NCL says 1st of the Mutant Ninja Turtle class ships will be delivered in 2022 as scheduled

[fstuff1]

https://cruiseradio.net/norwegian-cruise-exec-on-return-to-sailing-new-ship-more/

 

"Despite delays at the yard, he said they expect the unnamed vessel – the first in their new Leonardo line — to be delivered essentially on time in 2022."

 

my 1st thought was Where are they going to get the $ to pay for it?

and if demand isnt there in 2022, will NCL start selling LOTS of ships like Carnival is doing right now?

 

Edited August 5, 2020 by fstuff1

[DCGuy64]

HAHA, I love the title. I can't wait for Raphael, Donatello and Michelangelo, either! 🤣

[fstuff1]

5 minutes ago, DCGuy64 said:

HAHA, I love the title. I can't wait for Raphael, Donatello and Michelangelo, either! 🤣

 

yep.. normally, ncl names the 1st ship after the class.

ie: Jewel, Breakaway

 

they should have fired the marketing people for the name 'Breakaway Plus' class. ugg.. 

 

cant wait for Raphael, Donatello and Michelangelo, April and Splinter (?). ehh.. maybe not Splinter.

since they signed for 4 ships and 2 options for 6 total, they might not take the last optioned ship which solves the naming delema. (how do you spell that word?)

 

[Two Wheels Only]

The order for Leonardo ships 5&6 has already been made official and funding has already been secured. However, this was back when things were "normal". There are also 2 Oceania ships to be built by Fincantieri that have been financed. 

 

It's still too early to say that anything will be delivered "on time" or not. It's usually better to wait a few months for the kinks to be worked out of a new ship so being "first" on a new ship isn't something to stress, IMO.  

[Love my butler]

This is all a pipe dream.  No new ships will be ordered or delivered for several years, if ever.  NCL is broke and teetering on bankruptcy.  They have milked every last dollar they can from their 'loyal' customers with the phony FCC's and delayed refunds.  For your convenience of course.  Their only remaining option is to start selling ships.

[luv2kroooz]

The lower capacity ships are being well-played.

I expect delivery delays. You would think NCL would be pushing for a delay.

I am anxiously awaiting the earnings, or lack thereof, report tomorrow AM.

[Laszlo]

2022......Thats about when everyone will start cruising again

[shof515]

hopefully this class of ships has better pizza

[luv2kroooz]

And then hot-air Harry says the obvious and what everyone else says....we're developing standards, we're cleaning, safety is #1. Duh!!

 

What people really want to know is what happens when the unexpected happens?.....no matter how much cleaning they do, when you put groups of people in a relatively, small confined space, you have issues. It's just the unfortunate reality of the situation. 

 

The relevance, then, isn't what is being done to prevent Covid. It is.... what happens when COVID finds its way onboard an NCL cruise, or a Carnival cruise or a Royal Caribbean cruise? That would be a refreshing communication and meaningful change from the old....safety is our number one priority...script that everyone and their brother uses.

[chipmaster]

7 hours ago, fstuff1 said:

https://cruiseradio.net/norwegian-cruise-exec-on-return-to-sailing-new-ship-more/

 

"Despite delays at the yard, he said they expect the unnamed vessel – the first in their new Leonardo line — to be delivered essentially on time in 2022."

 

my 1st thought was Where are they going to get the $ to pay for it?

and if demand isnt there in 2022, will NCL start selling LOTS of ships like Carnival is doing right now?

 

 

This looks like Emirates with A380, LOL

[dexddd]

10 hours ago, luv2kroooz said:

And then hot-air Harry says the obvious and what everyone else says....we're developing standards, we're cleaning, safety is #1. Duh!!

 

What people really want to know is what happens when the unexpected happens?.....no matter how much cleaning they do, when you put groups of people in a relatively, small confined space, you have issues. It's just the unfortunate reality of the situation. 

 

The relevance, then, isn't what is being done to prevent Covid. It is.... what happens when COVID finds its way onboard an NCL cruise, or a Carnival cruise or a Royal Caribbean cruise? That would be a refreshing communication and meaningful change from the old....safety is our number one priority...script that everyone and their brother uses.

It is the same for most Corps.  Blah blah blah but ultimately it is they want to make money.  The airlines have been at the top with all they are doing for us.  Sure, you are doing all this for us, that is nice.

