Why doesn't Allure of the Seas do a 28 Day Pacific Cruise?

[DoomsdayFAN]

For those of you familiar with Princess Cruises, they offer a 28 day cruise that goes from Los Angeles to Hawaii (visiting all four of the main islands), then down to American Samoa, then to French Polynesia, then back to LA. The cruise itself is wonderful (especially if you don't mind going on such a long trip). I personally enjoy the extra sea days.

 

The ship they use for that (the Sapphire Princess) is a fraction of the size of the Allure of the Seas. I can only imagine how much more fun that same exact trip would be on the biggest ship in the world!

 

Which begs the question, why doesn't Royal Caribbean offer this route? A 28 day cruise on the Allure of the Seas in the vast Pacific would be just about the greatest cruising experience I could yet imagine.

 

So why don't they offer this? :confused: It's mind boggling to me that the only cruises I can ever find for this epic ship are short 7 day cruises confined to the Caribbean.

 

I'm not all that familiar with Royal Caribbean, but do they take their name literally and only stay in the geographical Caribbean? :cool: I would love it if someday they went out and offered this monster of a cruise on this monster of a ship. It would be a marriage made in heaven!

[ducklite]

Because there's no way in hell that French Polynesia would let a ship that large into their waters, let alone allow that many people onto their islands. (Thank God!!)

[paul929207]

First reason would be the problem of getting the Alure to LA or another west coast port. She will not go thru the Panama Canal. The Grand Princess went around South America earlier this yearon a 49 day cruise from Fort Lauderdale to San Francisco.

 

Would the ports handle a ship that big?

[Keith1010]

I suspect it is too big.

 

You could ask the cruise line about this.

 

Keith

[CruiserBruce]

Besides the other reasons stated, which are all very sound, I offer:

 

I think it would be very difficult to put 5400 people on that cruise for a price that would generate profits. That sort of exotic routes are done on small ships for a reason.

 

No cruise ship I am aware of can go more than 14 days without fuel, fresh fruit and vegetables and other supplies. I have heard Allure and Oasis would struggle over 10 days. The logistics would be massive and expensive.

 

And, I have heard, but can't confirm, that Oasis and Allure don't tender. So that would leave out many small ports.

[RSLeesburg]

Could you even fill the ship if you could get it to the west coast?

[The Sunset Glow]

Welcome to cruise critic!

 

RCI would be the ones to answer your questions and I imagine there are a number of reasons they don't do this but here are a few guesses:

 

1) If you priced what it cost to sail just 7 nights on Allure I cannot imagine what 28 nights would cost:eek: I'm guessing about $8K per person for a standard room. And you need 5-6K people willing to pay that each cruise. I can't see there being a big enough demand to fill a ship like the Allure for 28 day cruises on a consistant basis.

 

2) She is so big she only fits in a certain ports

 

3) She's too big to fit through the Panama canal so she would have to go around south america.

 

4) She sails full where she is now - demand is high - so why fix it if it ain't broken:cool:

 

RCI ships are all over the world not just the caribbean. They have cruises to Canada, Alaska, South America, Hawaii, Panama Canal, Austraila, South pacific, Mediterranean, Baltics, Asia.....they are just about everywhere. But which ship goes where depends on demand and the port size.

 

Another thing is RCI passengers tend to have more families so longer cruises are not as popular.

 

Hope this helps.:)

 

 

ETA I'm a slow poster! Looks like a lot of people have already replied with the same answers:cool:

[BillB48]

Besides the other reasons stated, which are all very sound, I offer:

 

 

 

And, I have heard, but can't confirm, that Oasis and Allure don't tender. So that would leave out many small ports.

 

You are correct, none of their present itineraries have tendered ports. In fact on the Western Carib itin they sail right by the almost mandatory stop of Georgetown.

[CruiserBruce]

Thanks Bill. Had heard it, just hadn't found a true way to really confirm it.

 

For the OP, many ports on the long Pacific cruises require small ships or tendering. That would mean Oasis or Allure passing on many Pacific stops.

[Langley Cruisers]

So why don't they offer this? :confused: It's mind boggling to me that the only cruises I can ever find for this epic ship are short 7 day cruises confined to the Caribbean.

 

Yes, because those cruises sell out week after week. The weekly cruises are popular and expensive enough and the product is so popular that the weekly Caribbean runs are ideal for them.

