NCL Won't Build 3rd F3; Is Bigger Still Better?

NCL announced today that they won't exercise an option to build the third in their upcoming 150,000-ton, 4,200-passenger, F3 series of ships.

Cruise lines commonly get the option to order extra vessels in a series when they sign shipyard contracts (they make a firm contract to purchase two, for instance, and then "reserve" shipyard space, with the option, if they decide to build another). Just as commonly, they tend to exercise the options. In fact, it's almost unheard of not to.

We're wondering if this move is the beginning of a new trend, or simply an anomaly.

Is this a good thing? What do you think? Is bigger still better?

we don't like the bigger ships, my traveling partner is my mother and she has had numerous operations for knees and back issues. She can't handle the bigger ships due to all the walking to get to and from places, we even have to limit the shore excursions for this same reason. I am personally happy that they have decided to not go with the larger ship, one of the reasons we only go on NCL is due to the smaller sized ships. But this is just my opinion - everyone has there likes and dislikes! :)

Although I enjoyed cruising on the Voyager class ships of RCL, I don't think I'd want to go any bigger than that. Even on Voyager you do lose some of the feeling of being at sea.

I'm not sure though that NCL's failure to pick up the option for a third ship refelects a decision to get away from the larger ships...my feeling is that NCL is in some financial difficulties and although they have picked up a new partner with more cash, I wonder if the infusion of cash came with the requirement that NCL pull in on it's expansion program and spend time getting their present line in order and generating more profit before they plan any more large ship acquisitions.

From what I've heard NCLA is bleeding red ink and if you look at most of NCL's upcoming fall and winter cruises they are just not demanding the prices that similar RCL cruises command.

As long as the service and food is on par with the smaller ships in the fleet (comparing Genesis to something like the Radiance Class) and the cruise experience is just as spectacular, why not build bigger!!

Only draw back......more and more people around pools, more complainers, more rude people, and maybe even some lines.

Mixed feelings here!! I will try Genesis Class Ships and then make my final opinion. I love the Freedom Class and the Voyager Class....so odds are for me, the bigger they are, the better time I have!

I want them build ships of all sizes. I am disheartened that the major lines are only building 80'000+ ton ships (which I classify as large). I feel it would be healthier for the industry to have ships of various sizes.

I am happy that Princess is making a commitment to the 30'000 ton R ships. A nice contrast to their mega-ships.

...and we get to it at the end of the news piece is the fact that bigger-bigger-bigger is not necessarily on tap for all lines. I find that refreshing!

Best,

Carolyn

Carolyn Spencer Brown

Editor

Cruise Critic

I want them build ships of all sizes. I am disheartened that the major lines are only building 80'000+ ton ships (which I classify as large). I feel it would be healthier for the industry to have ships of various sizes.

 

I am happy that Princess is making a commitment to the 30'000 ton R ships. A nice contrast to their mega-ships.

As long as the service and food is on par with the smaller ships in the fleet (comparing Genesis to something like the Radiance Class) and the cruise experience is just as spectacular, why not build bigger!!

 

Only draw back......more and more people around pools, more complainers, more rude people, and maybe even some lines.

 

Mixed feelings here!! I will try Genesis Class Ships and then make my final opinion. I love the Freedom Class and the Voyager Class....so odds are for me, the bigger they are, the better time I have!

Your second paragraph pretty well nailed it. It is like comparing a large city to a small town, and both have their attractions.

I will probably be trying NCL in the near future since RCI seems to be running from those of us who live in the "fly over" part of the country. The only ports on the east coast convenient to us are Jacksonville and Charleston.

I think ship size depends on itinerary. If I was opting to sail the Carribean with only a few stops, and just cruising for a relaxing week, I would opt for a larger vessel (not mega) with more activities, amentities, and more places to "hang out." However, if I were doing a port intensive cruise with a lot of excursions, I would prefer a smaller vessel where I could get to what and where I want quickly. In other words, I would not want to have to manuver around 4 or 5 thousand people and walk several football fields just to grab a meal. Another concern with these mega ships, what will the cruise lines have to do to attract enough people to fill them. Will they because massive convention centers where the masses will get lost in the shuffle. For those who read these boards on a regular basis, large groups are already overtaking some individual cruises. Could you imagine being on a ship with a convention of 3,000 people and not being part of that group? How cheap will the cabins become to fill the spots? All and all, I prefer a nice mid to large ship (1,800 to 2,000) where I can feel "at home" after a day or so.

Barbara

Okay, and I will say right up front that I personally much prefer a mid-size big ship over a mega-size big ship but: if Carnival's Bob Dickinson (former prez) has long preached that cruise lines' biggest competitors were not other cruise lines but instead -- Las Vegas -- doesn't he make a point? Vegas is one of the most popular places in the world! Hotels/Resorts get bigger and bigger. They still seem to fill up. Why wouldn't cruise lines enjoy similar mass growth?

Not sure of the answer, just asking the question.

