Carnival concerns about growth in AU

From ABC news.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-25/lack-of-port-facilities-may-impact-carnival-cruise-company/6974208

Thanks for the article Trev. We need more terminals for the grand ships. Tendering isn't much fun.

From ABC news.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-25/lack-of-port-facilities-may-impact-carnival-cruise-company/6974208

Lack of port facilities may put brakes on Carnival cruise line's growth in Australia

That is precisely the problem. Its great having all the ships here, but people will soon get tired and bored if there are only a few places for them to go.

The biggest potential for cruising is Queensland during our winter.

Where can the ships dock?

Built a couple of ships for the Australian market that are the size of Princess Sun class ships. Problem solved. Next :D

They could still be used for World Cruise itineraries, Circle Pacific, Grand South America etc.

They could visit a lot of places. Even if they needed to reposition them they could still go to most ports in the world.

The Monster ships are not really suitable for cruising in our region.

Thanks for the article Trev. We need more terminals for the grand ships. Tendering isn't much fun.

Especially off the bigger ships.

It seems the bigger the ship the worse the tender experience.

Built a couple of ships for the Australian market that are the size of Princess Sun class ships. Problem solved. Next :D

 

They could still be used for World Cruise itineraries, Circle Pacific, Grand South America etc. They could visit a lot of places. Even if they needed to reposition them they could still go to most ports in the world. The Monster ships are not really suitable for cruising in our region.

I agree with you, but some people on this forum say they want the bigger ships. The really big ones cannot get into a lot of the ports in this region. They can cruise from Sydney to several ports in NZ. There would only be a couple of ports in the Pacific islands that could accommodate them.:)

It will be interesting to see how people like the size of the Pacific Aria & Eden. From memory, they are about 48,000 - much smaller than the Pacific Pearl (around 60,000) and much, much smaller than the Dawn (around 70,000).

I agree with you, but some people on this forum say they want the bigger ships. The really big ones cannot get into a lot of the ports in this region. They can cruise from Sydney to several ports in NZ. There would only be a couple of ports in the Pacific islands that could accommodate them.:)

 

It will be interesting to see how people like the size of the Pacific Aria & Eden. From memory, they are about 48,000 - much smaller than the Pacific Pearl (around 60,000) and much, much smaller than the Dawn (around 70,000).

Or even bring back more like our favorite, Pacific Princess, at about 30,000, she got in almost everywhere and when you tendered it was a 5 minute ride not an hour, plus about 6 trips and everyone was ashore.

I agree with you, but some people on this forum say they want the bigger ships. The really big ones cannot get into a lot of the ports in this region. They can cruise from Sydney to several ports in NZ. There would only be a couple of ports in the Pacific islands that could accommodate them.:)

 

It will be interesting to see how people like the size of the Pacific Aria & Eden. From memory, they are about 48,000 - much smaller than the Pacific Pearl (around 60,000) and much, much smaller than the Dawn (around 70,000).

Problem is PO Australia really missed the boat with its itineraries on Aria and Eden. Could have easily captailised by doing a nice little runs up to French Polynesian and back. From what I have seen from the itineraries released to date two things spring to mind 1) they still expecting top dollar 2) the itineraries offered are virtually same or nearly similar to other cruise lines, some which have newer and flashier ships. There is NOT lot tempting me to try them.

Problem is PO Australia really missed the boat with its itineraries on Aria and Eden. Could have easily captailised by doing a nice little runs up to French Polynesian and back. From what I have seen from the itineraries released to date two things spring to mind 1) they still expecting top dollar 2) the itineraries offered are virtually same or nearly similar to other cruise lines, some which have newer and flashier ships. There is NOT lot tempting me to try them.

I agree...they could have done a run over to and around Tahiti ,then back again and sold as either a full cruise or in 2 halves.

If they want top dollar they must supply top service and top destinations.

I think the problem with cruises to French Polynesia from Australia is the duration of the cruise - 28 days if there are a couple of stops on the way. This is too long in days and too expensive for a lot of people. P&O used to do 28-night cruises to Tahiti (of 21 nights from Auckland), but around five years ago they changed their itineraries by cutting out all the long cruises (like Tahiti).:)

I think the problem with cruises to French Polynesia from Australia is the duration of the cruise - 28 days if there are a couple of stops on the way. This is too long in days and too expensive for a lot of people. P&O used to do 28-night cruises to Tahiti (of 21 nights from Auckland), but around five years ago they changed their itineraries by cutting out all the long cruises (like Tahiti).:)

I reckon they could get it down to like 18 day or 20 days return trip. If the Solistice can get to Papeete in 8 days stopping on the way in Bay of Islands and Auckland. Then you add 3 days in FP and 8 days home with a couple stops on the way.

