Largest Cruise Ship, Or Just Ugliest?

CaptTom said:

Click to expand...

I wonder what Robert Beebe would say about her A/B ratio and perhaps a backup sail plan???

"The aesthetic end result to maximizing profit at all cost."

Sounds like a rational choice for folks investing big bucks , for hope of a return..

Does Las Vegas or Atlantic City look any better?

Remember most folks ON a cruise ship are not boaters , have zero sense of what might be considered pretty by boaters and don't give a dam.

Bess and I have taken two cruises... One on the Norway (formerly the SS France) and on one of Royal Caribbean's big dogs on the early 2000's. I just wanted to see the big boat. Never again. It was a horrible experience. I mean, we weren't miserable. We spent time doing stuff and met with friends when we stopped in Jamaica, but to constant waiting in lines, listing to screaming kids, and generally seeing the ugly side of Americans was enough for us to swear off them forever.

OP... Ugly? Yea, pretty much, but the stranglehold the cruise lines have on the little islands they visit (at least in the Caribbean) is what troubles me the most.

Always amazed at these huge ships operations, all the staff/entertainment/food/etc/etc/etc. Also amazed it makes money given what they charge. Only been on two cruises and it was fairly cheap considering.

Tom.B said:

OP... Ugly? Yea, pretty much, but the stranglehold the cruise lines have on the little islands they visit (at least in the Caribbean) is what troubles me the most.

Click to expand...

They own many of the islands. Why wouldn't they have a stranglehold on an island they own?

Marlinmike said:

Always amazed at these huge ships operations, all the staff/entertainment/food/etc/etc/etc. Also amazed it makes money given what they charge. Only been on two cruises and it was fairly cheap considering.

Click to expand...

Their money making formula is really pretty straightforward. On the revenue side, they charge what the market will bear with wide variations by location on the ship, type room, and time booked and then filling capacity if they must with discounts but at prices more than covering the variable costs of the extra passenger.

Then on the cost side, they flag in countries that allow them to pay for less than US or European wages and have minimal requirements for compliance in many areas of operation. They build the boats in the most economical yards in the world. And they pay virtually no income taxes on their earnings.

Add to that practices such as proceed with the trip if at all possible so you don't have to refund money for a cancelled cruise. Then if problems arise, do not compensate with refunds, but always with discounts for future cruises, which basically costs you nothing. Also, if problems arise at sea, then find the most economical way to resolve them, even if that means keeping passengers on a boat filled with sewage or one where 90% of the passengers have norovirus.

Last, through mergers and acquisitions, minimize the competition.

Greetings,
Mr. BB. An observation from a learned remote source...
B&B wrote: "They build the boats in the most economical yards in the world."

Most economical does not mean the cheapest as his post implies. All but a very few of those boats are made in European yards that pay higher wages than American yards and far higher than Asian yards. The social benefits and labor conditions of the European yards far exceed those of American yards. The yards that build virtually all cruise ships are not 3rd world latrines.

The cruise ship owners pay for an extremely high tech and high quality product that makes the higher costs part of an economy of operation that no cheap labor yard could ever provide.

There is a good reason why the best engines, the best marine hardware, and the most innovative marine technology comes from Europe, in both design and manufacture. It is not because it comes from 3rd world sweatshops and cheap labor. (editorial comment tactfully removed...)

Blue growth: keeping Europe's shipyards afloat - Ship Technology

shipyards and builders

RT Firefly said:

Greetings,
Mr. BB. An observation from a learned remote source...
B&B wrote: "They build the boats in the most economical yards in the world."

Most economical does not mean the cheapest as his post implies. All but a very few of those boats are made in European yards that pay higher wages than American yards and far higher than Asian yards. The social benefits and labor conditions of the European yards far exceed those of American yards. The yards that build virtually all cruise ships are not 3rd world latrines.

The cruise ship owners pay for an extremely high tech and high quality product that makes the higher costs part of an economy of operation that no cheap labor yard could ever provide.

There is a good reason why the best engines, the best marine hardware, and the most innovative marine technology comes from Europe, in both design and manufacture. It is not because it comes from 3rd world sweatshops and cheap labor. (editorial comment tactfully removed...)

Click to expand...

As you so astutely noted, I said "most economical", not "cheapest." At no point did I say anything about third world or Asian. So you appear to be arguing with something you stated up front that I didn't say. I guess I'm confused with how third world or Asian ever became introduced into this discussion.

Now, since you introduced third world and Asia, I might mention a very small percentage of classed boats, are built in Asia. They are for the most part built in Europe and the US.

