cruise company sales revenue

Royal Caribbean sees record bookings as demand for experiences and travel grow

T here were a lot of records associated with Royal Caribbean Group’s first-quarter report released Thursday, including ticket pricing and bookings, and briefly for the stock, as demand for cruises continued to increase.

“Wow, what a great start to the year!,” said Chief Executive Jason Liberty.

“The acceleration of demand is also translating into higher revenue and earnings expectations for the balance of the year,” Liberty said on the post-earnings call with analysts, according to an AlphaSense transcript.

The stock shot up as much as 3.1% moments after the opening bell to an intraday high of $140.94, which was above the April 1 record closing price of $140.56, before paring gains. It was up 0.5% in afternoon trading.

It has rallied 7.6% amid a five-day win streak.

“Stronger-than-anticipated demand led to a record Wave season and continued strength in bookings in April from both a volume and pricing standpoint,” the company said. Wave season is when cruise promotions peak, during the first quarter of the calendar year.

The company swung to net income of $360 million, or $1.35 a share, after a loss of $48 million, or 19 cents a share, in the same period a year ago. Excluding nonrecurring items, such as losses on extinguishment of debt, adjusted earnings per share of $1.77 beat the FactSet consensus of $1.33.

Revenue grew 29.2% to $3.73 billion, above the FactSet consensus of $3.69 billion, as passenger ticket revenue jumped 34% to $2.54 billion and onboard and other revenue increased 19.9% to $1.19 billion.

“Consumer preferences continue to shift towards spend on experiences, particularly priority for travel,” Liberty said. “This is evident as the year-over-year growth and spend on experience is double that of spend on goods.”

Load factors for the first quarter increased five percentage points to 107%. A reading above 100% indicates that some cabins had three or more passengers.

“In addition to record ticket pricing, consumer spending onboard and pre-cruise purchases continue to exceed prior years driven by greater participation at higher prices,” the company said.

For 2024, the company raised its adjusted EPS guidance range to $10.70 to $10.90 from $9.50 to $9.70. That compares with the current FactSet consensus of $10.

The stock has gained 6.1% year to date, while the S&P 500 index has advanced 5.9%.

Royal Caribbean sees record bookings as demand for experiences and travel grow

Cruise News

Carnival’s 2023 Record Revenue & Capacity

Doug Parker

December 21, 2023

As the world’s largest cruise operator, Carnival Corporation (CCL) achieved significant milestones in the past year, demonstrating its commitment to providing exceptional cruise experiences while maintaining robust financial health.

Record-Breaking Revenues

Carnival Corporation’s annual revenues reached an all-time high of $21.6 billion in 2023, thanks to the company’s successful strategies and the growing popularity of cruises.

Notably, the fourth quarter of 2023 saw record revenues of $5.4 billion, emphasizing the strong demand for cruise vacations. Furthermore, the company experienced record-breaking booking volumes during Black Friday and Cyber Monday, both positive signals for future revenue.

Reduction in debt

Carnival Corporation accomplished a significant feat in reducing its debt this year. The company made substantial payments totaling $6 billion, which lowered its debt balance by $4.6 billion from its peak in early 2023.

At the end of the year, Carnival Corporation had $5.4 billion in available cash and credit facilities, placing the company in a strong financial position to face future challenges and take advantage of opportunities.

Passengers capacity up

Caribbean Princess, Carnival Vista, Carnival Horizon

The cruise line has seen a remarkable increase in passenger capacity, with occupancy rates surpassing 100% in the fourth quarter of 2023.

Additionally, customer deposits reached a record high of $6.4 billion in the fourth quarter, surpassing the previous record by 25%. This indicates a high level of consumer confidence and anticipation for future cruises.

Environmental strides

Carnival Corporation continues to make strides in its sustainability efforts. The company reduced its greenhouse gas emissions by over 10% compared to its peak year of 2011, despite a 30% increase in capacity.

It has also made significant progress in reducing food waste and is on track to achieve its ambitious sustainability targets ahead of schedule.

The cruise operator will mark another significant milestone this weekend when Carnival Jubilee enters service from Galveston, Texas. Princess Cruises’ next ship, Sun Princess, will debut early next year in Europe as the line’s first Sphere-class vessel.

RELATED: Carnival Cruise Line Ships by Size

MSC and Mercy Ships To Build State-of-the-Art Hospital Vessel

New Consumer Law Mandates Clear Pricing for Cruise Lines

Bringing you 15 years of cruise industry experience. Cruise Radio prioritizes well-balanced cruise news coverage and accurate reporting, paired with ship reviews and tips.

Entertainment

How to Watch
My Portfolio
Stock Market
Biden Economy
EV Deep Dive
Stocks: Most Actives
Stocks: Gainers
Stocks: Losers
Trending Tickers
World Indices
US Treasury Bonds
Top Mutual Funds
Highest Open Interest
Highest Implied Volatility
Stock Comparison
Advanced Charts
Currency Converter
Investment Ideas
Research Reports
Basic Materials
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Consumer Defensive
Financial Services
Industrials
Real Estate
Mutual Funds
Credit Cards
Balance transfer cards
Cash-back cards
Rewards cards
Travel cards
Personal Loans
Student Loans
Car Insurance
Morning Brief
Market Domination
Market Domination Overtime
Opening Bid
Stocks in Translation
Lead This Way
Good Buy or Goodbye?
Fantasy football
Pro Pick 'Em
College Pick 'Em
Fantasy baseball
Fantasy hockey
Fantasy basketball
Download the app
Daily fantasy
Scores and schedules
GameChannel
World Baseball Classic
Premier League
CONCACAF League
Champions League
Motorsports
Horse racing
Newsletters

New on Yahoo

Privacy Dashboard

Yahoo Finance

Norwegian cruise line's (nyse:nclh) q4 sales top estimates, stock soars.

Cruise company Norwegian Cruise Line (NYSE:NCLH) reported Q4 FY2023 results topping analysts' expectations , with revenue up 30.8% year on year to $1.99 billion. It made a non-GAAP loss of $0.18 per share, improving from its loss of $1.04 per share in the same quarter last year.

Is now the time to buy Norwegian Cruise Line? Find out by accessing our full research report, it's free .

Norwegian Cruise Line (NCLH) Q4 FY2023 Highlights:

Revenue: $1.99 billion vs analyst estimates of $1.96 billion (1.2% beat)

EPS (non-GAAP): -$0.18 vs analyst expectations of -$0.14 (33.3% miss)

EPS (non-GAAP) Guidance for Q1 2024 is $0.12 at the midpoint, above analyst estimates of -$0.20

Free Cash Flow was -$388.7 million compared to -$918.4 million in the previous quarter

Gross Margin (GAAP): 33.5%, up from 19.7% in the same quarter last year

Passenger Cruise Days: 5.86 million (beat vs. expectations of 5.80 million)

Market Capitalization: $6.78 billion

“Throughout the year, we successfully implemented measures to rightsize our cost base. Notably, the fourth quarter of 2023 marked our fourth consecutive quarter of improved Adjusted Net Cruise Costs Excluding Fuel per Capacity Day, this resulted in a substantial 21% reduction in 2023 compared to 2022,” said Mark A. Kempa, executive vice president and chief financial officer of Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd.

With amenities like a full go-kart race track built into its ships, Norwegian Cruise Line (NYSE:NCLH) is a premier global cruise company.

Hotels, Resorts and Cruise Lines

Hotels, resorts, and cruise line companies often sell experiences rather than tangible products, and in the last decade-plus, consumers have slowly shifted from buying "things" (wasteful) to buying "experiences" (memorable). In addition, the internet has introduced new ways of approaching leisure and lodging such as booking homes and longer-term accommodations. Traditional hotel, resorts, and cruise line companies must innovate to stay relevant in a market rife with innovation.

Sales Growth

A company's long-term performance can indicate its business quality. Any business can enjoy short-lived success, but best-in-class ones sustain growth over many years. Norwegian Cruise Line's annualized revenue growth rate of 7.1% over the last five years was weak for a consumer discretionary business.

Within consumer discretionary, a long-term historical view may miss a company riding a successful new property or emerging trend. That's why we also follow short-term performance. Norwegian Cruise Line's annualized revenue growth of 263% over the last two years is above its five-year trend, suggesting some bright spots.

We can better understand the company's revenue dynamics by analyzing its number of passenger cruise days, which reached 5.86 million in the latest quarter. Over the last two years, Norwegian Cruise Line's passenger cruise days averaged 262% year-on-year growth. Because this number aligns with its revenue growth during the same period, we can see the company's monetization was fairly consistent.

This quarter, Norwegian Cruise Line reported wonderful year-on-year revenue growth of 30.8%, and its $1.99 billion of revenue exceeded Wall Street's estimates by 1.2%. Looking ahead, Wall Street expects sales to grow 8.4% over the next 12 months, a deceleration from this quarter.

Here at StockStory, we certainly understand the potential of thematic investing. Diverse winners from Microsoft (MSFT) to Alphabet (GOOG), Coca-Cola (KO) to Monster Beverage (MNST) could all have been identified as promising growth stories with a megatrend driving the growth. So, in that spirit, we’ve identified a relatively under-the-radar profitable growth stock benefitting from the rise of AI, available to you FREE via this link .

Cash Is King

Although earnings are undoubtedly valuable for assessing company performance, we believe cash is king because you can't use accounting profits to pay the bills.

Over the last two years, Norwegian Cruise Line's demanding reinvestments to stay relevant with consumers have drained company resources. Its free cash flow margin has been among the worst in the consumer discretionary sector, averaging negative 17.3%.

Norwegian Cruise Line burned through $388.7 million of cash in Q4, equivalent to a negative 19.6% margin. This caught our eye as the company shifted from cash flow positive in the same quarter last year to cash flow negative this quarter.

