How much extra would you pay to reserve an exit-row airline seat?
This page is protected by Copyright laws. Do Not Copy.

Princess moving ship to P&O, further cutting Alaska capacity

By: Johanna JainchillDecember 09, 2009

Princess Cruises' 710-passenger Royal Princess, one of its smallest ships, will transfer to the line's UK-based sister company, P&O Cruises, in spring 2011.

The ship will be renamed Adonia during a drydock prior to the transfer.

The 30,200-ton, 710-passenger Royal Princess has sailed with Princess for less than three years. The former R-ship transferred to Princess in spring 2007 after its former owner, Swan Hellenic, was shut down by Carnival Corp. 

The move will mean another reduction in Princess' Alaska capacity during the 2011 season.

In summer 2010, Princess will sail seven ships in Alaska versus eight in 2009, a 16% capacity decrease, by taking the Star Princess out of the Alaska market. The Royal Princess will sail 14-day roundtrip cruises from Seattle to Alaska in summer 2010.

Princess said that as a result of the Royal Princess transfer to P&O, five sailings in April and May 2011 -- two in Tahiti and French Polynesia, one between Tahiti and Hawaii and one in Hawaii -- as well as a one-day coastal trip, will be cancelled and replaced by a 26-day cruise from Papeete, Tahiti, to Fort Lauderdale that will call as far south as Lima, Peru, and will transit the Panama Canal.

This article has been updated to reflect that the Royal Princess is one of Princess' three smallest ships, also including the Ocean Princess and the Pacific Princess.

From 1 to 5 of 12 Comment(s)

Leave a Comment
#12January 07, 2010
The cruise tax has nothing to do with it. Alaska is a mature market - meaning...in the vernacular.. been there, done that. For most cruisers, it is a one time only destination. The Alaska cruise market had been softening before the implementation of the $50 head tax.
#11December 16, 2009
Princess is not uniquie in this move, nor is the bad guy. This is not good for anyone in travel & tourism, except maybe the traveling clients. Alaska needs to get their head out of their duffle bag, or coin purse as the case is and look around. If they start now, maybe they can get their act together in time for the 2011 season. I say now as the cruise lines plan in advance of publishing their inteneraries usually about 12 months prior. Now is approaching late for them and the 2011 season.
#10December 15, 2009
Face it, Princess did little to update and upgrade the Renaissance ships they purchased from the French Government. They got them for a really low price. With HAL moving the Amsterdam to a 14-day itinerary, the competition for the Royal became too tough. The issue is the $50 head tax, but that's also part of the ever increased NCF's that we also have to pass along to the customer. Even if the head tax was removed those NCF's would still be sky high.
#9December 15, 2009
In response to #6, you lost your bet. The third post is mine. I am a travel agent who sells Alaska and all the cruise lines that service it. While the story is about Princess repositioning one ship, the issue is reduced tourism in the 2010 Alaska season, largely due to the head tax. While I will not turn away 2010 Alaska cruise sales, my clients will know the $50pp is funding the state of Alaska; not cruise infrastructure or tourism. At #7: Because they are the largest player. For clarification, P&O is a sister line of Princess, both are subsidiaries of the Carnival Corporation & PLC. I disagree with your clock cleaning theory. Alaska had and still has the potential to support additional cruise ships plus other tourism. If they want to and if they will, depends on them and what they do to attract it. JBE Travel Agent Aurora CO
#8December 11, 2009
Anyone who thinks the cruise tax is not hurting Alaska, they should come to our office and listen to what clients have to say.
View All Comments

Leave a Comment

Comment Guidelines
Your
Comment: 		characters remaining