From what I can see, the artists impressions look quite nice indeed.

(Mec1, poor spelling and typo's are my speciality - see your 9th word).

[ 02-14-2006: Message edited by: Malcolm @ cruisepage ]

According to my numbers QV will only be 13 feet longer than the other vista-class ships, and 7,000 tons larger. Draft, beam, and height will be the same.

Bigger kitchens and more big suites, I recall, to maximize income. Same ship.

Sometimes I wonder what RCI, MSC, or Star/NCL would do if they had CCL's bankroll? CCL is a very profitable but totally uninspiring company.

I think Carnival are very careful with their money. I totally agree about them being uninspiring, although Carnival Destiny (the biggest ship for a while) and QM2 were obviously high points.

O.K. IT IS ODD that they use the same type of ship for several brands of the Carnival group - and I understand that e.g. some RCCL ships are nicer than most Carnival ships - but this is not the point - Carnival is a different line than RCCL and also RCCL has also quite similar designs now for many years - so where is the fundamental difference between the fleet policy of the

Carnival group with the Vista class, Destiny class and the Grand Princess class

RCCL with the Voyager Class (& stretched versions - somehow similar to the development of the Destiny Class), the Millenium / Radiance of the Seas class and Challenger class on the horizon

NCL - with the 'modified' Superstar Virgo class

and MSC with this evolved Mistral ships - only now coming up with something different.

(this is very simplified and exaggerated - but I guess you understand what I mean)

I am not discussing which ships are nicer and which are not so nice - but ALL major cruise lines - NOT ONLY CARNIVAL - have more or less only one or two designs (I now neglect exceptions like QM2 or PoA) which they were building during the last decade - and continue to do so - one could actually say that the Carnival group presently builds ships of at least three designs - which is more than what the (smaller) competitors are doing.

[ 02-14-2006: Message edited by: Ernst ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Waynaro:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Ernst:
[qb].. but if you put MILLY and RADIANCE together, I doubt anyone will know the simiarities.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PamM:
So exciting that I have not yet opened the Cunarder which arrived the other day, Fri/Sat?..

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Waynaro:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Ernst:
[qb]RCCL with the Voyager Class (& stretched versions - somehow similar to the development of the Destiny Class), the Millenium / Radiance of the Seas class and Challenger class on the horizonWhat makes the FREEDOM-class different than the VOYAGER-class is the fact that there are new innovations (bigger rockwall, surf pool, waterpark, and hangover board jacuzzis) rather than just a stretch. The Millenium and Radiance class ships are basically the same mechanical wise, but the appear and the way they are designed are completely different. If you put a HAL version of Vista-class and the ARCADIA together, I bet anyone can tell its the same, but if you put MILLY and RADIANCE together, I doubt anyone will know the simiarities.

and MSC with this evolved Mistral ships - only now coming up with something different.MSC didn't plan this though. It just happened Festival went down and they picked up the trios because they basically are the same. Yes, you can say Aponte played safe and bought an existing design, but he surely didn't just take the MUSICA design and lengthened it.[/QB]

---

My summmary is certainly exaggerated (there are relevant differences between the Millenium class and the Radiance class) - but 'innovations' like a bigger rock climbing wall (! this is not even a new feature but just a bigger version) and hangover pools (nice ideas) are no fundamental changes in the design of the ship.

quote:

---

Waynaro wrote:
It just happened Festival went down and they picked up the trios because they basically are the same.

---

MSC Crociere picked up two ships: EUROPEAN VISION (now MSC ARMONIA) and EUROPEAN STARS (now MSC SINFONIA). MISTRAL was eventually acquired by Pullmantur (now GRAND MISTRAL).

******

So far it looks quite impressive but artist stetches always tend to make it more impressive than the actual reality once constructed.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fairsky:
You'd think with their boatloads (literally) of cash, Carnival Corp would spend a bit extra on designing unique and stunning ships. Sometimes I wonder what RCI, MSC, or Star/NCL would do if they had CCL's bankroll? CCL is a very profitable but totally uninspiring company.