Key Takeaways from Norwegian Cruise Line's Q4 Results

We were impressed by Norwegian Cruise Line's optimistic earnings forecast for next quarter, which blew past analysts' expectations. We were also happy its revenue narrowly outperformed Wall Street's estimates. On the other hand, its passenger cruise days unfortunately missed and its EPS fell short of Wall Street's estimates. Overall, this was a mixed quarter for Norwegian Cruise Line, but the outlook is sure to draw some optimism. The stock is up 6.1% after reporting and currently trades at $16.9 per share.

So should you invest in Norwegian Cruise Line right now? When making that decision, it's important to consider its valuation, business qualities, as well as what has happened in the latest quarter. We cover that in our actionable full research report which you can read here, it's free .

Port Overview
Transportation to the Port
Uber & Lyft to the Port
Dropping Off at the Port
Cruise Parking
Cruise Hotels
Hotels with Parking Deals
Uber & Lyft to the Ports
Things to Do
Cozumel Taxi Rates
Free Things to Do
Restaurants Near the Cruise Port
Hotels & Resorts With Day Passes
Closest Beaches to the Cruise Port
Tips For Visiting
Shore Excursions
Cruise Parking Discounts
Hotels with Shuttles
Which Airport Should I Use?
Transportation to the Ports
Dropping Off at the Ports
Fort Lauderdale Airport to Miami
Inexpensive Hotels
Hotels near the Port
Hotels With Shuttles
Budget Hotels
Carnival Tips
Drink Packages
Specialty Restaurants
Faster to the Fun
More Articles
CocoCay Tips
Norwegian Tips
Great Stirrup Cay
Harvest Caye
How to Get the Best Cruise Deal
Best Time to Book a Cruise
Best Websites to Book a Cruise
Cruises Under $300
Cruises Under $500
Spring Break Cruise Deals
Summer Cruise Deals
Alaskan Cruise Deals
107 Cruise Secrets & Tips
Tips for First-Time Cruisers
What to Pack for a Cruise
What to Pack (Alaska)
Packing Checklist
Cruising with Kids
Passports & Birth Certificates
Bringing Alcohol
Cruising with a Disability
Duty-Free Shopping
Cruise Travel Insurance
Things to Do on a Cruise Ship
What Not to Do on a Ship
News & Articles

Revealed: How Much Cruise Companies Earn Per Passenger

How much money do cruise companies make per passenger? Well, after more than a yearlong pause due to the pandemic, cruise lines are back to sailing completely full on many routes and are seeing revenues per passenger set new marks as the public gets back to traveling.

And because many cruise lines fall under the umbrella of large public companies with shares that trade on the stock exchanges, we can get some insight. Every quarter the major cruise companies like Carnival Corporation, Royal Caribbean Group, and Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd. offer a glimpse into their business via public reports. These reports let us know just how much money cruising makes.

Let’s just say the figures are substantial. In the course of a year, a cruise company brings in billions of dollars in revenue and carries millions of passengers. So how exactly do the figures break down? Take a look…

Carnival Corporation Revenue Per Passenger

Carnival Corporation is the company behind some of the largest and most well-known cruise lines on the planet. Names like Costa, Princess, Holland America — and of course, Carnival Cruise Line — are all brands operated by the company.

As of its most recent annual filing, Carnival Corporation had a passenger capacity across its 91 ships of roughly 254,000 cabins. Carnival Cruise Line boasts the largest portion of those cabins, with more than 75,000 rooms across 24 ships as of November 2022 — or about 30% of total capacity for the company.

While 2022 was a rebound year for Carnival, it wasn’t quite all the way back. For instance, before the pandemic, the occupancy percentage across the fleet was routinely at 100% or more. (Occupancy of 100% means that there are an average of two passengers per cabin on a cruise.) In 2022, the occupancy rate came in at 75%. That’s lower, but still a sharp increase from the 56% for 2021 and rising steadily.

In total, the company saw revenue of $12.17 billion in 2022, or about $33.3 million per day. Carnival Corporation also carried 7.7 million passengers during the year. That comes out to revenue of $1,580.26 per passenger carried.

Carnival Corporation:

2022 Revenue: $12.17 billion
2022 Passengers Carried: 7.7 million
2022 Revenue Per Passenger: $1,580.26
Source data

Royal Caribbean Group Revenue Per Passenger

When it comes to cruising, Royal Caribbean is one of the biggest in the industry. Parent company Royal Caribbean Group is the force behind Royal Caribbean International, Celebrity Cruises, Silversea, TUI, and Hapag Lloyd.

When it comes to those brands, Royal Caribbean International is by far the largest, with roughly two dozen ships and about 90,000 berths.

Similar to Carnival Corporation, Royal Caribbean has seen a sharp rebound in traffic as the pandemic has waned. In the full year 2022, occupancy was 85% overall. The company reports now that Caribbean sailings are reaching 100% with holiday sailings “close to 110%.”

In other words, the company is well on its way back to normalcy.

Overall, Royal Caribbean Group saw total revenue in 2022 of $8.84 billion, or about $24.2 million per day. The company carried 5.5 million passengers during the year. That comes out to revenue of $1,596.82 per passenger carried. This figure is in line with what’s seen for Carnival Corporation.

Royal Caribbean Group:

2022 Revenue: $8.84 billion
2022 Passengers Carried: 5.5 million
2022 Revenue Per Passenger: $1,596.82

Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd. Revenue Per Passenger

The final of the “big three” public cruise companies is Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings. While it is the smallest of the three major players, it’s no slouch. Brands include Norwegian Cruise Line, Regent Seven Seas, and Oceania Cruises.

All told, the company operates 29 ships, with roughly 62,000 berths. That makes it roughly one-fourth the size of Carnival Corporation when it comes to capacity. However, the cruise company also focuses on higher pricing and more luxury, such as its newest ship — Norwegian Prima.

As of the time of this writing, Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings had yet to release its full-year 2022 figures . However, we can still see how much it earns in revenue per passenger by studying statements through the first nine months of the year (ending September 30, 2022).

During that time, Norwegian saw total revenue of $3.3 billion, or about $9.1 million per day. The company carried 1.1 million passengers during the first nine months of the year. That comes out to $2,989.96 per passenger carried. And while there is some seasonality to cruise fares, this figure is roughly double what’s seen by Royal Caribbean Group and more than double Carnival Corporation.

Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd.:

2022 Revenue (through 9/30): $3.32 billion
2022 Passengers Carried (through 9/30): 1.1 million
2022 Revenue Per Passenger (through 9/30): $2,989.96

Visualizing the Data

It can be easier to compare the different cruise companies with a chart instead of just figures. Below, we’ve compared the different metrics for each company. One thing to keep in mind, however, is that the data shown in this article represents the entire year for Carnival Corporation and Royal Caribbean Group. However, at this time Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings has only published data for the first nine months of 2022.

Popular: 39 Useful Things to Pack (17 You Wouldn't Think Of)

Read next: park & cruise hotels for every port in america, popular: 107 best cruise tips, secrets, tricks, and freebies.

How much do the cruise line make per person after expenses?

Currently profits have been negative due to Covid.

Cruise News: Carnival’s New Ship, Royal’s New Beach Club, NCL’s Big Milestone & More

Cruising with a baby: what to know from someone who’s done it, answered: how much cash should you take on a cruise, hotels with cruise shuttles for every major port in america, 107 best cruise tips, tricks, secrets, and freebies, 39 useful things to pack for your cruise (including 17 you’d never think of).

Privacy Policy
Terms & Conditions

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Publications
Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

Advanced Search
Journal List
Elsevier - PMC COVID-19 Collection

The global cruise industry: Financial performance evaluation

The global cruise industry has experienced persistent growth dynamics over the last two decades, with an impressive rebound after the 2008 financial crisis, unlike commercial shipping. Globalization, restructurings, mergers and a diverse bundle of travel and tourism services to cater for different passenger profiles have boosted robust revenue and profitability growth. Major cruise companies deploy ambitious investment plans to expand and renew their expensive fleet with larger modern vessels of high value. The mix of funding sources to finance these capital-intensive projects is critical and exerts a direct impact on the cost of capital. The paper contributes a rigorous corporate financial performance evaluation in the cruise sector and attempts to shed light on managerial financial efficiency, capital structure options, solvency conditions and corporate value dynamics. A sample of leading cruise companies, jointly holding a dominant market position, is incorporated to empirically investigate and assess their financial, accounting and stock market performance, based on convenient financial ratios and established market metrics. The detrimental impact of the recent coronavirus pandemic on the cruise sector is also discussed. This original study attempts to bridge the relevant research gap, as past literature remains surprisingly thin on this critical topic. A set of challenging and innovative contributions is delivered for the financial performance of major cruise companies, for the first time to the authors' knowledge, in support of efficient managerial implications and recommendations.

1. Introduction

Cruise tourism business is a form of traveling for leisure purposes that involves an all-inclusive holiday on a cruise ship. According to UNWTO, cruise tourism includes ‘a wide range of activities for travelers in addition to its traditional function of providing transport and accommodation’. The cruise industry is the fastest growing sector of the travel industry, with demand estimated to grow at 7.0% per annum over the past decade, and cruise passenger surpassing the threshold of 30 mln. in 2019 ( CLIA, 2020 ; Wondirad, 2019 ). At the same time, the business is seen to be extremely volatile and ever more highly capital-intensive. Newbuilt cruise vessels can cost multiples in value compared with commercial ocean ships, estimated at $1.3 bln. per vessel, accommodating up to 6000 passengers, albeit at lower operating unit costs ( Dowling, 2006 ; Lester & Weeden, 2004 ; Wood, 2004 ). Nevertheless, in the 1990s, the cruise industry has experienced extensive restructuring, following a wave of failures and consolidations. Larger holding cruise companies acquired smaller peers that continued operating as ‘brands’ withing the new business ventures though, serving repeat customer loyalty and offering diverse quality and service levels.

