The newbuilds; although not fully defined in scope will be quite similar to
the LIBRA Class for Star Cruises. There will most likely be four of them for
NCL and although based upon the LIBRA Class, they will not be carbon copies.
They will be distinct in character and decor for NCL. It is still highly
likely that the first newbuild can/will be in the water sometime in 2003.

NCL will be looking to Star Cruises for guidance and their may very well be
some influence in the newbuilds as well as some enhancements in store for
the current fleet. NCL is toying with the idea of adding a "High Stakes"
casino venue a la Star. The newbuilds will also offer multiple dining venues
with a wider variety than is currently offered aboard the current fleet as
well as those ships belonging to other companies.

Carnival's management is taking a keen interest in NCL although they will
not be involved in the day to day management. I am told that all three
parties are currently developing a marketing plan that will involve NCL,
Star and Carnival and that NCL will most likely join Carnival's Marketing
Consortium "Leading Cruise Lines of the World".

As for the Norway, it is all but finalized/official that she will be
switched to a 2/5 day itinerary program later this year and this is how she
will while away the remainder of her NCL days. They intend to keep her in
service until Q3 2001, when the first newbuild, "Norwegian Sun", is in
service. Beyond that, they are non committal. They are hesitant to retire
her at this time due to a capacity shortage. She could very well remain in
service until the second newbuild's anticipated arrival in 2003 but that
hinges upon her ability to turn a profit and the popularity of the 2/5
program, and if all else fails, a 3/4 day program.

It has yet to be determined what, if any, capital improvements the Norway
will receive over the course of her remaining tenure with NCL. I am told tha
t capital spending in regards to the Norway will be kept to a minimum with
the bulk spent on improving the younger "core" fleet members.

More changes and details thereof will be announced shortly.

--
Tim Rubacky
Cruise Ship List Owner www.onelist.com

Keeping her until 2003, not to mention through 2001 is an act of desperation. They need the capcity for now but not the headaches she causes.

I am curious where do you get your information? I try to follow NCL very close. Do you expect that even though NCL has said that they are pulling the SEA out of the port of houston after December 2000, that there is a chance of bringing another one of their ships in? Also, what is the word on the name the ship contest?

STAR CRUISES can rename NORWAY as SUPERSTAR ASIA. They can promote tradition and classic cruise experience in Asia-Pacific. After 2009, they can re-transfer NORWAY to NCL for floating hotal.

Do you think that this is a good suggestion? Thank You!

I dont know who's been feeding you the info, but I can assure you that the Norway is the biggest liability NCL has. She is a BIG money loser. Heavy on fuel, requires lots of constant and expensive upkeep and garners the lowest per diems in the fleet.

According to NCL's new CEO, NCL really has only three ships that can be considered "core" or valuable and those are the Dream, Wind and Sky.

I do believe that if he had his druthers, he'd get rid of the lot and just keep those three if it was feasible but it is not.

Eric,

There is as much of a chance at Star taking the Norway in as their is of them re-appointing Kristian Siem and Geir Aune to their former posts as Chairman and COO respectively.

Granted, Norway is majestic looking and nostalgic, she holds very little intrinsic value, espacially to the Asian market which has basically been weened on BIG and NEW ships.

My information came from very high up in the corporate "food chain"; from a Director and a VP. I dont doubt that the engineering staff are fond of her and thus dont see her maintenance as a challenge, but that does not mean it is not expensive; or more expensive to maintain her than the newer ships.

As for her per diems, I have spread sheets that show a sizeable dispaity between Norway's per diems and more importantly, the yield on those per diems. The newer ships in the fleet have a higher percentage of high yield cabins.

Logic, which would and does apply here would dictate that the Norwegian Sky, Wind and Dream cost less to operate due to the lower fuel consumption, fewer crew members and overall; more efficient operations.

It is also relevant to point out that shipboard and even some shorseside staff do not always have nor have disseminated to them the same information.

As of this afternoon, none of NCL's Reservations, and few, if any Sales and PR staff were the least bit cognizant of the changes that are taking/about to take place.

At the same time, the information is already making its way to the trade press/media and NCL's CEO has commented on several facets publicly.

Regards,

I pose a Question to you Malcolm, and any other people why think that QE2 is nearing the end, why would Cunard have just invested a further $30 million, on QE2 just to have her replaced by the Queen Mary 2?

The truth is they wouldn't. QE2 is going to WORK WITH QM2 on the Atlantic and she will also continue her annual World Cruise as well as branch out into the Pacific. Please, think about it, why would Cunard retire QE2 when QM2 can not pass through the canal? That would be stupid because Cunard can not use QM2 on World Cruises or move her to the Pacific Ocean like the can with QE2.