As to my post implying cheapest, perhaps you inferred lowest labor rates or third world. These yards are cheapest for them in the long run. They are highly efficient yards that can handle the size and scale and build such huge passenger ships economically while meeting all the required specifications and class requirements. They are considerably more efficient in building such boats that say the largest yacht builders in the same areas of the world. They are well equipped to handle the volume, not just in number of ships, but the volume of a single ship. As a simple example, there is a huge difference in building a megayacht with 20 staterooms and building a cruise ship with thousands of cabins. Automation and technology plays a far greater role in building cruise ships. There is a lot of prefabrication, none of which you would see in a major yacht builder.

Perhaps "efficient" would have been a better choice of words, but I think less accurate as Feadship or Oceanco or Lurssen are very efficient, just very much each build unique and the economies available to a cruise ship builder not available to them.

Greetings,
Mr. BB. I suspect a misinterpretation. Apologies.

RT Firefly said:

Greetings,
Mr. BB. I suspect a misinterpretation. Apologies.

Click to expand...

No problem at all. In fact, supports one of my premises regarding boat building and that is that we can build and deliver a boat as inexpensively in the US as importing from Asia. All the largest builders of large boats are in Europe with costs of labor exceeding US costs or in the US. For smaller boats such as runabouts and small cruisers the volume builders are in the US.

Just take Nordhavn. You could build an efficient modern facility and you could build and have an equivalent boat available in the US for no more, and perhaps less, than it costs to build and ship one to the US. Now, you'd have to make a very large investment and you'd be decades behind in marketing and building the name so you'd probably still fail. It just wouldn't be because of where you were building.

There is no more efficient small boat factory in the world than Sea Ray and no more efficient yacht builder in the world than Westport.

I think one of the best reflections of these economics is the effort of Ocean Alexander to build in the US.

O C Diver said:

Think I dove her 16 times over 4 or 5 years.

Click to expand...

You're obviously a technical diver. So what gas mixes did you use and I assume you switched mixtures when descending that deep?

makobuilders said:

You're obviously a technical diver. So what gas mixes did you use and I assume you switched mixtures when descending that deep?

Click to expand...

When I did it open circuit (scuba tanks) it was with trimix;

Oxygen / Helium / Nitrogen

16/50/34 surface to bottom back to 120'
32/20/48 120' to 40'
70/0/30 40' to surface

Most of the dives were with a rebreather where the mixture was 16/50/34. Oxygen level was increased on ascent reducing the Helium and Nitrogen. From 15' to the surface it was 100% Oxygen.

Ted

Boy, I'm sure that was a fascinating experience, but I'm not that brave anymore. I worked for my father's marine construction company to get through college, almost all shallow coastal stuff, pilings, power plant intakes, that kind of thing. We used Desco helmets (we called them "Desco pots" because you could bang those things on rocks and girders and intake racks and concrete walls and beat the daylights out of them, tough as cannonballs). I remember my one deepest dive though, to the mouth of an intake pipe at a hydroelectric station in upstate New York. It was an easy dive, piled on the lead and just walked the top of the inclined 36" pipe all the way down to the end, wrapped a cable and shackle around a log stuck on the intake grate and came back up, but it was around 120 feet (on plain air). We dove in the dark all the time so it wasn't that, and even aside from the thermoclines, there was just something dense about the water that deep. Felt psychologically very different. No thanks.

BruceK said:

That would be Queensland businessman/politician Clive Palmer, associated with Queensland Nickel which recently ceased production. I would very much like to see photos of the ship under construction, it`s only 2 years to the maiden voyage. I`ll believe it when I see them, or the ship.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't hold your breath on the Titanic replica floating under Clive's watch.

Indeed he might be sinking, financially, himself over a debt that his 'cash box' company guaranteed. Paid article so I wont include the link, but it is in relation to work carried out for gas exploration in PNG where a $16m payment remains in dispute. In my exploration experience you might contract with a company that has no significant assets but in that case you will obtain a guarantee from one that does have adequate net asset backing. If reports of his personal wealth are accurate then I expect that the dispute will be resolved, although its going through the courts first. Whatever personal wealth he does have will not likely become entangled in messy situations like Queensland Nickel or Palmer Coolum Resort where hundreds of jobs lost and debt/legal disputes are substantial. The former might be resurrected but has been quoted as being akin to a Phoenix Company situation. Its a safe bet that major suppliers to the new operating shell company will be looking for a guarantee.

As to his expertise when boating, he could probably use some help
‘Titanic II’ billionaire narrowly avoids superyacht collision – Motor Boat & Yachting

That boat, a $5.3m Horizon 30m vessel, was gifted to his daughter Emily for her 15th birthday in 2009. But it is now going:

"The Courier Mail" Mar 19, 2016:
"We can’t have two of them (superyachts). There isn’t enough space (on the jetty), so we’ve got to let Maximus go. We’re making way for the new one.” Mr Palmer said he did not know how much the new boat was costing or even who was paying for it.


