Jump to content

A Very Great Deal For This Island!


Recommended Posts

Sounds like they found a place for a form of cold layup for these two ships.  This was eluded to recently during an investor's call.  Park the ships with minimum crewing to support the basic ongoing upkeep while minimizing demand on ship systems.  

The ship and crew effectively become part of the local society like they are in a building.  This greatly reduces operating costs over the months to come which further helps the company make it even longer.

Great news.  Let's hope for no tropical systems for them to deal with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, twangster said:

Sounds like they found a place for a form of cold layup for these two ships.  This was eluded to recently during an investor's call.  Park the ships with minimum crewing to support the basic ongoing upkeep while minimizing demand on ship systems.  

The ship and crew effectively become part of the local society like they are in a building.  This greatly reduces operating costs over the months to come which further helps the company make it even longer.

Great news.  Let's hope for no tropical systems for them to deal with.

Recent news articles suggest Carnival are burning $650 million a month compared to Royal at $290 million. I guess things like this could account for some of the difference. But with similar number of ships what are your thoughts on why it's such a large difference?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, mattymay said:

Recent news articles suggest Carnival are burning $650 million a month compared to Royal at $290 million. I guess things like this could account for some of the difference. But with similar number of ships what are your thoughts on why it's such a large difference?

Not really sure. Different fleet size is definitely a factor but so is median age.  Much of Carnival's fleet is smaller and older.  

With the introduction of mega sized ships Royal grew more efficient in terms of revenue per passenger carried.  Smaller fleet but with bigger ships, Royal has been achieving better revenue performance on a relative basis.  For every mega ship Royal has at sea, Carnival needs somewhere between two to three ships to carry the same numbers, passengers and revenue.

Now remove the guests and move into a mode of maintaining and operating a fleet at reduced crew levels.  That's still a Captain per ship, a senior bridge crew per ship,  marine departments per ship, security teams per ship.  Dock fees, fuel minimums, operating certificates, etc. all on a per ship basis.  The highest paid crew positions are still required while many of the lowest paid positions have been sent home. 

The cost to maintain a smaller ship during these times may be slightly lower that the cost to maintain a mega sized ship but at absolute minimums there is a floor that is reached, a minimum operating cost that any ship requires regardless of size.  That extra two to three ships per million in passenger revenue starts to bite them very hard. 

There are also fewer brands so fewer high priced executive teams running each brand.   Royal Caribbean International, the flagship brand operates around the world.  Carnival as in the red whale tail brand that is the flagship primarily operates only in North America.  Carnival Australia is a completely different organization from a corporate structure perspective sharing only the name and whale tail, it's almost like yet another Carnival brand.  For other regions Carnival operates another brand such as P&O, AIDA, Costa for example.  Like ships there are floor costs to operate each brand using the corporate structure that Carnival uses.   For each brand there are presidents and senior vice presidents, etc. - the highest priced positions.

I also think corporate culture starts to creep in as a factor which underlie the revenue performance and revenue efficiency that was experienced during the good times in the decades leading up to this point.  That's hard to quantify in exact numbers.  During the good times the cost of Carnival's corporate culture and inefficiency was masked by the fists full of dollars coming in.  Stripped of passenger revenue and forced to operate at minimums we see it more plainly.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, twangster said:

Not really sure. Different fleet size is definitely a factor but so is median age.  Much of Carnival's fleet is smaller and older.  

With the introduction of mega sized ships Royal grew more efficient in terms of revenue per passenger carried.  Smaller fleet but with bigger ships, Royal has been achieving better revenue performance on a relative basis.  For every mega ship Royal has at sea, Carnival needs somewhere between two to three ships to carry the same numbers, passengers and revenue.

Now remove the guests and move into a mode of maintaining and operating a fleet at reduced crew levels.  That's still a Captain per ship, a senior bridge crew per ship,  marine departments per ship, security teams per ship.  Dock fees, fuel minimums, operating certificates, etc. all on a per ship basis.  The highest paid crew positions are still required while many of the lowest paid positions have been sent home. 

The cost to maintain a smaller ship during these times may be slightly lower that the cost to maintain a mega sized ship but at absolute minimums there is a floor that is reached, a minimum operating cost that any ship requires regardless of size.  That extra two to three ships per million in passenger revenue starts to bite them very hard. 

There are also fewer brands so fewer high priced executive teams running each brand.   Royal Caribbean International, the flagship brand operates around the world.  Carnival as in the red whale tail brand that is the flagship primarily operates only in North America.  Carnival Australia is a completely different organization from a corporate structure perspective sharing only the name and whale tail, it's almost like yet another Carnival brand.  For other regions Carnival operates another brand such as P&O, AIDA, Costa for example.  Like ships there are floor costs to operate each brand using the corporate structure that Carnival uses.   For each brand there are presidents and senior vice presidents, etc. - the highest priced positions.

I also think corporate culture starts to creep in as a factor which underlie the revenue performance and revenue efficiency that was experienced during the good times in the decades leading up to this point.  That's hard to quantify in exact numbers.  During the good times the cost of Carnival's corporate culture and inefficiency was masked by the fists full of dollars coming in.  Stripped of passenger revenue and forced to operate at minimums we see it more plainly.   

Good point.. I forgot when they mentioned Carnival they are referring to the Carnival Corporation. I was purely thinking Carnival Cruise Line vs RCI. Makes more sense now.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/19/2020 at 2:10 AM, mattymay said:

Recent news articles suggest Carnival are burning $650 million a month compared to Royal at $290 million. I guess things like this could account for some of the difference. But with similar number of ships what are your thoughts on why it's such a large difference?

Carnival also holds a number of resort properties through Holland and Princess in Alaska.  All the lodges were closed over the summer.  They also have their own trains that are not operating. (under Princess and Holland)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...