[ducklite]

Money and tendering mean nothing. The Society Islands and French Polynesia are already squawking about some of the larger ships already calling there, and there's a good chance that a few of them won't be going there much longer.

[Hstergo]

There would be refueling issues too, and some of the islands are simply not set up for that many people coming to shore at one time.

[BruceMuzz]

The most profitable cruise itineraries are 7-day cruises.

 

Passengers who take 10 and 14 day cruises spend the same amount of money onboard as passengers on 7-day cruises.

People who take 28 day cruises spend just slightly more money onboard than passengers on 7-day cruises - but the cruise line has to spend far more money (especially for fuel) on the longer trips.

 

That's why most mass market cruise lines only use their older smaller ships (that cannot really compete against the newer bigger ships) for the longer voyages.

 

Allure and Oasis are both legal licenses to print money. Those ships make enormous profits right where they are. It would be very foolish to consider moving them anywhere else.

[DoomsdayFAN]

Allure and Oasis are both legal licenses to print money. Those ships make enormous profits right where they are. It would be very foolish to consider moving them anywhere else.

 

Yeah, well, logistics aside, the thought of doing that 28 day cruise on the Allure is a fantasy that would make my day a hundred times over. :p

 

 

Too bad Royal Caribbean doesn't build a third ship of similar size specifically for the Pacific. :(

[Krazy Kruizers]

HAL ships are able to go through the Panama Canal.

The Allure and Oasis can not fit through. Maybe once the new locks are completed they may be able to use them. But from what I have heard, the new locks are being built primarily for the larger freighters.

HAL has some Hawaii / Tahiti cruises that leave from San Diego. They are expensive and the ships are rarely filled. HAL is losing money on those runs.

[John Bull]

 

Too bad Royal Caribbean doesn't build a third ship of similar size specifically for the Pacific. :(

 

Posters on this thread have listed a great many reasons why Allure doesn't cruise the Pacific.

Painting a different name on the bow doesn't resolve any of them ;)

 

JB :)

[dorisis]

We have done 2 South Pacific cruises. The first was on a 700 passeenger ship. Last october we did it on the 28 day Princess Sapphire. We have sailed the caribbean on the Allure and loved it but the South Pacific was best on the smaller ship. i can understand why you like RC...so much to do on sea days and 0n the 28 day cruise half of them are sea days.

[BillB48]

HAL ships are able to go through the Panama Canal.

 

The Allure and Oasis can not fit through. Maybe once the new locks are completed they may be able to use them. But from what I have heard, the new locks are being built primarily for the larger freighters.

 

HAL has some Hawaii / Tahiti cruises that leave from San Diego. They are expensive and the ships are rarely filled. HAL is losing money on those runs.

 

The Oasis and Allure (as well as the other larger ships) will be able to fit through the new locks currently under construction. The initial size limit will be 1200'x160' which will accommodate those ships. The fly in the ointment is a clearance problem with the Bridge of the Americas, but with proper timing it "could" be done. Just don't know how eager anyone will be to have a go at this.

 

You are correct that the expansions is primarily for cargo ships, but that is really the same for the current locks. Only about 2% of the number of transits comes from passenger ships. Under present toll structure it would cost around $700,000 for one of the O&A ships to transit:eek:!

[Doug S]

All the logistic issues posted above are very valid. I have one additional thought.

 

Longer cruises out of the west coast to Hawaii tend to cater to a much different demographic than the big ships are set up for. Had a great 14 day Golden Princess cruise to Hawaii and back a few years ago. Average passenger age pushed 70. More scooters than I had ever seen in one place in my life. Only 5 kids on board, 3 infants and 2 young teens from Europe. Most of the yuppie, family crowd simply do not have the flexibility to take over 2 weeks away from their lives (with travel to/from port). Plus the number of sea days and the type of excursions cater more to an older, more sedate crowd. Good news is there would be no line at the flowrider.

[rvsullivan]

No matter how you look at it, these are niche cruises. They tend to fill a 300-700 person cruise ship with long booking times and at great expense. Trying to fill a mega ship routinely for this type of cruise would never make money.

[hubofhockey]

How many times in four weeks can you see Chicago, Blue Planet, and Ocean Aria? I will say this about the Allure. There is no way you can experience everything in seven days. It's an amazing ship. We look forward to a cruise on the third ship in this class after it comes out in 2016.