Jump to content
Cruise Critic Community
mnocket

Great Article on Overtourism - Shouldn't Cruise Lines Mix Up Their Itineraries More?

Recommended Posts

On 7/2/2019 at 2:57 PM, mnocket said:

Given the growing problem of overtourism, don't cruise lines have a responsibility to expand their ports of call?

 

No.  They answer to their shareholders who want profits. They (cruise lines) are, much to some folks shock, are  for profit companies and want to make money. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
44 minutes ago, TruckerDave said:

No.  They answer to their shareholders who want profits. They (cruise lines) are, much to some folks shock, are  for profit companies and want to make money. 

 

You make it sound like expanded offerings (ports) and profit are mutually exclusive.  I disagree.

 

Much to some folks shock, there are many corporations that see social responsibility as a corporate goal - and not for purely philanthropic reasons. Yes there are the millennials who value it and the marketing departments that exploit it, but good stewardship of those resources upon which a company depends if just plain good business.  Fishermen shouldn't destroy the fishing grounds upon which they depend and cruise lines shouldn't destroy the destinations upon which they depend.

 

On a personal level, I must admit that I get a bit tired of this common retort... "cruise lines are for profit companies that answer to shareholders" every time someone bemoans cutbacks or suggests improvements.  Is devaluing a company's product always in the shareholders best interest?  Perhaps sometimes, but more often the driver is a short-sighted focus on near-term rewards (executive bonuses?) - much like overfishing.  I guess there will always be those who view suggestions of investments in customer care, social responsibility, the environment, supplier health, employees, etc.  as anti-shareholder.  Fortunately, many companies are coming to see these as investments with real returns.  <end of rant>

Edited by mnocket

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

We had previously been those islands and to Dubrovnic on land trips.  We went back on cruises and found all them to be major disappointments.  Dubrovnic is a different, and an enjoyable place after the cruise ship hoards leave at 4ish.    Far too crowded before that.     No doubt Santorini and Mykonos are the same.  We will check the cruise schedules.  If there are no cruise ships in port when we are making our way down to Crete we make stop for a few days.  If there are multiple cruise ships in port we will pass it by on our way to Crete and then Cyprus.  We typically travel in Sept/Oct to avoid some of the crowds and the ultra hot weather in Greece, Italy,  and Turkey.

 

This is one of the reasons why Med cruises are turning us off big time these days.

Edited by iancal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/3/2019 at 4:11 PM, mnocket said:

 

 

Much to some folks shock, there are many corporations that see social responsibility as a corporate goal - and not for purely philanthropic reasons. Yes there are the millennials who value it and the marketing departments that exploit it, but good stewardship of those resources upon which a company depends if just plain good business.  Fishermen shouldn't destroy the fishing grounds upon which they depend and cruise lines shouldn't destroy the destinations upon which they depend.

 

I now need to wipe off my keyboard after I spit out my drink laughing after reading this.  Apparently CCL didn't get the memo about "good stewardship of the resources".  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/3/2019 at 1:11 PM, mnocket said:

there are many corporations that see social responsibility as a corporate goal - and not for purely philanthropic reasons.

Like Patagonia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That may be so but last time I checked Carnival Corp and RCI were not in the social responsibility group.  Strictly focused on maximizing shareholder value.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, iancal said:

That may be so but last time I checked Carnival Corp and RCI were not in the social responsibility group.  Strictly focused on maximizing shareholder value.

RCI, unlike Carnival, is not being cited for repeat pollution violations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Tom47 said:

RCI, unlike Carnival, is not being cited for repeat pollution violations.

 

Currently, perhaps not, but check their record and why they were banned from sailing Glacier Bay National Park.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Texas Tillie said:

 

Currently, perhaps not, but check their record and why they were banned from sailing Glacier Bay National Park.

 

3 minutes ago, Texas Tillie said:

 

Currently, perhaps not, but check their record and why they were banned from sailing Glacier Bay National Park.

