quote:

---

Originally posted by gpcruisedude:
I wonder if this company will add a second ship??

---

A second ship would mean new itineraries and possibly competing directly with the majors.

At any rate they will eventually need a new first ship, at least when 2010 arrives...

[ 03-20-2003: Message edited by: cruiseny ]

I have a looonnnnggg history with that ship. She was my first cruise as Olympia when I was 9yo and resailed her as Regal Empress 5 years ago.

If you do a search on CruiseTalk I have posted a lot about her.

Take the www.maritimematters.com tour of her. It is quite extensive. In her day, she had some fantastic public rooms despite a bizarre layout of spaces.

Rembrandt is my favorite ship still afloat, Canberra is an = to me

quote:

---

Originally posted by eandjracquet:
I sailed the Regal Empress and thought she and her crew were great-the only thing I found objectionable was the gym-ick!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by eandjracquet:
I would love it if Regal Cruises would purchase the Rembrandt/Rotterdam-what a great addition

---

I would love to see her back in active service but from a practical point of view that is not a really feasible proposition.

First, they'd have to at least break even in only seven years as that ship is going to be banned in 2010. Secondly it is a much larger ship than they are used to selling. She would be quite expensive to operate (fuel-thirsty steam turbines). The company's marketing does not appeal to the right clientele as that ship, it would seem as though most of the people who go on REGAL EMPRESS do not know that she's a classic ship. In fact I imagine many of them would choose a new, dull vessel if they knew the difference. True, she is a favorite of ship enthusiasts, but no doubt they make up a tiny percentage of her clientele, especially given her budget-oriented marketing (that is, when there is marketing).

I think a lot of her business actually comes from travel agents who have agreed to push her first. I believe one of the many partners of Regal is also the owner of the large travel agency Liberty Travel, so no doubt they prefer to "push" their own ship... They have branches in the NY Metro area and in Florida - not surprisingly those are the two home-bases for Regal. It would be interesting to see how many of Regal's cruises are sold through those agencies...

The best thing for REMBRANDT would be for her to be preserved at Rotterdam, for ever. Regal or someone similar taking her over would first stall an effort that has gotten a long way to preserve her, and just postpone it. In 2010 there would be the need to either preserve the ship or send her to thes scrappers. Better to get the preservation underway now I think...

Regal will be in a rather difficult position in 2010 and I'm not quite sure what they'll pick up as a replacement... Quite possibly, the cheapest thing they can find that is compliant (or easy to bring into compliance) with SOLAS 74. Hmm...

One ship that comes to mind is THE EMPRESS. She is owned by the infamous International Shipping Partners (or rather one of their multitude of subsidiary companies, which is what makes them infamous) and ISP is a major shareholder in (indeed, a co-founder of) Regal Cruises.

The confusion is in her specifications as related with ISP. I quote:

quote:

---

1960 Method 2 (Sprinklered throughout). Complies with Solas 1974 as existing vessel

---

The problem with that Method II ships usually have combustible materials and thus cannot comply with SOLAS 74. Perhaps one of our SOLAS experts can clarify this?

If she is indeed SOLAS-OK, I would not surprised to see her as the next Regal ship. She is not a bad size, in good condition, already owned by a major shareholder, out of work, and so on.

Then they have the SOLAS 74 compliant ENCHANTED CAPRI which could become the next Regal ship. I do not think she is owned by ISP (but who knows, nothing they own seems to have their name on it - and this became quite an issue during a certain deadly incident, that of the SCANDINAVIAN STAR - but that is another story) but she seems to be compliant with the appropriate SOLAS, and again, is out of work, connected with ISP, and probably in the appropriate size range.

THE BIG RED BOAT II/EDINBURGH CASTLE would be an obvious choice - she is again highly connected with ISP, out of work, and compliant with the next SOLAS. She also has the benefit of a very refitted passenger accomodation. Unfortunately she has steam turbines and to make matters worse has had enough mechanical troubles that Regal may well not want to touch her... (Though the refit that seems to have caused those problems was overseen by - surprise - ISP, part owner of Regal...)