QE2 is also very up to date, she is IN Style, IN class. She may have had her hull built in 1969 but she is not by any means an OLD ship. She has everything new apart from her hull plates, which by the way are very very strong and have been passed as 'serviceable' for at least another 15 years in the resent refit in 1999.

You can not compare Norway to Queen Elizabeth 2, they are very different. Firstly, QE2 has new engines, and has had some $300 million spent on her to keep her on top, and modern. Norway however has her original '60's steam turbines as well as not being treated to the amount of work QE2 has enjoyed. Also Norway was designed and built many years before QE2.

May I put foreword a proposal? Do not say that QE2 is nearing the end, or will be retired with out thinking about what you are saying first.

Of cause I do appreciate that you may have an opinion that says that QE2 is old, but I also have an opinion, and it is what is written above.

Do we all not enjoy posting/discussing here?? If this was not so, we wouldnt all be spending so much time here.

If you would like to hear it directly from the "suits" so be it. I just thought you might enjoy the information as much as I enjoy sharing it. If this is not the case, please feel free to let me know.

Regards,

* Old steam turbines instead of diesels.
* 2.25 passengers / crewmember instead of 2.5 passengers / crewmember.
* Fewer top-grade outside cabins.
* Higher costs for maintenance.

But she has also many advantages and one of these is that she is already paid for. A ship like the Norwegian Sky costs about $ 350 million. That is a cost of about $ 12 million every year for 30 years! And what do you get? A nice ship - correct!

But not a living legend!! This ship is really an international icon. She has elegance and grace, something that few "modern" ships can offer. In my opinion many people has chosen to cruise with NCL because they have the S/S Norway. Without her they will choose another line - that is no money to NCL.

I also think that the NCL has not been very good in their marketing efforts of this ship. They have a lot to learn from Cunard that has been extremely succesful in promoting the QE2 and Caronia.

To sum up: The S/S Norway offers much more than capacity. This ship has a tremendous potential.

A major refit would take this ship to the top again.

The management must also find a better way of using her. Why not cruises to Rio or the Cape-town?

Finally: If this ship is retired I hope that they look after her. I really hope that we all agree that it would be a sad end to see pictures of her beeing scrapped on a beach in Pakistan. I can not imagine a more sad end for this ship.

If you think otherwise please look what P&O did to the beloved S/S Canberrra
www.sscanberra.com/gallgad.htm

Regards,

Sorry if I gave you the wrong impression. I dont dislike the Norway, in fact, I think she is a magnificent looking ship and I dont wish to see her gone.

However, I dont feel as though there is much of anything left of her days as the France. Sure, the cabins are all still there (many of them altered and fairly dull now) but the public spaces have been greatly altered to the point where, IMO, they are not indicative of the France.

The Rembrandt, OTOH, is a great expample of a liner that is in a largely original state.

But from a "professional" point of view, the Norway's day has come and gone.

She is expensive to operate and maintain. She has increasingly problematic plumbing, HVAC and propulsion systems and has suffered several mechanical breakdowns and fires in the past year.

Gripsholm,

she is a liability due to the fact that she is a loss leader. If the Norway was removed from NCL service, there would be little to no negative impact on revenues, in fact, it may even have a positive impact.

Sure, new ships cost money but they generate more revenue than their expenses. A ship such as the Norwegian Sky can be written off in five to ten years. Even at a cost of $12 million/year over 30 years, the ship will probably bring in triple that amount in revenues.

In regards to the Norway, I concede she is graceful but dont find her "elegant" with the possible exception of the Club Internationale. And true, the Norway does attract a fair number of first time cruisers but of those, it's probably an even split between those who would cruise again after their experience on her and 1/2 are turned off.

Why?? Expectations. They expect to find a plush, luxurious, "Grand Dame". They expect to be taken back to a kinder, gentler era and sail on the France. Whos fault is this? NCL and the travel industry "professionals" are equally at fault.

A major refit to bring back the lustre would cost NCL an exorbitant amouint of money, in the range of $40-50 million to do it "right". The ship would never return this investment over the time she has left, which is three years maximum, with NCL.

I do hope NCL can find some profitable role for the Norway, but highly doubt they will at this point. I hope I'm wrong.

I can´t understand how a removal of the S/S Norway could actually increase revenues. You seem to expect that it is all about capacity! We all due respect but I think you are wrong. For instance I´m rather convinced that a removal would create a lot of VERY LOUD protest that could seriously hurt the image and sales of NCL.

You are also saying that a majot refit would cost about $ 40 - 50 million - and that is probably correct. This cost is about 1/10 of the building cost of a new - and if I my say so - dull and boring ship!

