What do you think ?

[jack2007]

Saw this piece of news and wondered what your views are.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5i...iwzGQD8U03MG80

At the moment its only a proposal.
.

[Dave]

To me this is a desperate attempt by NCL to salvage their mismanaged U.S. flagged ship operations. Instead of improving the product to fill the ships they get the government to step in.

[gdjoslin]

I agree with Dave. I think the Government should stand clear. I do not think adding a day in Mexico or where ever would stop the cruises or help them out. We want to do Hawaii, will probably go out of San Diego. We want the sea days.

[TrvlPro]

I also hope the Gov't stays out of this issue. NCL tried to open a new market with a new approach. They ran into government regulations from the state of Hawaii that helped create the mees they're in now. If their product in Hawaii is inferior, and it is, to the product provided by the rest of the industry the solution is easy. They mentioned re-flagging POH and moving it. Simply re-flag both the other ships and base them in CA to compete heads up on the same playing field they're looking for. To give a competitive advantage through regulation to the one line that experimented and failed sounds just like the kind of program the government would stick their nose in and make worse than it is today. The free market can fix this on it's own. Those who don't provide the product it's clients expect continue to loose money and eventually fix it or fail.

Cheers, Neil

[f-mattox]

Dosen't sound like a "level playing field" to me; it sounds like NCL American is trying to put Princess and Holland America at a distinct disadvantage. Who's going to go on a cruise to Hawaii that spends 48 hours in Ensenada. Four hours is three too many.

[TrvlPro]

Who's going to go on a cruise to Hawaii that spends 48 hours in Ensenada. Four hours is three too many.

Now that's funny!

[LisaP]

The words that I'm thinking aren't suitable for posting.

I'm not a lawyer, but in looking though the text of the proposal (see link below), I wonder how it will apply to other itineraries that make one stop outside the U.S. For example, the Chamber of Commerce of Catalina has already expressed its concern as itineraries that stop there also stop in Ensenada as the only non-U.S. port. What will this mean for Alaska cruises? Or, the 4-nighters from NY to Nova Scotia and back?

I do not believe for a second that the reason cited for the proposal is true - an increase in competition in Hawai'i cruises from the west coast. They are entirely different types of cruises. I'm certain a lot of jobs are generated by those cruises, too.

The full text of the proposal may be found here.

[Dave]

Also - looking at the number of cruises each year from the coast to the islands as compared to the number of cruises NCL America does makes the argument even more silly.

[TrvlPro]

The words that I'm thinking aren't suitable for posting.

Lisa, I've never been a mind reader before but I know exactly what you were thinking. I had the exact same reaction.

Cheers, Neil

[Dwayne]

I was shaking my head and rolling my eyes after reading it!

Dwayne