[luv2kroooz]

3 minutes ago, dexddd said:

It is the same for most Corps.  Blah blah blah but ultimately it is they want to make money.  The airlines have been at the top with all they are doing for us.  Sure, you are doing all this for us, that is nice.

I know. My viewpoint is starting to shift. They could clean 24 hrs a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year, but as soon as someone steps onboard with the infection, they are done. The cruise lines can't win here because passenger screening is not foolproof.

 

So instead of trying to tell us how safe it is, In feel like they should be required to come up with a plan of what to do when COVID is onboard, communicate their plan clearly to the public, require waivers from passengers, and then market the sailings. If they stay shutdown forever, they are going bankrupt. So, let them market sailings and then ultimately the market will decide success or failure, instead of the CLIA or regulatory agencies - based on passenger demand and safety record.

 

My belief is that if they started marketing sailings now, there would be little to no demand for them from the general public. But then their success or failure is being determined by market conditions, not CDC, CLIA, etc.

[hallux]

19 hours ago, fstuff1 said:

they should have fired the marketing people for the name 'Breakaway Plus' class

Were they not the same basic design but "enhanced" (quotes because the changes are not agreeable to everyone)?  I guess the RCI marketers need to be fired for releasing "Quantum Plus" class ships (the under construction Odyssey of the Seas being one).  Same idea - it's the same basic design with "enhancements", though the Odyssey has some cabin changes that I'm not thrilled about.

[fstuff1]

7 minutes ago, hallux said:

Were they not the same basic design but "enhanced" (quotes because the changes are not agreeable to everyone)? 

I guess the RCI marketers need to be fired for releasing "Quantum Plus" class ships (the under construction Odyssey of the Seas being one).  Same idea - it's the same basic design with "enhancements", though the Odyssey has some cabin changes that I'm not thrilled about.

 

What i would have done:

when the new bigger Panama locks were near completion, NCL designed  the Joy so it can fit in the new locks by moving the lifeboats inside the ship instead of overhang.

(Escape was still too big to fit because the lifeboats over hanged on the outside of the ship.)

 

so Joy/Bliss/Encore were of a different design. ie: no more dance floor in the mdr to make space for the lifeboats

Plus they had the race track which the Escape didnt.

 

so before the Joy was finished, i would have announced the elimination of the 'breakaway plus' class, put the escape in the Breakaway class since the breakaway and getaway also cant fit in the new Panama locks.

and make a Joy class for the Joy/bliss/encore.

[spanishguy1970]

19 hours ago, Love my butler said:

This is all a pipe dream.  No new ships will be ordered or delivered for several years, if ever.  NCL is broke and teetering on bankruptcy.  They have milked every last dollar they can from their 'loyal' customers with the phony FCC's and delayed refunds.  For your convenience of course.  Their only remaining option is to start selling ships.

ding ding ding Jackpot

[Trimone]

I know contractors working on the ships, they are behind, but I believe they have financial protection with German leases, a separate entity to NCLH, whereas other cruise companies finance nearer to home..

 

[Two Wheels Only]

1 hour ago, hallux said:

Were they not the same basic design but "enhanced" (quotes because the changes are not agreeable to everyone)?  I guess the RCI marketers need to be fired for releasing "Quantum Plus" class ships (the under construction Odyssey of the Seas being one).  Same idea - it's the same basic design with "enhancements", though the Odyssey has some cabin changes that I'm not thrilled about.

 

Whether using "Ultra", "Plus", "Evo", etc., the larger designs are a separate class. The general public doesn't even care about what class a ship is. It wouldn't surprise me if the last 2 Leonardo ships become Leonardo Plus.😉

 

 

[Jobeth66]

4 hours ago, luv2kroooz said:

So instead of trying to tell us how safe it is, In feel like they should be required to come up with a plan of what to do when COVID is onboard, communicate their plan clearly to the public, require waivers from passengers, and then market the sailings. If they stay shutdown forever, they are going bankrupt. So, let them market sailings and then ultimately the market will decide success or failure, instead of the CLIA or regulatory agencies - based on passenger demand and safety record.

 

My belief is that if they started marketing sailings now, there would be little to no demand for them from the general public. But then their success or failure is being determined by market conditions, not CDC, CLIA, etc.

