Couple more questions... HAL's new tipping policy.

"*bicker*" wrote in message
...
A Wed, 11 Aug 2004 17:15:09 -0400, Charles
escribió:
In article , *bicker*
wrote:
Incorrect: Monopoly is when there is only one supplier for a
commodity. Not only are there multiple suppliers of
cruises, but many travel agents offer products from
competing suppliers, so customer can choose among the
competing offerings while working with a single sales
person.
I am using the word in the sense that an industry becomes dominated by
one company or group that has become so large it can dominate the whole
industry. Including suppliers, in this case travel agents. You can bet
that if it could Carnival would eat up the rest of the competitors.

There are two big stumbling blocks: (1) Carnival isn't a
dominant supplier;

Of course they are. You obviously don't know the industry.

(2) RCI.

Look at the many brands they own now---that is their history, aquire or
takeover. This is not good for consumers. That is my opinion.

If Carnival buys RCI, we can start to worry about this.

When Carnival has a market cap of $40 billion, and RCI has a market cap of
$8 billion... to me that's basically a monopoly.

They could put RCI out of business if they wanted to. Carnival has no debt.
RCI has a huge debt. If Carnival cut their pricing by 70% they'd put RCI
out of business within 2 years.

What really prevents Carnival from being a "true monopoly" is that cruising
is done with discretionary income. It's not like electricity, gas, oil,
etc.

--Tom

"*bicker*" wrote in message
...
A Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:03:42 -0400, "George Leppla"
escribió:
"*bicker*" wrote
There are two big stumbling blocks: (1) Carnival isn't a
dominant supplier;
You don't think that Carnival Corp isn't a dominant supplier?

What I think is irrelevant; what you think is also
irrelevant. Status as a dominant supplier is a decision
made by legal authorities. Carnival was investigated.
They're clear.


So was OJ

"*bicker*" wrote in message
...
A Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:03:42 -0400, "George Leppla"
escribió:
"*bicker*" wrote
There are two big stumbling blocks: (1) Carnival isn't a
dominant supplier;
You don't think that Carnival Corp isn't a dominant supplier?

What I think is irrelevant; what you think is also
irrelevant. Status as a dominant supplier is a decision
made by legal authorities. Carnival was investigated.
They're clear.


So was OJ

"Lee Lindquist" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 17:15:09 -0400, Charles
wrote:

I am using the word in the sense that an industry becomes dominated by
one company or group that has become so large it can dominate the whole
industry. Including suppliers, in this case travel agents. You can bet

You probably should argue with someone named bicker about
whether it's a monopoly, or an oligopoly.

The effect is generally the same for the consumer.

However, in this case no one need purchase a cruise.

Correct. Key point.

--Tom


Should the oligopoly operate far outside of market forces, customers
are free to choose other holidays, or none at all.

--
- Lee

"Benjamin Smith" wrote in message
link.net...
Tom & Linda wrote:

"Ray Goldenberg" wrote in message
...

On 10 Aug 2004 10:42:17 -0700, (Benjamin Smith)
wrote:


I think there are two ways to success. Make the most money by
appealing to a what they would call changing customer, or downsize and
go with your customer.

Hi Ben,

Could you cite an example of a cruise line that has "downsize and go
with your customer"? I can't think of any that have been successful.
Can you?



Cunard to some extent... though they weren't very successful.

And it was always the Sea Goddess ships and the Royal Viking Sun that
seemed
(at least to me) to dress up Cunard. Especially with things like the
champagne and caviar served on the beach by the crew from the Sea
Goddess
ships.

And of course, it was exactly those ships that Carnival management took
away
from the Cunard fleet, making Cunard a mass market line, rather than an
ultra lux line with the Sea Goddess ships.


I don't think Cunard is a mass market line, nor are they an ultra lux
line. I think Cunard is better with the QM2, QE2, and Caronia than with
the yachts. Now they have a distinct product, not one that is all over
the place.


The yachts were very special though, based on what I saw. We were next to
one in St. Thomas. There was a line of limos dropping off and picking up
the rich boys and girls all day. And the airport was busy with all the Lear
jets flying them in and out all day.

Cunard is much more distinct now... but nowhere in that league (with the
yachts). Now, to me, they're just mass market like Celebrity or HAL.
Nothing more. You may think so, but I don't. But the Sea Goddess ships
sure were much more. Those 2 were special.

--Tom

"Benjamin Smith" wrote in message
link.net...
Tom & Linda wrote:

"Ray Goldenberg" wrote in message
...

On 10 Aug 2004 10:42:17 -0700, (Benjamin Smith)
wrote:


I think there are two ways to success. Make the most money by
appealing to a what they would call changing customer, or downsize and
go with your customer.

Hi Ben,

Could you cite an example of a cruise line that has "downsize and go
with your customer"? I can't think of any that have been successful.
Can you?



Cunard to some extent... though they weren't very successful.

And it was always the Sea Goddess ships and the Royal Viking Sun that
seemed
(at least to me) to dress up Cunard. Especially with things like the
champagne and caviar served on the beach by the crew from the Sea
Goddess
ships.

And of course, it was exactly those ships that Carnival management took
away
from the Cunard fleet, making Cunard a mass market line, rather than an
ultra lux line with the Sea Goddess ships.


I don't think Cunard is a mass market line, nor are they an ultra lux
line. I think Cunard is better with the QM2, QE2, and Caronia than with
the yachts. Now they have a distinct product, not one that is all over
the place.


The yachts were very special though, based on what I saw. We were next to
one in St. Thomas. There was a line of limos dropping off and picking up
the rich boys and girls all day. And the airport was busy with all the Lear
jets flying them in and out all day.

Cunard is much more distinct now... but nowhere in that league (with the
yachts). Now, to me, they're just mass market like Celebrity or HAL.
Nothing more. You may think so, but I don't. But the Sea Goddess ships
sure were much more. Those 2 were special.

--Tom

"Charles" wrote in message
d...
In article , *bicker*
wrote:

What I think is irrelevant; what you think is also
irrelevant. Status as a dominant supplier is a decision
made by legal authorities. Carnival was investigated.
They're clear.

I guess you don't have a mind of your own.



I think he said he was a business consultant.

--Tom

"Charles" wrote in message
d...
In article , *bicker*
wrote:

What I think is irrelevant; what you think is also
irrelevant. Status as a dominant supplier is a decision
made by legal authorities. Carnival was investigated.
They're clear.

I guess you don't have a mind of your own.



I think he said he was a business consultant.

--Tom

In article , Lee Lindquist
wrote:

However, in this case no one need purchase a cruise.

Should the oligopoly operate far outside of market forces, customers
are free to choose other holidays, or none at all.

I would put it a bit differently. They can try to operate outside
market forces. That is what these new policies are about. It is not a
given that they will succeed. Customers are free to choose other
holidays, or none at all, as you say, but also there will probably be
times large numbers of customers have no choice but to forgo holidays.

--
Charles

In article , Lee Lindquist
wrote:

However, in this case no one need purchase a cruise.

Should the oligopoly operate far outside of market forces, customers
are free to choose other holidays, or none at all.

I would put it a bit differently. They can try to operate outside
market forces. That is what these new policies are about. It is not a
given that they will succeed. Customers are free to choose other
holidays, or none at all, as you say, but also there will probably be
times large numbers of customers have no choice but to forgo holidays.

--
Charles