So does Carnival not do European or International cruises

Next yea 2017 there are no cruises that are not domestic America for Carnival. Why is that? While their competitors have plenty in europe, asia, middle east australia etc.

Really, isn't the Vista in Europe now?

Yes, the Vista is in the MED right now as a matter of fact. CCL does the Med always when launching a new ship as they are built in Europe. In the past there have been other ships sent to the Med as well, but not as of late. It appears that for 2017 there are no ships from CCL going to be ported in Med.....but that could change too!

Carnival has only been doing European cruises when they have a new ship coming out . The Vista debuted this year so that is why they are in Europe now. There will be no Carnival ship in Europe next year but they will be back in 2018 since the Vista 2 will be coming out then.

Most of the European cruises are pretty cheap and the biggest problem is airfare from the US. Most people say that the airfare to Europe costs more than the cruise.

If you want to sail in Europe in 2017 then you will have to sail on a different line - maybe one of Carnival's sister ships.

Carnival stopped cruising out of Europe several years ago. I think the average Carnival cruiser can't afford the airfare.

Sorry, Fyree39, but I find that comment quite offensive and demeaning and definitely NOT true.There are plenty of folks who sail CCL that can AFFORD to pay lots more but choose not to....very closed minded comment. Plus, NCL and RCI offer cruises within the same price point, and the same demographic can be found on ALL mainstream lines. That is NOT why CCL does not sail in the Med...their ships always sail full capacity (and we have been on them!!)

Next yea 2017 there are no cruises that are not domestic America for Carnival. Why is that? While their competitors have plenty in europe, asia, middle east australia etc.

Really? Domestic America?

Let's see,,,, Splendor or Spirit is in Australia (My old geography class tells me that's international).

Mexico, Jamaica, Grand Cayman, Bahama, Bermuda, Canada, St. Martin, Aruba,,,,, most of these are "International"

. I think the average Carnival cruiser can't afford the airfare.

Stereotype much?

Why should Carnival sail in Europe and compete with Holland or Costa - which they own? It would make as much sense as sending a Costa ship to the Bahamas. Why compete against themselves? Plus they would have the added expense of transcontinental cruises which probably make very little revenue.

Carnival would have more European/International cruises IF there were a demand by Carnival cruisers.

There just really isn't and airfare is a factor.

and so goes cruise critic, I "somewhat" agree with Fyree 39. Read the posts on this board, people drive 16 hours to get to the port, look for Super 8, complain about a $1 increase in water, don't go on shore excursions, and would never go to the Steak house , because the food is free. There is a certain element on Carnival that does attract middle income people. I am certainly not saying all. We hear people talking about credit cards like they are evil and want to cash their S&S card. I am not saying people with more money are better, not even close. We, on the other hand, charge everything on Capitol One, I mean everything. We love the mileage, haven't paid for a flight in years.

Sorry, Fyree39, but I find that comment quite offensive and demeaning and definitely NOT true.There are plenty of folks who sail CCL that can AFFORD to pay lots more but choose not to....

Before everyone gets on Fyree39 for that comment, Carnival's former CEO made the statement that this cruise line targets the budget seeking, low to middle income American cruiser. This is not an opinion, its a fact. That's why Carnival has positioned the majority of its fleet at several ports that are within driving distance of its passengers. Ports like Jacksonville, Charleston, Mobile, New Orleans, Galveston, and Baltimore. While there are indeed many cruisers that do fly to their port of embarkation, the "average" Carnival cruiser drives to the aforementioned ports. Yes, some ports like Miami and Ft. Lauderdale get a larger percentage of "fly-in" cruisers, but you can't compare flying to these cities to flying to any city in Europe.

Yes, there are Carnival cruisers that can afford the sometimes exorbitant airfare to fly to Europe, but they are a small percentage and don't represent the majority (or the average) Carnival cruiser. I know that I'm not the only one who would balk at $6,000 worth of airfare for my family of 4. As mentioned above, the airfare would most likely cost more than the actual cruise. And that's before adding very expensive pre or post cruise stays as well as excursions that are required at many European ports of call. The reality is that an European cruise, even on Carnival, is out of the budget of many "average" American cruisers.

Carnival did position ships in Europe a few years back, but they quickly canceled the majority of those sailings and decided to keep those ships sailing from US ports. They couldn't get enough Americans to fly out there, and they failed to advertise themselves enough to attract the European cruiser. For many on the other side of the Atlantic, Carnival was a little known cruise line.

Before everyone gets on Fyree39 for that comment, Carnival's former CEO made the statement that this cruise line targets the budget seeking, low to middle income American cruiser. This is not an opinion, its a fact. That's why Carnival has positioned the majority of its fleet at several ports that are within driving distance of its passengers. Ports like Jacksonville, Charleston, Mobile, New Orleans, Galveston, and Baltimore. While there are indeed many cruisers that do fly to their port of embarkation, the "average" Carnival cruiser drives to the aforementioned ports. Yes, some ports like Miami and Ft. Lauderdale get a larger percentage of "fly-in" cruisers, but you can't compare flying to these cities to flying to any city in Europe.