The last sentence is fascinating. I don't want that kind of boat, just the method of acquiring it!


There may another angle to the story. "The Australian" reported in Mar 3, 2016 article "Clive Palmer yacht a $5m rustbucket". Not sure what the details are, it was a paid article and I'm not that interested, although a couple of lost propulsion incidents might point to systemic 'deferred maintenance' issues.

Insequent said:

I wouldn't hold your breath on the Titanic replica floating under Clive's watch.


As to his expertise when boating, he could probably use some help
‘Titanic II’ billionaire narrowly avoids superyacht collision – Motor Boat & Yachting

That boat, a $5.3m Horizon 30m vessel, was gifted to his daughter Emily for her 15th birthday in 2009. But it is now going:

"The Courier Mail" Mar 19, 2016:
"We can’t have two of them (superyachts). There isn’t enough space (on the jetty), so we’ve got to let Maximus go. We’re making way for the new one.” Mr Palmer said he did not know how much the new boat was costing or even who was paying for it.

Click to expand...

A reasonable explanation: the new boat is as likely as Titanic Mk.2. In other words there will be no new boat.
I`ll take bets that in the coming election, be it the July 'Double Dissolution" ( should that be Disillusion?),or the normal course, Clive won`t be re-elected to the House of Reps, and his one remaining "tame" Senator won`t get back either.
A thought about the "Harmony" pic (that`s the topic, right?). I`ve seen other pics, it`s not pretty, but that pic looks distorted, like a small car caught in a nose to tail between 2 trucks.

Mr B (as opposed to your wonderful spouse!)-you are pretty close with your estimates of the cost differential of boat building here vs SE Asia. A few years ago, I represented a small groups tht was considering building a specific boat model, anticipated demand around 5-8 boats annually. That had me spend quite a bit of time exploring the Asia vs US as they felt there was some intangible value attached to the "Made in USA" label. We were looking a using an existing builder, financing some expansion for them to handle the production. Some 20-25 years ago, when most SE Asian building was done primarily in Taiwan, the cost difference between here and there was around 30-35%. The difference was mostly in labor costs. Very little cost difference in materials and parts. That has narrowed over the years as the infrastructure built up and the labor force became more skilled. About 5 years ago, we determined that the cost difference had dropped to something around 8-19%. A difference that can be dealt with. But, many, many boats are still built overseas because of the built-up infrastructure and skilled workforce.

The boat in the OP's picture does not improve much, if at all, from other angles. I've cruised past it. Some of these monsters (monstrosities?) have jet turbines on the uppermost aft deck. Presumably to provide enough power to run a million 1500W hairdryers etc. That noise cannot add to a nice on board experience.

I really want to take a cruise, but first need to find a suitable destination and secondly a right-sized cruise vessel. It wont be as large as the one in post #1 unless its one of the special Cunard ships.

Apologies for the thread drift above and one last indulgence if I may. Bruce, the article I linked was a bit old, there is a new yacht coming and expectations are it will be of similar size to the so-called rust bucket Horizon. The Titanic replica is never coming...

Insequent said:

I really want to take a cruise, but first need to find a suitable destination and secondly a right-sized cruise vessel. It wont be as large as the one in post #1 unless its one of the special Cunard ships.

Click to expand...

National Geographic and Lindblad Expeditions run a fleet of very small cruise ships to some very interesting places. It's a bit pricey, though. I've actually thought about applying to work there.

With regards to the original post, it's amazing to me the number of truly hideous passenger ships out there now. I fear may sound like an old fart when I say this, but the last truly pretty passenger ship was the QE2. I really don't even think Queen Mary 2 is all that pretty.









What's up with that butt??

THD said:

Mr B (as opposed to your wonderful spouse!)-you are pretty close with your estimates of the cost differential of boat building here vs SE Asia. A few years ago, I represented a small groups tht was considering building a specific boat model, anticipated demand around 5-8 boats annually. That had me spend quite a bit of time exploring the Asia vs US as they felt there was some intangible value attached to the "Made in USA" label. We were looking a using an existing builder, financing some expansion for them to handle the production. Some 20-25 years ago, when most SE Asian building was done primarily in Taiwan, the cost difference between here and there was around 30-35%. The difference was mostly in labor costs. Very little cost difference in materials and parts. That has narrowed over the years as the infrastructure built up and the labor force became more skilled. About 5 years ago, we determined that the cost difference had dropped to something around 8-19%. A difference that can be dealt with. But, many, many boats are still built overseas because of the built-up infrastructure and skilled workforce.

