No agreement between NCL & NYC

[styxfire]

Per Cruise industry News, NYC officials & Norwegian Cruise Line did not come to an agreement over a housing charter.  

City officials are quoted mentioning they have received better deals, with the New York Post citing Carnival and ferry operator Tallink as potential players, also mentioning they were in talks with four separate companies.  (A 20-ur-old Tallink ferry is currently being used for Ukrainian refugees in Europe, although the original 4-month lease already passed.)

Industry sources that asked not to be quoted said a charter for a megaship would run in the mid six-figure range on a per day basis.

 

That matches the rough math I posted here a couple days ago, ~$16 mil/mo., which exceeded the cost of NYC’s $15mil/mo. tent-city.  (The mayor had previously said he expected a cruise ship would be less than the tent-city.)

[CptAleSpill]

Great!!  That means that none of our friends here on the forum will have their cruises cancelled because of this.  There just has to be better options.

[pandncruisers]

I have been watching this since the talk was the Breakaway and we are on a b2b in January on the Breakaway.  Thx for the update

[BirdTravels]

Too bad. It would be nice to get some quick cash to help the cruise line. And using one of the older BA class ships (Getaway or Breakaway) would be perfect. 

[styxfire]

No such thing as "quick cash", imo...  Tallink's ship is now in month SEVEN of its 4-month lease, because there's no way to end it once it starts.   The opportunity cost (i.e. forfeiting on-board spend from paying customers) is high.  Will be interesting to see who the other "contenders" (besides Tallink & Carnival) are.

[YVRteacher]

Mayor of New York says talks are still in place for an NCL ship to dock at Staten Island to be used as immigrant housing.  The Tallink plan fell through.

They need the NCL ship for a minimum of six months and NCL has responded that this is cost-effective for them since the profit is high (NYC will pay a high amount for this) and there are minimal fuel charges if the ship can use shore power.  Since there will not be evening turn down service, activities or specialty dining crewing costs are way down.

The decision has not yet been made and talks are still happening.  There are plenty of articles about this.

[pandncruisers]

Just read Today that NCL  cost is more than the city wants to spend so as of right now the Mayor said the idea is scrapped since the city has Better deals.

[Travelling2Some]

Somebody had mentioned on one of the previous threads about this that the Carnival Ecstasy is just about headed to the scrap heap and still has crew employed.  If true that would seem like a good choice.  Cruise lines are businesses so I'm sure it will be a matter of profit in the end.  Governments, of course, can waste money with abandon.  

[CruiseBunny425]

As mentioned above, there are ships scrap-bound like the Ecstasy that are way better suited for this than upsetting their customers. If they feel the need to help, donate money to get an unused ship ready or refurb unused hotel or office space. Leave our cruises alone. I’m glad it’s looking like the Bliss is safe and hope everyone’s booked trip is. The solution is out there - a bandaid on a hemorrhage of leasing out a ship isn’t it. 

[ace2542]

On 10/8/2022 at 8:48 PM, BirdTravels said:

Too bad. It would be nice to get some quick cash to help the cruise line. And using one of the older BA class ships (Getaway or Breakaway) would be perfect. 

It would be brand suicide to do cancel paying customers cruises plus have a big knock on effect on hotels and even other cruise lines. Cunard does a 26 night with NCL sailing in the middle in NYC at christmas and hundreds of passenger get off for the NYC sailing and hundreds more get on QM2 for that NY carribean sailing. Housing migrants would drive a coach and horses through that package.

[Karaboudjan]

41 minutes ago, ace2542 said:

It would be brand suicide to do cancel paying customers cruises plus have a big knock on effect on hotels and even other cruise lines. Cunard does a 26 night with NCL sailing in the middle in NYC at christmas and hundreds of passenger get off for the NYC sailing and hundreds more get on QM2 for that NY carribean sailing. Housing migrants would drive a coach and horses through that package.

