Jump to content

Recommended Posts

An article for the Costa Concordia  estimated $400 per ton in 2013. So your 100k  ton ship would be worth about 40 million as scrap at that price.  Iron ore commodity price is about 25% lower than in 2013 so the scrape price might also be lower.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, npcl said:

An article for the Costa Concordia  estimated $400 per ton in 2013. So your 100k  ton ship would be worth about 40 million as scrap at that price.  Iron ore commodity price is about 25% lower than in 2013 so the scrape price might also be lower.

 

A ship's tonnage is not its weight. It's a measure of it's cargo-carrying capacity. From Wikipedia: Tonnage is a measure of the cargo-carrying capacity of a ship. The term derives from the taxation paid on tuns or casks of wine. In modern maritime usage, "tonnage" specifically refers to a calculation of the volume or cargo volume of a ship. Tonnage should not be confused with displacement, which refers to the actual weight of the vessel. Tonnage is commonly used to assess fees on commercial shipping.

 

I have never seen displacement stats published for any Princess ship but some further checking suggests that the weight of the typical cruise ship is 50% or less of its gross tonnage. So a cruise ship published as 100,000 gross tonnage probably weights 50,000 tons or less with the metal content of that being even less.

Edited by lstone19
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, lstone19 said:

 

A ship's tonnage is not its weight. It's a measure of it's cargo-carrying capacity. From Wikipedia: Tonnage is a measure of the cargo-carrying capacity of a ship. The term derives from the taxation paid on tuns or casks of wine. In modern maritime usage, "tonnage" specifically refers to a calculation of the volume or cargo volume of a ship. Tonnage should not be confused with displacement, which refers to the actual weight of the vessel. Tonnage is commonly used to assess fees on commercial shipping.

 

I have never seen displacement stats published for any Princess ship but some further checking suggests that the weight of the typical cruise ship is 50% or less of its gross tonnage. So a cruise ship published as 100,000 gross tonnage probably weights 50,000 tons or less with the metal content of that being even less.

They were using the ship tonnage (cargo carrying capacity) for the estimate in  the Costa Concordia article when they came up with the $400 figure.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ombud said:

Exactly.  Look at what's happening to Pullmantuer ships. For sale (without items of value). 1988 & 1990 engines. Cheap to put in new carpet, beds, repaint ..... I would imagine it's more expensive to replace engines 

https://www.cruiselawnews.com/2020/06/articles/disease/is-pullmantur-cruises-ending-operations/

 

Reading the link, it's clear to me that the ships will be headed to Alang.  There's no reason to dismantle as thoroughly the interior of the ships as they are if the Company believed they could be sold and re-purposed.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, npcl said:

They were using the ship tonnage (cargo carrying capacity) for the estimate in  the Costa Concordia article when they came up with the $400 figure.

 

Interesting way of doing it. Thanks for the clarification.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/20/2020 at 7:18 AM, LHT28 said:

Pacific Princess on the market

http://cruiseship.homestead.com/cruiseships.html

 

And a bargain at "only" $100 million. 😵  Tony might be able to get that by collecting his change from under the furniture cushions. (I found an old chocolate chip my wife had lost under one of my cushions. That's about the extent of our vast wealth.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, lstone19 said:

 

Interesting way of doing it. Thanks for the clarification.

I think they were doing it that way because that is the figure that most people would associate with the Concordia.  So they did the calculations and the conversions necessary, instead of using a size number that most people would not know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, since we are on the Princess board........ Golden and Star were already announced to be transferred to P&O Australia. Golden end of 2020 Alaska season and the Star at the end of the 2021 Alaska season. Golden is already done in the Princess fleet and I'm willing to bet Star does not return either. If any other ships are removed from service with Princess the most likely candidates would be Sun and Sea due to their age and size. Given the recent deployment announcements this month for fall and winter 2021/22 with Pacific to Tahiti and Grand from LA to Hawaii and Mexico/Sea of Cortez, I'd be surprised if either of them were headed out of the fleet. 

 

If Sun/Sea were to leave along with Golden/Star, that would leave Princess with 16 ships once Discovery enters service. That would be a net decrease of 2 vessels from their pre-Covid fleet size of 18 vessels by end of 2021. 

Edited by AtlantaCruiser72
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, AtlantaCruiser72 said:

If Sun/Sea were to leave along with Golden/Star, that would leave Princess with 16 ships once Discovery enters service. That would be a net decrease of 2 vessels from their pre-Covid fleet size of 18 vessels by end of 2021. 

 

Sorry to say this, but, I think that is going to still be too many ships.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, rkacruiser said:

 

Sorry to say this, but, I think that is going to still be too many ships.

 

Possibly, but I could easily see Carnival Corp reducing fleet sizes of HAL, P&O Australia and P&O UK a good bit more than Princess and focus on moving as many of those guests to the Princess brand as they can. There is a large overlap of client demographic amongst all 4 brands. 

 

Despite recent events Princess has a very strong brand identity both in North America and internationally that other brands in the Carnival fleet do not. With a fleet of large, amenity filled modern vessels they fit a nice niche for Carnival Corp between brands like Carnival/Costa and Seabourn/Cunard.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting discussion.