Click to expand...

There is another major factor too. The investors in boat building are not in the US. To be successful, it requires a tremendous amount of capital and there just aren't many people or companies in the US willing to make that kind of investment. Beyond Chouest (Westport), Versa (Hatteras), and Brunswick (Sea Ray and many others), it's not here. When Glastron, Four Winns, etc. were being resold by Platinum they sold to Beneteau. Sunseeker and Ferretti, two of the three largest yacht builders, are both Chinese owned. In Asia there is money looking for a home. Not so much in the US.

I did considerable analysis a couple of years ago, looking at a specific Asian boat builder. Had they been willing to sell (some owners were, others weren't, so a real internal battle), they would be building in the US now.

B-definitely spot on about Asian money, especially Chinese, looking for a home. For many wealthy Chinese, there first priority is to get their money out of China and keep it safe from the vagaries of the government. It has skewed the Seattle real estate market tremendously. Especially for office buildings and large multi-family projects. Among those investors, much les concern over the economics of a deal, much more of an attitude of "buy it, whatever it costs". A short example-a client decided to sell a 25 year old apartment complex he built and ran. He has always kept it in top shape, and it is in a good location. Several appraisals came in at around $12-13M, his broker solicited offers and got 13 serious offers all ranging from $10.5-$14M with the usual conditions, due diligence, examine financials, building inspections, etc with a 90 day closing pending getting financing. All made extensive site visits with engineers, architects, etc. A family owned Chinese RE company sent its local rep, he spent 3 hours on the property, and by late that afternoon sent a written offer, no conditions whatsoever, close in 45 days, all cash, with a $250K non-refundable binder, offering $21.5M! I now have a very happy client.

Those ships have the aesthetic appeal of a doublewide on a deck barge. Hideous, indeed.

I sure miss the shape of the old ships. Graceful sheer lines, beam curves not flattened by Panamax limits, etc. It makes more work for the guys cutting plates, but dang it they are easy on the eyes.

Wayfarer said:

...With regards to the original post, it's amazing to me the number of truly hideous passenger ships out there now. I fear may sound like an old fart when I say this, but the last truly pretty passenger ship was the QE2. I really don't even think Queen Mary 2 is all that pretty.

What's up with that butt??

Click to expand...

Yes, as much as I love the QM2, that curved butt is indeed fake, it was an add-on for almost entirely aesthetic reasons and as that photo shows, if you look closely you can see it's kind of glued on for looks. On the other hand the resulting fantail is maybe my favorite part of the ship, the "Don't jump Rose!" spot to watch the ocean recede into the distance with a glass of champagne in your hand. Even if the tail is fake I still think it's the most graceful liner on the water present day, although Disney tries to copy the classic look with navy blue or dark hulls and red stripes. Cunard did Queen Victoria and the new QE too, but they're both "eh" in my opinion, although I've never been on those two.

The Disney Wonder is more of a classic ocean liner. I took this picture just north of Shearwater in BC in when it was southbound. I had passed it 3 weeks earlier in Grenville Channel in the fog. Very impressive 150 yards to starboard.

Today they call them cruise ships.
We called them our only way to get around.
Most of the time...
Union Steamships Catala.

Hideous looking thing.

When we are in St. Lucia's Rodney Bay we see the Royal Clipper once a week. Have thought of taking her on one of her transatlantic crossings.

I've done a cruise on the Royal Clipper. It really was very nice. I've also done cruises on some of the giant cruise ships with thousands of passengers.

I always hear people say how they wouldn't want to do that, because you're crowded onto a boat with so many people. Honestly, when you're on the boat you really don't notice it. That is, it doesn't feel crowded at all. The only time you notice is when you are waiting to debark or embark. Then sometimes there is a bit of a line. There can also be lines for some meals, but then there are usually a dozen different choices; so if you don't like the lines just get your meal somewhere else.

Not saying that it is the best way to travel. The cruise on the Royal Clipper was head and shoulders above any experience I've had on a big cruise ship. But my wife and I just don't find the big cruise ships to be nearly as bad as some people (mostly people who have never BEEN on a big cruise ship) seem to think it is.

I used to think that car carriers (Ro/Ro) were the ugliest boats in the world - basically just office buildings laying on their sides... but some of those photos above of the cruise ships are just about as bad. Designed to be purely functional - not aesthetic.

Harmony of the Seas (and its peers) look like someone figured out how to get Soviet era housing to float. Ugh.

Found this one (about the ugliest I've ever seen) which made me bump this thread back into existence:
2007 Winston Marine Commercial/5 Decks Power Boat For Sale - www.yachtworld.com