 

Hardly suicide.  The lost revenue and goodwill is something that can be calculated/estimated and worked into the fee to NYC leaving NCL coming out ahead.  It seems that NCL did that but the cost was just higher than NYC wanted to pay.

[ace2542]

3 minutes ago, Karaboudjan said:

 

Hardly suicide.  The lost revenue and goodwill is something that can be calculated/estimated and worked into the fee to NYC leaving NCL coming out ahead.  It seems that NCL did that but the cost was just higher than NYC wanted to pay.

And what about the lawsuit from Cunard and UK agencies over their loss of income against the 26 night christmas sailing - which this might have driven a horse and cart through?

[Karaboudjan]

1 hour ago, ace2542 said:

And what about the lawsuit from Cunard and UK agencies over their loss of income against the 26 night christmas sailing - which this might have driven a horse and cart through?

 

What lawsuit?  Has NCL made some official arrangement with Cunard  I looked at the 12/15-12/22 westbound TA on the QM2 and I don't see any mention of NCL.  

 

Anyway, NCL has plenty of ships, so why assume that they would cancel the cruises out of NYC?  

[mjkacmom]

1 hour ago, Karaboudjan said:

 

Hardly suicide.  The lost revenue and goodwill is something that can be calculated/estimated and worked into the fee to NYC leaving NCL coming out ahead.  It seems that NCL did that but the cost was just higher than NYC wanted to pay.

And I don’t think hotel revenue in NYC would be affected by a cruiseline.

[pandncruisers]

At one time the talk was with the Breakaway and in a few weeks it's heading down to NOLA so 6 months total commitment from Ncl on 1 ship will usually effect more than 1 port and lots of passengers

[chengkp75]

On 10/9/2022 at 1:25 PM, YVRteacher said:

and there are minimal fuel charges if the ship can use shore power.

You can't just plug a cruise ship into an outlet for "shore power".  A cruise ship needs 10,000 volt supply, even sitting at the dock, as the AC chillers require this.  The infrastructure to provide about 6-8 megawatts of 10kv power is in the several million dollar range, for the port, let alone whether or not the ship has spent the $1 million or so to have a shore power installation built.  This is why there are very, very few cruise ship shore power stations outside of California, where the law mandates it, and they wouldn't be at an unused Navy dock.

 

 

[ace2542]

23 hours ago, Karaboudjan said:

 

What lawsuit?  Has NCL made some official arrangement with Cunard  I looked at the 12/15-12/22 westbound TA on the QM2 and I don't see any mention of NCL.  

 

Anyway, NCL has plenty of ships, so why assume that they would cancel the cruises out of NYC?  

IF ncl did have to cancel the ship carrying their portion of the connecting passengers from Cunard that might mean Cunard having to refund hundreds of passengers if the second leg of the trip was fully booked with just cunard passsengers. The UK agencies would also suffer a hit and I can see them wanting compensation? UK agencies would have to what? Cancel, put people up in hotels in nyc find different cruises ouf of different cities for the 11 nights till QM2 came back? They would take a hit and want money for it

Edited October 12, 2022 by ace2542

[ace2542]

22 hours ago, mjkacmom said:

And I don’t think hotel revenue in NYC would be affected by a cruiseline.

It would be for the one or two hotels that are used by the cruiseline?

[Karaboudjan]

21 minutes ago, ace2542 said:

IF ncl did have to cancel the ship carrying their portion of the connecting passengers from Cunard that might mean Cunard having to refund hundreds of passengers if the second leg of the trip was fully booked with just cunard passsengers. The UK agencies would also suffer a hit and I can see them wanting compensation? UK agencies would have to what? Cancel, put people up in hotels in nyc find different cruises ouf of different cities for the 11 nights till QM2 came back? They would take a hit and want money for it

 

I understand that IF this was a package offered jointly by Cunard and NCL, but I have not been able to find any evidence of that.  Can you point me to some documentation to support that?  Otherwise I have to think that this is just a sort of B2B that happens to work for people (and maybe travel agencies are selling) but that NCL (or Cunard) is not taking any responsibility for beyond the standard terms and conditions.  