Carolyn

Carolyn Spencer Brown

Editor

Cruise Critic

I think ship size depends on itinerary. If I was opting to sail the Carribean with only a few stops, and just cruising for a relaxing week, I would opt for a larger vessel (not mega) with more activities, amentities, and more places to "hang out." However, if I were doing a port intensive cruise with a lot of excursions, I would prefer a smaller vessel where I could get to what and where I want quickly. In other words, I would not want to have to manuver around 4 or 5 thousand people and walk several football fields just to grab a meal. Another concern with these mega ships, what will the cruise lines have to do to attract enough people to fill them. Will they because massive convention centers where the masses will get lost in the shuffle. For those who read these boards on a regular basis, large groups are already overtaking some individual cruises. Could you imagine being on a ship with a convention of 3,000 people and not being part of that group? How cheap will the cabins become to fill the spots? All and all, I prefer a nice mid to large ship (1,800 to 2,000) where I can feel "at home" after a day or so.

Barbara

I was in Las Vegas in June, the size of the resorts there on the strip is unbelievable. There is also a massive amount of new construction happening on the strip at this time. I was Las Vegas in the middle of the week, I arrived on a Tuesday and departed on Friday, and the place felt crowded, I can't imagine being there over a weekend. Where do all of the people come from?

I have been on seven cruises. The ship's sizes ranged from 23,000 GRT 740 passengers to a fully booked (4200 passengers) Freedom of the Seas. I have also been on a 46,000 GRT 1450 passengers ship, two Panamax ships and two post-Panamax ships, including the Navigator of the Seas.

In fact, I sailed the exact same itinerary on the Freedom of the Seas as I did on the Navigator of the Seas. While I enjoy the extra amenities that the bigger ships have to offer (especially the H2O Zone on the Freedom of the Seas), tendering on the Freedom OTS was much worse than tendering on the Navigator OTS.

The problem is, that as the ships get bigger, the tenders remain the same size and the number of tender ports on the ship remains the same (two per side). The Freedom OTS needs to have three tender ports per side and Genesis, which I am guessing will also have only two tender ports per side, should have at least three, and possibly four tender ports per side.

As a result of my experience on the Freedom OTS, I will only consider itineraries for ships that are bigger than the Voyager class of ships if the ship docks at all ports that I want to get off at.

These four photos show the tender line at Grand Cayman ...

While the line moved reasonably fast, we ended up floating for about 15 minutes about 100 meters from the side of the ship waiting for a tender port, on the ship, to open up so we could re-board the ship.

I have cruised on 70,000 to 160,000(FOS & Liberty Nov.10) and I much prefer the bigger ships..while I agree that you may have more lines(especially with tendering and elevators),my thing is options & amenities.We cruised on the Enchantment in April,and while she was a nice ship,we were bored to death without the Royal Promenade & ice-show,the 19 bars & lounges,etc...we also were on the Disney Wonder last year on a 3 nighter,and she was terrific-at only 82,000 tons,I thought I'd be bored,but she had plenty to do(best production shows I've EVER seen!).....we will definitely try Genesis and the new NCL 150,000 ton ships...BTW,I'm the same way with hotels-I prefer a sprawling resort with 50+ acres,3-4 pools,several restaurants,shops,lots of lounges/bars,etc.,than a small intimate B & B......On smaller ships,you get better service,maybe better food,and maybe even a better "cruise ship" feeling rather than a "Vegas" style ship-but we still love the Voyager/Freedom class mega ships where you will NEVER be bored and still find some solitude if you just look for it(I.E.,the Viking Crown Lounge is wonderful during the day,even if a bit bright & big w/great views!)

Big Al

I'm not sure though that NCL's failure to pick up the option for a third ship refelects a decision to get away from the larger ships...my feeling is that NCL is in some financial difficulties and although they have picked up a new partner with more cash, I wonder if the infusion of cash came with the requirement that NCL pull in on it's expansion program and spend time getting their present line in order and generating more profit before they plan any more large ship acquisitions.

 

From what I've heard NCLA is bleeding red ink and if you look at most of NCL's upcoming fall and winter cruises they are just not demanding the prices that similar RCL cruises command.

I think we may be seeing the begining stages of what will eventually be a business contraction. Regardless of size, cruise lines need passengers to fill their cabins and the more cabins there are to fill, the cheaper most cabins become and the greater the pressure to cut costs and push onboard spending, a never ending cycle.

Apollo Management, part owner of NCL (and Oceonia) seems to acquire significant financial interests in a huge range of different businesses sectors, on the cusp of a downturn. Because Apollo is private capital, the details of these transactions and the identity of their shareholders are not public information.

We have been on the Disney Magic, Grand Princess, Liberty of the Seas, Norwegin Star and Sun. We are looking at cruising Europe next. My wife and I are both in agreement that if we are on a 12 to 15 day cruise, it better be a bigger ship with alot to do onboard.

I ,personally, love big crusie ships. But RCI is planning to build 220,000 (i hope i put the right tonnage) and i think that is a little too big.

Yeah, and I really liked the QM2 being the largest in the world.