However, I can't help wondering if divesting ships this quickly is not premature.   

 

There was a huge demand for cruising before Covid and if an effective vaccine is found, and the number of cases diminishes to a low level, then I'm guessing that cruising will return as a popular holiday option.  Given that possibility, I am surprised that there is not more talk of mothballing the ships, perhaps for a year, with the option to return them to service if demand returns.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

If all the people on CC sho have said not going cruising again or leaving it a couple of years,  there may not be the demand.......

 

Also by getting rid of all the small ships..... a lot had said they want cruise on the likes of the sky...... But this could be all hot air......

 

It was be interesting to see what actually happens.....

 

Particularly if Atlanta cruiser72 is right

2 hours ago, AtlantaCruiser72 said:

Possibly, but I could easily see Carnival Corp reducing fleet sizes of HAL, P&O Australia and P&O UK a good bit more than Princess and focus on moving as many of those guests to the Princess brand as they can. There is a large overlap of client demographic amongst all 4 brands. 

 

Cheers Don

 

Edited by getting older slowly
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Smokeyham said:

Interesting discussion.

However, I can't help wondering if divesting ships this quickly is not premature.   

 

There was a huge demand for cruising before Covid and if an effective vaccine is found, and the number of cases diminishes to a low level, then I'm guessing that cruising will return as a popular holiday option.  Given that possibility, I am surprised that there is not more talk of mothballing the ships, perhaps for a year, with the option to return them to service if demand returns.  

The operational cost of keeping the ships (even with minimal crew) out weighs the impact of only getting a minimal price (scrap) for ships that have been fully depreciated.

 

By reducing the overall number of berths, one can expect that the cruise lines will have more pricing power when they do get back to speed.  That in turn should give them more of a profit margin pre-debt payments.  They will need as much margin as possible to be able to make the much larger debt payments. As some of the cruise line CEO's have said, do not expect any deals in fares. 

 

 

Edited by npcl
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/22/2020 at 12:44 PM, npcl said:

They were using the ship tonnage (cargo carrying capacity) for the estimate in  the Costa Concordia article when they came up with the $400 figure.

 

It is quite possible that the author of the article you read did not understand the difference between displacement and gross tonnage.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Smokeyham said:



However, I can't help wondering if divesting ships this quickly is not premature.   

 

 

 

As the announcement said, the six ships were already scheduled to leave the fleet. This just speeds up the time table.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Smokeyham said:

Interesting discussion.

However, I can't help wondering if divesting ships this quickly is not premature.   

 

There was a huge demand for cruising before Covid and if an effective vaccine is found, and the number of cases diminishes to a low level, then I'm guessing that cruising will return as a popular holiday option.  Given that possibility, I am surprised that there is not more talk of mothballing the ships, perhaps for a year, with the option to return them to service if demand returns.  

Seems I've read that mothballing is expensive and complicated, more expensive and difficult than keeping the ships operational with small crews. Maybe Chang can shed some light on the mothballing process.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, rkacruiser said:

 

Sorry to say this, but, I think that is going to still be too many ships.

well how many ships do ya have in mind ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, c-boy said:

well how many ships do ya have in mind ?

 

I do not have a specific number.  I simply think that all of the operating Companies under the Carnival umbrella have become too large.  HAL's customer service issues seem to start when their fleet became too large for their Executives to properly manage, in my opinion.  The increase in the micromanaging from Seattle only compounded problems.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, npcl said:

The operational cost of keeping the ships (even with minimal crew) out weighs the impact of only getting a minimal price (scrap) for ships that have been fully depreciated.

 

 

This may be an ignorant question on my part-and if so--forgive me.

 

The Federal government has in the past mothballed merchant marine vessels for many years.  I have seen such fleets in the James River as an example.  There are no crews aboard.  Are there?  Is something like that not feasible for the cruise companies to do?

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, rkacruiser said:

 

This may be an ignorant question on my part-and if so--forgive me.

 

The Federal government has in the past mothballed merchant marine vessels for many years.  I have seen such fleets in the James River as an example.  There are no crews aboard.  Are there?  Is something like that not feasible for the cruise companies to do?

I am wondering the same thing.   I'm thinking that the ships could be put into some form of temporary mothball, with the thinking that they will be put back into service within about two years.    

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Smokeyham said:

I am wondering the same thing.   I'm thinking that the ships could be put into some form of temporary mothball, with the thinking that they will be put back into service within about two years.    

 

It's been done with Merchant Marine ships I am fairly certain.  And, unless I am mistaken, some of those ships that were returned to service had been in "The Ghost Fleets" (as I recall they were called) for longer than two years.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Forum Assistance
      • SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENT: Azamara - We are back with New Greece Voyages
      • SPECIAL EVENT: Q&A with Barbara Muckermann, CMO Silversea Cruises
      • ICYM Our Cruise Critic Live Special Event: Explore the Remote World with Hurtigruten!
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • Canadian Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...