Norway ports open until 2032 for large ships

[maggieq]

We booked the jewel may30th cruise with a terrific price on an oceanview cabin and then upgraded to a balcony gty.   Initially, the price of the cruise was high but we were able to jump on it pretty early on.  Not crazy about the jewel itself but the itinerary was just amazing.  

[RCTransatlanticLover]

22 minutes ago, maggieq said:

Not crazy about the jewel itself but the itinerary was just amazing.  

Just curious: what about the Jewel are you “not crazy about?” I’ve been on it twice and thought it was a great ship. I’ve also been her sister, the Serenade, and enjoyed that one as well.

[notscb]

On 8/29/2024 at 7:20 AM, Biker19 said:

Not sure the abandonment was Norway port limitation related - more likely $ revenue related.

The economic impact of cruise tourism in Norway has been studied in 2013 and in 2019  and what was surprising is that the overall spending of cruise ship passengers is actually lower than other tourists to the area (of which there are many- it's Norway). In the time since the 2013 study, cruise pax spending on land has decreased. I doubt the delay is truly revenue related, but more giving an opportunity for cruise lines to pivot to meet the new eco-regulations.

 

 

[Biker19]

8 hours ago, notscb said:

In the time since the 2013 study, cruise pax spending on land has decreased.

RCI cares about on-board spending not so much on land. The RCI business model is to place their ships where they can make the most revenue - both cabin and on board spend. When they think they can make more money elsewhere, they home port there.

[maggieq]

10 hours ago, RCTransatlanticLover said:

Just curious: what about the Jewel are you “not crazy about?” I’ve been on it twice and thought it was a great ship. I’ve also been her sister, the Serenade, and enjoyed that one as well.

Our favorite ships are oasis class so the jewel, for us, lacked on the food and entertainment options.   We have cruised on the jewel a few times, based on itinerary. 

[Mikamarii]

9 hours ago, notscb said:

The economic impact of cruise tourism in Norway has been studied in 2013 and in 2019  and what was surprising is that the overall spending of cruise ship passengers is actually lower than other tourists to the area (of which there are many- it's Norway). In the time since the 2013 study, cruise pax spending on land has decreased. I doubt the delay is truly revenue related, but more giving an opportunity for cruise lines to pivot to meet the new eco-regulations.

 

 

I've never really delved in to this and not an economist but it seems to come up often and lots of strong opinions on it. It always made me think about where these numbers come from.

 

I've been on some boards and panels for our local government and tourism is always on the agenda. Usually the drivers of these are hotel owners/representatives as it is such a massive industry. So the numbers are gonna be driven by their own interests. I think it's fair to say Hotel companies loathe the cruise industry. They make 0 dollars off it. If they are driving the research they will want to make the cruise industry look bad. They will also have a large representation (ie loudest voice) but there are many smaller voices that are getting drowned out as they probably love the money the cruise passangers bring. 

 

When looking at per person spending it makes sense that the land traveller will spend more. Hotels alone are 300+ a night and yes people eat 3 times a day and snacks. But is that spending going straight to the local economy? Most people are staying and eating at large chain hotels/restaurants/etc so how much of that money is staying in the economy compared to what a cruise passanger is spending.

 

When they calculate the spending do they include port taxes and fees? I think they usually cost 30-50USD person. So a family of four that doesn't even get of the ship is spending 120-200USD into the local government. I don't know what the actual number is but we recently missed a port and were refunded 31USD per person in port fees. 

 

The numbers would look different if it was averaged out per hour spent? A cruise passanger may, on average, may only spend 60-70 a day but that is usually within a 6-8hr period vs 24 hr period for a land guest. The land guest will still come out on top given the hotel costs but the numbers probably wouldn't look as drastic.

 

We recently left Nuuk, Greenland and was quite surprised at the size and amount of new construction going on in the area. Greenland cities can only be accessed by air or boat, not road. Not sure how many people are planning a week-long land vacation in Greenland but imagine the number is small. The money driving a chunk of this economy is likely from cruise passangers.

