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

[newmexicoNita]

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:

Never thought of it quite that way.....LOL

 

Nita

[bUU]

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

As alluded to, for the cruise line, there are economies of scale that result in a stronger profit margin. For the passengers, generally larger ships have facilities in them that aren't warranted or perhaps too large to even be considered for smaller ships. If you derive enjoyment from the activities that those specific facilities provide, then you benefit greatly from a larger ship.

[newmexicoNita]

As alluded to, for the cruise line, there are economies of scale that result in a stronger profit margin. For the passengers, generally larger ships have facilities in them that aren't warranted or perhaps too large to even be considered for smaller ships. If you derive enjoyment from the activities that those specific facilities provide, then you benefit greatly from a larger ship.

I was being a smart A##, I know there are some who enjoy the small floating ciities, it just isn't my thing. The ships carrying 2000 to 3000 still offer many great activities, wonderful spa, NCLs latest a bowling alley, plus the rock climbing, etc. plus many of these ships offer alternative dining 2 or 3 or more pools and many more balconies. When the ships get much larger than that they loose much of, if not all the intimacy we used to love about sailing. All things do change, some for the good, some are loving the bigger is better idea, I am just not one of them. Is my age showing? LOL

[DanJ]

Personally, I really like the 100,000 ton size because it's not too big and not too small--just right!

 

It wasn't too long ago when that statement read "I really like the 75,000 ton size. Those 100,000 ton ships are way to big"

 

5-10 years from now, we'll be able to change it to "I really like those 150,000 ton ships. Those 220,000 ton ships are just too big".

 

LOL

[bUU]

Is my age showing? LOL

I'm not sure it is only age. There are lots of older folks (though for many things, surely not the overwhelming majority) that relish certain changes. I know my mother, for example, is someone who greatly prefers the larger cruise ships -- the larger the better.

[hammybee]

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:

 

Good one !

 

Actually there are benefits, the economies of scale. It's less costly to sail in an average cabin with 3000 of your new best friends than it is to do so with 500 best friends. Most people probably could not afford to sail on anything other than a larger capacity ship. I am one of them.

[Julie's Crazy Poodle]

While I like larger boats, I'm concerned about the impact (or potential impact) on the coral reefs, and environment. I'm also not really a huge fan of tendering, and in many ports- boats are too large *already*and tendering is thus necessary.

[Cuizer2]

While I like larger boats' date=' I'm concerned about the impact (or potential impact) on the coral reefs, and environment. I'm also not really a huge fan of tendering, and in many ports- boats are too large *already*and tendering is thus necessary.[/quote']I've yet to run across a port where the large cruise ships had to tender while the small cruise ship (those of 70,000 GRT and less - small being relative) did not have to tender.

 

All but the smallest of cruise ships (30,000 GRT and under) require a deep water dock to dock. The reason most tender is:

 

1) No deep water dock - like Grand Cayman

 

2) Not enough pier space - like St. Thomas and/or Cozumel.

[momofmeg]

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?

 

I defientely do not think bigger is better for the consumer. It is only better for the cruiseline's profits. The more people they cram in the better THEIR profit.

 

It would be differant if there were enough pools, lounges etc to keep everyone happy but I have found these areas too congested, so that I spent more time in my stateroom then enjoying myself around ship.

[Cruising89143]

For me bigger is better and I like the current trend towards big. The cruise lines like it too. Cruise lines are not having any issues with filling up the big boys and now there are plenty of people waiting for RCI to open up bookings on the Genesis. They will have no problems in filling those large ships. I see now that HAL has even gone a little larger with the Eurodam. She will hold over 2000 guests now.

[Philip217]

I was very surprised to see that all of you missed the most important reason why NCL - and Carnival Corp - have decided not to order any new big ships for a few years.

 

Yes, economy of scale is one of the best reasons to build bigger and bigger ships. The fixed high costs on a large ship (fuel, management payroll, etc) are nearly the same as on a small ship. Currently the smallest mass market cruise ship that can make a profit carries around 2200 passengers. With the price of fuel going up so quickly, that minimum will go up quickly as well. The cruise lines simply cannot afford to build new small ships that will never have a hope fo being profitable.

 

So why have they stopped building the mega-ships? It's all about costs. When you cruise with us, you pay us in dollars. When we build ships, we must pay in Euros. The current exchange rate for the useless dollar makes it impossible for the cruise lines to see a reasonable profit on investment. They will not build a Billion Dollar Ship that may never have a chance to see a profit.

 

As soon as the exchange rate improves, the number of mega-ship orders will go up again.

[Cruising89143]

I was very surprised to see that all of you missed the most important reason why NCL - and Carnival Corp - have decided not to order any new big ships for a few years.

