quote:

---

Originally posted by Globaliser:
Actually, if you'd bothered to read Tim's post, you'd see how unrealistic that is. When a feasibility study for a newbuild takes two to three years, why do you expect that a feasibility study for the SSUS should be done in a matter of weeks? How long do you think the work would have taken? Do you think that it would have been sensible for NCL to throw money at her when NCLA (the likely destination of the SSUS) was just starting up, its performance was doubtful and its future was uncertain? In your opinion, should NCL have put the preservation and restoration of the SSUS ahead of all other commercial considerations and made it the company's top priority at that time?

Because that is what, in effect, you are suggesting that NCL should have done. And it is completely unrealistic.

[ 04-03-2006: Message edited by: Globaliser ]

---

Globaliser I won't say what I think the 'bad things' NCl have done and do you know why? Because no matter what I do say you take it out of context and twist it. I already said I'm a ship fan, not a company one. Since I joined here 12 months ago I've learnt a lot about the good things and the bad they all do. But for some reason you're singling me out when others have slated NCL too over this. And it was Malcolm who originally mentioned about the study going on since 2003 on the first page. I didn't know it had been going on that long. Did you pick every single thing he said apart? No. Have you picked apart every single thing anyone else who disagrees with you has posted? No. Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean you and bully me into seeing things your way. I found the article and posted it as I know there's a lot of Big U fans on here. I've enjoyed being on this board but if you're going to be such a bully I'm not coming here again. People can have friendly disagreements without resorting to those tactics.

In response to Ernst and Linerdan before I go, someone posted on one of the Norway threads a few months ago if Kloster was still in charge Norway wouldn't have ended up the way she has. So if NCL/Star Cruises can spend a fortune in berthing fees even after they took her out of the fleet because she had no future with them, who's to say the same thing won't happen with the Big U and Indy? And to date they still haven't said what they're going to do with Norway so it would be a miracle if they said anything at all about their plans for the other two nstead of the same old lines.

So let`s CONTINUE the discussion:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ernst:
I do not know what has been done - certainly a lot in Bremerhaven.
I guess if it was worth something they did not throw it away. As sad as itmight be, but if one has to get rid of a ship this means that stuff is thrown away.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Patsy:

I've enjoyed being on this board but if you're going to be such a bully I'm not coming here again.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Patsy:
But for some reason you're singling me out when others have slated NCL too over this.

---

But when I read unfair and unreasonable rants like the following, then yes, I will engage:-

quote:

---

Originally posted by Patsy:
NCL talk crap and tell lies. ... The day they say something honest is the day I'll believe in Santa Claus and the tooth fairy.

---

[ 04-05-2006: Message edited by: Globaliser ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by J.S.S.Normandie:

Usually the interior fittings are removed and sold. They may not be worth much money but the beautiful dining room ect... were priceless.

---

Beside that, the interior of the France / Norway was not that special. It would be nice to such a 60ies interior - but I guess in her case it is more the interplay of the different "parts" which created the atmosphere. A lounge in it's original conditon with all panellings, chairs, tables, ashtrays in place is someting different than a single, rotten 60ies chair. This is not comparable to the craftsmanship found in earlier times where each piece was an attraction in it's own. Don't get me wrong: I have nothing against furniture form the 60ies - but not every piece is outstanding or deserves to be preserved.

[ 04-05-2006: Message edited by: Ernst ]

[ 04-05-2006: Message edited by: J.S.S.Normandie ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by J.S.S.Normandie:
I would like to see the dining room from France put on another ship, .

---

NCL in Bremerhaven plucked SSNorway like a chicken of all valuables including the art panels from the Dining rooms, Trolland, Debussy room, Internet cafe, stairtowers, and the theatre.

The artwork is timeless and the best France had to offer in the mid 20th century:IMO and would go well into any contemporary interior scheme.

quote:

---

Originally posted by desirod7:

NCL in Bremerhaven plucked SSNorway like a chicken of all valuables including the art panels from the Dining rooms, Trolland, Debussy room, Internet cafe, stairtowers, and the theatre.

The artwork is timeless and the best France had to offer in the mid 20th century:IMO and would go well into any contemporary interior scheme.

