chengkp75

It is a decision as to whether or not they want to dedicate man/hours to maintaining the equipment, and whether or not their insurance club wants the additional risk of the added laundry machines. It is a simple risk/reward calculation. It's just like the decision as to whether or not to have coffee makers in every cabin. Some lines do, some don't. Some lines have them on certain itineraries, and not others. Why? Because if the line provides the coffee makers, they have to inspect and test them on a regular basis, for safety, and this takes up a massive amount of man/hours. Does the reward of giving each passenger their own coffee maker outweigh the cost of the units and the time required to inspect/test them taken away from other maintenance tasks, perhaps on more important equipment? They do, but given the limited size of technical departments onboard, it becomes a question of where do we better utilize our resources.

I've seen a couple of small tankers go in, and the MSC Cargo Passion III was the container ship. She is very small (1000 TEU containers, opposed to the Dali's 10,000), so her draft was not a problem, and a lot of her deck containers were refrigerated, so high value. I think the hope was to bring in some car carriers, but I don't think that happened.

And, I said the line "generally" eats the increase, perhaps I should have said "always". I have never heard of an increase (except for Panama Canal cruises), but can't say it has never happened. And, the point I was trying to make, in response to the OP's question, was that the estimated per passenger taxes and fees could be higher on the second week of the B2B because it is not a school vacation week, while the first week was (higher demand on first week). Same total taxes and fees, but with less passengers, the per passenger taxes and fees are higher, for the same cruise.

Yes, the rebates of taxes and fees is never very large. For Rocketman, note the use of "estimates" and "quoted amount".

Okay, here's an example. Let's say there is a cruise that has total taxes and fees of $50,000. Historically, the cruise line knows that 2000 passengers have booked this cruise, so they set the taxes and fees at $25/passenger. Now, if only 1800 passengers actually take the cruise, the cruise line does not ask for more money from each passenger ($2.78), they just pay the difference to the ports/countries. If, however, 2200 passengers take the cruise, the cruise line will often rebate the $2.27/passenger to their onboard account. Happens all the time, and is particularly noticeable on Panama Canal cruises where the taxes and fees are especially high, so the actual passenger count makes a big difference. They are actually required to rebate the reduction in taxes and fees, since this is a "pass through" charge (i.e. it goes from the passenger to the third party that charges the taxes/fees).

If the taxes per passenger were to increase (too few passengers), the line generally eats the increase. If they go down (more passengers), there is an adjustment to the onboard account rebating the difference.

I never said they were in compliance. I said I couldn't prove that they weren't. I'll bet someone can. And, from what I can see, the only thing the software will do is allow them to possibly violate regulations closer to the borders of the regulated zones. It also takes any personal responsibility away from those people who are designated to ensure compliance by putting it on the software. "Well, OneOcean didn't tell me that we were entering a regulated space, so I thought it was okay".

No, their probation period ended in April, 2022, having just been found in violation of that probation in Jan, 2022. I have no proof that they are in violation, but without a seismic change in corporate culture (and Mickey Arison still heads the board), and the c-suite officers are all long term Carnival employees that were there when the violations and probation violations and compliance plan "gaslighting" was going on, so I don't foresee that the environmental compliance outlook has shifted 180 degrees, let alone adopted a completely foreign (to them) culture. Plus, they've rolled the "Chief Climate Officer" into the jobs of the President and CEO, meaning that it does not get the attention the job needs. Sorry, this "software" program is mere window dressing.

What the OP does not realize is that the "taxes" are not taxes placed on his/her purchase, but taxes paid by the ship to the port. Now, many of these taxes are fixed for the ship, so that fixed tax amount is divided up by the number of passengers onboard to get a "per passenger" amount of taxes and fees. Now, the identical cruise the next week, may have significantly more or less passengers historically booked than the first week, and this will affect the number of passengers that the fixed tax or fee is divided into. In many cases, when actual occupancy on the ship is vastly different (either up or down) from historical data, the "taxes and fees" get adjusted once the cruise starts.

And, what is this going to do to make Carnival Corp any more environmentally compliant than they are now (which is not saying much)? Not much. Sure, it tells them exactly when they cross into a regulated zone, but does this automatically shut off the incinerators, or change over fuels? Nope. Does this stop them from venting fluorocarbons (refrigerants), as they've done in the past, since this is a worldwide restriction? Nope. Does this stop them from bypassing oil/water separators in discharging waste water, again a worldwide restriction? Nope. All of these things Carnival has been convicted of doing in the past, and continued to do while on probation from that conviction. Many shipping companies manage to be environmentally compliant without relying on navigational software to remind them when to "watch out for regulators" by being compliant all the time, even when not required. That commitment would make me applaud Carnival far more than this showpiece. While I see that the "PR" in PR Newswire is for "press release", in my opinion, this entire piece of "environmentally compliant software" is nothing but the other "pr" "public relations".

If this is as widespread as reported, its unusual. I don't track what ships are where, or what itineraries they are doing, so I'll ask a couple of questions. Was the ship recently in bad weather, rolling and pitching badly? Is it where there has been a recent major change in the temperature where she is cruising? Either condition could cause widespread emptying of the deck drain U-traps, allowing sewer gas to back up into the ship. The crew should be going around to all the areas that have deck drains, but where the drains don't regularly see water (like drains in electrical lockers and fan rooms where the drain is for containing leaks only), and pouring water down to refill the trap, which will stop the smell almost immediately.

Wait, after saying that you will never sail NCL again, and complaining about the condition of the ship, a week after you got off the ship you are still tracking it?

While I personally have nothing but contempt for Schettino (and refuse to acknowledge his rank), there was nothing in his professional history that predicted that he would act in this fashion in an emergency. Until you are face to face with the beast, you never know whether you will run into the fire or away from it, regardless of how much training you have. Some of the best personnel during training and drills will pack up in the real thing, and some who shy away during training will become heroic in an emergency.

Not much, but I think it might be a barge for supplies.

I can't help it.