Financial empirical research on cruise shipping remains surprisingly thin. Few earlier studies investigate, selectively, topics such as, the translational partnership organization of the industry ( Hall & Braithwaite, 1990 ); cruise impact on and implications for regional and local market development ( Hobson, 1993 ); cruise market globalization trends ( Wood, 2000 ); cruise strategic capacity investments ( Byung-Wook, 2005 ; Wie, 2005 ); cruise line and passenger challenges ( Veronneau & Roy, 2012 ); cruise line supply chains and logistics ( Daly & Fernandez-Stark, 2017 ; Veronneau and Roy, 2009 , Veronneau and Roy, 2011 ; Veronneau, Roy, & Beaulieu, 2015 ); fund raising approaches for newbuilding cruise ships ( Kiziellewicz, 2017 ; OECD, 2007 ); and mergers, acquisitions and restructurings ( Charlier, 2004 ; Hobson, 1994 ); inter alia.

This study focuses on the financial performance evaluation of the global cruise business and attempts to fill this research gap in the field by contributing a set of challenging and innovative findings, as well as managerial implications and recommendations. To the authors’ best knowledge, this appears to be the first attempt to investigate in depth the critical issues of managerial efficiency, profitability, and growth prospects, financing sources and capital structure, leverage, solvency, and value creation dynamics in the context of the global cruise industry. Initially, a concise overview of prevailing key developments and trends in the cruise business over recent years is provided. Subsequently, critical key financial metrics and performance indicators are estimated and evaluated over time and against major peer competitors for a sample of leading cruise players.

The theoretical framework and the stream of literature that the paper is grounded on relates to critical investment and financing decisions and their financial implications for managerial performance, corporate profitability, value creation, and firm growth. To this end, in a broader context, a core set of seminal reference papers investigate key managerial decisions on funding source options (debt and/or equity), capital structure mix priorities, (weighted average) cost of capital (WACC) shifts, and share price volatility, inter alia, as well as their interrelated implications for investment decisions and overall corporate financial performance (e.g., Baker & Wurgler, 2002 ; Donaldson, 1961 ; Hovakimian, 2006 ; Kisgen, 2006 ; Modigliani and Miller, 1958 , Modigliani and Miller, 1963 ; Myers, 1984 , Myers, 2001 ; Myers & Majluf, 1984 ). It remains an innovative, challenging and fruitful empirical task to investigate the financial implications of these decisions and evaluate the managerial efficiency and financial performance of major global cruise companies, as depicted and reflected on the evolution of critical and widely established financial ratios and metrics. Indeed, these issues are not seen to have been investigated yet in the relevant empirical literature. Nevertheless, they remain important for a highly capital-intensive sector, such as the cruise industry, taking, indicatively, into consideration that the cost of a newbuild cruise vessel can now surpass the $1.0 bln. threshold ( CLIA, 2020 ).

The empirical approach is based on a blended financial methodology, including preliminary data mining and collection, financial statement analysis and comparative assessment and evaluation of critical cruise financial ratios and indices. Based on that, a set of focal policy recommendations is finally provided. The information input is obtained from financial statements and annual reports, stock market datasets and company financial analysis reports, over a recent five-year horizon.

The paper is structured as follows. Section 2 provides a concise summary of recent developments in cruise demand and supply sides, identifying critical growth drivers, economic implications, and prospects ahead. Section 3 overviews major cruise company investment decisions; and Section 4 analyses the complex topic of financing decisions and fund-raising approaches, based on alternative capital structure options that eventually shape the critical cost of capital indicator. Section 5 investigates, analyses, and evaluates a set of key financial ratios, metrics, and indicators to assess cruise company financial performance and value creation dynamics. Finally, Section 6 concludes.

2. Cruise business growth drivers

2.1. demand for cruise services and economic impact.

Cruise shipping business offers a bundle of combined global shipping and tourism services to cruise passengers, as it caters for vacation services on board and ashore, with a full package of diverse recreational tourism-related services. However, a fundamental strategic shift is seen in global cruise business over time ( Garin, 2005 ). Whereas in earlier days, cruise shipping services were mainly targeting higher net-worth luxury customers at substantial price cost, the industry has gradually diversified to demonstrate market segmentation and to attract massively average-income cruise passengers of different age and social profiles. This trend has been supported by attractive cruise service packages at reasonable prices, as massive newbuilt vessel capacity has resulted to extensive economies of scale benefits. Broadly, cruise shipping is perceived as a ‘customer's market’, shaped by shifting consumer tastes and trends. Cruise passengers appear to increasingly prefer ‘paying more for experiences than for possessions’.

Cruise shipping is the fastest-growing segment in the leisure travel market with high capacity utilization rates. The prime cruise business actors include more than 55 cruise line companies, offering ocean, river, and specialty cruise services, and covering more than 95% of global cruise capacity. Business members include also more than 340 executive partners that are key suppliers and cruise line partners, including ports and destinations, ship development suppliers and business services; around 15,000 travel agencies, including the largest players, hosts, franchises and consortia; and, 25,000 travel agent members worldwide ( CLIA, 2019 ).

Contrary to commercial ocean shipping, the global cruise business has shown robust growth rates and persistent recovery, after the 2008 financial crisis. In terms of total revenue, the cruise industry generated $46.6 bln. in 2018, exhibiting a spectacular rebound since revenue had declined abruptly below $25 bln., due to the recession spread after 2008 ( CLIA, 2020 ). The economic output generated by the global cruise industry is estimated at $150 bln. in 2018 against $126 bln. in 2016 (+20%, 2018/2016), with 28.5 mln. cruise passengers, offering 1.17 mln. jobs (full-time equivalent employees; +6.2%, 2018/2017), and distributing $50.2 bln. in wages and salaries ( CLIA, 2018 , CLIA, 2019 ). In view of global passenger spending capacity, estimates indicate aggregate direct purchases of $7.97 bln. (+11.4%, 2018/2017), corresponding to $376 average passenger spending before boarding a cruise and to $101 in port visiting during a cruise. Furthermore, 65% of cruise passengers is seen to spend a few extra days at embarkation or debarkation ports. Cruise business is seen to develop around Caribbean, Australasia, Brazil, Europe, North America, Asia, Canada, UK, and Ireland. The worldwide income multiplier effects of the cruise industry have wider economic implications, as these disseminate to a wide spectrum of related business sectors and activities.

Over 2008–2018, the global cruise business has experienced an unprecedented 10-year average growth above 45% in sourced cruise passengers ( CLIA, 2019 ; Florida Caribbean Cruise Association, 2019 ). This performance is attributable predominantly to the spectacular passenger growth from European markets (60.4%), followed by North American markets (39.4%). This figure raises up to nearly 75% if passenger growth of the rest of the world is also counted ( Table 1 ). The number of total cruise passengers came up to 30 mln. in 2019 from 16.3 mln. in 2008 (+84%). A steady cumulative annual passenger growth rate (CAGR) at 7% is estimated over 1990–2020.

International demand for cruises (sourced passengers, mln).

Source: CLIA (2019) .

Initial estimates on the number of annualized worldwide cruise passengers carried indicate 32.0 mln. passengers for 2020 against 3.6 mln. passengers back in 1990 (+790%, 2020/1990) ( Fig. 1 ).

Global cruise passengers carried (mln.)

Cruise passengers originate from a diversity of geographic regions and source markets ( Table 2 ). North America remains by far the largest source region of cruise passengers, contributing more than half of global cruise passenger flows (50.2%); its share, though, has dropped compared with 2007 (66%). Europe follows at a distance (23.7%) and has also seen its share slightly on the decline. Asia, on the other hand, is a robustly upcoming cruise passenger source region (15.0% in 2019, up from 9.2% in 2018).

Worldwide cruise passenger by source region (%).

Europe: Benelux, France, Germany, Italy, Scandinavia, Spain, Portugal, UK. Source: CLIA (2020) .

The breakdown of preferred destinations, as depicted by cruise line deployment by region is presented for 2018 and 2019 in Table 3 . The Caribbean remains by far the prime cruise destination of high demand (32%) with the Mediterranean (17%) and Europe (excluding Mediterranean; 11%) following at a distance ( Table 3 ).

Cruise line deployment by region (%).

Source: CLIA (2020) .

The cruise market share distribution among major cruise players is presented below ( Table 4 ). Three leading players are seen to dominate the global cruise market. Carnival Corporation holds a dominant position with passenger and revenue market shares at 47.4% and 39.4%, respectively. Royal Caribbean Cruise ranks second with passenger and revenue shares at 23.0% and 20.2%, respectively. Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings follows at a distance with passenger and revenue shares at 9.5% and 12.6%, respectively. These three major players control a global cruise market share of 80% in passenger terms and 72.2% in revenue terms, respectively.

Cruise line market share.

Source: Authors' compilation; www.cruisemarketwatch.com .

2.2. Growth drivers and prospects

Cruise shipping growth is driven by consistent efforts of all parties involved to explore alternative approaches towards increasing business efficiencies. These include further newbuilding investments to expand and modernize cruise fleet, adding new vessels of larger capacity, diversifying the destination choices offered, increasing penetration in core North American and Latin American markets, attracting more passengers from new source markets and enriching on-board and on-shore activities to meet cruise passenger demands. Furthermore, the inclusion of more local ports has been treated responsibly, based on collaboration with cruise destinations and local communities. The cruise industry is seen to become more conscientious, paying attention towards preservation of local cultures and landmarks and minimization of environmental footprints; exploring alternative creative ways to manage visitors' flows; and, implementing higher standards of responsible tourism. The latter include partnerships with local governments, staggered arrivals and departures, local excursion diversification, shoreside power, and local passenger spending, as more travelers are spending time in and near cruise ports (e.g., Klein, 2011 ).