 

The one thing I try to keep in mind at each port is the jobs that it creates for locals. When we arrive we always see so many workers around, from info booths, to security, to port workers, bus drivers, etc. That has to be a big boost for the locals even though the individual worker isn't making money directly from the hand of the cruise passanger.

 

I do appreciate the fact that thousands of people are unloading on small towns doubling or tripling their population. I can see the frustration from locals. 

 

Ok sorry for the long winded post. It's always an interesting topic. Not an expert opinion by any stretch just some tuesday morning musings. Feel free to rip me apart. We love cruising and will continue to do so as long as we can. Whether by excursion, souvenir, or food, we always try to spend money in every port. We have also returned to a couple places for land based tours after visiting by cruise ship because we wanted more time there.  

 

 

 

 

[notscb]

12 hours ago, Mikamarii said:

I've never really delved in to this and not an economist but it seems to come up often and lots of strong opinions on it. It always made me think about where these numbers come from.

 

I've been on some boards and panels for our local government and tourism is always on the agenda. Usually the drivers of these are hotel owners/representatives as it is such a massive industry. So the numbers are gonna be driven by their own interests. I think it's fair to say Hotel companies loathe the cruise industry. They make 0 dollars off it. If they are driving the research they will want to make the cruise industry look bad. They will also have a large representation (ie loudest voice) but there are many smaller voices that are getting drowned out as they probably love the money the cruise passangers bring. 

 

When looking at per person spending it makes sense that the land traveller will spend more. Hotels alone are 300+ a night and yes people eat 3 times a day and snacks. But is that spending going straight to the local economy? Most people are staying and eating at large chain hotels/restaurants/etc so how much of that money is staying in the economy compared to what a cruise passanger is spending.

 

When they calculate the spending do they include port taxes and fees? I think they usually cost 30-50USD person. So a family of four that doesn't even get of the ship is spending 120-200USD into the local government. I don't know what the actual number is but we recently missed a port and were refunded 31USD per person in port fees. 

 

The numbers would look different if it was averaged out per hour spent? A cruise passanger may, on average, may only spend 60-70 a day but that is usually within a 6-8hr period vs 24 hr period for a land guest. The land guest will still come out on top given the hotel costs but the numbers probably wouldn't look as drastic.

 

We recently left Nuuk, Greenland and was quite surprised at the size and amount of new construction going on in the area. Greenland cities can only be accessed by air or boat, not road. Not sure how many people are planning a week-long land vacation in Greenland but imagine the number is small. The money driving a chunk of this economy is likely from cruise passangers.

 

The one thing I try to keep in mind at each port is the jobs that it creates for locals. When we arrive we always see so many workers around, from info booths, to security, to port workers, bus drivers, etc. That has to be a big boost for the locals even though the individual worker isn't making money directly from the hand of the cruise passanger.

 

I do appreciate the fact that thousands of people are unloading on small towns doubling or tripling their population. I can see the frustration from locals. 

 

Ok sorry for the long winded post. It's always an interesting topic. Not an expert opinion by any stretch just some tuesday morning musings. Feel free to rip me apart. We love cruising and will continue to do so as long as we can. Whether by excursion, souvenir, or food, we always try to spend money in every port. We have also returned to a couple places for land based tours after visiting by cruise ship because we wanted more time there.  

 

 

 

 

If you're curious, the 2013 study linked was funded by the Meltzer Research fund, based in Norway, but was peer and IRB reviewed as it was conducted by the University of Bergen.

 

Everyone definitely has an opinion on this topic, but I think it's always important to consider what the data says followed by what the locals who are impacted by the tourism say.