Princess are already offering 20 PNG cruises with bit of teh SP.

Thanks for the article Trev. We need more terminals for the grand ships. Tendering isn't much fun.

Ditto😀

But what are the lines (the main beneficiaries of the growth) doing themselves to improve the ports.

I reckon they could get it down to like 18 day or 20 days return trip. If the Solistice can get to Papeete in 8 days stopping on the way in Bay of Islands and Auckland. Then you add 3 days in FP and 8 days home with a couple stops on the way.

If you left from Auckland, you could shave another 5 or 6 days off that. It's about a third of the way there already. I've always seen Auckland as just as easy for Australians to get to as Sydney (apart from Sydneysiders :)).

There are also alternatives to Tahiti like the Cook Islands, which apart from Rarotonga get very few visits.

Yeap. Cook Islands, Samoa, Tonga, etc

But what are the lines (the main beneficiaries of the growth) doing themselves to improve the ports.

Running PR like this to get the taxpayer to pay. :p

But what are the lines (the main beneficiaries of the growth) doing themselves to improve the ports.

Running PR like this to get the taxpayer to pay. :p

Exactly...There is no reason why Carnival cant set up their own terminals and docks...like they do at Fort Lauderdale.

Star cruises built their own facilities and now cruise every week to KL and Phuket.

If they wait for the taxpayers to front up, do you really think that on shore resort operators are going to rush to give their taxes to something that's going to take business away from them?

I had noticed that Royal had a single cruise stopping at Tonga next year which was odd, I enquired about it & the rep told me they will be testing out the port & if all goes well we will probably see more stops there.

For us the only thing that would make us go on a non Royal/Celebrity ship is the ports - no use otherwise as we enjoy our loyalty perks & the cruise 'style' & age demographic of these lines.

We were tempted to do one of the Princess round Pacific or round South America cruises but after investigating & finding the ship they use is lacking in some of what we consider basics (My Time Dining, Free access to adult solarium/pool area for example) we decided against it. Now if Princess would use one of their better ships for the long trips we may go with them - although the potentially older age demographic could be a bit of a put off for us still.

I don't know why Royal don't use one of their smaller Vision class ships to do some longer itineraries, a Sydney>Asia>Sydney would be good instead of those round Australia cruises they currently offer.

I guess the infrastructure for cruise ships in regards to both docking & providing excursions etc for the passengers in general isn't well developed in the South Pacific, hence the same old ports.

I'm sure they are working on it but it may also be that some of the islands just don't want this sort of tourism, or they just can't offer enough of interest to passengers - although I would argue that if Mystery Island can be a port then pretty much anywhere can be? :)

Regards the larger ships, I think it will be inevitable that Garden Island will eventually be converted to a full time cruise ship terminal to cater for them & the navy will relocate south or north of Sydney.

Running PR like this to get the taxpayer to pay. :p

And I can't blame them for that.

I am all for the bigger ships coming here more often. I love the modern options & wow factors they offer. First of all we need to see a new Mega Terminal built at Luggage Point behind the Airport in Brisbane Asap. This will mean bigger ships can conveniently do south pacific cruises in a 7 day turnaround which would suit many who can't take long periods off work. At the same time we need a whole lot of smaller Caribbean style docks built along the Qld coast whereby even the largest of ships can tie up at a pier for a short day trip. I'm just talking about cheap & cheerful concrete piers like the type you would see being used daily at ports in the Caribbean like Cozumel or Grand Turk. This would really open up tourism for Qld, not only for Aussies but for many International visitors wanting to see famous Australian beaches & wildlife & southern/northern Great barrier reef & so on.

And I can't blame them for that.

It's rent seeking.

Too much bad government lately, and it results in taxpayers paying for the profits of commercial businesses. I can blame them for that.

It's rent seeking.

 

Too much bad government lately, and it results in taxpayers paying for the profits of commercial businesses. I can blame them for that.

We can blame a poor, hand held out, labor government for allowing the building of the Brisbane cruise terminal on the wrong side of the Gateway bridge