Broadly, the cruise industry demonstrates promising growth dynamics ahead. This is supported by a global shift in consumer tastes and habits around cruise services, irrespective of passenger generation. For instance, more than 66% of generation ‘X', 71% of millennials, and expanding percentages of generation ‘Z', originating predominantly from the vital US market, are seen to have an increasingly positive attitude towards cruise travel and tourism services compared with earlier years. Generation ‘Z' is anticipated to become the largest consumer generation by 2020 outpacing even millennials. This generation, like the one before, prefers experiences over material items. They appear to prefer cruise travels, including multiple destinations and targeted specialized services (such as music festivals at sea, for instance; CLIA, 2020 ).

Cruise passenger numbers originating from major emerging markets, such as China, India, and Latin America, are anticipated to increase further, supported by improving global disposable income and economic growth conditions. In addition, social demographic shifts indicate that, as global marriage rates are on a decline, increasing numbers of single adults are seen to pursue lone cruise services with a ‘traveling alone’ focus. Cruise lines respond to this upcoming clientele by offering, targeted ‘solo travel’ services, such as studio cabins, solo-lounges, and single-friendly activities. Another upcoming cruise clientele sub-group is female travelers, as their numbers are seen growing. Many tourism and travel companies are creating female-centered cruise itineraries, based on focused interests, and facilitating building women community bonds ( CLIA, 2020 ). Relevant references investigating these issues further include Teye and Leclerc (2003) , Chen, Neuts, Nijkamp, and Liu (2016) , Satta, Parola, Penco, Persico, and Musso (2016) , inter alia.

What is more, cruise travelers are now seen to set sights on destinations that were previously out of reach and some only accessible by cruise ships from the Galapagos Islands to Antarctica. Demand for off-peak season cruise packages also exhibits rising popularity, as travelers may prefer to visit tropical destinations to escape a domestic cold season. The number of modern ‘digital nomads’, that is travelers combining work with leisure time, is also on the rise. This target group can enjoy cruise vacation services in conjunction with remote e-work, cutting down on time-off and still earning an income. On the other hand, micro travel cruise services exhibit upward demand trends as well, as many travelers are interested in quick recreational trips of varied and flexible trip duration alternatives. In response to that, cruise companies offer bite-sized cruise options of three-to-five-days, scheduling shorter itineraries to a variety of destinations.

3. Investment decisions in the cruise business

The cruise companies promote consistently a set of ambitious and capital-intensive strategies to sustain business growth. Newbuilding investment projects target to expand and modernize the existing fleet with vessels of larger capacity. Total cruise industry capacity reached 537 thous. passengers and 314 ships, with about 55 active cruise companies at the end of 2018 ( CLIA, 2020 ). The brand diversification of operations is summarized in Table 5 .

Cruise passenger capacity.

Source: Authors' compilation; CLIA (2020) .

Most cruise players have large investment plans under deployment, scheduled over 2019–2025. For instance, Carnival, Royal Caribbean, and Norwegian plan to invest $4.2 bln., $7.2 bln., and $4.5. bln., respectively, in newbuilding vessels, aggregating to $16 bln. in investments. With total cruise sector investments adding up to $70.3 bln., the joint investment share of these three major players corresponds to 23% of total cruise investment budget ( Table 6 ).

Newbuilding investments – capital requirements (USD bln.), 2019–2025.

Source: Authors' compilation; www.cruisemarketwatch.com (2020).

Broadly, an impressive newbuilding cruise vessel orderbook is under execution over 2019–2025 ( Table 7 ; more details in Table 7A in the Appendix; ( WAC, 2019 )). It is worth noting that the large vessel size in several cases can accommodate more than 6000 cruise passengers. Recent feedback on cruise investment plans indicates that 278 vessels are projected in operation by the end of 2020 and 19 vessels are scheduled to debut in 2020. The average age of cruise fleet is seen at 14.1 years, improved from 14.6 years in 2018.

Cruise ship newbuilding orders, 2019–2025.

A broader issue of concern for cruise investments relates to the environmental sustainability commitment. While cruise ships comprise less than 1% of global maritime fleet, the entire shipping industry benefits from the adoption of new technologies and practices that were not in play earlier. The development of new technologies and cleaner fuels remains a high priority for the cruise industry. Estimates indicate that the cruise companies have invested over $22 bln. in new energy-efficient ships and technologies to minimize the environmental impact, supporting the goal of reducing carbon emission rates by 40% by 2030 compared to 2008 ( CLIA, 2020 ). As per new emission standards, sulfur in the fuel is limited to 0.5% from January 2020. The cruise industry is also seen to be consistently committed to responsible tourism practices, with a focus on destination stewardship, setting-up partnerships with local governments in key destinations. A complementary concern relates inevitably to cruise hosting port constraints, including market segmentation, vessel size service capacities, seasonality effects and congestion bottlenecks at peak periods. To that end, cruise players are anticipated to invest further into port facilities and related infrastructure.

Having said that, the compliance of cruise companies to environmental protection is associated with high investment costs for the construction of new generation cruise ships. Vessel manufacturing costs also rise as ships incorporate innovative advanced technologies. Although cruise vessel prices are seen, on average, at around half a billion dollars, updated estimates indicate this figure to now surpass the one billion dollars threshold ( CLIA, 2020 ). To that end, the critical questions as to how these massive investments are to be financed and at what capital cost remain to be tackled. Following the global financial crisis, several leading international banks specialized in ship credit, such as RBS and DVB, have decided to exit ship lending entirely, liquidating their ship loan portfolios. On the other hand, an emerging global trend relates to private entry strategies, partnerships, and internationalization patterns of cruise companies entering cruise terminal operations in major destinations, such as the Mediterranean Sea ( Pallis, Parola, Satta, & Notteboom, 2018 ). Plausibly, the deployment of such strategies is anticipated to bring about considerable financial implications for cruise lines and cruise terminals, both in terms of spending patterns as well as of income.

4. Financing decisions in the cruise business

4.1. capital funding priorities.

The financing approach a cruise company is to follow to fund its investments and the contribution of alternative capital source options are of fundamental managerial importance. Obviously, this should have direct implications for this cruise company's optimal capital structure mix and its cost of funding. The investigation of these issues in the context of cruise companies remains a challenging and innovative task. To the authors' knowledge, this appears to be the first empirical study tackling these issues in the cruise industry. This research interest is further reinforced and justified considering that the global cruise industry is a highly capital-intensive business with consistent investment expansion plans under development over the last decades, associated with substantial funding requirements. As noted earlier, most cruise companies plan to expand and upgrade their fleet and have already placed a massive newbuilding orderbook under play. The incorporation of luxury facilities and high-end technological advances and services drive unit vessel prices even higher than $1.3 bln. ( CLIA, 2020 ).

Managerial financing decisions have direct implications for the cruise company's capital structure mix, its cost of capital and, eventually, shareholder value creation and growth prospects. The capital structure mix refers to the percentage weights of equity and debt, reflecting the respective capital source contribution to form the company's total invested capital. As the cost of equity and cost of debt differ, modifications in the capital structure mix also affect the company's overall cost of capital. These focal issues have generated steaming debate among academics and market practitioners over time. A summary of major finance theories on capital structure is now provided and subsequently explored briefly in the context of the cruise business.

Modigliani and Miller (1958) , first, postulate the capital structure irrelevance approach. Assuming perfect markets and absence of taxes and bankruptcy costs, the capital structure mix is irrelevant because firm market value is determined by the company's earning power and the risk of its underlying assets. Modigliani and Miller (1963) incorporate, subsequently, the tax effect on capital cost and firm value. In this case, firm value increases with leverage due to tax shield benefits. Interest on debt capital is an acceptable deduction from the firm's income and thus decreases the firm's net tax payment. Assuming potential tax benefits, debt financing can result to lower cost of capital.

Trade-off theory, furthermore, argues that the optimal level of debt is where the marginal debt benefit is equal to its marginal cost ( Myers, 1984 ). Debt financing up to a certain level contributes interest tax shield benefits, offsetting financial distress costs. A firm can attain an optimal capital structure by adjusting debt and equity weights, thereby balancing tax shield benefits and financial distress costs. Myers and Majluf (1984) postulate the pecking order theory, based on earlier research by Donaldson (1961) , and argue that (assuming perfect capital markets) management prefers internally generated funds rather than raising external funds. A company should prefer internal funding first, then issue debt, and finally, as a last resort, issue equity capital. Firms with higher profit and growth opportunities would use less debt capital ( Myers, 2001 ). If a firm has no investment opportunities available, profits are retained to avoid future external financing. Information asymmetry between insiders and outsiders and separation of ownership can explain why firms avoid capital markets.

Market timing theory of capital structure maintains that companies are more likely to issue equity when their market value is high, relative to book and past market values, and to repurchase equity when their market value is low ( Baker & Wurgler, 2002 ). Share price volatility affects corporate financing decisions, and eventually the firm's capital structure. As the resulting effects on capital structure are persistent, this indicates that current capital structure is strongly related to historical market values. Capital structure is perceived to be the cumulative outcome of past attempts to time the equity market. It is argued though, that market timing does not exert material effects on the firms' capital structure in the long run ( Hovakimian, 2006 ). The credit rating-capital structure (CR-CS) hypothesis is proposed as an extension of the existing trade-off theory of capital structure ( Kisgen, 2006 ). Capital structure decisions are expected to adjust along the relevant benefits and costs associated with shifts between different credit rating levels. When a firm is closer to a rating shift, it may issue less debt compared to the alternative of being far from a credit rating shift.