That is true, but no new violations since then.   They have been reinstated to Glacier Bay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/3/2019 at 4:11 PM, mnocket said:

 

 

...

 

.  Is devaluing a company's product always in the shareholders best interest?  Perhaps sometimes, but more often the driver is a short-sighted focus on near-term rewards (executive bonuses?) - much like overfishing.  I guess there will always be those who view suggestions of investments in customer care, social responsibility, the environment, supplier health, employees, etc.  as anti-shareholder.  Fortunately, many companies are coming to see these as investments with real returns.  <end of rant>

As long as our laws do not encourage the long view, corporations ARE logically compelled to maximize short term returns.  Until capital gains are indexed to inflation and performance bonuses are held subject to claw-back if gains from performance turn out to have been fleeting, there is no rational reason to think long term.  Companies do not want to invest long term in factories (which would create domestic jobs);  new devices and processes are quickly sold or leased overseas to get quick return.  Why risk net return to the vagaries of time if $100,000,000 in manufacturing profits over ten or twenty years will be taxed at the same rate as the same amount booked this year by selling it to China or Indonesia?

 

Our corporate compensation approach, like our national taxation approach, makes quick short term profits more attractive than long term. 

 

Shareholdes do not want long term return - they want year-to-year (or quarter-to-quarter) results.  

 

Social responsibility costs money - customers do not want to pay that money, and corporate managements do not want to remove that money from their shareholders:  there is a two edged blade attacking social responsibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I sincerely do not intend to offend, but it sounds like many of the replies to my post regarding Corporate Social Responsibility reflect thinking that is 15 years out of date.  Perhaps some who have been retired for a while haven't kept up with the changes that have happened to corporate cultures over the past dozen or so years.  Before you flame me, PLEASE take a few minutes and google  "Corporate Social Responsibility".  It will probably come as a surprise to many that you will get over 35,800,000 results. Read some of them with an open mind.  You will see that companies are not "throwing away shareholder money" on CSR initiatives - they are investing in CSR because its good for employees, customers, suppliers, AND the shareholder bottom line.  If you're jaded and cynical by a career spent in yesteryear's corporate culture, you will have a hard time believing what you read.  The truth is the times they are a changing.

 

Here's just a sample of what you'll find if you go ahead and do a google search.....

 

While just 20 percent of S&P 500 companies published a CSR report in 2011, 81 percent reported doing so in 2015! <it's probably inching up towards 100% today>

Corporate responsibility can do a lot to attract customers. Fifty-five percent of consumers said they are willing to pay more for products from socially responsible companies.

Meanwhile, a CSR program can help drive employee recruitment. Seventy-nine percent of millennials — the largest generational group in the nation — said they consider corporate responsibility when deciding where to work. And 83 percent of millennials said they would be more loyal to a company with a CSR program, according to a recent employee engagement study by Cone Communications.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here's Cisco's CSR Homepage

Intel's CSR Homepage

Hasbro CSR Homepage

Coca-Cola

Wells Fargo CSR Homepage

PNC CSR Homepage

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

At any rate, this whole CSR issue is really a huge expansion of my original point which was simply....

 

Just as fishermen have a responsibility to not deplete the fishing grounds, so do cruise lines have a responsibility to address the issue of overtourism - and my suggestion is that they could best accomplish this by developing new destinations to relieve the burden on the same old ports that every cruise line seems to visit.  Further, I suggest that in the case of fishermen and cruise lines alike, it is in the best interest of their shareholders to do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/3/2019 at 3:01 PM, iancal said:

We are spending six weeks touring the Greek Islands in Sept/Oct. 

 

We are not even considering spending time in Santorini or Mykonos.   We were there years ago and again quite recently on a cruise.  Turned us off completely.  Lots of other islands to visit and spend time that are less crowded and more enjoyable.

