Arison: More ships may leave Alaska

[gtalum]

When it comes down to it, most full-time Alaskans would be happier with a much smaller land-based tourism business run by Alaskans.

[Earthworm Jim]

One factor not mentioned here, is where the ship leaving Alaska might be going. And from CEO Arison's comments, it may well be back to Europe:

 

Arison and other Carnival executives said it was becoming increasingly difficult to make money in Alaska due to growing fees, taxes and regulations imposed on cruise companies by the state, and they said that other destinations such as Europe now hold more appeal for their ships.

 

So what does that mean? Is Carnival going back to Europe? Or will the Carnival ships currently on the Alaska run be converted to one of Carnival's other lines, and those lines will increase their sailings in Europe?

[DocJohnB]

The below report is a study conducted during the 2002 cruise season in just one Maine port of call . . . . . . Bar Harbor, ME.

 

http://www.maine.gov/dep/blwq/topic/vessels/repCruiseReport.pdf

 

Some of the more interesting points:

 

"The average respondent (of survey) spent $85.26 in Bar Harbor. This was upped to $105.82 when including cruise-line sponsored tours".

 

"Passengers had a $12.1 MILLION impact on revenue sales, including multiplier effects, and supported 275 full and part-time jobs in Bar Harbor in 2002".

 

The economic impact figures were based on 97,000 passengers on 64 cruise ships scheduled in Bar Harbor in 2002.

 

Last year saw 97 visits with nearly 135,000 passengers. ( http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-19385350.html )

 

The number is expected to be about the same (97) this season. ( http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-20341375.html )

 

To me, that is just too huge a chunk of revenue to lose by trying to squeeze an added head tax on as Alaska has done.

 

I do not know the numbers, but would hazard a guess that more ships visits take place in Alaska than in Maine.

[mudpievelour]

Send Rhapsody back to Galveston.

 

Send ANY SHIP back to Galveston. The price of my cruise has almost doubled since I booked. Carnival doesn't seem to understand that Texans WILL keep all those floating tour busses full and making money (provided they change up the itinerary a little.)

 

Gma was right. The state of Alaska doesn't care if the cruise companies pull out. They want their wilderness pristine. Don't want it trampled by millions of "tourists".

[DocJohnB]

Actually, no. The Alaska tourism industry is largely staffed by temporary folks who come in just for the summer. The work is only for 3-4 months a year. When I went to Alaska on a land-based vacation a few years back, a lot of the hotel employees and tour operators were from Florida, believe it or not. When tourism is quiet in most of Florida, in the summer, it's peak tourism time in Alaska.

 

Yes, but these "temporary" residents eat, sleep, and play in Alaska while working in the tourism industry thereby contributing more revenue to the state. I believe they would also be contributing to the state coffers via "income tax".

[Pegs222]

Try living in a tourist area before you start lecturing. Tourists are an essential pain in the behind. Locals want their money, but don't want the inconvenience of dealing with them.

 

And you may want to check your facts before you lecture me. The people that work in the shops etc. are not all locals, they are from all over the lower 48 and Hawaii. They are only there for the, tourist season.

[DocJohnB]

 

Gma was right. The state of Alaska doesn't care if the cruise companies pull out. They want their wilderness pristine. Don't want it trampled by millions of "tourists".

But, and again using my adopted state of Maine as the example . . . we are just as concerned with our coastlines and wilderness areas and do a pretty good job at keeping them "pristine". We even use tourist revenue to do so. When it comes to taxes and regulations, Maine leaves a lot to be desired, but it works hard at balancing both sides of the tourist/ecology equation, and for the most part, succeeds.

[dan40]

When it comes down to it, most full-time Alaskans would be happier with a much smaller land-based tourism business run by Alaskans.

 

 

I'm a full time Florida resident and I bitch about the traffic snarls caused by Snowbirds as much as anyone. But I do not bitch about having NO State Income Tax thanx to the tourists contributions.

 

 

And I will bet ANYTHING that the number of Alaskans coming here in winter to service the tourists is ZERO.

[Hondu]

Sailed to Alaska 3 times and don't see any reason to go back. Nice place but enough is enough. Cannot believe that the locals would prefer to see no ships when compared to all those passengers spending lots of money. Wonder what the impact would be in Skagway on the White Pass rail excursion if no cruise ships called for just one season?

[mr. cruiser]

This is just the start of the war between the industry and state of Alaska. We will see who blinks first, but I think the industry will have the upper hand if they stick together.

[LemurCat]

And you may want to check your facts before you lecture me. The people that work in the shops etc. are not all locals, they are from all over the lower 48 and Hawaii. They are only there for the, tourist season.

 

You might want to re-read my post. I didn't say anything about where the locals do or don't work. I merely stated that the locals don't want to deal with the hassle of the tourist season but do want the money.