Sailed her April 2001 Eastern Caribbean

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by timb:
[...] I truely hope they reinvent the Big U in a tasteful up to date way kind of like the winebar interiors they have done on their new builds. I know I know I am a heretic

---

I posted it already in another thread: This is a good example how an old ship can be rebuilt - I hate imitations - if the original interior is gone one has to come up with something contemporary:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ernst:

I posted it already in another thread: This is a good example how an old ship can be rebuilt - I hate imitations - if the original interior is gone one has to come up with something contemporary:

click here

---

The ships designers would have wanted her to be a modern ship inside and out. I would like to see furniture a liitle less stark than what Ernst presented, maybe pieces like these...

http://www.ethanallen.com/ea/com.ethanallen.ecom.FrameDirectorServlet?top=1&body=1

quote:

---

Originally posted by mike sa:
Why would we want to the Big U to look like any other ship, she is uniquely American - a true flag ship and should then reflect the very best of what makes the US the nation it is, personally I think the 40s minimal AMERICAN look would be perfect for her - as long as it doesn't end up looking like the POA - FAKE a la Las Vegas / Disney themed type look, as for any fittings from the Norway / France - lets put them into Celebrity's next new build a la Millenium's Olympic Restaurant etc.

---

Celebrity? Good idea!

It should be remembered that Star Cruises started life as a casino company and still run big casinos both ashore and on their own ships.

This to my mind means that they are only interested in big profits not classic ships !

If the older ships they own including the ss United States can not be converted to make money for them I would say that it is obvious that they as well as the SS Norway will be scrapped if they can find a way to arrange for it to be done.

The Australian Maritime website which is run by a person who is very enthusiastic about classic ships has now removed all information about both Star Cruises and NCL from his very large shipping website.

He also knows some of the management of Star Cruise and had been their quest on some of their cruise ships.

It is a pity other website did not follow his example !

It is really strange - I am sure they could easily get the billion of Dollars they would have to spend on such a refit from these myriads of ship enthusiast - but wait - probalby she will then be avoided by this crowd as she won't be rebuilt to her original condition.....

[ 04-07-2006: Message edited by: Ernst ]

NCL have now removed the 'worth something' artwork for inclusion in future newbuilds [so they say].. they were not removed in Bremerhaven; as Raoul stated in another thread, only the casino bits and the tenders were removed there. If they did intend to scrap her at that point all would have been stripped there imo.

Re casinos.. if that's all NCL/Star cared about, why did they create the NCL America arm? None of those vessels in Hawaii are permitted to have a casino.

IMO, had the Singapore Gov't actually done anything with the proposed bids for the 2 gambling sites, then Norway would have been part of the Sentosa bid for Star.. however as things there have dragged and draaaaaaaaaaaagged, then having Norway hanging around for something that may not happen for years to come is not viable.

Re the NCL cruises to Honolulu.

I thought NCL had said that they would be using American built and crewed ships for the service which was why the bought the United States and the other American liner.

Re the Australian website it should be remembered that without people like those running that website ships like the Funchal would not be in service and cruising from Australia.

What you may not know is that the person behind the website, was from Holland but has lived in Australia since he was about 17.

He was the person who with his company brought the Chinese passenger ship Ming Hau to Australia for cruising plus the Russian CTC cruise lines, which included the old Cunard passenger ships so I think he knows what he talks about which includes classic ships, and cruising from Australia.

It is quite obvious some of you do not know him as well as myself !

He still travels on the newer cruise ships and gives lectures !

quote:

---

Originally posted by Neil Whitmore ( Bob ):
Hi

Re the NCL cruises to Honolulu.

I thought NCL had said that they would be using American built and crewed ships for the service which was why the bought the United States and the other American liner.

---

The deal with the US Congress was that NCl bought the 2 ACV vessels, one partially built, and one a pile of bits, and shipped them to Germany for completion.. with special dispensation given to permit Norwegian Sky to be reflagged and named Pride of Aloha to start things off.

Pride of America is from more or less the same plans with some amendments from ACV, and Pride of Hawaii purely being a bunch of bits, incorporated every part left over from Pride of America.. apparently enough to satisfy the US authorities she can be US flagged. Part of the deal of getting Congress out of the embarrassing hole with ACV. They are American crewed and pay all the US taxes etc.. but no casinos aboard.

NCL bought Indy & SSUS after this had started, perhaps to stop others buying the.. but who knows? They certainly cost a lot to have just lying around if nothing is planned for them.. but it was stated nothing would be done until the final NCL America vessel was built and up and running.

No I don't 'know' RG only of him and not always perhaps the best side. He was also involved in a few failures.

Keep it in context - all things on earth are finite.

This is even more anoying as if we look at what we know - or better what we saw happening - NCL did actually soemthing for these vessels.

They operated the Norway for decades (What more do you want?) - they took the risk of buying some older vessels and spend the money to keep them laid up - which at least mantains a small chance that they come back - SO PLEASE STOP THESE CONSPIRACY THEORIES THAT THIS IS ALL ABOUT KEEP THEM OUT OF REACH OF COMPETITORS - IF THIS WAS THE ONLY REASON THESE SHIPS WOULD HAVE BEEN SCRAPPED. (sorry, but I start to get angry....)

[ 04-07-2006: Message edited by: Ernst ]