[ace2542]

18 hours ago, Karaboudjan said:

 

I understand that IF this was a package offered jointly by Cunard and NCL, but I have not been able to find any evidence of that.  Can you point me to some documentation to support that?  Otherwise I have to think that this is just a sort of B2B that happens to work for people (and maybe travel agencies are selling) but that NCL (or Cunard) is not taking any responsibility for beyond the standard terms and conditions.  

But if the package collapsed Cunard might run into problems. They would not be able to accommidate people on the middle leg. And the UK agencies who promote the package would be faced with putting hundreds of transferring passenger into hotel in nyc for 11 nights or however many nights. That is a big expense for them?

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, ace2542 said:

But if the package collapsed Cunard might run into problems. They would not be able to accommidate people on the middle leg. And the UK agencies who promote the package would be faced with putting hundreds of transferring passenger into hotel in nyc for 11 nights or however many nights. That is a big expense for them?

First off, there is no package other than what a travel agent has cobbled together (unless you can show otherwise).  As such, Cunard has no liability to accommodate passengers when they are not on Cunard ships.  Could this cause problems for Cunard, if people cancel because they can't do the middle leg?  Sure.  Whose fault is that?  The travel agent who sold the idea, not NCL's.  That agent would likely find it difficult to make Cunard bookings in the future.  Would the travel agent have problems?  You betcha, but you know what?  That travel agent should have disclosed the terms and agreements in the NCL ticket contract that state that NCL can cancel the cruise for any reason, and what, if any, compensation they will give for a cancelation.  Otherwise, the travel agent is liable for selling a fraudulent product to their clients.  NCL would have no liability to anyone, unless this was a contractual agreement between NCL and Cunard.

[ontheweb]

48 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

First off, there is no package other than what a travel agent has cobbled together (unless you can show otherwise).  As such, Cunard has no liability to accommodate passengers when they are not on Cunard ships.  Could this cause problems for Cunard, if people cancel because they can't do the middle leg?  Sure.  Whose fault is that?  The travel agent who sold the idea, not NCL's.  That agent would likely find it difficult to make Cunard bookings in the future.  Would the travel agent have problems?  You betcha, but you know what?  That travel agent should have disclosed the terms and agreements in the NCL ticket contract that state that NCL can cancel the cruise for any reason, and what, if any, compensation they will give for a cancelation.  Otherwise, the travel agent is liable for selling a fraudulent product to their clients.  NCL would have no liability to anyone, unless this was a contractual agreement between NCL and Cunard.

And it's not very likely that there is a contractual agreement between NCL and Cunard as they are parts of different corporations.

[Karaboudjan]

39 minutes ago, ontheweb said:

And it's not very likely that there is a contractual agreement between NCL and Cunard as they are parts of different corporations.

 

Being different corporations doesn't preclude an agreement.  NCL offers cruisetours that partner with Alaska Railroad, and there are plenty of joint ventures in the airline industry.  But I still have not seen any evidence that there is some agreement here.

[PATRLR]

On 10/11/2022 at 1:07 PM, chengkp75 said:

You can't just plug a cruise ship into an outlet for "shore power". 

Are you saying a couple these won't do the trick?  

Edited October 13, 2022 by PATRLR

[ontheweb]

1 hour ago, Karaboudjan said:

 

Being different corporations doesn't preclude an agreement.  NCL offers cruisetours that partner with Alaska Railroad, and there are plenty of joint ventures in the airline industry.  But I still have not seen any evidence that there is some agreement here.

The examples you gave are not competitors like NCL and Cunard. It is one thing for a cruise line to partner with a complimentary partner like a railroad or an airline, but quite different with a competing cruise line.