---

In the wonderful(?) world of business, only one thing matters: profit. Maximized profit gained as the result of using a certain formula must be replicated at every opportunity. Therefore, to construct a fleet of one-offs is certain suicide because of the expense incurred in reinventing the wheel every time. Every successful business does it this way, whether it's McDonald's, Carnival or General Motors. OK, GM's a bad example, given that their profits and market share continue to plummet. It's their own fault. They left two critical ingredients out of the formula: quality and reliability. Otherwise their products, especially during the '80's, were cookie-cutter vehicles.

When you look at it this way, even RCI is doing the same thing. The Voyager class was the basis for the Freedom class. The Radiance class isn't that much different, and now the Genesis "class" is equally similar to the others. Only small variations to the formula are permitted. Otherwise, the company could be taking too much risk, and of course that spells doomsday for the stock price, the only thing that matters, apparently.

First, consider this. Since 1995 when Carnival Destiny was launched Carnival has basically only had two ship designs--Destiny-class and the Spirit-class. Granted, the Destinty class has been modified, lengthened, and tweeked...but it's basically the same design from 1995.

In that same time period RCI has had the Vision-class, Voyager-class, Radiance-class, and now Genesis-class designs introduced. While related, each of these classes are unique and innovative.

Secondly, RCI, unlike CCL, does not shamelessly re-funnel the same ship designs for its brands. No one looks at a Celebrity ship and a Royal Caribbean ship and thinks they are the same. RCI does share some design elements and hardware, but they recognize the benefit of separating brand identities.

CCL, on the other hand, has nearly identical vista ships for HAL, Cunard, P&O, and Destiny class ships for Carnival and Costa, and is now moving Grand-class ships to European brands too.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thad:
Fairsky,
I saw that she is only to be 964.5 feet long, I thought it had been reported that she was to be 990 feet long.

Thad

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by BigUFan:

When you look at it this way, even RCI is doing the same thing. The Voyager class was the basis for the Freedom class. The Radiance class isn't that much different, and now the Genesis "class" is equally similar to the others. Only small variations to the formula are permitted. Otherwise, the company could be taking too much risk, and of course that spells doomsday for the stock price, the only thing that matters, apparently.

---

If a cruise line deploys a radically different vessel that is a huge success, they run the risk of instantly making the rest of their fleet obsolete and less desirable. How do you convince potential customers that the old tonnage is just as good as the brand new ship that's being touted?

This was a major pain for Carnival back when they were trying to market the CARNIVALE and MARDI GRAS along with the HOLIDAY Class and FANTASY Class ships.

quote:

---

Originally posted by BigUFan:
The Voyager class was the basis for the Freedom class. The Radiance class isn't that much different, and now the Genesis "class" is equally similar to the others.

---

Although they may look similar externally, the Radiance class is VERY different to the Eagle class, even if were discount the size difference.

The Radiance class are externally focused; they have tons of glass offering sea views everywhere. In fact they have the best connection with the sea of any mega-ship that I have been on. On the other hand, the Eagle class are internally focused on the Royal Promenade. The Eagle class are truly floating resorts, they are ‘fun ships’, where as the Radiance are a little more sophisticated and tasteful. Many of the public rooms are quite different. The only similarity is some of the décors style, which is essentially the RCI’s branding.

I agree that FOS is essentially just a stretched Eagle class. However, we do not know as yet, how similar she will be internally. I suspect you are right in this case. As for Genesis, apart from the fact that she looks similar to all RCI ships, we have no idea how similar or different her interiors will be.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Linerrich:

If a cruise line deploys a radically different vessel that is a huge success, they run the risk of instantly making the rest of their fleet obsolete and less desirable. How do you convince potential customers that the old tonnage is just as good as the brand new ship that's being touted?

This was a major pain for Carnival back when they were trying to market the CARNIVALE and MARDI GRAS along with the HOLIDAY Class and FANTASY Class ships.

Rich

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Linerrich:
How do you convince potential customers that the old tonnage is just as good as the brand new ship that's being touted?

---

Sell it cheaper. You can also deploy it in parts of the world that are short of tonnage. 5 years or so ago, the uK only got the older American ships. The new fleet members stayed in the Carib. It's still partly true; we have Norwegian Dream and Legend of the Seas.

Of course, upgrading old tonnage is the ultimate answer, if you do not want to sell it.

[ 02-15-2006: Message edited by: Malcolm @ cruisepage ]