 

Yes, there are Carnival cruisers that can afford the sometimes exorbitant airfare to fly to Europe, but they are a small percentage and don't represent the majority (or the average) Carnival cruiser. I know that I'm not the only one who would balk at $6,000 worth of airfare for my family of 4. As mentioned above, the airfare would most likely cost more than the actual cruise. And that's before adding very expensive pre or post cruise stays as well as excursions that are required at many European ports of call. The reality is that an European cruise, even on Carnival, is out of the budget of many "average" American cruisers.

Carnival did position ships in Europe a few years back, but they quickly canceled the majority of those sailings and decided to keep those ships sailing from US ports. They couldn't get enough Americans to fly out there, and they failed to advertise themselves enough to attract the European cruiser. For many on the other side of the Atlantic, Carnival was a little known cruise line.

So true. Attracting the American cruiser who wants to enjoy as inexpensive cruises as possible is the goal for Carnival Cruise Line and they do a good job with it.

Really? Domestic America?

 

Let's see,,,, Splendor or Spirit is in Australia (My old geography class tells me that's international).

Mexico, Jamaica, Grand Cayman, Bahama, Bermuda, Canada, St. Martin, Aruba,,,,, most of these are "International"

I just found out that Carnival has another website called "Carnival Australia"

I had no idea it existed until today and have been travelling on carnival since 1999

Before everyone gets on Fyree39 for that comment, Carnival's former CEO made the statement that this cruise line targets the budget seeking, low to middle income American cruiser. This is not an opinion, its a fact. That's why Carnival has positioned the majority of its fleet at several ports that are within driving distance of its passengers. Ports like Jacksonville, Charleston, Mobile, New Orleans, Galveston, and Baltimore. While there are indeed many cruisers that do fly to their port of embarkation, the "average" Carnival cruiser drives to the aforementioned ports. Yes, some ports like Miami and Ft. Lauderdale get a larger percentage of "fly-in" cruisers, but you can't compare flying to these cities to flying to any city in Europe.

 

Yes, there are Carnival cruisers that can afford the sometimes exorbitant airfare to fly to Europe, but they are a small percentage and don't represent the majority (or the average) Carnival cruiser. I know that I'm not the only one who would balk at $6,000 worth of airfare for my family of 4. As mentioned above, the airfare would most likely cost more than the actual cruise. And that's before adding very expensive pre or post cruise stays as well as excursions that are required at many European ports of call. The reality is that an European cruise, even on Carnival, is out of the budget of many "average" American cruisers.

 

Carnival did position ships in Europe a few years back, but they quickly canceled the majority of those sailings and decided to keep those ships sailing from US ports. They couldn't get enough Americans to fly out there, and they failed to advertise themselves enough to attract the European cruiser. For many on the other side of the Atlantic, Carnival was a little known cruise line.

I agree with Tapi on this one. The target market for Carnival is middle-income cruisers. I have a sailed a number of European, Asian and South American itineraries but all, except Europe on Breeze, were on other lines.

Carnival is doing something right by concentrating their fleet on domestic cruising. BTW: Carnival Australia's target market is the same.

I fly and cruise all over the world but I still believe Carnival is the best bang for your cruising buck. Overall, I enjoy myself more on Carnival than on any other cruise line. The most boring cruises I've been on were HAL and Seabourn.

I have also found that far more people choose Carnival because they won't have to fly to the port.

Take care,

Mike

Before everyone gets on Fyree39 for that comment, Carnival's former CEO made the statement that this cruise line targets the budget seeking, low to middle income American cruiser. This is not an opinion, its a fact. That's why Carnival has positioned the majority of its fleet at several ports that are within driving distance of its passengers. Ports like Jacksonville, Charleston, Mobile, New Orleans, Galveston, and Baltimore. While there are indeed many cruisers that do fly to their port of embarkation, the "average" Carnival cruiser drives to the aforementioned ports. Yes, some ports like Miami and Ft. Lauderdale get a larger percentage of "fly-in" cruisers, but you can't compare flying to these cities to flying to any city in Europe.

 

Yes, there are Carnival cruisers that can afford the sometimes exorbitant airfare to fly to Europe, but they are a small percentage and don't represent the majority (or the average) Carnival cruiser. I know that I'm not the only one who would balk at $6,000 worth of airfare for my family of 4. As mentioned above, the airfare would most likely cost more than the actual cruise. And that's before adding very expensive pre or post cruise stays as well as excursions that are required at many European ports of call. The reality is that an European cruise, even on Carnival, is out of the budget of many "average" American cruisers.