Of course, they could go outside "the family" which in fact I would not be surprised to see them do. What I don't know is if Regal would have the capital to buy a ship like NOORDAM, PACIFIC SKY, or something else that a major cruise line might want to be rid of.

Well, how about SUPERSTAR CAPRICORN? She's old enough now...

[ 03-28-2003: Message edited by: cruiseny ]

Is ISLAND ADVENTURE going to be continuing, meaning New SeaEscape goes to two ships?

I was initially under the impression that ENCHANTED CAPRI was on a short-term charter to replace ISLAND ADVENTURE while the former vessel was in drydock herself.

Incidentally, if ISP is still managing ENCHANTED CAPRI, this means that they are now connected with the new SeaEscape (appropriately called New SeaEscape). This is interesting as Scandinavian World Cruises, later known as SeaEscape (the old one) was the very company that "launched" ISP and their tangled web of affiliates and subsidiaries in the first place.

I just wrote a similar post about this for another board a few days ago and I am going to salvage bits and pieces and reconstitute them for this audience . The story of ISP and SeaEscape (the old, not the new, or at least until ISP became or is becoming affiliated with the new, if they are) is a very interesting, convoluted, and certianly incomplete one, with a certain air of mystery and, some would say (and who am I to say whether this is true or not) a bit of crime involved on occasion (well, rather, one very famous, or infamous, occasion, which doesn't make most people think 'ISP' but perhaps should)...

[ 03-28-2003: Message edited by: cruiseny ]

SeaEscape, the old one, was started in 1980 as Scandinavian World Cruises. To trace the history of ISP, we must go back to this, as this is where we began...

That project started in the late 1970s at DFDS, who decided to start a passenger-car service from New York to Florida. The project was headed up by Bruce Nirenberg, formerly a high-level NCL executive, who later went on to found Premier Cruises, become president of Costa and NCL, and then return to Premier just before they went bankrupt in a last-ditch effort to save the company, as no doubt many Cruise Talkers will recall. Anyhow, DFDS assumed that by the time their ship would get in service, they would have been able to convince the US to lift the cabotage restrictions of the Passenger Services Act (the passenger version of the Jones Act). Unfortunately for DFDS, that did not happen.

So when the ship, SCANDINAVIA (later STARDANCER, VIKING SERENADE, ISLAND ESCAPE) was built, and the PSA remained, the only alternative was, well, to follow the law. DFDS bought two smaller ships - Fred. Oslen's BLENHEIM, which became SCANDINAVIAN SEA, and Bremer Schiffsfart's CARIBE BREMEN which became SCANDINAVIAN SUN. These ships would carry passengers between Miami and Freeport, while SCANDINAVIA ran from New York to Freeport. Thus, passengers, baggage and cars essentially "changed ships" at Freeport on their way to Miami. The ships would also carry casino-day-cruise passengers on the same trips.

Scandinavian World Cruises did not survive, lasting only three years, largely because of the inconvenient, time-consuming routing.

The casino cruise business was doing well though, and so in 1983 DFDS pulled SCANDINAVIA off the New York-Freeport route, instead placing her on the company's traditional flagship route, Oslo-Copenhagen, in mainline DFDS service. Scandinavian World Cruises became a one-ship operation, using SCANDINAVIAN SUN, and DFDS appointed Niels-Erik Lund, their finance director, to turn the company around. In 1985 DFDS sold their majority shareholding in the company and they were remaned SeaEscape. Niels-Erik Lund resigned in 1987 and formed International Shipping Partners.

Niels-Erik Lund was not done with SeaEscape. In fact, his new company immediately was involved with his old one. This was only one of many ventures of ISP. They work as a massive network of companies, all with different names, addresses, and often "fuzzy" ownership (this, in order to avoid responsibility in the case of a lawsuit or accident), and a large portfolio of vessels operated by this network of affiliate companies.

