Just returned from cruise - don't get it...

Benjamin Smith wrote:

and maybe Oceania is one of them and Dielsmann another, then we'll get
It's Peter Deilmann Cruises, or Deilmann for short.

I guess it's I before E except after D And drop the "s".

It's german. ie and ei are both acceptable. But changes the meaning.

Happ[ens Herr Deilmann's name is an eiy
--
Julie
**********
Check out my Travel Pages (non-commercial) at
http://www.dragonsholm.org/travel.htm

Julie,

IMHO it depends, at least to me, on my familiarity with the port-of-call. A
couple years ago when we visited Curacao we went on a ship's tour which
offered a Jewish cultural theme. I had been to Curacao but Danni had not,
and I remembered visiting a synagogue the first time.

It was a bad choice, monumentally dull, but I don't know if hours of
research would have made the decision easier or better.
--
DG in Cherry Hill, NJ



"Juliana L Holm" wrote in message
...
*bicker* wrote:

How many excursions do folks recommend for a 7-day, 5
port-of-call itinerary?

Unless there is a compelling reason to choose otherwise, my choice is 0.

I research my destinations in advance, learn the way to travel around, and
options, so that I can do stuff on my own. Sometimes take a local bus,
sometimes a cab, sometimes I get a cab for a day (usually less expensive
than a half day excursion)

Sometimes I stay on the ship. I always return to the dock at least two
hours
before sailing, then shop in the inevitable dockside shops or just get on
and
enjoy the ambiance of the emptier ship (and emptier hot tubs).

The big times I make exceptions a

When I cannot get to what the ship is doing on my own (some Mayan ruin
excursion s are only available to cruise ship passengers, IIRC)
When it is a new place that I am worried about getting around. (possibly
Jamaica.
When time is very short and the excursion is very long (like the Chichen
Itza
excursions and the like)
When the logistics/costs really are more involved/higher doing it on my
own
(Like the Nasa space center tour in Port Canaveral, that drops you at
the
airport).

I've gone on one excursion on the first three cruises.

Julie
--
Julie
**********
Check out my Travel Pages (non-commercial) at
http://www.dragonsholm.org/travel.htm

Julie,

IMHO it depends, at least to me, on my familiarity with the port-of-call. A
couple years ago when we visited Curacao we went on a ship's tour which
offered a Jewish cultural theme. I had been to Curacao but Danni had not,
and I remembered visiting a synagogue the first time.

It was a bad choice, monumentally dull, but I don't know if hours of
research would have made the decision easier or better.
--
DG in Cherry Hill, NJ



"Juliana L Holm" wrote in message
...
*bicker* wrote:

How many excursions do folks recommend for a 7-day, 5
port-of-call itinerary?

Unless there is a compelling reason to choose otherwise, my choice is 0.

I research my destinations in advance, learn the way to travel around, and
options, so that I can do stuff on my own. Sometimes take a local bus,
sometimes a cab, sometimes I get a cab for a day (usually less expensive
than a half day excursion)

Sometimes I stay on the ship. I always return to the dock at least two
hours
before sailing, then shop in the inevitable dockside shops or just get on
and
enjoy the ambiance of the emptier ship (and emptier hot tubs).

The big times I make exceptions a

When I cannot get to what the ship is doing on my own (some Mayan ruin
excursion s are only available to cruise ship passengers, IIRC)
When it is a new place that I am worried about getting around. (possibly
Jamaica.
When time is very short and the excursion is very long (like the Chichen
Itza
excursions and the like)
When the logistics/costs really are more involved/higher doing it on my
own
(Like the Nasa space center tour in Port Canaveral, that drops you at
the
airport).

I've gone on one excursion on the first three cruises.

Julie
--
Julie
**********
Check out my Travel Pages (non-commercial) at
http://www.dragonsholm.org/travel.htm

Ray Goldenberg wrote in message . ..
On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 11:36:54 GMT, Benjamin Smith
wrote:

Somehow Delta Queen has survived (bankrupt and
were purchased and reborn)and Deilmann is doing well from what I understand.

Hi Ben,

As you said, Delta Queen went bankrupt and are trying to survive
financially. They are owned by a large corporation with deep pockets.
I thought that is what you did not want.

What I would like to see is less expansion of the market and less
standardization. If Delta Queen keeps the character of steamboat
cruising and doesn't attempt to try to make it a product for a youth
market and doesn't start buying more and more boats making them bigger
and adding more content to them to compete with land-based
establishments, I'm OK with them being corporate owned. I'm looking
for alternatives to the corporate mindset that produces feature
matching and homogenization.