[BigDoug]

Please remember that it was the VOTERS in Alaska that approved the $50 head tax. Only $4 of the tax goes to environmental compliance. The rest goes into the general fund.

[LemurCat]

Please remember that it was the VOTERS in Alaska that approved the $50 head tax. Only $4 of the tax goes to environmental compliance. The rest goes into the general fund.

 

Would that be the Permanent Fund they also pay oil dividends out of?

[gtalum]

I'm a full time Florida resident and I bitch about the traffic snarls caused by Snowbirds as much as anyone. But I do not bitch about having NO State Income Tax thanx to the tourists contributions.

 

Not only does Alaska not have a state income tax, Alaska residents get a dividend every year form the oil industry. They really don't want a lot of tourists.

 

 

And I will bet ANYTHING that the number of Alaskans coming here in winter to service the tourists is ZERO.

 

I'm not sure what that has to do with anything. Alaska has a tiny population, so they have to import temporary tourism workers every season. Florida has a huge population.

[futaba951]

Not only does Alaska not have a state income tax, Alaska residents get a dividend every year form the oil industry. They really don't want a lot of tourists.

 

 

 

 

I'm not sure what that has to do with anything. Alaska has a tiny population, so they have to import temporary tourism workers every season. Florida has a huge population.

 

 

Florida wouldn't be so crowded if 3/4 of the pop. didn't need to drag around on a walker or flair around on a scooter, leaving a trail of rotten farts on their way to pick up their MONTHLY dividend from SSA. :p

[dan40]

Florida wouldn't be so crowded if 3/4 of the pop. didn't need to drag around on a walker or flair around on a scooter, leaving a trail of rotten farts on their way to pick up their MONTHLY dividend from SSA. :p

 

 

HEY! I don't have a WALKER! And I don't have a SCOOTER! And I don',,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,never mind!:eek::D

[dan40]

Florida wouldn't be so crowded if 3/4 of the pop. didn't need to drag around on a walker or flair around on a scooter, leaving a trail of rotten farts on their way to pick up their MONTHLY dividend from SSA. :p

 

New Wine for Seniors

California vintners in the Napa Valley area, which primarily produce

Pinot Blanc, Pinot Noir and Pinot Grigio wines, have developed a

new hybrid grape that acts as an

anti-diuretic.

It is expected to reduce the number of trips older people have to

make to the bathroom during the night.

The new wine will be marketed as

 

PINO MORE

[Nunu]

oh dan

[Traveler353]

The best part of tourist season is when they all go home. When I lived in Maine the big joke was: Yes were all for the new interstate improvement. 4 lanes in and 10 lanes out.:p

[futaba951]

The best part of tourist season is when they all go home. When I lived in Maine the big joke was: Yes were all for the new interstate improvement. 4 lanes in and 10 lanes out.:p

 

 

Living in Biloxi that's no joke. You need that occasionally. I live in Grand Bay just across the state line. I've been through a few hurricanes myself.

[greatam]

G'ma,

Where do they get the 10's of thousands of people that service the cruise industry in Alaska and Hawaii. I'd guess they are LOCALS too, and would not like to see the cruise ships leave.

 

This is where you are WRONG. Sure, a few locals get jobs. BUT the majority of people that work in Alaska during cruise ship season are from the lower 48. There is LITTLE money left by the cruise ships in Alaska. And the cost to the state is HIGH. All those tour buses tear up the roads. Extra police and fire protection is needed. Every cruise passenger wants nice docks, nice amenities. But those amenities are only used by cruisers during a very short 4-5 month season.

 

And when you figure it out on a YEARLY basis, even a port as third world as Honduras reaps almost as much money as the Alaska ports without nearly the infrastructure costs.

 

The CITIZENS of Alaska put the initiative on the ballot in 2006. They were really tired of paying for road repair, dock repair and all the other things cruisers demand. So they instituted the "head tax" to pay for the infrastructure. The cruise lines sure were not stepping up to the plate. Even a lot of the cruise line buses are plated out of states other than Alaska, so they even loose the license plate money.

 

The cruise lines are pulling ships out of Alaska because there are just too many cabins chasing too few dollars. The $50.00 tax is a scapegoat because the cruise lines have built too many big ships and need to fill the space. Very few who spend$200-300pp for Alaska excursions are REALLY complaining about the extra $50.00.

 

This from the Alaska board, with posts by FULL TIME Alaska residents (and one part timer-me). "Trickle down" DOES NOT work in Alaska.

 

http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=1061940

[dan40]

This is where you are WRONG. Sure, a few locals get jobs. BUT the majority of people that work in Alaska during cruise ship season are from the lower 48. There is LITTLE money left by the cruise ships in Alaska. And the cost to the state is HIGH. All those tour buses tear up the roads. Extra police and fire protection is needed. Every cruise passenger wants nice docks, nice amenities. But those amenities are only used by cruisers during a very short 4-5 month season.