 

I keep seeing this 'waiver' thing popping up from multiple people and I'm just curious - what 'waivers' do you suppose the cruise lines could have passengers sign, and what would they entail?

 

Passengers can't sue if they get sick on the ship?  Who would be protected from suit?  The ship?  The crew? Other passengers?  The cruise line? The parent company?

 

do the passengers agree not to seek treatment in a hospital where they disembark?  Do they agree to pay in advance for any treatment they might receive?  Are they guaranteed to be accepted by these hospitals if they must be taken there?  

 

Do the waivers require the ships to provide medical treatment and housing at no cost to the passengers in the event they are restricted from commercial travel?

 

And what about minors?  Minors are generally not bound by the terms of a waiver signed by a parent/guardian - in most jurisdictions, the statute of limitations is tolled for a minor until after they reach the age of majority or emancipation - which means (for example) if the statute of limitations is 2 years, most minors would have until they are 20 years old to seek recompense for an injury that occurred before they were 18.

 

A waiver is, quite honestly, worth the paper it's printed on in most cases.  I'm not sure what people think it will prevent.

 

If someone gets sick on the ship, they're going to use up resources and it's going to result in others being quarantined, potentially  made ill, and potentially dying.  If it turns out the ship's crew didn't do enough (or knew about an ill passenger/crew member and didn't report it properly) that waiver is going to be null and void.  

 

I'm just really interested in how people think waivers work, and how one would be worded in such a way that the CDC would say 'oh, ok - if passengers sign this, you can sail even with the current risks'

 

[luv2kroooz]

1 minute ago, Jobeth66 said:

 

I keep seeing this 'waiver' thing popping up from multiple people and I'm just curious - what 'waivers' do you suppose the cruise lines could have passengers sign, and what would they entail?

 

Passengers can't sue if they get sick on the ship?  Who would be protected from suit?  The ship?  The crew? Other passengers?  The cruise line? The parent company?

 

do the passengers agree not to seek treatment in a hospital where they disembark?  Do they agree to pay in advance for any treatment they might receive?  Are they guaranteed to be accepted by these hospitals if they must be taken there?  

 

Do the waivers require the ships to provide medical treatment and housing at no cost to the passengers in the event they are restricted from commercial travel?

 

And what about minors?  Minors are generally not bound by the terms of a waiver signed by a parent/guardian - in most jurisdictions, the statute of limitations is tolled for a minor until after they reach the age of majority or emancipation - which means (for example) if the statute of limitations is 2 years, most minors would have until they are 20 years old to seek recompense for an injury that occurred before they were 18.

 

A waiver is, quite honestly, worth the paper it's printed on in most cases.  I'm not sure what people think it will prevent.

 

If someone gets sick on the ship, they're going to use up resources and it's going to result in others being quarantined, potentially  made ill, and potentially dying.  If it turns out the ship's crew didn't do enough (or knew about an ill passenger/crew member and didn't report it properly) that waiver is going to be null and void.  

 

I'm just really interested in how people think waivers work, and how one would be worded in such a way that the CDC would say 'oh, ok - if passengers sign this, you can sail even with the current risks'

 

I don't have answers to your 33 questions. This is what is being used by several amusement/theme parks.....

 

There remains an inherent and elevated risk of exposure to COVID-19 in any public place and any place where people are present. While we are committed to enhanced standards in an effort to keep you as healthy and safe as possible, we cannot guarantee you will not be exposed.

[Jobeth66]

12 minutes ago, luv2kroooz said:

I don't have answers to your 33 questions. This is what is being used by several amusement/theme parks.....

 

There remains an inherent and elevated risk of exposure to COVID-19 in any public place and any place where people are present. While we are committed to enhanced standards in an effort to keep you as healthy and safe as possible, we cannot guarantee you will not be exposed.

 

Yeah.  Completely worth the paper it's printed on.  No guarantee you won't be exposed - but there's nothing keeping the person so exposed from seeking recourse in the courts for said exposure, and if it turns out that the theme park was aware that an employee (for example) was positive and still allowed guests to enter the premises, a good lawyer will have that tossed immediately.

 

And still not valid for a minor in most places, so, meh.  

 

I don't see this sort of thing making a material difference to the suits at the CDC.