Peter Deilmann is expensive
and does not market or depend much on the North American market. So
it is not a good example of a inexpensive cruise line making it in the
North American market. I understand what you want but unfortunately,
there has not been any company that could make a successful business
case. :+(


But I'm not looking for inexpensive. I'm looking for something that's
affordable for middle income clientele that's an alternative to the
mainstream cruise lines and perhaps priced somewhat higher. Smaller,
more focused, different entertainment options, no Park West art
auctions, different types of merchandise in the shops, different types
of activities, CDs without the canned material that they repeat cruise
after cruise, etc.

Ben S.

Best regards,
Ray
LIGHTHOUSE TRAVEL
800-719-9917 or 805-566-3905
http://www.lighthousetravel.com

*bicker* wrote in message ...
A Sun, 11 Jul 2004 23:38:55 -0400, "E.k.R."
escribió:
Frankly I feel we were all better off before the RCI/Celebrity and
Carnival/Princess mega-mergers.

Define "all". I believe the folks relying on those
corporations' value wouldn't fit into that category.

Shareholders gained value to be sure, but I think the individual
cruise passenger lost out.

Precisely right. For things I own, or investments I make, I
wouldn't have it any other way.

So, in the tradeoff of what is beneficial to the consumer in the sense
of choice and quality vs. the shareholder you choose the shareholder
over the consumer?

Ben S.

*bicker* wrote in message ...
A Mon, 12 Jul 2004 01:01:23 GMT, Benjamin Smith
escribió:
Mass market you'll say, my
problem is more they are corporate, but in a sense it is the same thing.
Expand and standardize. I think this is fine for some of them, but not
all of them. I'm quite frankly tired of being told that if I want a
"different" cruise experience I have to go to expensive lines.
That should not be the case and it *does not* have to be the case.

Folks often begrudge the premium they have to pay for
something exclusive, yet that is the nature of economies of
scale. I can understand your frustration at that fact,
though.


I'm not. What I'm saying is that some products may cost more to offer
to a smaller clientele, but they don't have to be in the "luxury"
category to have enough of a clientele to sustain a profitable
business. I used bed and breakfasts and small shops in small towns as
an example. And I'd love if some of the premium lines would start
charging premium prices again. Perhaps if Celebrity and HAL charged
premium prices not only could they then improve their food and crew
training, but they also would be sailing with more people who desire
to sail these lines as opposed to people sailing the lines for good
deals but really enjoy other types of lines more. Frankly, I think
both HAL and Celebrity have too many berths for the type of products
they could be.

What we
need is not more expensive lines, but new lines that aren't corporate
owned.

That's a red-herring, IMHO. If I owned a cruise line --
invested my own money -- I'd want to make the best decisions
I could to foster my long-term financial security, even if
that means crafting a cruise line that isn't to my own
personal specifications. I can always use the extra money I
make to buy the specific aspects I want, over-and-on-top of
what is offered to the mass market.

The we I'm talking about are consumers. Your business decisions are
sound but you would not have the type of consumer-based focus and
vision that I would be interested in as a client.

Ben S.

On 12 Jul 2004 12:01:43 -0700, (Benjamin Smith)
wrote:

What I would like to see is less expansion of the market and less
standardization. If Delta Queen keeps the character of steamboat
cruising and doesn't attempt to try to make it a product for a youth
market and doesn't start buying more and more boats making them bigger
and adding more content to them to compete with land-based
establishments, I'm OK with them being corporate owned. I'm looking
for alternatives to the corporate mindset that produces feature
matching and homogenization.

Hi Ben,

They are emphasizing to the travel industry that they want families
with children on their ships. They are trying to expand their current
base of clients.

But I'm not looking for inexpensive. I'm looking for something that's
affordable for middle income clientele that's an alternative to the
mainstream cruise lines and perhaps priced somewhat higher. Smaller,
more focused, different entertainment options, no Park West art
auctions, different types of merchandise in the shops, different types
of activities, CDs without the canned material that they repeat cruise
after cruise, etc.

Unfortunately the above has not made economic sense. Those with money
to invest have to feel there is going to be a return on their
investment. They do not invest and start cruise lines as charities.
They have to feel they are going to make a fair return on their
investment and not lose money. It always amazes me how those that
criticize companies are not willing to risk their own capital.

Best regards,
Ray
LIGHTHOUSE TRAVEL
800-719-9917 or 805-566-3905
http://www.lighthousetravel.com

On 12 Jul 2004 12:01:43 -0700, (Benjamin Smith)
wrote:

What I would like to see is less expansion of the market and less
standardization. If Delta Queen keeps the character of steamboat
cruising and doesn't attempt to try to make it a product for a youth
market and doesn't start buying more and more boats making them bigger
and adding more content to them to compete with land-based
establishments, I'm OK with them being corporate owned. I'm looking
for alternatives to the corporate mindset that produces feature
matching and homogenization.

Hi Ben,

They are emphasizing to the travel industry that they want families
with children on their ships. They are trying to expand their current
base of clients.