 

And when you figure it out on a YEARLY basis, even a port as third world as Honduras reaps almost as much money as the Alaska ports without nearly the infrastructure costs.

 

The CITIZENS of Alaska put the initiative on the ballot in 2006. They were really tired of paying for road repair, dock repair and all the other things cruisers demand. So they instituted the "head tax" to pay for the infrastructure. The cruise lines sure were not stepping up to the plate. Even a lot of the cruise line buses are plated out of states other than Alaska, so they even loose the license plate money.

 

The cruise lines are pulling ships out of Alaska because there are just too many cabins chasing too few dollars. The $50.00 tax is a scapegoat because the cruise lines have built too many big ships and need to fill the space. Very few who spend$200-300pp for Alaska excursions are REALLY complaining about the extra $50.00.

 

This from the Alaska board, with posts by FULL TIME Alaska residents (and one part timer-me). "Trickle down" DOES NOT work in Alaska.

 

http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=1061940

 

Look at D.C The CITIZENS did that too.

[DocJohnB]

There is LITTLE money left by the cruise ships in Alaska. And the cost to the state is HIGH. All those tour buses tear up the roads. Extra police and fire protection is needed. Every cruise passenger wants nice docks, nice amenities.

Can't buy into that LITTLE money left by cruise ships. I cited a Maine study (post #28 this thread) that show in ONE port (Bar Harbor) cruisers had a $12 million impact on revenue. That was 7 years ago and based on 68 ship visits in ONE port. That figure has gone up in the ensuing years. It cannot be a whole lot different in the Alaskan ports.

 

An article in the Apr 1, 2009 edition of (Alaska) Capital City Weekly ( http://capitalcityweekly.com/stories/040109/new_421206803.shtml ) had the following little tidbit.

 

"In 2008, the Juneau Convention and Visitor's Bureau projected that each cruise ship passenger would spend an average of $186. At over a million cruisers, that adds up." That is $186 million dollars. That doesn't include the port taxes already charged. By the way, good article. You might want to read it all. Some interesting points.

 

The CITIZENS of Alaska put the initiative on the ballot in 2006. They were really tired of paying for road repair, dock repair and all the other things cruisers demand. So they instituted the "head tax" to pay for the infrastructure.

Not quite true. 40% goes to "cruise ship infrastructure". 60% goes to cities on the cruise "routes" ($5 to each of the first 5 ports visited) and to the Ocean Rangers environmental monitoring program ($4).

 

This is where you are WRONG. Sure, a few locals get jobs. BUT the majority of people that work in Alaska during cruise ship season are from the lower 48.

This also generates revenue for the state and its' citizens in the form of rent, board, transportation, etc.

 

The cruise lines are pulling ships out of Alaska because there are just too many cabins chasing too few dollars. The $50.00 tax is a scapegoat because the cruise lines have built too many big ships and need to fill the space.

While I partly agree with the first sentence, the second sentence is bunk.

 

My personal opinion is that "head taxes" for a particular segment of industry is pure, unadulterated greed by the people (politicians) of the government involved.

 

The industry has filed suit in federal court. Will be interesting to see how it all pans out.

[Maraprince]

Local residents make their money during the "tourist" season because when winter comes, there is little money to be made. Many residents work 2-3 jobs during the warm weather months.

 

Cruise passengers take tours. Tours mean money for the local operators. Without the cruise ships, Alaska would lose that extra revenue.

 

While $50 per passenger sounds like a small amount, it adds up. Even if a passengers doesn't leave the ship, they are still charged the head tax.

 

One of the main reasons why Alaska has to repair their roads are the almost daily earthquakes that occur in the region and not tour buses.

 

Without tourists, many residents would not have people eating in their restaurants or shopping in their stores. Every tourist area has "imported" workers to supplement the local workers.

 

One way or another the money spent on shore adds revenue to Alaska.

 

The worst thing in this whole hullabloo is that many people will be denied seeing the beauty of Alaska and what it has to offer. It is not every day you have an eagle flying over your head. What a magnificent sight! Or, being able to enjoy almost 12-14 hours of daylight, seeing a glacier of a seal colony. We are lucky to have a state like Alaska without having to go to Norway who doesn't have the wildlife or the long days.

 

Alaska is America and the last "frontier" with a rich history and heritage. Alaska can only be experienced in person. Videos may be nice, but it doesn't come close to the real thing.

 

 

MARAPRINCE

[adonisr]

We had our cruise booked to Alaska when this all first flared up. The responses by people from / in Alaska were very similar to some here and some even more heated.

 

The basic response from many in AK is, we don't want cruise ships and their crowds.

 

So in honor of their request, we did our one trip and plan to never go back.

 

There are are too many destinations where my tourist $$ are wanted to spend them somewhere they're not.