Carnival needs Judge approval to Sail

[chengkp75]

7 minutes ago, BlerkOne said:

 

I'll go out on a limb and say "training" is not going to be an acceptable solution.

 

If Carnival ships are found to have "magic pipes", duct tape won't fix that.

The judge has embraced the ISM culture, so training can be an acceptable solution, provided that training is documented as to content, applicability, and enforcement, and that it meets industry best practices.

 

No, a magic pipe would most likely ban at least that ship, and maybe the top 10 egregious offenders from US waters until the probation is over.  In addition to civil and criminal punishments.

[BlerkOne]

1 minute ago, chengkp75 said:

The judge has embraced the ISM culture, so training can be an acceptable solution, provided that training is documented as to content, applicability, and enforcement, and that it meets industry best practices.

 

 

Carnival is doomed.

[PhillyFan33579]

21 minutes ago, BlerkOne said:

 

Carnival is doomed.

 
I don’t know if they are doomed, but I heard on a local radio station this morning that Carnival will not be cruising before January due to environmental compliance issues, even if the rumored end of the no sail order happens this month. 

[PhillyFan33579]

3 hours ago, tidecat said:

While I know these are unprecedented times for the cruise industry, I am highly disappointed in Carnival CEO Arnold Donald.

 

Mr. Donald's leadership, or should I say, lack thereof, on the environmental compliance will ultimately cost Carnival it's life. The ships have not carried passengers for 7 months, and some of them have 700 maintenance items that need to be addressed. Even if only a fraction of those are addressed before sailing resumes, we're looking at maintenance running into the millions per ship, and in spite of the capacity cuts, Carnival will still have around 85 ships.

 

Ultimately, even if the decision to leave US waters to avoid CDC reporting requirements was the right one, the company still has had time to tackle the ongoing environmental issues. The company could have even spun the negative publicity from the CDC reporting to say that it chose to remain in US waters so that it could perform environmental-related maintenance. All of this would be moot had it been addressed in 2017, 2018, and 2019.

 

Is it time to change CEOs?

The environmental issues are a Carnival Cruise Lines issue, not a Carnival Corporation issue. So if you want to fire someone, you should be looking at Christine Duffy, not Arnold Donald. 

[jimbo5544]

1 hour ago, BlerkOne said:

Only one chapter.

HA...

[BlerkOne]

8 minutes ago, PhillyFan33579 said:

The environmental issues are a Carnival Cruise Lines issue, not a Carnival Corporation issue. So if you want to fire someone, you should be looking at Christine Duffy, not Arnold Donald. 

Nope. Carnival Corp issue, Princess was one of the big offenders.

[BlerkOne]

36 minutes ago, fyree39 said:

Vote in the corporate elections, not the presidential election. I never vote, so I had to look it up. This year's voting was done back in April and I once again tossed my proxy ballot. Maybe next year I'll actually look at it.

 

https://sec.report/Document/0001193125-20-049339/#toc862180_3

Doesn't matter. Most stock is held by institutions.

[jimbo5544]

3 hours ago, tidecat said:

While I know these are unprecedented times for the cruise industry, I am highly disappointed in Carnival CEO Arnold Donald.

 

Mr. Donald's leadership, or should I say, lack thereof, on the environmental compliance will ultimately cost Carnival it's life. The ships have not carried passengers for 7 months, and some of them have 700 maintenance items that need to be addressed. Even if only a fraction of those are addressed before sailing resumes, we're looking at maintenance running into the millions per ship, and in spite of the capacity cuts, Carnival will still have around 85 ships.

 

Ultimately, even if the decision to leave US waters to avoid CDC reporting requirements was the right one, the company still has had time to tackle the ongoing environmental issues. The company could have even spun the negative publicity from the CDC reporting to say that it chose to remain in US waters so that it could perform environmental-related maintenance. All of this would be moot had it been addressed in 2017, 2018, and 2019.

 

Is it time to change CEOs?

The board are the ones to do that, the ONLY ones.  For the record, he is going nowhere.   Period.  I have no idea what leaving us waters for CDC means.

Edited October 17, 2020 by jimbo5544

[BlerkOne]

35 minutes ago, PhillyFan33579 said:

 
I don’t know if they are doomed, but I heard on a local radio station this morning that Carnival will not be cruising before January due to environmental compliance issues, even if the rumored end of the no sail order happens this month. 

