Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

About The_Big_M

  • Rank
    10,000+ Club

About Me

  • Location
    Sydney, Australia

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Agreed. A lot of speculators are buying based on reversion to what it was. Not realising there has been a lot of equity issued since, which devalues it. When shares start getting valued based on BAU operations rather than speculation the actual return achieved is likely to drive the share price down.
  2. Not really. In the current climate the business model is non-viable. If circumstances change as expected then it may be viable again. Hence it's purely speculative. However, just because it's thought positive now is not a guarantee for the future. Remember back in February last year when it was considered viable to continue as it was. What a furphy that was! Then in March when it just required slight changes. Again, wrong. Then in April when the outage would just be a few months. Again, wrong! And so on.
  3. It's conventional usage but incomplete in the post you quoted. Those not on the red list are asked to stay at home (no cost), whereas coming from countries on the red list have to stay in hotel quarantine which has a cost.
  4. As RickT said, it's basically a moot point. We've had the same here for almost a year... but there also hasn't been any cruising, or most travel for that matter. This isn't a permanent thing though and as the vaccine is rolled out, restrictions across the travel industry will relax, including this.
  5. I have to say I like his tagline: "It's not who you are underneath, it's what you do that defines you." How apt.
  6. Actually, at any time that's usually the way it's done. Visas aren't applied for till a month or so out, as staff are not committed earlier. Nobody plans out where staff are 6 months out for general staff. Conversely nobody is going to start sales only a month out; that's way too late as most people make bookings further out than that. You might want to check the next time sales open for a new flight route. You'll normally see that sales have opened before they even have regulatory approval! Because formalities and details take quite long to organise, whereas the genera
  7. Yes, I watched the conference. I don't think you are being fair. It has been well publicised that the ship was to operate sailings, including with press releases so it was known it was not for maintenance. And this was not the reason given either i.e. he did not say they did not have permission to operate in NZ - only about the visas. He actually said they applied for their initial visas on the 8th of January - this is a whole month before they were scheduled to operate, and 3 weeks ago now. The 21st was their 2nd application, after the first refusal. Of course if you were operatin
  8. It now appears unlikely this cruise will sail, as NZ has refused entry. Covid 19 coronavirus: Cruise ship Le Lapérouse refused entry to NZ waters - NZ Herald NZ say they approved entry for the ship - but said it was conditional on visas for the crew. Subsequently they did not issue visas for all 61 'non-essential' crew, and now say that means the ship cannot enter. This seems contradictory for NZ as giving permission for the ship is straightforward that that is for it to operate, not for other reasons. Thus, crew are all necessary as well, so it is odd they
  9. Well, I remember dining crew roaming the restaurant singing, with loud music playing in the background. Does that count? 😉
  10. ... To the extent they cannot issue any more mortages over what they hold.
  11. Wish I could say the same. Still waiting for repayments for two cruises cancelled in September, that would have already sailed, to be refunded. The TAs say to wait 4 months+ for the refund. And they're not large amounts.
  12. The distinction is he continues to keep attacking me. I am not attacking his posts at all. And each time I rebut something he says he goes on to some new attack - or just repeats his old ones. Look at his latest post; again I say nothing about that topic that he alleges is the only reason he continues, yet he just goes to attack anything I say. There's a difference between defending oneself, and attacking. I actually think if most of you had had someone continually digging through posts of yours trying to find something to attack you with, you'd feel badly about it. So it's pretty
  13. It's an ongoing discussion amongst a number of us - not something I'm bringing up. In fact, this chain started from me responding to something you had written so again you're accusing me of something I didn't do. But unlike you, I'm not going to tell you to stop bringing it up. It is a discussion forum, after all. Posted Wednesday at 03:20 AM (cruisecritic.com) So how about you stop telling me what I said, or accusing me of something I didn't do, and we can all move on.
  14. People have already said they wish it to stop as do I, but as you haven't I'm not debating what I've said with you on this any further. I believe if you actually wanted to understand there's already been more than enough written. From your post you're inferring things I didn't say, as well as changing the nuance of what has been said and then arguing with that. I could explain the distinction again, but I don't see the point so am leaving this here.
  • Create New...