To sum up, debt financing can offer a lower cost of capital, due to tax deductibility advantages. A company with positive prospects can proceed to raise capital using primarily debt rather than equity, so to avoid ownership dilution (transmitting negative signals to market players). Debt signaling (company announcements of funding with debt) is typically seen as positive news. However, a high debt exposure bears enhanced bankruptcy risks, and increases shareholders' financial risks, thus a higher return on equity is required. To conclude, companies must assess their optimal funding mix at which the marginal benefits of debt equal the marginal costs incurred. The optimal capital structure mix is associated with that combination of equity and debt financing that results to a lower cost of capital, supporting robust value creation prospects.

4.2. Capital structure mix and WACC

Based on 2019 figures, all three major cruise companies have seen their long-term debt exposure increased against 2018, by 22.8% at $9.7 bln. for Carnival, by 8.4% at $9.0 bln. for Royal Caribbean, and, by 5.2% at $6.1 bln. for Norwegian ( Table 8 ). This reflects a debt weight reallocation in the capital structure mix for Carnival and Norwegian, though this remained stable for Royal Caribbean. Over 2016–2019, debt funding contribution increased from 41.9% to 43.7% for Carnival and from 59.2% to 59.9% for Royal Caribbean but declined overall from 65.1% to 61.1% for Norwegian. On average, Carnival is seen to rely more on equity funding (equity/debt mix: 60/40), contrary to Royal Caribbean and Norwegian that are seen to be more dependent on debt (equity/debt mix: 40/60) ( Table 9 ; Fig. 2 ).

Capital sources (USD bln.).

Source: Authors' calculation based on cruise company financial statements.

Cruise company capital structure mix (%).

Capital structure mix components.

As the capital structure of major cruise companies indicates, the funding mix is relatively balanced with a reasonable exposure to debt risk. This comes in contrast to global commercial shipping business that is seen to be typically financed predominantly by bank lending ( Drobetz, Gounopoulos, Merikas, & Schroder, 2013 ; Syriopoulos, 2007 , Syriopoulos, 2010 ).

The weighted average cost of capital (WACC) is a critical metric for a company's aggregate cost of funding from all potential capital sources. It is calculated as the weighted average cost of equity and cost of debt (weighted contribution of equity and debt (plus of any other capital source) in total invested capital), that is:

where: k e = cost of equity; E = Equity; k d = pre-tax cost of debt; t = corporate tax rate; D = Debt; E/(E + D) and D/(E + D) = weights of equity and debt in the company's capital structure, respectively.

Hence, WACC is a key indicator of the minimum after-tax required rate of return which the cruise company must earn for all its investors (capital suppliers, i.e. shareholders and debtholders). At the same time, the company's cost of capital is the expected return to both stakeholders (owners and lenders) and represents investors' opportunity cost of taking on the risk of investing their funds into the company. More specifically, cost of equity is the required rate of return on common stock of the company. It is the minimum rate of return which a company must earn to keep its common stock price from declining. Cost of equity is estimated using alternative models (including, dividend discount model (DDM) and capital asset pricing model (CAPM)). After-tax cost of debt represents the after-tax rate of return debtholders require to earn until debt maturity. Cost of debt is calculated by assessing the yield to maturity of the company's bonds and other loan instruments. If no yield to maturity is available, the cost of debt can be estimated using the instrument's current yield. After-tax cost of debt is included in WACC calculation because debt offers a tax shield (i.e., interest expense on debt reduces taxes and this is incorporated in the cost of debt calculation). The WACC factor for major cruise companies in 2019 is summarized below ( Table 10 ).

Cruise company cost of capital, WACC (%).

WACC: Weighted Average Cost of Capital. Year: 2019.

Source: Authors' calculation based on cruise company financial statements and Bloomberg database.

The next section focuses on the core research objectives and develops the empirical methodology on the financial performance evaluation of major cruise companies to contribute a set of fruitful managerial recommendations, and conclusions.

Fig. 3 illustrates the underlying logical nexus and summarizes the earlier key points, interrelating cruise company investment and financing decisions with critical corporate financial performance ratios and metrics to follow in the next section and highlights the paper's contributions to the topic at hand.

Nexus of investment and financing decisions to cruise company financial performance.

Source: Authors' compilation.

5. Financial performance evaluation: Methodology and key findings

This section deals with a solid quantitative assessment of corporate financial performance dynamics, and trends shaped in the cruise industry, over the period 2016–2019. As mentioned, this topic remains surprisingly unresearched in the relevant academic literature (e.g., Clancy, 2017 ). To explicitly state the research objectives and innovative contributions of this study, the following critical issues are investigated for leading global cruise companies: the ambitious investment plans under deployment; the capital funding priorities and sources, based on the decomposition of the capital structure mix; and, the assessment and evolution of the WACC metric over time. To assess, subsequently, the profitability robustness, value creation dynamics and growth prospects of the sample cruise companies, an integrated financial performance evaluation approach is undertaken, based on a widely applicable, financial ratio analysis, focusing on the following key issues: revenue and profit growth; managerial efficiency, as depicted by ROE, ROA, ROIC ratios; the ROIC-WACC interrelationship and its growth and value dynamics implications; financial leverage exposure and solvency assessment; and earnings per share ratios and share price performance over time.

To serve these research objectives, the empirical methodology is based on a solid corporate financial analysis, assessment, and evaluation of critical financial ratios and established metrics on key cruise market players, built on financial statement, accounting, and stock market inputs. This applied approach can then produce useful empirical findings and policy recommendations for efficient managerial decisions of the cruise companies. Though this methodological framework is standard in different business sectors, to the authors' best knowledge, this appears to be the first empirical application to global cruise corporate players.

A case study company sample is selected, consisting of the major cruise players, namely Carnival, Royal Caribbean, and Norwegian cruise lines. As discussed earlier, these cruise companies hold an undoubtedly dominant market share, as they jointly control more than 80% of the global cruise market in terms of revenue and passengers and set the financial tune in the sector ( CLIA, 2020 ). Hence, by focusing on these companies, a solid, reliable, and sufficiently representative feedback can be gained for the overall cruise sector. Furthermore, these leading cruise companies have their shares listed and traded on international stock exchanges (New York, London); thus, useful empirical reflections can be gained by their stock market behavior, performance, and market value. The consolidated financial statements of the sample cruise companies have been incorporated for the empirical financial analysis. These cruise companies own several subsidiaries (e.g., Carnival Corporation & PLC owns Costa Crociere, and Aida Cruise, through Costa Group; as well as it owns P&O Cruises and Cunard, through Carnival UK, etc.), and the strategies of the parent companies are realized also by their own brands.

As a point of clarification, MSC Cruise is also an important cruise market player, though it holds a relatively lower market share compared with the other sample companies. MSC was initially included in the preliminary sample compilation under study. However, it was eventually excluded from the final sample, to preserve data consistency and convergence, as MSC Cruise is not listed on a stock exchange and a part of the research interest is in the stock market behavior of the listed cruise companies. Due to the dominant market share and economic importance of the sample cruise companies, the empirical analysis and findings are not expected to be affected materially by the exclusion of MSC Cruise. In any case, a relevant follow-up study could enrich and expand on the current sample to include more cruise players.

A brief corporate profile of each sample cruise company now follows.

5.1. Cruise company profile

Carnival Corporation & Plc (CCL) offers cruise services under the Carnival Cruise Lines, Holland America Line, Princess Cruises, and Seabourn brand names in North America; and AIDA Cruises, Costa Cruises, Cunard, and P&O Cruises names in Europe, Australia, and Asia. Carnival runs 100 cruise ships and is a sole dominant cruise market player, as it controls a market share at 48%. This is the only cruise group with its shares traded on dual listing (S&P500 and FTSE100 indices). The company was founded in 1972 and is headquartered in Miami, Florida.

Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd. (RCL) operates as a global cruise vacation company the cruise brands Royal Caribbean International, Celebrity Cruises, Azamara and Silversea Cruises. The firm also holds interest in TUI Cruises, Pullmantur and SkySea Cruises brands. Royal Caribbean runs 60 ships and holds a significant cruise market share at 23%. The company plans to launch 11 new cruise ships of average vessel capacity over 4500 passengers by 2025. The company was founded in 1968 and is headquartered in Miami, Florida.

Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd. (NCLH) is a global cruise company and operates the Norwegian Cruise Line, Oceania Cruises and Regent Seven Seas Cruises brands, offering itineraries to more than 490 destinations worldwide. With a combined fleet of 28 ships, and nine ships to be added by 2027 with an average capacity of 3000 passengers per vessel it holds a cruise market share at 10%. The company was founded in 2010 and is headquartered in Miami, Florida.

5.2. Revenue and profit growth

Cruise revenues exhibit consistently robust growth trends for the leading cruise players, over 2016–2019 ( Table 11 ). Contrary to most commercial shipping market segments that experienced abrupt and persistent revenue declines since the outbreak of 2008 global financial crisis, cruise shipping has seen a robust resistance and relatively rapid recovery. In 2019, Carnival recorded cruise revenue at $20.8 bln. (+10.3%, 2019/2018). Similarly, Royal Caribbean also gained robust revenues at $10.9 bln. (+15.3%, 2019/2018). Norwegian Cruise Line, on the other hand, saw comparatively modest revenue growth at $6.5 bln. (+6.6%, 2019/2018).

Cruise company revenue and profits.

EBITDA: Earnings Before Interest, Tax, Depreciation and Amortization.

Source: Authors' calculations; cruise company financial statements; www.macrotrends.net .

Gross profits exhibit an upward trend for all three cruise players, especially for the market leaders, Carnival, and Royal Caribbean. Earnings before interest, tax, depreciation, and amortization (EBITDA) is considered as a critical indicator of operational profitability and is defined as income after operating expenses have been deducted and before interest payments, taxes, depreciation, and amortization have been deducted. This profit component is to compensate subsequently for debtholder claims (interest payments), State claims (taxes) and, lastly, shareholder claims (dividends), with the latter ones perceived as residual claimants, bearing highest risk levels. The leading cruise companies exhibit modest EBITDA and Net Income shifts over 2016–2019.