 

Yes, economy of scale is one of the best reasons to build bigger and bigger ships. The fixed high costs on a large ship (fuel, management payroll, etc) are nearly the same as on a small ship. Currently the smallest mass market cruise ship that can make a profit carries around 2200 passengers. With the price of fuel going up so quickly, that minimum will go up quickly as well. The cruise lines simply cannot afford to build new small ships that will never have a hope fo being profitable.

 

So why have they stopped building the mega-ships? It's all about costs. When you cruise with us, you pay us in dollars. When we build ships, we must pay in Euros. The current exchange rate for the useless dollar makes it impossible for the cruise lines to see a reasonable profit on investment. They will not build a Billion Dollar Ship that may never have a chance to see a profit.

 

As soon as the exchange rate improves, the number of mega-ship orders will go up again.

 

 

Mickey Arison stated a few weeks back that there would not be any new builds for their North America brands such as Carnival, Princess or HAL other than what was already on the books due to the weak dollar. They will in place focus on their brands for Europe. Once the dollar gains some strength then you will see Carnival Corp. order more ships. All that makes sense to me. Of course RCI is seeing things a different way and continues to build now working on a fourth Freedom class contract for 2011 behind the two Genesis class ships.

[bUU]

Maybe this is the time to revitalize the US ship-building industry. :)

[mikedw]

Maybe this is the time to revitalize the US ship-building industry. :)

 

I doubt if you would have any takers. Most US shipyards have order books filled for the next several years with military and merchant ship construction. Below is the website that list all US Shipyards and there current newbuild contracts.

http://www.shipbuildinghistory.com/today/contracts.htm

[BruceMuzz]

Revitalize the US Shipping Industry?????

 

When NCL purchased the half built Pride of America from Ingalls Shipyard in Mississippi, they wanted to avoid towing the hull to Europe to finish it. So they offered the job to all those American Shipyards that are nearly bankrupt and begging for work.

 

They couldn't even persuade the American shipyards to bid on the job.

 

The American yards were willing to starve until the next lucrative government ship contract came along.

 

Then when NCL towed the hull to Bremerhaven to complete it, the Germans announced that the construction done by Ingalls was so poor that the yet to be completed ship would have to be almost completely re-built. It was during the rebuilding process that the ship took on water and sank in the harbor.

 

You are not going to find any large cruise line willing to take the chance to build a ship in the USA. But if they wanted to try, the costs would be nearly double what they are in Europe or Asia - even with the worthless dollar.

 

It's not going to happen.

[PunkinsDad]

Then when NCL towed the hull to Bremerhaven to complete it, the Germans announced that the construction done by Ingalls was so poor that the yet to be completed ship would have to be almost completely re-built. It was during the rebuilding process that the ship took on water and sank in the harbor.

Really?? I spent 3 years on an Ingalls-built ship (USS Peterson DD969) and found her to be a very well constructed vessel. We also underwent a 14 month overhaul and modernization performed at the Ingalls shipyard (now Northrup Grumman Ship Systems) in Pascagoula.

 

The Ingalls folks are (or at least were back then) true craftsmen (and women) who did wonderful work.

 

As far as POA is concerned, I understand that after she reached Germany, some design changes were made, mainly the ship was lengthened from 850 to 920 feet, and an unusually fierce storm damaged the uncompleted ship causing her to partially sink at her berth.

[BruceMuzz]

When the German Engineers at Lloyd Werft Yard inspected the Pride of America Hull, they all agreed that it would probably make an excellent warship, but as a cruise ship it would be very unstable and uncomfortable.

 

In the process of rebuilding the hull, they had to cut large holes near the waterline to pour in permanent concrete ballast to make it more stable. While waiting for the concrete to set (so they could close up the holes) a freak storm blew through and whipped up large waves in the harbor. These waves washed into the holes that had been cut for the concrete pouring, slowly submerging the ship.

 

I was able to watch her sink - from the Bridge of the SS Norway.

[PunkinsDad]

When the German Engineers at Lloyd Werft Yard inspected the Pride of America Hull, they all agreed that it would probably make an excellent warship, but as a cruise ship it would be very unstable and uncomfortable.

 

In the process of rebuilding the hull, they had to cut large holes near the waterline to pour in permanent concrete ballast to make it more stable. While waiting for the concrete to set (so they could close up the holes) a freak storm blew through and whipped up large waves in the harbor. These waves washed into the holes that had been cut for the concrete pouring, slowly submerging the ship.

 

I was able to watch her sink - from the Bridge of the SS Norway.

 

That makes a bit more sense. So what we are talking about here is improper design, not inadequate or shoddy construction.

 

I wonder if Ingalls actually did the hull design? I know that this is not the case for the warship construction, those designs all come from the Navy. I suppose if they had been asked to design the ship, thier long history of warship construction might indeed have influenced them.

 

Do most of the major yards known for cruise ship construction actually do the design as well? I would have thought that the designers and naval architects would usually be contracted directly to the cruise line.