Jump to content
Cruise Critic Community

Baron Barracuda

Members
  • Content Count

    2,123
  • Joined

About Baron Barracuda

  • Rank
    Cool Cruiser

About Me

  • Location
    RAMSEY, NJ
  • Favorite Cruise Line(s)
    CELEBRITY
  • Favorite Cruise Destination Or Port of Call
    CARIBBEAN

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Cruise lines have historically overbooked anticipating a certain level of cancellations. In current environment cancellation rate will undoubtedly rise.
  2. Read that piece on airlines. Found it logical and reassuring. Still can't get dw to fly though. She trusts planes but not airports. On cruise ships tight corridors inhibit air circulation. Believe much of the Diamond Princess spread was attributed to how air was recirculated throughout ship. Passengers who didn't leave their cabins were still infected.
  3. As I read the news pieces 10 days into sailing seven passengers returning from shore excursion test positive. They are put ashore a day or two later and ship calls at two more ports before sailing concludes. I see everyone who went ashore was tested on day 10 but what about those who never left ship? Also no word of additional testing being performed at subsequent ports or during disembarkation. The seven sick passengers may have been contagious for days prior to their positive test and would have expected entire ship to have been tested at disembarkation. Surprised Italian health authorities weren't more vigilant.
  4. That's one side of the story. CDC could respond that cruise lines have not demonstrated an ability to prevent outbreaks even during layup. 85 cruise ships have experienced and continue to experience outbreaks. They could also point to how for many months cruise lines failed to address the concerns raised by CDC in the original no sail order, especially how to prevent outbreaks aboard ship from spreading to local communities and overburdening health care resources. CDC's frustration with lack of responsiveness from cruise lines is visible in the no-sail documentation on their web site. Don't know how you can say they are receiving no information or support. Just through July 10th CDC staff spent 38,000 hours working with cruise lines. Perhaps cruise lines are being singled out because of the high level of risk they are perceived to present and (until recently) their lack of a plan to deal with it. Cannot compare to airlines who took prompt action last spring and where just-issued report shows minimal chance of infection. As far as lack of financial support, many AMERICAN companies are currently in dire straits and millions of AMERICANS are out of work. Financial assistance from Washington isn't unlimited and at some point will have to be recouped through taxes. Better to aid companies and employees who actually pay AMERICAN taxes. As far as suspending PVSA, that's an issue for congress, not CDC.
  5. How about Freedom carrying 3600 passengers x 52 weeks x 16 years with only one falling through window. That's 1 out of 2,995,200 or 0.000033%
  6. When our children were young we frequently combined cruises with WDW visits. DW always preferred to cruise first. Liked to get aboard ship with nicely packed clean clothes. Then upon reaching WDW she and I would spend the first 1/2 day doing laundry while kids relaxed in the pool. We only sailed out of PC once. Usually found more attractive itineraries and better pricing sailing out of MIA and PE. We'd fly into FLL, overnight there (learned our lesson never to fly in day of cruise) and shuttle to ship. After cruise we'd rent a car and drive 4 -5 hours to Orlando. There we'd load up on snacks at local supermarket before checking in at WDW and dropping off rental.
  7. Not that it matters, but wouldn't be Royal writing the check, it would be their insurance company,
  8. Yes, it's the CDC's fault. They're the only ones not allowing cruising . Isn't it being allowed in England .....no.....how about Australia ......no.....how about Canada ......no. Hmmm aside from limited sailings in Italy, Norway and maybe Singapore it seems cruising is pretty much shut down worldwide.
  9. We'll see, but given their financial situation there can't be any sacred cows. Once upon a time airlines paid nice fees to TA''s too. And that younger demographic they're trying to attract prefers self-serve shopping. Go online, browse websites and click on the vacation you want. Just look how online shopping has displaced bricks and mortar.
  10. Easy to point fingers at CDC but it's not just US that has problems with cruising. Currently banned in England, Australia, Canada and pretty much everywhere else in the world except a couple of exceptions in Italy, Norway and now maybe Singapore. CDC's original no-sail order detailed issues cruise lines needed to address in order to be allowed to resume sailing. Cruise lines dragged their feet through spring and summer as if hoping problem would just go away. Subsequent no-sail orders chastised cruise lines for this non-responsiveness. Even healthy sail panel report fails to fully address some major CDC concerns such as how to prevent onboard outbreaks from overburdening shore side medical facilities.
  11. IMO cutbacks, especially in food quality, really became evident a few years ago when Fain set out his double-double goal (double earnings in 3 years + double digit return on invested capital). They hit that target and execs got big bonuses. Meanwhile fares and beverage prices soared and service suffered. By the way food & beverages last year only amounted to 5.3% of revenue. Meanwhile Marketing was 14%, payroll 10% and fuel 6.4%. The largest expense category was Commissions, transportation & other 15%. If I were a TA I'd be nervous.
  12. They can't charge more than people are willing to pay. Airlines are also hemorrhaging cash but the fares I've looked at are down substantially from last year.
  13. There's also the issue of whether Alaska (and Canada) will be open to cruise lines. Last I checked Alaska required tourists to test negative prior to visit and still be quarantined upon arrival..
  14. $0.3B of the $1.0B in new money will repay other debt maturing next month. RCL has a further $1.3B of debt maturing in 2021 that will have to be repaid or refinanced. That's above and beyond the $250mm/mo cash burn. Note that while the 2.65% interest rate on the new 3 year notes is same as that on the maturing ones the new notes are convertible into common stock at roughly $82/sh.
  15. $300mm of the new cash will be used to repay existing debt maturing next month. RCL has an additional $1.3B of debt maturing next year which will need to be repaid or refinanced. This is above and beyond the $250mm/month cash burn so cash will run out sooner than 2/22. Also note that the $500MM in new notes are convertible into common stock at roughly $82/sh. A good amount of the debt issued earlier this year is also convertible. So on a fully diluted basis they have a lot more than 215MM shares outstanding.
×
×
  • Create New...