The jury is still out on that. The judge delayed her ruling to let Carnival respond.

[jimbo5544]

40 minutes ago, PhillyFan33579 said:

 
I don’t know if they are doomed, but I heard on a local radio station this morning that Carnival will not be cruising before January due to environmental compliance issues, even if the rumored end of the no sail order happens this month. 

As of right now, that IS the status.  When she rules on their reply, (if they did one)then.....

[BlerkOne]

Just now, jimbo5544 said:

As of right now, that IS the status.  When she rules on their reply, (if they did one)then.....

Carnival ships need court approval 60 days before restarting, judge says — then delays order

[PhillyFan33579]

30 minutes ago, BlerkOne said:

Nope. Carnival Corp issue, Princess was one of the big offenders.

 
You are right. I thought an article I read yesterday said CCL, but a quick google search today shows a bunch of articles that all address Carnival Corp. So this issue is potentially bigger than I thought it was. 
 

In the past I never thought any judge would take the drastic step to keep a cruise line from sailing. But after months of the CDC banning cruises from the US, I can see a judge doing the same thing. 
 

EDIT: I still would be in favor of firing Christine Duffy. The on-board experience on Carnival has gone downhill under her leadership. 

Edited October 17, 2020 by PhillyFan33579

[PhillyFan33579]

30 minutes ago, BlerkOne said:

The jury is still out on that. The judge delayed her ruling to let Carnival respond.

Make up your mind! In a post 30 minutes ago you said Carnival was doomed. 

[bigrednole]

1 hour ago, PhillyFan33579 said:

 
I don’t know if they are doomed, but I heard on a local radio station this morning that Carnival will not be cruising before January due to environmental compliance issues, even if the rumored end of the no sail order happens this month. 

Obviously if the 60-day ruling does go into affect, then CCL is done until January most likely. They will have to go all out for the specific ships that will sail first, then shift focus to the next group, and so on. This is not something that caught them by surprise. They chose to ignore it which makes it worse.

[jimbo5544]

24 minutes ago, bigrednole said:

Obviously if the 60-day ruling does go into affect, then CCL is done until January most likely. They will have to go all out for the specific ships that will sail first, then shift focus to the next group, and so on. This is not something that caught them by surprise. They chose to ignore it which makes it worse.

Do you know that for a fact?

[jimbo5544]

42 minutes ago, PhillyFan33579 said:

 
You are right. I thought an article I read yesterday said CCL, but a quick google search today shows a bunch of articles that all address Carnival Corp. So this issue is potentially bigger than I thought it was. 
 

In the past I never thought any judge would take the drastic step to keep a cruise line from sailing. But after months of the CDC banning cruises from the US, I can see a judge doing the same thing. 
 

EDIT: I still would be in favor of firing Christine Duffy. The on-board experience on Carnival has gone downhill under her leadership. 

She is not going anywhere either.  Before Covid, while I do not have privy to specific information, I would bet the earnings per share were up rather substantially, and that primarily determines her worth, the way it works in all stock based enterprises.

[PhillyFan33579]

2 minutes ago, jimbo5544 said:

She is not going anywhere either.  Before Covid, while I do not have privy to specific information, I would bet the earnings per share were up rather substantially, and that primarily determines her worth, the way it works in all stock based enterprises.

I agree with you that she has done a great job from a stockholder perspective. This is just my personal opinion, but I think there have been too many cutbacks under her leadership that have degraded the Carnival experience. My wife and I were loyal to Carnival for years but for many reasons, including the cutbacks I mentioned, we now prefer the experience provided by RCI, not to mention RCI’s ships are incredible. 

[poz222]

What difference does it make inside or outside US waters... because of CDC restrictions on crew movements on and off the ships they could not get technicians on/off ships inspectors would not go on because of quarantine requirements even while in port and many of the tests/work has to be down outside of port for discharge issues. 

[PointNemo]

This is a very serious development.

[BlerkOne]

57 minutes ago, PhillyFan33579 said:

Make up your mind! In a post 30 minutes ago you said Carnival was doomed. 

Carnival is doomed if allowed to pretend training makes a real difference in compliance.

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, bigrednole said:

Obviously if the 60-day ruling does go into affect, then CCL is done until January most likely. They will have to go all out for the specific ships that will sail first, then shift focus to the next group, and so on. This is not something that caught them by surprise. They chose to ignore it which makes it worse.