 

Carnival did position ships in Europe a few years back, but they quickly canceled the majority of those sailings and decided to keep those ships sailing from US ports. They couldn't get enough Americans to fly out there, and they failed to advertise themselves enough to attract the European cruiser. For many on the other side of the Atlantic, Carnival was a little known cruise line.

Very true but let me add something else we are seeing.

Many of the Carnival cruisers we have come accross in our roll calls are more concerned about the drink of the day and just having a good time on the ship.

Sailed on several Princess cruisers now and the bulk of these people at least the ones going to Europe are more about seeing the world.

and so goes cruise critic, I "somewhat" agree with Fyree 39. Read the posts on this board, people drive 16 hours to get to the port, look for Super 8, complain about a $1 increase in water, don't go on shore excursions, and would never go to the Steak house , because the food is free. There is a certain element on Carnival that does attract middle income people. I am certainly not saying all. We hear people talking about credit cards like they are evil and want to cash their S&S card. I am not saying people with more money are better, not even close. We, on the other hand, charge everything on Capitol One, I mean everything. We love the mileage, haven't paid for a flight in years.

I find these comments very valid as well. Another trend I see here is, just take a look at the posts, when the low deposits are offered, and people waiting for them. Which are of little to no value, since prices aren't lower, and sometimes higher. :)

I find these comments very valid as well. Another trend I see here is, just take a look at the posts, when the low deposits are offered, and people waiting for them. Which are of little to no value, since prices aren't lower, and sometimes higher. :)

The low deposit offers help people who can barely afford a cruise and would rather pay little now and put the rest on a CC to pay off in the future when they can.

Kind of how our govt operates these days.:eek:

Before everyone gets on Fyree39 for that comment, Carnival's former CEO made the statement that this cruise line targets the budget seeking, low to middle income American cruiser. This is not an opinion, its a fact. That's why Carnival has positioned the majority of its fleet at several ports that are within driving distance of its passengers. Ports like Jacksonville, Charleston, Mobile, New Orleans, Galveston, and Baltimore. While there are indeed many cruisers that do fly to their port of embarkation, the "average" Carnival cruiser drives to the aforementioned ports. Yes, some ports like Miami and Ft. Lauderdale get a larger percentage of "fly-in" cruisers, but you can't compare flying to these cities to flying to any city in Europe.

 

Yes, there are Carnival cruisers that can afford the sometimes exorbitant airfare to fly to Europe, but they are a small percentage and don't represent the majority (or the average) Carnival cruiser. I know that I'm not the only one who would balk at $6,000 worth of airfare for my family of 4. As mentioned above, the airfare would most likely cost more than the actual cruise. And that's before adding very expensive pre or post cruise stays as well as excursions that are required at many European ports of call. The reality is that an European cruise, even on Carnival, is out of the budget of many "average" American cruisers.

 

Carnival did position ships in Europe a few years back, but they quickly canceled the majority of those sailings and decided to keep those ships sailing from US ports. They couldn't get enough Americans to fly out there, and they failed to advertise themselves enough to attract the European cruiser. For many on the other side of the Atlantic, Carnival was a little known cruise line.

Another balanced eloquent post - thanks for saying what was in my head better than I could have! :)

The problem is Carnival never pushed for European cruisers and other lines stole what they could have had...they then pushes Costa to the Med citizens.

However, Carnival now had a dedicated Southampton team when the Vista started to be created so who knows. The also are almost non existent in UK travels agents apart from 2. Experienced cruisers over here have often not even heard of Carnival

Carnival are happy with US cruisers but I do think they missed a trick. Especially when you consider how much is spent on European cruise compared to a Caribbean one.

More people this side of the pond seemed to have booked Vista than the Sunshine but many of us have become 'loyal to royal' or lovers of UK favourite P&O. Thing is there are a lot of us that don't like the high prices of these guys so NCL has seized it chance in recent times.

If Carnival are adventurous they can market med/short atlantic coast cruises to middle/lower income UK cruisers who want another choice. Every time I meet a UK CCL cruiser they feel the same as me.

I also hope Carnival appears in China and stops putting it off.

"Kind of how our govt operates these days."

What the hell does the government have anything to do with Carnival or cruisers in general.

Very true but let me add something else we are seeing.

 

Many of the Carnival cruisers we have come accross in our roll calls are more concerned about the drink of the day and just having a good time on the ship.

 

Sailed on several Princess cruisers now and the bulk of these people at least the ones going to Europe are more about seeing the world.

Exactly.

I cruise Carnival for an enjoyable time on the ship and I choose other lines for the itineraries.

Truthfully: I would avoid Carnival if it was a Europe, Asia, South America or Australian cruise. Not that I don't like Carnival but I wouldn't have time to enjoy the ship. I'll sail Azamara, Celebrity, or some other line when I want a port intensive cruise.

You can have it both ways.

Take care,

Mike