean thing its geting old. Ive been here a couple of months now and its just crazy. I cant imagine how many times old timers have seen this argument in the past years!
Anyway you pose some good questions Mike. What I do know though is that Carnival's buisness plan is working for them and RCL's buisness plan well........ lets look at the numbers.
quote:Originally posted by dmwnc1:Not everything at McDonald's consist of dead cow on a bun.
Absolutely, you can have a dead fish in a bun!
(What a great quote!)
[ 10-03-2009: Message edited by: Malcolm @ cruisepage ]
quote:Originally posted by Cam J:Somehow we always get back to this Carnival vs Royal Caribbean thing its geting old. Ive been here a couple of months now and its just crazy. I cant imagine how many times old timers have seen this argument in the past years! Anyway you pose some good questions Mike. What I do know though is that Carnival's buisness plan is working for them and RCL's buisness plan well........ lets look at the numbers.Cam J
I know. It is getting annoying. When are people just going to realize that RCI blows Carnival out of the water in just about everyway?? jk I am just playing with you. I harsh on Carnival but I still like them.
You should have seen CT a while back, everything always ended up, somehow, being about Cunard.
quote:Originally posted by Cunard Fan:You should have seen CT a while back, everything always ended up, somehow, being about Cunard.
quote:Originally posted by desirod7:McDonalds is known for its consistency. People who are frightened of the new return for the same experience over again with no surprises. Their costs and operations are down to 1/100 of a cent and 1/10 of a second. Me: I hate it and the food gives me indigestion consistently.Princess is known for a consistent product, like Carnival and people return since there are no bad surprises. NCL has fallen down in the past since the food, entertainment, and service was sometimes good, sometimes not.
That pretty much sums up why we cruise Princess once a year, then split the second one between Carnival and HAL, they have products we like and have not done anything that would mean we don't want to sail with them...Though the Epic is kind of calling me right now.
quote:Originally posted by dougnewman: quote riginally posted by Rex: "Someone here is looking at this like an adult, I see."To care about anything other than money is childish?It is not as though he said Carnival is a terrible company, just that it is not interesting to him as a ship enthusiast. That seems fairly mature to me.
To care about anything other than money is childish?
I think if you look at it, that was a complement, you mention Carnival on here and the first post is almost bound to be that Carnival sucks, now if it isn't, then let me say I liked Fairsky's reply.
One interesting thing, with the run up in oil prices CCL (well actually Mickey) cam out and said "no fuel surcharges", now yes the fuel surcharges are tiny in comparison to the rest of the cruise cost, but there is something physiological about them that people hate.
By coming out and saying that he forced RCCL/NCL/MSC to not add them, hurting their bottom line.
In the end, as other have said, CCL does a great job at covering a lot of market segments and providing what those cruisers want, are the innovative, no, do they keep moving forward adding new (for them) amenities, certainly, on that note, I don't see the GM reference as being quite correct, maybe Ford.
quote:Originally posted by jetwet1:I don't see the GM reference as being quite correct, maybe Ford.
Carnival Corp's business model resembles Alfred Sloans GM in it's heyday (1940s to 1980). A car for every purpose and pocketbook was a motto used.
Carnival's could be a ship for every pocketbook and purpose GM used their 'ladder of success' that kept buyers within the 'GM family' by offering the most diverse line-up in the industry. They started w/value leader Chevrolet (the Carnival Cruise Line of the industry) and ended with Cadillac (Seabourn) in the luxury catagory. Pontiac, Oldsmobile and Buick each had their niche at that time as do Carnival's various cruise divisions today .
[ 10-05-2009: Message edited by: lasuvidaboy ]
quote:Originally posted by lasuvidaboy:Carnival's could be a ship for every pocketbook and purpose GM used their 'ladder of success' that kept buyers within the 'GM family' by offering the most diverse line-up in the industry. They started w/value leader Chevrolet (the Carnival Cruise Line of the industry) and ended with Cadillac (Seabourn) in the luxury catagory. Pontiac, Oldsmobile and Buick each had their niche at that time as do Carnival's various cruise divisions today .[ 10-05-2009: Message edited by: lasuvidaboy ]
Another reason the GM comparison to Carnival has been appropriate is because for decades, GM used the same platforms for similar models across their brands, much like the Vistas and Destiny-class vessels of today.
Rich
quote:Originally posted by jetwet1:I think if you look at it, that was a complement, you mention Carnival on here and the first post is almost bound to be that Carnival sucks
I will admit that some other companies have more interesting ships, on the other hand is anyone better at running a cruise line? I don't think so.
For me, Carnival the brand does not really appeal. On the other hand Cunard suits me very well and HAL and Princess are fine too.
Ford is perhaps more like Royal Caribbean, both of them sort of being perpetually in second place and as Ford tried to emulate GM, Royal Caribbean has tried to emulate Carnival in having a wide portfolio of brands for every taste and budget but has met with mixed success.
quote:Originally posted by lasuvidaboy:They started w/value leader Chevrolet (the Carnival Cruise Line of the industry) and ended with Cadillac (Seabourn) in the luxury catagory.
Ultimate Bulletin BoardTM 6.1.0.3
More Vacation & Cruise Specials...