What stymies me, is that Carnival knew which ships required the most work to become compliant.  Are the ships that they are planning on sailing first the ones with the least amount of work?  Or did they choose ships for demographics, amenities, etc, and just figure, we can get some stuff done, and do the rest later.  To my thinking, just a poor, dumb boat mechanic, they should have chosen the ships closest to compliance, and that would have minimized the capital outlay during a period of no revenue.

36 minutes ago, BlerkOne said:

Carnival is doomed if allowed to pretend training makes a real difference in compliance.

Training is most certainly one aspect of compliance, and in the ISM culture, it does make a real difference.  Very few industries live the ISM safety, environmental, and quality culture.  As I've said, I've been with two shipping companies, one of them NCL, that were on DOJ probation, and that really turned around and embraced the culture.  It is a lot like those ships that have poor scores on the USPH sanitation inspections, they have not fully embraced the culture to make it part of everyday operations.

[Organized Chaos]

When their court troubles were headline cruise news, I fully supported the government in their actions against Carnival Corp. Not only had they violated laws & regulations for years, they continued to do so while on probation, so I was quite vocal in support of throwing the book at them. I lead with that just in case I'm accused of being a cheerleader for what I'm saying next.

 

So with that said, I completely disagree with the judge's decision to tie those matters to the pandemic shutdown. Cruise lines didn't ask for this, never could've predicted it, and certainly weren't expecting to be shut down for several months. Essentially, in my opinion, the judge is kicking Carnival Corp. while they're down, and they don't deserve that. Yes, they deserve to answer for and pay for their long-time violations, but I think it's dirty pool to force them to be in complete & total compliance before being allowed to start up again after a shutdown they had no control over. If the pandemic had never happened, chances were good that the judge would've allowed them to meet compliance while they remained in operation. To take an opposite approach now is a low blow, if you ask me.

 

The third-party auditors said that some of their ships have as many as 700 maintenance items that need to be addressed. Obviously, none of us know the extent of all those items, but I would think it's safe to say that some would require more extensive work. Not necessarily dry dock, but possibly a shipyard. If that's the case, it wasn't possible for Carnival Corp. to accomplish some of those goals, considering the pandemic shut down all the shipyards for several months. Even if they could've accomplished the maintenance requirements without shipyards, like I said before, they more than likely would've been allowed to meet compliance while still in operation, had it not been for the pandemic.

 

Best case scenario, cruise lines get to resume in December. And we don't need the "no they won't" comments from the usual suspects. I said best case scenario. For the judge to hit them with this now, when they're closer than ever to resuming operations, I think that's just low. Their legal troubles should be kept completely separate from the shutdown, which is something they had zero control over.

[tidecat]

3 hours ago, bigrednole said:

Obviously if the 60-day ruling does go into affect, then CCL is done until January most likely. They will have to go all out for the specific ships that will sail first, then shift focus to the next group, and so on. This is not something that caught them by surprise. They chose to ignore it which makes it worse.

Unless if the Miami/Canaveral ships just happened to be the ones in the best shape, I doubt that played any part of the restart strategy. Long Beach and San Diego are out because it's regulation-happy California. New Orleans, Mobile, Jacksonville, and Charleston are less valuable when capacity is restricted. Tampa and Galveston would probably be the next ones to return after Miami and Canaveral.

 

I haven't seen much mention of restarting for other brands besides Princess, and December 15-31 may be gone for them as well.

[Moviela]

One article said that the Court would not sign the order until later today if Carnival lawyers can make an argument why it should not be signed. I hope she balances law and equity to determine that Carnival is putting forth their best effort. 

 

On another note, those that claim the company may have liquidity problems should take notice that a director of the corporation has purchased 10,000 shares last week, nearly doubling his stake in the company.  That does not sound like someone who does not have confidence that Carnival LLC is a viable concern to me. Please do not purchase any shares without professional investment advice, you can lose some or all of our money. 

[BlerkOne]

20 hours ago, jimbo5544 said:

From ap news:

 

• Seitz is retiring later this year and is turning over the case to U.S. District Judge Ursula Ungaro, who jointly presided over Monday’s hearing. Three people who claimed they were victims of Carnival’s environmental violations attended the hearing. Their attorney, Knoll Lowney, expressed skepticism that Carnival will keep its word this time.

 

Apparently she changed her mind - that is from an article from 2019 and this is 2020.