It costs a lot for a line to invest in a new design, which is what Royal Caribbean has successfully done in recent years. Even though this has cut their profits, their philosophy is that, in the long run, it will pay off.

Eventually, of course, Carnival will have to establish new designs, but don't look for small vessels within the CCL brand--that's not what they are about. They have other brands for people wanting smaller ships.

i'm not considering you as a novice
but here we go then

i also do not agree with Rich to some content
to put it black/white as Carnival Corp / Royal Caribbean
they are both in it for the money, their only
difference is their approach...
(Carnival with a lot of brands, RCI more compact
innovative etc)

but here is your answer from an insider
head of MSC cruises just had this interview
days ago... (source Seatrade Insider)

Interviewed at Seatrade Europe in Hamburg today, MSC chief executive Pierfranceso Vago said the two additional vessels would be a prototype design broader in the beam than those currently in the fleet and with passenger capacity up to 20% higher than the company’s largest, Fantasia-class vessels.

He said the company is looking at two firm orders, and that it might add options for two more. ‘Economies of scale are dictating the market so yes, they will have a larger passenger capacity than our current ships, he said.

so what does it mean... Fantasia class is about
3300 passengers and 138.000 tons
that would be... 4000 pax and 165.000 tons

so if you want to make money by numbers
the answer is plain.. BIG(GER)
i believe Carnival will surely go this route
as well, they have different brands with smaller
ships as Rich rightly points out

it's not my cup of tea you'll all know that i
prefer my beloved ms Funchal
for me the smaller the better (very often: the more expensive)

best regards
b. Joe

[ 09-29-2011: Message edited by: buddhaJoe ]

Many experienced cruisers stay on the ship during visits to St. Thomas just for that reason.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Salaison:
Did you just call Fantasy-Class ships old? lol

---

In ship's age, they ARE getting old. FANTASY came into service over 20 years ago already. A huge percentage of the traditional ocean liners did not last that long in service. Most ships are designed and built with a planned lifespan of 20-30 years.

It is going to be a very expensive proposition for Carnival to replace that entire class of ships but they are going to have to do it to stay competitive. And then what are they going to do with all of those ships? There not enough market for second hand tonnage or new markets to send all the ships off to.

But we haven't seen that yet with the new breed of ships built since the late '60s and '70s. The "trickle-down" or "hand-me-down" process can only go on for so long.

Is it within the realm of possibility that Carnival Corp. or others might invest in their own "recycling yard", the euphemism for scrapyards today? I wonder if it would be more profitable for them to sell a whole ship for scrap, or do it themselves and make money on the remains. And I mention this only half in jest!

Or maybe they can turn all the ships into floating retirement homes ... Aint we got fun for the over 80 set!

I would think the folks in the boardroom at Carnival Corp are already thinking about this problem. Run them till they drop and then cut them up? But even then they still need to pay for a whole new generation of ships at some point to replace these aged Fantasies and in the meantime they are still running with an older generation of hardware. At some point they are going to have to feel like they are carrying an Apple II into the meeting while all the competitors are sitting there with the iPhone or iPad or Mac Air.

Back to the original question there's no reason Carnival could not start replacing the Fantasy class with another what today amounts to mid-sized class on modern design. Only thing stopping them is money. The Corporation is pouring money into the other brands like AIDA and even Princess. Maybe the strategy is to take CCL all the way down market to be a 21st century version of Commodore or the Regal Empress.

quote:

---

Originally posted by SSTRAVELER:
Maybe the strategy is to take CCL all the way down market to be a 21st century version of Commodore or the Regal Empress.

---

Regal Empress, Commodore, and Premier? It was Carnival that cut prices to their level which helped put them out of business. Except for a shipnut, a cruise passenger will go on the more modern ship.

quote:

---

Originally posted by dmwnc1:
I know this is going to sound pretty stupid to some of you, but Carnival Cruise Lines has pretty much stretched the Destiny-to-Dream Class design about as far as it can go. Why couldn't they then in turn go smaller on a few ships, and in 2014 or 2015 replace some of the aging Fantasy-Class ships with a modified-for-CCL Sphinx class cruise ship used in AIDA Cruises? I know that CCL has spent a bit of money refitting some of the Fantasy-class with balconies, but still it would be nice to see something new for them sporting a newly designed whale tail.

---

First off, Carnival's next ship order(whenever that may be) will most likely be smaller, and will certainly be a new design.

I don't beleive its "Corporate Greed" that guides Carnival's decisions, as Rich stated earlier, rather its common business sense. As, I have said many many times before; Carnival can't just build a brand new design or platform as often as they would like. If they did, I could only imagine the financial impact.

Look at the impact introducing new platforms has had on Royal Caribbean and their finances.

Imagine if Carnival did the same; the financial consequences would be much much worse.

Regarding the Fantasy class, they can still be competitive in the short cruise market, and are crurrently fufilling their purpose. They are a good fit for that segment of the industry and I dont see why they should be replaced at the moment.

With the exception of any further ships that might be ordered for Seabourn, which will obviously be small, the remaining Sphinx-class orders are almost certainly the last sub-100,000-GT ships that Carnival will build for the foreseeable future, and quite possibly ever, for any of its brands.

I still think it would be cool if they could get three of the Sphinx-class, with all those balconies, and put them on the short cruise market out of south Florida or LA. Seems like it would one-up any competition with the 'older' ships like the Sovereign-class or Norwegian Sky.

[ 10-01-2011: Message edited by: dmwnc1 ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by dmwnc1:

I still think it would be cool if they could get three of the Sphinx-class, with all those balconies, and put them on the short cruise market out of south Florida or LA. Seems like it would one-up any competition with the 'older' ships like the Sovereign-class or Norwegian Sky.

[ 10-01-2011: Message edited by: dmwnc1 ]

---

Historically, it's been a hard sell to offer lots of balconies on the short cruises. There is a lot of price resistance to paying premium rates for premium accommodations for only 3 nights, and the alternative is to drop the rates drastically, which the lines of course don't want to do. This is why we have not seen very much of the newer, balcony-laden ships on this run.

Of course the time is approaching when nearly all available ships will have tons of balconies, and eventually they will have to be put on the 3 & 4-night cruises. It will be interesting to see how the price points work out then.