But I'm not looking for inexpensive. I'm looking for something that's
affordable for middle income clientele that's an alternative to the
mainstream cruise lines and perhaps priced somewhat higher. Smaller,
more focused, different entertainment options, no Park West art
auctions, different types of merchandise in the shops, different types
of activities, CDs without the canned material that they repeat cruise
after cruise, etc.

Unfortunately the above has not made economic sense. Those with money
to invest have to feel there is going to be a return on their
investment. They do not invest and start cruise lines as charities.
They have to feel they are going to make a fair return on their
investment and not lose money. It always amazes me how those that
criticize companies are not willing to risk their own capital.

Best regards,
Ray
LIGHTHOUSE TRAVEL
800-719-9917 or 805-566-3905
http://www.lighthousetravel.com

On 12 Jul 2004 12:04:22 -0700, (Benjamin Smith)
wrote:

So, in the tradeoff of what is beneficial to the consumer in the sense
of choice and quality vs. the shareholder you choose the shareholder
over the consumer?

Hi Ben,

It always amazes me how those that are not risking any capital want to
tell those that do risk their capital how things should be done. If
they have such a great idea then they should pool the resources of
like-minded individuals and companies and start up the business.
Cruise lines are not charities. I don't mean this as a personal slam
on you but are my opinions in general terms as far as all businesses
are concerned even travel agencies. g

Best regards,
Ray
LIGHTHOUSE TRAVEL
800-719-9917 or 805-566-3905
http://www.lighthousetravel.com

"Benjamin Smith" wrote in message But I'm not
looking for inexpensive. I'm looking for something that's
affordable for middle income clientele that's an alternative to the
mainstream cruise lines and perhaps priced somewhat higher. Smaller,
more focused, different entertainment options, no Park West art
auctions, different types of merchandise in the shops, different types
of activities, CDs without the canned material that they repeat cruise
after cruise, etc.

Ben S.


I think of all the smaller, unique cruise lines that have either been
swallowed up or couldn't compete with the big guys and it's sad. It really
shows just how homogenized the industry has become. Just in the last 15
years we used to have: Premier Cruises, Regency Cruises, Home Lines, Sitmar
Cruises, Dolphin Cruise Line, Majesty Cruise Line, Eastern Cruise Line,
Western Cruise Line, Admiral Cruise Line, Cape Canaveral Cruises, Royal
Viking Line, Royal Cruise Line, Sun Line, Epirotiki, Royal Olympic, Festival
Cruises, American Hawaii Cruises, United States Line, etc., etc. I'm sure
there are several that I left out.

Now we have one company that controls something like 60% of the cruise
industry, and two smaller players that basically make up the difference.
Sure there are multiple brands under each parent company, but regardless it
seems the brands lose much of their individuality once they become part of
the corporate family. Even the hardware suffers, which is a major reason I
take cruises to begin with. Let's face it, the cruise experience doesn't
differ significantly from line to line in the same price bracket (although
die hard loyalists would like to believe otherwise), so it's the hardware
that I get excited about. Currently there are no ships on the horizon that
even tweak my interest. They are all clones and hybrids of something
already out there. QM2 was the last new ship that I had any real desire to
sail on. Why, because she is unique. If Carnival builds five more like her
then her appeal will fade, at least for me. Carnival Corp. alone has a
single ship platform now being used for FIVE of their brands. A
Spirit/Vista Class hybrid is being used for Carnival, Costa, Holland
America, P&O Cruises, and Cunard. Why should I pay Cunard prices when I can
cruise the same type ship under P&O or HAL? RCI/Celebrity did a little
better job differentiating between the Radiance Class and M-Class, although
both classes share many similarities. These days even the "International"
staff is interchangeable between brands. We have Princess Cruises staff
working on the QM2, and Carnival staff working on Costa ships. What really
makes the experience different? Not a whole lot. Someone on another board
brought up an analogy of Carnival Corp. and General Motors. Basically
General Motors produced the same car for several of it's brands, with only
slight modifications and the signage on the car being different. Why buy a
Buick or Oldsmobile when you can basically have the same car under the
cheaper Chevrolet brand? The same could be said with Carnival's brands, or
at least they seem to be heading in that direction. GM learned that
strategy doesn't work, at least not for the long term. While production was
cheap, consumers are smarter than many corporate executives would like to
believe and they caught on. GM sales went down the toilette and now they
have a much different strategy.

Hopefully Carnival and other brands will not have to hit rock bottom in
order for cruise executives to realize that consumers want different
products to choose from, and not just a smoke screen, but real and true
differences that define a product.

Ernie

ps - I'm not holding my breath for Delta Queen considering who is President
of the line. Let's hope that "Fuzzy Wuzzy's Den" doesn't start appearing on
the DELTA QUEEN!