Finally I´m totally convinced that this ship - and other old ships for that matter - can be run at a profit (and a handsome one)

If the NCL can not make money on this ship I recommend the shareholders to retire the management instead of the S/S Norway.

An endless subject, the future of this NORWAY!
Here are my 2 cents too, sharing few of my reflections.
...it's odd to thing during the time we are talking about that, NCL and Star have probably decided about her future quite accuratly. A normal thing for a big firm. According the last news given by Timber (thank you for the infos and I encourage you to go on sharing the ones you will be able to have), they are about to test her on an inferior market, short cruises on "minor" itineraries. Apparently this is their choice, their policy, not a good new, unless if it appears later it is a success. So, we'll see...
According me, NO, she's NOT a liability. If so, she would be sold or scrapped since a moment. Sentimental considerations are just for ship's lovers like us in this forum or anywhere else. But we know to have a "cold head" if necessary.
The only one way I can understand or be agree with the words of Timber, is if they (NCL/Star) use all her crew efforts, all her logistic, advertising, marketing, needs, (at least the part of them we can consider to be used only for NORWAY since they are just a part of a "big machinery" used by and for all their ships. We can't easily isolate most of them without knowing the real numbers), or all her care and maintenance efforts in another very modern big "money maker" cruise ship, such as N. SKY, so yes I think they'll be able to earn more money.
But herself, because she is paid, but more important according me, before all because it is a true fact she has not been retired yet, she is NOT a liability. ....or NCL is mad!
Second thing Timber: why do you work on the assumption that peoples are so disappointed after cruising on her?
Why did you told only the Club International is elegant and the most part of the other public rooms are altered since her "FRANCE days"? Ok, I concede you it is a matter of taste and all INDIVIDUAL opinion regarding that is acceptable and respectable, but there are several other great public rooms which are almost the sames as the original ones (myself, I even thought they were more altered before cruising on her two years ago).
Exemples: Club International, Windward dining room (only furnitures are changed - fortunately because the style of the 50s/60s ones is quite "special" and cold and anyway was short-lived -), the two enclosed promenades on International deck, the children playroom (2nd class), the Saga Theatre (only the two balcony's extansions were added and the seats changed to speak only about the decoration), the perfumery which has the original glass cases and ceiling, the stairs towers are the same, walls deco, banisters...and many other little things.
So yes, for a connoisseur, you can find again several original feature of the FRANCE. Of course, all was not perfect (although the "satisfaction rates" was about 97% "excellent" opinions in the 60s, with several voyages transporting more 1st class passengers than Q.M., Q.E. and U.S. together the same week!). More according me few things have been even improved in the decoration (art deco pictures, furnitures, warmer tones...) Of courses, although the ambiance is still quite special and charming, other things have been largely "McDonaldslised" and the service is not the same with less charm however, less power. Another era.
But contrarily what you affirm, NORWAY has still something good to propose. The most part of passengers do know she's no more the FRANCE and anyway NCL never marketed her as "the memory of SS FRANCE" while the past twenty years (in Europe for the 98 and 99 summer seasons yes, but not in US, the overwhelming majority of her customers for these past twenty years).
Why do you affirm, the half of the ones who cruised on her are desapointed and don't want to sail on her again?
How can you explain, in a concurrent site, with 81 reviews written by all sort of cruisers, firt ones AND experimented ones for a really big part, NORWAY has a score of 86 / 100, a score qualified as "good"? Many of these (not all it is true) said she is not so "worn" and she is still in quite good shape.
My opinion is all is still possible now if you consider the ship only and yes she needs a major refurbishment, about the same as QE2 had last year.
No, I think, the problem is not the NORWAY herself, at least for the moment, but really the policy of her owners about her future. I don't try at all to hide me the reality regarding this ship and even if I put aside all sentimental consideration, I'm agree with Gripsholm and MHP, it depends if they have decided to not put any bucks on her and let her die as it seems to appear. History seems to repeat itself, as the Frenchs, my fellow-citizens, did in 1974. That's why I'm not optimist too (a point where we are agree Timber). Are they ready to use her for about ten years again or not?
This is the key.
According what you wrote, "she is a loss header". According what it appears from NCL, she's going to die...
Last July there was a survey made by Travelpage ( http://www.travelpage.com/itg/pr_survey_99.htm ).
400 persons had to choose a favorite among all the cruise lines and more than 200 cruise ships, among these the last modern big ones (I have absolutly nothing at all against these other ships and I didn't participate to this survey), despite all her defaults, her bad condition and her bad future, the winner is....

.....SS NORWAY...

Strange, maybe someone should explain me....