 

@Biker19 also reminds us of an excellent point- Cruise lines are highly incentivized and have very obviously been working toward keeping folks spending onboard as much as possible which really backs up what the data currently shows. Personally, I was always the type of cruiser who looked forward to the destination (enjoying the ship, but the ship wasn't the destination per se). I'm sad to see the industry pivot toward the ship as the destination model.

[Mikamarii]

10 hours ago, notscb said:

If you're curious, the 2013 study linked was funded by the Meltzer Research fund, based in Norway, but was peer and IRB reviewed as it was conducted by the University of Bergen.

 

Everyone definitely has an opinion on this topic, but I think it's always important to consider what the data says followed by what the locals who are impacted by the tourism say.

 

@Biker19 also reminds us of an excellent point- Cruise lines are highly incentivized and have very obviously been working toward keeping folks spending onboard as much as possible which really backs up what the data currently shows. Personally, I was always the type of cruiser who looked forward to the destination (enjoying the ship, but the ship wasn't the destination per se). I'm sad to see the industry pivot toward the ship as the destination model.

Thank you. I didn't clue in that the survey was linked so I was able to read both of them. There's definitely some fascinating stuff. Some interesting points that I drew from the research (mainly the 2019 study). Again my interpretation only. 

 

-When accommodations and transportation factored in land travellers spend more. When that is removed the spending is roughly equal.

 

- cruise passanger spending is on par with camping visitors and people who visit family/friends. 

 

- When factoring in shore excursions purchased through the cruiseline they make the assumption that only 50% of that goes to Norway and rest to the cruiseline. I think that is lowballed. There is definitely markup but I don't think that it is that much. It also stated that the northernmost ports have almost 0 independently purchased shore excursions which then lowers overall spend. It makes it seem like this is the fault of the passanger; however, This is maybe because there are fewer services up there and tour operators have contracts with the cruiselines and don't sell as much privately. Regardless, this overall underestimates the amount spent if using a 50/50 distribution. 

 

- in this study, the contribution to the Norweigan economy by cruises does not include taxes/port fees/ and supplies purchased by the cruiseline itself. It's only a study on cruise passangers. I believe this undervalues cruises. On our missed Norway port we were refunded 31USD per person. A lowball estimate of 2000 passangers on our fjords cruise equates to 62000USD (roughly 665000NOK) lost to the Government for an 8hr visit.

While the survey is being honest and true to its study it does make it easy for anti-cruisers to interpret that cruise lines don't contribute as much. If I stay at a hotel for the night and spend 300 on a hotel and 30$ (10%) goes to taxes that number is included in the land based overall spending but my port fees aren't included in the cruise passanger spend (for this study)

 

- 92% of cruise passangers spend money while in port in Norway.

 

- spending by cruise tourists has declined. They estimate several different factors for this. A big one though is they admit that the latest survey is much more robust and interviewed more than twice as many people Than the previous study. 

 

- they say only 8% of cruise dollars is left in Norway vs 86% by land travellers. My opinion is this is a little misleading. They take the percentage based off total spend of the entire vacation and because cruises are expensive it makes the number seem small. It also makes the assumption that every dollar spent on cruise fare goes to the cruiseline which isn't true as previously mentioned by port fees.  If the cruise is 10k and I spend 1000k in ports they calculate that only 10% of the money goes to Norway. But 100% of that 1000k goes to Norway just like a land passanger and, as previously stated, hotels aside, spending is roughly equal. 

 

- People who cruise are more likely to return to Norway vs a land visitor

 

-Surveys that show locals against cruising also have a strong opposition to tourism in general. Largely because of perceived lack of spend by cruise passangers. This survey also mainly focuses on cruise passanger perception. So the numbers they use are thay the cruise passangers feel the port they visited was overcrowded not specifically the locals. 

 

Thank you for providing the link. It was a really interesting read. We do try to limit or spending on the cruise line excursions and book independently and spend more money directly in port. I appreciate some of the concerns with Cruising but also feel that it is improperly targeted as a form of travel.