 

This is a test. Cruise Critic member @ontheweb has been trying to post the following reply here but has not been able to, so I am trying for them; the quote is by @ontheweb

 

This is in response to post #24 by iancal about not going to Santorini while cruise ships are there because it is too crowded.



 

We were on a HAL Eastern Mediterranean cruise. In Santorini we got lost. We stumbled upon a museum in a cave. We took the tour, The guide spoke English for us, and Greek for the other couple taking the tour. After the tour, I took out our HAL map, and asked the guide to point out where we were. We were off the map. He asked if we had rented a car. When we said no, he unsuccessfully tried to get us a taxi. Then he pointed out a shortcut to get us back to the mapped area.

 

So there are still quiet places even when a ship is in port. And it was actually very interesting.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with mnocket’s summary of recent corporate CSR programs (gleaned largely from PR releases); there has been a lot of TALK about social responsibility - even by cruise lines - but even we retired folk have some idea of what is going on - many of us, in fact, are relying on corporate developments and do pay attention. 

 

Yes, there have been some changes: largely to polish corporate image because that is now part of what contributes to the bottom line.  And, the fact remains, the bottom line is the top priority for corporate managers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/3/2019 at 5:05 PM, iancal said:

We had previously been those islands and to Dubrovnic on land trips.  We went back on cruises and found all them to be major disappointments.  Dubrovnic is a different, and an enjoyable place after the cruise ship hoards leave at 4ish.    Far too crowded before that.     No doubt Santorini and Mykonos are the same.  We will check the cruise schedules.  If there are no cruise ships in port when we are making our way down to Crete we make stop for a few days.  If there are multiple cruise ships in port we will pass it by on our way to Crete and then Cyprus.  We typically travel in Sept/Oct to avoid some of the crowds and the ultra hot weather in Greece, Italy,  and Turkey.

 

This is one of the reasons why Med cruises are turning us off big time these days.

 

It is still possible, with planning, to cruise and not run into huge crowds. As recently as two years ago I cruised on a 350 passenger ship to the Adriatic and Greek isles and (due to careful research) we were the only ship in Santorini on a lovely mid-April day until around 2pm when one other ship (not a huge one either) arrived.

 

September, IMO is almost the same as June-August these days with so many ships not leaving the Med until well into October.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Agree.  Our challenge is that we fondly remember how Santorini was in the mid-late 80's.   We may try to pick up a small ship in Greece or Turkey and do some cruising. If not...island hopping by ferry down to Crete and then to Cyprus.  We are simply not interested in taking another Med cruise on the popular cruise lines.  We thought that we would be doing more cruising in retirement.  The opposite has transpired.  Fewer cruises and far more independent land travel.

Edited by iancal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, iancal said:

island hopping by ferry

We loved the ferries!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The cruise lines have killed themselves when it comes to Europe.  Over the next 10-20 years, I suspect that half of the current ports will begin to limit port calls to ships under 35,000 gross tonnes.  I can probably count the ships that can meet this criteria on my fingers.  Had the lines been responsible and not built out ships that can carry almost 10,000 souls, they wouldn't be in this situation.  Frankly I don't see the point of stopping anywhere if you've booked a ship that's just a big floating resort.  Just enjoy the time at sea.

 

We plan on cruising more in the next 20 years--not including river cruising (which is also getting far too overbuilt) we expect to take at least 10 cruises--several being expedition, and all being on ships with under 350 passengers.  More than a few will be 20 days or longer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 7/3/2019 at 5:05 PM, iancal said:

We had previously been those islands and to Dubrovnic on land trips.  We went back on cruises and found all them to be major disappointments.  Dubrovnic is a different, and an enjoyable place after the cruise ship hoards leave at 4ish.    Far too crowded before that.     No doubt Santorini and Mykonos are the same.  We will check the cruise schedules.  If there are no cruise ships in port when we are making our way down to Crete we make stop for a few days.  If there are multiple cruise ships in port we will pass it by on our way to Crete and then Cyprus.  We typically travel in Sept/Oct to avoid some of the crowds and the ultra hot weather in Greece, Italy,  and Turkey.