According to a market motto, ‘if gross profit is not there, there will be no net profit’ as well. Gross profit margin is calculated as the ratio of gross profits to revenue. Assuming a cruise company investing in a sector that exhibits a high gross profit margin but not making bottom-line net profits may be a striking indication of a mismanaged case. Corporate restructuring and operational tuning may be required to turn the business into a profitable venture. Broadly, the level of gross profit margin depends directly on how a business is organized and the other costs it must support. For instance, after gross profit calculation, a cruise company still must pay operating expenses, financial, tax and other expenses. Subsequently, a cruise company must have robust net profits to distribute an attractive return (dividend) to shareholders. In case a cruise company can effectively control operating expenses, it can remain profitable with a lower gross margin ratio. Broadly, a higher gross profit margin is preferred, as it indicates efficient processes and offers flexibility to have money left over to spend on other business operations.

The net profit margin is calculated as the ratio of net profits to revenue. Net profit is calculated as the gross profit (revenue minus cost of goods sold) minus operating expenses, interest paid on debt, taxes and all other expenses. The net profit margin is a far more definitive profitability metric for investors and analysts and indicates how much of each dollar received as revenue translates to corporate profit. This is critical since revenue increases do not necessarily translate into increased profitability. A higher profit margin is desirable since it means the company generates more profits from its revenue. A careful assessment of both cruise company gross profit margin and net profit margin reveals managerial efficiency in earning profits relative to the costs involved in producing cruise services.

The operating profit margin, on the other hand, is calculated as Earnings Before Interest and Taxes (EBIT) to revenue. EBIT is revenue minus all operating costs, before interest paid, taxes and dividends. A highly variable EBIT can indicate a risky business, whereas a stable EBIT a well-managed and predictable one. Hence, the operating profit margin ratio indicates the net operating profitability and points to a successful management at generating income from the core business operations (per dollar of revenue), controlling costs effectively and/or increasing revenues faster than operating costs.

The profit margin ratios for all three sample cruise companies remain consistently high over 2016–2019 ( Table 12 ). The 2019 net profit margin for Royal Caribbean, for instance, at 17.4% indicates that, for $100 of revenue, $17.4 have remained as net profit in the company. The joint evaluation of gross, operating, and net profit margins for the leading cruise companies indicates a broadly stable, efficient, and successful financial management.

Cruise management financial efficiency.

GPM: Gross Profit Margin; OPM: Operating Profit Margin; NPM: Net Profit Margin.

When examining the per day figures, cruise revenue and profits per day are seen at $51.7 mln. and $8.6 mln., for Carnival; $ 26.0 mln. and $5.0 mln., for Royal Caribbean; and $16.6 mln. and $2.6 mln., for Norwegian, respectively, for 2018. Average cruise revenue and expense per passenger are estimated at $1791 and $1562, respectively. This corresponds to a profit at $227 per passenger, forming a net profit margin at 12.7%. A breakdown of the estimated average cruise revenue and expense per passenger is summarized in Table 13 .

Average cruise revenue and expense breakdown per passenger.

2018 figures; financial breakdown of typical cruiser worldwide (across all cruise lines). Average cruise duration: 8.0 days; median duration: 7.0 days.

Source: Carnival Corporation & Plc., Royal Caribbean Cruises, Norwegian Cruise Lines, Thomson/First Call, Cruise Lines International Association (CLIA), Florida Caribbean Cruise Association (FCCA), DVB Bank, Cruise Pulse; www.cruisemarketwatch.com .

5.3. Managerial efficiency ratios

A set of critical and widely employed diagnostics tools to evaluate managerial efficiency on cruise company financial performance include the Return on Equity (ROE), Return of Assets (ROA) and Return on Invested Capital (ROIC) ratios. These metrics permit comparative performance evaluation of each sample cruise company over time as well as against its competitors. They can also reveal critical drivers of growth and provide explanation for the stock market behavior of the cruise companies' share trading patterns at higher/lower valuation levels.

ROE is defined as net income to equity and indicates the equity required to generate a certain amount of net income; or, how well the company is using equity (owners' capital). ROA is calculated as net income to assets and indicates the assets required to generate a certain amount of net income; or how effectively the management utilizes the company's fixed and current assets (how dependent it is on them). ROIC is defined as EBIT (earnings before interest and tax) to total invested capital (equity plus debt) and indicates the operational profit generated by the total capital employed in the company; or, how efficiently the company allocates all its capital to profitable investments; or, how much capital is required to grow its business. ROE attracts investors' attention as it a critical indicator of how effectively a company's management uses shareholders' capital and reveals whether management is growing the company's value at an attractive and competitive rate. ROE, ROA and ROIC ratios are calculated as in the forms below ( Table 14 ).

ROE – ROA – ROIC ratios.

ROE: Return on Equity; ROA: Return on Assets; ROIC: Return of Invested Capital.

EAT = Earnings After Tax (Net Income); EBIT = Earnings Before Interest and Taxes (Operating Profit); Invested Capital = Equity + Debt.

A key factor distinguishing ROE and ROA is financial leverage or debt, since the fundamental balance sheet equation holds that assets equal equity plus debt. Plausibly, in case a company carries no debt, its equity and total assets will be the same, hence, ROE and ROA would also be the same. However, if that company takes on financial leverage, ROE will rise above ROA; this relates to the balance sheet equation, since equity equals assets minus liabilities. Thus, by taking on debt, a company increases its assets, due to the cash that comes in. But since equity equals assets minus debt, a company decreases its equity by increasing debt. In other words, when debt increases, equity shrinks; since equity is ROE's denominator, then ROE, in turn, gets a boost. At the same time, when a company takes on debt, total assets (ROA denominator) increase; hence, debt amplifies ROE in relation to ROA. ROE, however, weights net income only against owners' equity and does not provide any feedback on how well the management uses funding from borrowing and issuing bonds. If ROA is sound and debt levels are reasonable, a strong ROE is a solid signal that management is efficient at generating returns from shareholders' capital. On the other hand, if ROA is low or the company bears a heavy debt, a high ROE may be misleading as to the company's growth prospects.

ROIC overcomes certain ROE and ROA limitations and is a better measure of profitability than ROA and ROE, as it removes the debt related distortion that can make highly leveraged companies look highly profitable when using ROE. Unlike ROE and ROA that incorporate net income, ROIC is based on EBIT (earnings before interest expenses and taxes), arguably a critical operating profitability indicator that takes total invested capital into account. This can offer a closer focus on the core operating performance, removing financing decision effects (that is, regardless of the capital source, equity, or debt).

The joint evaluation of ROE ROA and ROIC ratios for the leading cruise companies indicates a persistently robust financial performance and efficient use of each company's equity, debt, and assets in all cases ( Table 15 ). ROE ratios run from 12.1% (Carnival) to 14.9% (Norwegian) to 16.0% (Royal Caribbean), respectively, reflecting a satisfactory return on shareholders' equity. Carnival is seen to attain the best performance of its assets (ROA: 6.7%), with the other cruise companies following closely (Royal Caribbean: 6.3%; Norwegian: 5.8%). ROIC ratios are seen also to be very close for all three cruise companies (Carnival: 9.6%, Royal Caribbean: 10%, Norwegian: 9.8%), indicating a solid operational performance with efficient use of shareholder and debtholder capital, and supporting robust growth dynamics and value creation.

WACC: Weighted Average Cost of Capital. Year: 2019. Source: Bloomberg database.

5.4. ROIC versus WACC: Growth and value dynamics

When comparing a company's return on invested capital (ROIC) against its cost of capital (WACC), ROIC should stand higher than WACC to support robust growth prospects, value creation and share price trading at a premium. ROIC also can be used as a benchmark to compare a firm's value against competitors. A common market benchmark spread in support of value creation is a ROIC higher than WACC by at least +2%. A ROIC lower that WACC (or a spread of less than 2%) is considered as a value destroying condition. Some companies run at a zero-return level, and, while they may not be destroying value, they have no excess capital to invest in future growth ( Koller, Goedhart, & Wessels, 2020 ). The cruise companies under evaluation exhibit a ROIC higher than WACC in all cases. However, the ROIC-WACC spread is seen lower than 2% in all sample cruise cases, raising concerns about their solid growth prospects and value creation potential.

The ROIC ratio can be adjusted on a per unit basis to be equivalently recalculated as:

This implies that superior ROIC ratios can be attained from either a) a ‘price premium’ relative to peers; b) a lower ‘cost of capital’ per unit, improving cost and capital efficiency; or, c) a combination of both, a) and b). A company can create value by investing its capital into profitable investment projects to attain attractive ROICs. Robust revenue growth rates, ROIC higher than WACC and operating cash flows are core drivers to corporate value creation.

In the longer-term, a company can sustain strong revenue growth and high ROIC only in case it possesses and preserves a well-defined ‘competitive advantage’ against its peers. However, as competition erodes ROICs and competitive advantages, management should consistently seek new sources of competitive advantage to create sustainable value. Empirical evidence indicates that, of alternative growth models to value creation, launching new products or services typically creates more value for shareholders ( Koller et al., 2020 ). In this context, a challenging strategic option for cruise companies remains as to how effectively they can respond towards their competitive advantages, by developing, for instance, alternative diversified bundles of cruise products and services to contain intensified global competition.

5.5. Financial leverage – Solvency

Cruise companies, in line with commercial shipping counterparts, have typically relied mainly on debt (bank lending and bond issuing) to finance their capital-intensive investment projects ( Syriopoulos, 2007 , Syriopoulos, 2010 ). The financial leverage, or debt-to-equity ratio (or debt ratio), is a widely used financial debt burden metric that compares a company's total debt (creditors' financing) to shareholder equity (owners' financing). Based on that, management and investors can evaluate debt contribution into invested capital, signal equity or asset adequacy to fulfill obligations to creditors (particularly under distress conditions), and assess the borrower's credit risk profile.