As I read my cruise brochures, the bigger ships cost more to cruise on(most of them) and I think they should stick to the ships that are the size of the NORWEGIAN DAWN and PEARl..

We have been on the Disney Magic, Grand Princess, Liberty of the Seas, Norwegin Star and Sun. We are looking at cruising Europe next. My wife and I are both in agreement that if we are on a 12 to 15 day cruise, it better be a bigger ship with alot to do onboard.

What's the point of taking a European cruise if you go on a mega-ship with malls, rock climbing walls, surf parks, etc.?

The whole point of going to Europe is to see Europe - not to bring the Mall of America with you.

Might as well go to the Caribbean (or Las Vegas) again...

:cool:

The absolute best way to see Europe is on one of the small (100-200) passenger river cruises! You really get the total experience that way, especially if you don't cruise on one that has been chartered for only US citizens!

I travel solo, so I'm sure that makes a difference in my view. I prefer ships with much smaller capacity (up to 1000 pax). Remember taking a New England cruise on a Carnival ship. Don't remember the name. Actually have tried to forget the whole experience! Each time we stopped at a port, the entire place was flooded with us tourists. Luckily, I had been to most of the ports before, so it wasn't entirely ruined for me. I went because I got an unbelievable deal. Got what I paid for!

Used to love the old HAL Noordam. She, alas, is no more. Now I've been "Crystalized" and only sail on their ships.

So, it takes all kinds to make the world. Aren't we lucky! So much depends on what kind of experience you're looking for....

I think different ships serve different needs. If you're going for fun, a bigger ship is better. If you're going to tour, in many cases, a smaller ship is better.

I think different ships serve different needs. If you're going for fun, a bigger ship is better. If you're going to tour, in many cases, a smaller ship is better.

And if you are going for price, most often, bigger is better, especially in Europe where the USD is weaker than ever.

...give me a small to medium size ship anyday over the new behemoth mega ships, my wife and I have cruised with friends onboard both very small and medium size ships and find that the smaller they are, the more you get to know the other passengers, which we enjoy doing. We also hate waiting in long lines for everything thats going on, so far our largest ship has been 1600 passengers and that was as large as we want to go. That limits our choices for some of the lines, but Oceania, HAL, and Princess still have small ships with reasonably priced cruises and interesting itineraries, so we'll look to them for our cruising 'needs'...

...we also find the overall atmosphere is vastly different between a large ship and a small one. As has been mentioned, if you want a Vegas strip atmosphere, than the megaships will provide that for you, but if you prefer something a bit more romantic and intimate, then go for one of the smaller ships...a lot more classy IMHO...

I'm in agreement with post #3 above. If this was CarnivalCorp or RCI stepping back from newer bigger ships, that might indicate something about the future of mega-ships. NCL isn't a trendsetter, they are just trying to stay in existence. I'm sure if NCL had the dough, they would buy that ship.

While I find the largest of ships to be more and more fascinating, it remains to be seen that "Bigger" is in fact "Better". My experiences from small to large vessels have led me to think that "Bigger ", while all the more awesome, only rewards you with more people, more lines, less time, and less friendly and personal sevice. Hense: "Better", is not what I have experienced. 75,000 - 100,000 GT is a comfort zone for me. Although, as some of you have pointed out, the itinerary can and should really play a part in the choice of ship size. Also, the reason for which you are cruising. Are you going for the itinerary, or for the ship? I find that I am split down the middle when I cruise. I want to enjoy where I am cruising to, but I also want to enjoy the ship I am cruising on.

When it comes down to it, I can't wait to see NCL's new F3 ships (partially due to their size, but mainly the innovation) It seems though, the battle of size is clearly being won by RCI. All in all, I think there is something to be said about the innovation that is being ushered into the industry by NCL. Pretty darn cool IMHO. BTW... I love all the speculation on NCL not opting for the 3rd F3.... Wish I could ask Miss Cleo. :rolleyes:

I'm in agreement with post #3 above. If this was CarnivalCorp or RCI stepping back from newer bigger ships, that might indicate something about the future of mega-ships. NCL isn't a trendsetter, they are just trying to stay in existence. I'm sure if NCL had the dough, they would buy that ship.

Nita

What pray tell is the advantage of ships carrying 3500, 4000 or more passengers?

 

Nita

For who? The cruise line - plenty. For the passenger, well, if the ship sinks, you are less likely to be the one eaten by a shark. :eek:

We are taking our first Voyager class cruise on Explorer of the Seas in Feb. We booked 18 months in advance because the price was so low. Now the price has more than doubled.

We also booked Jewel of the Seas for the Fall of 2008 because the price was incredible.

On the other hand, we had hoped to book NCL Dawn for Bermuda next June but the prices are too high. We just booked a last minute cruise on NCL Pearl because the price was great. Now we'll wait to see if the Dawn lowers its prices next Spring for its Bermuda cruises.

I guess it's all about supply and demand. I am hoping we like the large Voyager class ship. Personally, I really like the 100,000 ton size because it's not too big and not too small--just right! We'll have to see how tired we get walking around a voyager class ship.