 

This is one of the reasons why Med cruises are turning us off big time these days.

 

More than once I've experienced being in a popular destination when the ships pull in.  Everyone who cruises should have the experience although you may not regard cruising in the same way again.  It's not only the numbers but conduct as well.  Obnoxious tourists in groups is not the sole preserve of cruise ships however. You will see the same phenomenon when large tour buses pull in somewhere but not quite to the same degree because it's hundreds vs. thousands.     

 

 

Edited by K32682

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, clo said:

Like Patagonia.

One of the few.  I don't think there are "many."   I haven't heard of too many companies donating their recent tax cut bonus to charity.  Patagonia donated their $10,000,000.00 refund to environmental charity...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, slidergirl said:

One of the few.  I don't think there are "many."   I haven't heard of too many companies donating their recent tax cut bonus to charity.  Patagonia donated their $10,000,000.00 refund to environmental charity...

Probably/maybe not.  One of our daughters and her husband have a company and they work closely with Patagonia.  They truly walk the walk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, clo said:

Probably/maybe not.  One of our daughters and her husband have a company and they work closely with Patagonia.  They truly walk the walk.

The companies in the outdoor business seem to eagerly support environmentally conscious efforts.  Like, when the Outdoor Retailers Association pulled their massive Summer and Winter Markets  out of Utah because the government of Utah (NOT the citizens) supported the current administration's decimation of 2 National Monuments sacred to the Native American tribes in the area.   The state loses $45 million dollars each year that ORA used to bring, hotels lose that week of totally sold out properties, restaurants lose that week of full tables.

 

Making new ports just expands the overcrowding/daytrippers-who-spend-very -little-money-onshore to another place.  With those large ships, dropping 3-10,000 people for a few hours puts a huge footprint on any port.   If an existing port is OK with the situation, fine.  But, if an existing port is fed up, they are free to put restrictions.  And if an area wants to create a new port, they better have something for the tourist to see IN TOWN or they will just be a dumping off spot for people hopping into tour busses to drive elsewhere for the time in port.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I have little doubt that these cruise line senior execs, are goaled in the same manner as execs in other North American firms.

 

Quarterly and YE results and stock price.  Revenue, Profit, and growth.  They will earn quarterly performance bonus', stock options, and outright stock grants.  They no doubt want to be socially responsible but certainly  not at the expense of their remunerations or their positions.   That is their brief from the shareholders.

Edited by iancal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Privately owned companies are more likely to think long term: they really have “shareholders”.  Most public companies’ common stock is held by funds - who trade in and out- not really being “holders” - rarely thinking beyond this year’s, or perhaps the next’s, results. They have very little inclination to protect a company’s sphere of activity in the future if it has to come at any significant cost to this year’s bottom line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, slidergirl said:

 Like, when the Outdoor Retailers Association pulled their massive Summer and Winter Markets  out of Utah because the government of Utah (NOT the citizens) supported the current administration's decimation of 2 National Monuments sacred to the Native American tribes in the area.

Can't remember, was Bears Ears one of those?  A donation to that was our Christmas gift to them two years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, clo said:

Can't remember, was Bears Ears one of those?  A donation to that was our Christmas gift to them two years ago.

I believe Bears Ears  was one of them.  Since you live in Nevada, here is another controversy.

https://www.npca.org/articles/2189-naming-matters?fbclid=IwAR3nCat2PUCnmkzBPdNrtbqxP2yp3ViliugXa01ZHc6LPugFOJpEE5GFoWo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • SAIL-AWAY GIVEAWAY - Enter for a chance to win a $3,000 Norwegian Cruise Line Gift Card
      • Forum Assistance
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Member Cruise Reviews
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...