A debt ratio of 0.5, for instance, means that there are half as many liabilities than there is equity. In other words, shareholder funding is twice as high as creditors funding, implying shareholders and creditors own 66.6% and 33.3% of company assets, respectively. A lower debt-to-equity ratio usually implies a more financially stable business. On the other hand, a high debt-to-equity ratio indicates an aggressively debt-financed business. Companies with a higher debt component must repay their credit obligations to lenders (debt servicing with regular interest payments); hence, debt financing can turn more expensive than equity financing. Highly leveraged companies, furthermore, may run at risk of being unable to adequately service a high debt exposure. As a result, prospective investors may assume a higher risk exposure, refraining from investing their funds on this company. At the same time, financial leverage should not decline excessively, as companies raising equity (by issuing stock) are exposed to high stock market volatility and ownership dilution implications.

Financial leverage contributes to a better understanding of the debt impact on the overall cruise company profitability and growth. It is important to investigate whether debt is high because it supports healthy business expansion and growth. This can eventually generate higher earnings than it would have without this debt financing. If leverage increases earnings by a greater amount than debt's cost (interest payment), then the business and its shareholders should expect to benefit by value creation. On the contrary, high leverage associated with a weak financial performance may result to additional debt financing, as shareholders should be reluctant to contribute additional equity financing. In this case, share prices and corporate value may decline.

The interest coverage or times interest earned (TIE) ratio is another widely popular debt metric. It indicates how many times a company's annual debt obligations (interest and debt service expenses) are covered by the net operating income (income before interest and tax). It is a long-term solvency ratio, expressed in times, to assess a company's long-term solvency ability to pay its debt liabilities as they become due. TIE reveals also whether a prospective borrower can afford to take on any additional debt.

Higher TIE ratios are considered more favorable than lower ones. A TIE at 4.0, for instance, indicates that operating income is four times higher than yearly interest expense liabilities; hence, the company can comfortably meet its debt obligations. On the contrary, a TIE less than 1.0 reflects a company that cannot meet its interest obligations on its debt. Companies with weak TIE ratios may face difficulties in raising funds for their operations. A better TIE ratio implies the company has enough cash after paying its debt to continue investing in the business. However, management should be careful to avoid a very high TIE ratio in case this is due to an unnecessarily conservative stance towards debt and/or absence of policies to take full advantages of debt facilities. Plausibly, a company's capital structure mix has a critical direct impact on TIE ratio.

The leading cruise companies are seen to follow a careful approach towards debt financing and to maintain robust solvency positions over 2016–2019 ( Table 16 ). Carnival exhibits a consistently attractive and stable debt-to-equity ratio, at 0.78 in 2019. This is obviously in line with the higher equity component apparent in its capital structure mix. The same holds for Carnival's solvency position, displaying a comfortable operating profitability position to meet its interest payment obligations, with TIE ratio at 14.4 in 2019. Royal Caribbean and Norwegian are exposed to higher debt financing with a debt-to-equity ratio at 1.49 and 1.57, respectively in 2019. Whereas TIE ratios for Royal Caribbean and Norwegian are well above 1.0, at 5.3 and 4.3, respectively in 2019, these ratios still lag considerably behind Carnival. Broadly, the debt-to-equity and TIE ratios of leading cruise companies reflect balanced financing strategies with manageable debt exposures and adequate solvency positions. This comes in contrast to the typically heavily indebted commercial shipping companies ( Syriopoulos, 2007 , Syriopoulos, 2010 ).

Financial leverage – solvency ratios.

5.6. Earnings per share ratios

Earnings per share (eps) growth is an important financial indicator to measure managerial performance as it reflects a company's growth prospect dynamics. If revenue shows how much money is flowing into the company, eps depicts how much of that money is flowing down to shareholders, as profits per every outstanding share of stock. In other words, eps shows the net earnings contribution generated per share to shareholders, not simply because of changes in earnings but also after accounting for the effects of issuance of new shares. This may be particularly important in case the growth comes because of acquisitions, a strategic path of growth preferred by several cruise companies over the last decades.

A comparison of eps growth for major cruise companies, over 2016–2019, reveals that Norwegian has attained the best performance (eps growth: 56%), and Royal Caribbean follows closely (eps growth: 50%), whereas Carnival is lagging behind at a distance (eps growth: 12%). Broadly, the leading cruise companies exhibit robust profitability and promising growth prospects, rendering cruise company shares a broadly challenging investment choice ( Table 17 ).

Cruise company eps ratios.

6. Managerial implications and conclusion

6.1. a note on the covid-19 impact.

As this study was about to close, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the COVID-19 outbreak as a global pandemic on March 11, 2020. Most countries around the world introduced restrictions to international travel and imposed bans on non-essential travel to contain the virus spread. To that end, recent UNWTO estimates indicate that the near-complete global lockdown has abruptly halted economic growth, exerting an unprecedented impact on most business sectors, and especially on the travel, tourism, and cruise industries. In fact, these dramatic circumstances resulted eventually to the cruise ship business shutting, inevitably, entirely down. Current forecasts estimate the total industry revenues for 2020 to be 35% lower than in 2019 (from $685 bln. in 2019 down to $447 bln. for 2020; UNWTO, 2020 ; Richter, 2020 ). This translates into a fall of 300 mln. tourists and $320 bln. losses in international tourism receipts, more than three times the losses during the 2008 global financial crisis.

With a focus on the global cruise business, the virus spread led many countries to close their borders, resulting to thousands of cruise passengers kept at sea and vessels seeking a port to dock. Canada, for instance, banned all ships with more than 500 people from docking in its ports (mid-March). Australia, New Zealand, and the US banned all ships arriving from foreign ports and directed all foreign flagged ships to leave the country. Cruise passengers and crew members were quarantined on board and cruise liners had to struggle hard to attain delayed repatriation ( Giese, 2020 ; Ito, Hanaoka, & Kawasaki, 2020 ; Moussali & Tsekoura, 2020 ).

The following points highlight a set of critical implications for the cruise industry due to the coronavirus pandemic ( Giese, 2020 ; Research and Markets, 2020 ):

- most operators have had to suspend all voyages and others have cancelled most cruises;

- cruise companies have experienced detrimental financial implications, in terms of revenue and profits and at the same time of upward additional costs (for instance, costs associated with substantial refunds for cancellations, costs associated with docking ships at ports where ships were quarantined, costs of maintenance even when not sailing for utilizing cruise ship engines to provide power to maintain onboard services, air conditioning, desalination and propulsion);

- the defensive reaction to coronavirus spread has exerted domino effects and provoked far reaching implications for many cruise-linked companies, and cruise destinations, as many small island nations and other local economies rely heavily on the jobs, income cashflows and value chain effects generated by cruise ships and related business; for instance, the cruise industry is estimated to contribute about $2.0 bln. to the Caribbean each year; this results in a 5.9% contribution to some nations' entire GDP, as is the case with St. Kitts and Nevis ( Ship Technology, 2020 );

- it is highly doubtful whether the cruise companies will remain in a position to sustain their robust financial performance, as discussed in the previous sections; liquidity constraints are expected to eventually drug cruise companies into additional debt (with global investors' stock market sentiment remaining low); hence, further deterioration in their funding costs is anticipated ( McKinsey, 2020a ; Syriopoulos & Bakos, 2019 );

- to elaborate the deterioration in financial terms and capital costs, Carnival Cruise Line, the world's largest cruise operator, has lost its investment-grade status in June 2020, after S&P downgraded its rating at BB- (dropped from BBB-); S&P analysts perceive a ‘high level of uncertainty’ for the cruise operator's return to normal services and its ultimate recovery path; furthermore, the firm's credit measures are expected to ‘remain very weak through 2021 because of its plans for a gradual reintroduction of capacity’; the weak demand may eventually force Carnival to speed up removal of older ships and delay new ship deliveries ( Nagarajan, 2020 );

- in sum, the cruise industry faces a long struggle to ensure its survival as a widespread sentiment of concern, uncertainty, and instability has prevailed in the sector ( McKinsey, 2020b );

- these adverse circumstances are vividly reflected on the abrupt share price and market value decline of leading listed cruise companies ( Fig. 4 ).

Cruise share returns (%) – Post COVID-19 impact.

The detrimental COVID-19 financial implications for cruise revenue, profits and the gloomy business prospects (risk of closure for several cruise companies) are underlined indeed by the highly volatile and dramatic collapse of share prices for the largest listed cruise groups (even by −130% on average in few days; Fig. 4 ). Indicatively, Carnival, Royal Caribbean and Norwegian cruise share prices declined sharply at $7.97, $24.36, and $8.40, respectively, as the virus burst (April 2), recording losses by 70–80% from the beginning of the year (share prices at $51.31, $134.65, and $58.83, respectively, on January 2). Cruise share prices, nevertheless, rebounded impressively recently, returning up at $14.33, $50.83, and $14.22, respectively (July 28), partly mitigating the earlier heavy losses.

6.2. Key managerial implications and recommendations

This study has undertaken a concise, focused, and updated financial performance evaluation of the cruise sector, based on a sample of leading cruise players. Surprisingly, to the authors' best knowledge, relevant studies remain extremely thin on this topic. This paper intends to partially fill this research gap and to offer a set of innovative contributions and managerial recommendations. Cruise companies have shown a consistently dynamic growth performance over recent years, rebounding impressively after the 2008 financial crisis impact. Cruise revenue and profitability are seen on a solid upward trend, diverging from commercial shipping companies. Critical financial performance indicators, such a ROE, ROA and ROIC ratios, are consistently high, reflecting efficient managerial investing, operating, and financing decisions. The leading cruise companies have ambitious and highly capital-intensive investment plans under development, with active newbuilding orderbooks for vessels of larger carrying capacity, expensive technological advances, and modern facilities to cater for diversified cruise passenger needs, complying at the same time with strict environmental conditions. As major international banks are seen to exit ship lending, a critical question remains as of potential alternative capital sources to finance these investments, assuming that cruise vessel construction costs typically range from $0.5 bln. to over $1.5 bln. The capital structure of the leading cruise companies demonstrates a balanced and healthy debt-equity mix, with dept-to-equity ratios and solvency ratios performing impressively.