[luv2kroooz]

21 hours ago, Love my butler said:

This is all a pipe dream.  No new ships will be ordered or delivered for several years, if ever.  NCL is broke and teetering on bankruptcy.  They have milked every last dollar they can from their 'loyal' customers with the phony FCC's and delayed refunds.  For your convenience of course.  Their only remaining option is to start selling ships.

I listened in on the dismal earnings call today. Del Rio said he is relying heavily on business from past guests when cruises start up. Boy, is he gonna be in for the shock of his life when he realizes many of his past guests have taken their business elsewhere.

[luv2kroooz]

6 minutes ago, Jobeth66 said:

 

Yeah.  Completely worth the paper it's printed on.  No guarantee you won't be exposed - but there's nothing keeping the person so exposed from seeking recourse in the courts for said exposure, and if it turns out that the theme park was aware that an employee (for example) was positive and still allowed guests to enter the premises, a good lawyer will have that tossed immediately.

 

And still not valid for a minor in most places, so, meh.  

 

I don't see this sort of thing making a material difference to the suits at the CDC.

Yeah, my opinion is obviously shifting on this although I agree with your statement about the CDC.

 

Anyone who knowingly and willfully visits a theme park, cruise ship during a time of pandemic ought to be prepared to personally accept the financial and health risks associated with their decision. The blame game stops there. They have no expectation of safety during a time of pandemic when you know the virus can't be controlled. If you choose to roll the dice, then be prepared to accept and own the consequences.

 

The only way to fully prevent exposure at these places, then, is to force extended shutdowns.

 

[Travelling2Some]

2 hours ago, Two Wheels Only said:

 

Whether using "Ultra", "Plus", "Evo", etc., the larger designs are a separate class. The general public doesn't even care about what class a ship is. It wouldn't surprise me if the last 2 Leonardo ships become Leonardo Plus.😉

 

 

You are so right in saying the general public does not know or care about ship classes.  I bet most of us have had the experience of a friend saying they just booked a cruise.  So you ask them on which ship and they say they don't remember.  So you ask them which cruise line.  They say they're not sure.  Ridiculous, right?  My mother-in-law used to ask me if a certain price was a good deal but she couldn't tell me the ship or even the line.  I kept explaining to her that's like asking me if a hotel room is a good deal without saying if it's a Motel 6 or a Four Seasons.  Either I'm surrounded by idiots (possible) or much of the general public seems to think all ships are the same.

Edited August 6, 2020 by Travelling2Some
typo

[hloakes]

2 hours ago, Jobeth66 said:

 

I keep seeing this 'waiver' thing popping up from multiple people and I'm just curious - what 'waivers' do you suppose the cruise lines could have passengers sign, and what would they entail?

 

Passengers can't sue if they get sick on the ship?  Who would be protected from suit?  The ship?  The crew? Other passengers?  The cruise line? The parent company?

 

do the passengers agree not to seek treatment in a hospital where they disembark?  Do they agree to pay in advance for any treatment they might receive?  Are they guaranteed to be accepted by these hospitals if they must be taken there?  

 

Do the waivers require the ships to provide medical treatment and housing at no cost to the passengers in the event they are restricted from commercial travel?

 

And what about minors?  Minors are generally not bound by the terms of a waiver signed by a parent/guardian - in most jurisdictions, the statute of limitations is tolled for a minor until after they reach the age of majority or emancipation - which means (for example) if the statute of limitations is 2 years, most minors would have until they are 20 years old to seek recompense for an injury that occurred before they were 18.

 

A waiver is, quite honestly, worth the paper it's printed on in most cases.  I'm not sure what people think it will prevent.

 

If someone gets sick on the ship, they're going to use up resources and it's going to result in others being quarantined, potentially  made ill, and potentially dying.  If it turns out the ship's crew didn't do enough (or knew about an ill passenger/crew member and didn't report it properly) that waiver is going to be null and void.  

 

I'm just really interested in how people think waivers work, and how one would be worded in such a way that the CDC would say 'oh, ok - if passengers sign this, you can sail even with the current risks'

 

 

Right now they working on legislation to protect businesses from lawsuits, especially companies that carry passengers. I work for a bus company and without this protection they cannot afford the liability insurance. 

[david_sobe]

Does anyone know if there will be a lobster night on any of the Leonardo class ships