After Niels-Erik Lund's "departure" from SeaEscape, the company began to expand. They added the SCANDINAVIAN DAWN, SCANDINAVIAN SAGA, SCANDINAVIAN SEA, SCANDINAVIAN SONG, and the infamous SCANDINAVIAN STAR within a period of about a year.

We now take a detour to find why SCANDINAVIAN STAR is so infamous.

In 1990, the ship was sold to a Danish ISP subsidiary, and entered service between Oslo and Fredrikshavn chartered out to the Danish company Da-No Line. On her fifth voyage, in April 1990, the ship was in the Skaggerak between Oslo and Fredrikshavn, when she caught fire, probably because of an arsonist who set fire to a pile of clothing. 158 people died, and it has since been asserted that this was in part because of the ship's poor design, poor condition, and the negligence of the crew and particularly the home office.

SCANDINAVIAN STAR, after being burnt-out, was sold to an ISP subsidiary and renamed REGAL VOYAGER. She has been rebuilt and is now part of the ISP fleet. ISP denies having had anything to do with the ship when she burned however it has been determined that the ship was owned and operated by ISP affiliate companies at the time, though the "paper trail" is not sufficient to hold them officially responsible.

Incidentally, REGAL VOYAGER's owning partners apparently include (or included at the time) not only ISP but, I have variously read, Fred Kassner, the Liberty Travel, whose name escaped me before and who is a partner in Regal Cruises. She has since been through a full gamut of various charters, and is presently laid-up at Trinidad, as shown by the ISP web site.

Many of the recent revisions to the SOLAS fire code that many of us often moan about - like the ones that seem poised to down REGAL EMPRESS - were introduced at least partially due to this incident and to lobbying by outraged surviving family members of victims (and surviving victims themselves) as the disaster.

Back to SeaEscape. It would seem as though they expanded too fast, because in 1992 they ran into financial trouble and ceased operations.

The name was later bought by a differen group of investors (not connected with ISP) and they now operate the ISLAND ADVENTURE, formerly a Soviet and then Ukranian passenger/car ferry.

Their competition is Discovery Cruise Line, operating the DISCOVERY SUN, former SCANDINAVIAN SUN (see link in earlier post above). ISP appears to have been involved in managing their ships at one point however according they stopped in 2000. The ship is now managed by V.Ships, the world's largest ship-management company and manager of some of the world's best-rated cruise ships. (Vlasov Group helped found, and still partially own, Silversea, and also are involved in the former MINERVA, now SAGA PEARL/EXPLORER II, plus many RSSC vessels.)

Meanwhile ISP has continued to be active in quite a few ventures. They provided management to Premier, though as far as I know they were not actually one of ISP's web of companies (that is, only as far as I know - one literally never knows with ISP). They have been involved in various other ventures as well, some of which are noted on their site, and doubtless some that are not. There are certainly plenty of stories behind some of these ventures, but that is the "general background" of ISP for those who are interested.

[ 03-28-2003: Message edited by: cruiseny ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by gpcruisedude:
I wonder if The Regal Voyager wouldn't be a good choice for Regal Cruises in the future..

---

First, I could never go on that ship without thinking of her as the giant floating gas chamber she was once...

Second, she would be a huge drop in standards from REGAL EMPRESS and I doubt that a ship like her (essentially a ferry) would do well in the marketplace.

Third, according to ISP's website she is built to SOLAS 60 Method III, which means she will not last past 2010 either.

[ 04-02-2003: Message edited by: cruiseny ]

Here she as the Valtur Prima

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thad:
I think that Regal should consider chartering or buying the Caribe, currently laid up in Havana. She has nice classic lines, but is practically a nine year old ship, after her massive rebuilding in 1994. It seems a shame that she lies unused in the backwaters of a carribean port. Another idea would be to have World Explorer Cruises charter her.

---

She's way too nice to waste on Regal's bottom-of-the-barrel market segment. Besides, I don't think her passenger density is anything near what Regal would desire!

She would do best on longer cruises to interesting destinations.