The global pandemic has hit the cruise sector severely with destabilizing effects to many corporate players as well as to cruise-related businesses even at risk of fatal default. These fragile financial circumstances generate a set of critical managerial implications, recommendations, and potential actions for the cruise companies under pressure to support their business overcome the virus crisis, including the following:

- robust cash liquidity positions supported by the earlier impressive profitability are to benefit the most prudent, well prepared, and forward-looking cruise companies;

- in fact, heavy pressure on cruise revenue and profits is already apparent, as cruise cancellations, customer refunds, additional operational costs and widespread uncertainty have been escalating;

- cruise managers must inevitably proceed towards an extensive reassessment of their investment, financing, and operating plans with a view to curtail the earlier ambitious projects for larger costly newbuild cruise vessels;

- as the pandemic implications affect nearly all business sectors and liquidity turns scarce and expensive, financing strategies have to be redesigned, conveniently tailored under these adverse circumstances;

- the relatively attractive cruise company WACCs, estimated earlier in this study, are hard to maintain further, as funding is turning more expensive, typically in favor of the largest and best reputed players;

- the optimal capital structure mix remains of critical concern, as different capital sources bear different funding costs, diversified among competing cruise companies;

- as a result, the earlier robust and promising financial performance of the cruise companies, as depicted by the ROE, ROA, ROIC, WACC ratios, leverage exposure, solvency, earning per share and stock market performance, is highly unlikely to remain unaffected under the prevailing gloomy market circumstances;

- a vital short-term goal for cruise business is undoubtedly survival; this comes at a severe cost, as government intervention and extensive lending is seen to become imperative to keep cruise companies afloat;

- long term objectives of cruise companies should include the restoration of the disastrous reputational damage that has been caused by the virus effects on the broader cruise business.

Having said that, cruise business has in fact faced hard times and global crises in the past but managed to recover convincingly, demonstrating tough resilience, adaptability, and flexibility. This virus crisis, however, appears to be quite different. The critical question remains as to when the cruise industry is going to return into business operations again ( Calder, 2020 ). Unfortunately, there is no clear answer to that yet, as there are many uncertainties to make rational forecasts for the entire 2020. Fears are that this crisis will affect cruise revenues for a long time, particularly in the Asian region, as this is a dynamic market of growing importance for the cruise industry in recent years ( Moussali & Tsekoura, 2020 ; OMR Global, 2020 ). Obviously, these adverse implications are anticipated to have a tremendous financial impact on all cruise players, inducing downward adjustments in investment, financing, and profitability projections. However, it is for small cruise players that the implications are expected to be even more painful, forcing inevitably several of them to exit the market or to be taken over.

According to a recent KPMG report ( Giese, 2020 ), a set of direct responsive actions is under play by the cruise industry to keep future business intact, including bonus credit offers (110–125% of booking amount) instead of cash refunds, as an option to cruise passengers whose trips have been cancelled due to the pandemic, providing flexibility for future bookings. Based on recent UBS bank estimates ( Panetta, 2020 ), around 76% of the passengers whose cruises were cancelled due to pandemic have opted for a credit for future trips instead of a refund. Furthermore, based on a recent CLIA survey, 82% of cruisers indicate their interest in booking a cruise for their next vacation. Despite multiple outbreaks of COVID-19 and uncertainty over when sailing will reconvene, several reports record increased bookings for 2021 in comparison to 2019. This reflects a persisting interest of cruise passengers in continuing pursuing cruise travel and tourism services in the future, though it may be harder to convince first-time cruisers ( Giese, 2020 ; Panetta, 2020 ). At the same time, as most countries continue to fight against COVID-19 effects, the virus impact is anticipated to challenge the business model of several industries ( McKinsey, 2020c ). For the time being, there does not seem to be a clear timeline for the restart of cruise operations. To gain customer support after travel restrictions will have been lifted, companies consider promotion campaigns at reduced cruise package prices for 2021, to compete and revitalize cruise demand. In any case, the assessment of the post-COVID-19 impact on the global cruise business can be more accurately evaluated after the pandemic is over. This could well lead to a challenging follow-up empirical study.

Appendix A.

Source: Authors ‘compilation; www.cruiseindustrynews.com ( Cruiseindustrynews, 2020 ). A summary version is presented in Table 7 .

Author's statement

The authors confirm that their paper entitled ‘The Global Cruise Industry: Financial Performance Evaluation’ (RTMB-D-20-00143R1_R2) is the output of original research and it has not been published elsewhere, nor is it currently under consideration for publication elsewhere.

To the authors' view this manuscript is appropriate for publication in the Research in Transportation Business and Management – Special Issue on Cruise Shipping, Ports and Destinations (Cartagena 2020 Conference) because it covers an unresearched topic and contributes innovative empirical findings and useful policy recommendations.

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Baker M., Wurgler J. Market timing and capital structure. Journal of Finance. 2002; 57 (1):1–32. [ Google Scholar ]
Byung-Wook W. A dynamic game model of strategic capacity investment in the cruise line industry. Tourism Management. 2005; 26 (2):203–217. [ Google Scholar ]
Calder S. 2020. Coronavirus: When will cruises start again and should I book?, The independent (April 16) [ Google Scholar ]
Charlier J. The cruise shipping industry in the corporate mergers and overpanamax eras. A comparison with the container shipping industry. Revue Belge de Géographie. 2004;(4):433–460. [ Google Scholar ]
Chen J., Neuts B., Nijkamp P., Liu J. Demand determinants of cruise tourists in competitive markets: Motivation, preference and intention. Tourism Economics. 2016; 22 (2):227–253. [ Google Scholar ]
Clancy M. In: Cruise ship tourism (2nd ed.) Dowling R., Weeden C., editors. CAB International; 2017. Power and profits in the global cruise industry (Ch. 2) pp. 43–56. [ Google Scholar ]
CLIA . 2018. The contribution of the international cruise industry to the global economy in 2018, report, cruise line international association, Miami, Florida. [ Google Scholar ]
CLIA . 2019. Cruise trends industry outlook, report, cruise line international association, Miami, Florida. [ Google Scholar ]
CLIA . 2020. State of the cruise industry outlook, report, cruise line international association, Miami, Florida. [ Google Scholar ]
Cruiseindustrynews Cruise Ship Order Book 2019–2027. 2020. http://www.cruiseindustrynews.com/cruisenews/cruise-ship-orderbook.html Cruise Industry News, posted on May 15.
Daly J., Fernandez-Stark K. Duke University; 2017. Barbados in the cruise tourism global value chain, technical report, global value chains Centre. [ Google Scholar ]
Donaldson G. 1961. Corporate debt capacity: A study of corporate debt policy and the determination of corporate debt capacity, Boston, Harvard. [ Google Scholar ]
Dowling R. CAB International; Cambridge: 2006. Cruise ship tourism. [ Google Scholar ]
Drobetz W., Gounopoulos D., Merikas A., Schroder H. Capital structure decisions of globally-listed shipping companies. Transportation Research – Part E. 2013; 52 :49–76. [ Google Scholar ]
Florida Caribbean Cruise Association . 2019. Cruise industry overview 2018, industry report, Miami, Florida. [ Google Scholar ]
Garin K.A. 2005. Devils on the deep Blue Sea: The dreams, schemes, and showdowns that built America’s cruise-ship empires, New York, Plume. [ Google Scholar ]
Giese M. COVID-19 impacts on global cruise industry: How is the cruise industry coping with the COVID −19 crisis? KPMG Report, posted on July 23. 2020. https://home.kpmg/xx/en/blogs/home/posts/2020/07/covid-19-impacts-on-global-cruise-industry.html
Hall A., Braithwaite R. Caribbean cruise tourism: A business of transnational partnerships. Tourism Management. 1990; 11 (4):339–347. [ Google Scholar ]
Hobson P. Analysis of the US cruise line industry. Tourism Management. 1993; 14 (6):453–462. [ Google Scholar ]
Hobson P. Increasing consolidation within the cruise line industry. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing. 1994; 2 (4):91–96. [ Google Scholar ]
Hovakimian A. Are observed capital structures determined by equity market timing? Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis. 2006; 41 (1):221–243. [ Google Scholar ]
Ito H., Hanaoka S., Kawasaki T. The cruise industry and the COVID-19 outbreak. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives. 2020; 5 :100–136. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Kisgen D. Credit ratings and capital structure. Journal of Finance. 2006; 61 (3):1035–1072. [ Google Scholar ]
Kiziellewicz J. Methods of raising funds for purchasing of new cruise ships by international corporations. International Journal of Management and Economics. 2017; 53 (2):69–83. [ Google Scholar ]
Klein R.A. Responsible cruise tourism: Issues of cruise tourism and sustainability. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management. 2011; 18 (1):107–116. [ Google Scholar ]
Koller T., Goedhart M., Wessels D. 7th ed. McKinsey & Company Inc; 2020. Valuation: Measuring and managing the value of companies. [ Google Scholar ]
Lester J., Weeden C. Stakeholders, the natural environment and the future of Caribbean cruise tourism. International Journal of Tourism Research. 2004; 6 :39–50. [ Google Scholar ]
McKinsey Managing and monitoring credit risk after the COVID-19 pandemic, Article, posted on July 31. 2020. https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/risk/our-insights/managing-and-monitoring-credit-risk-after-the-covid-19-pandemic?cid=other-eml-alt-mip-mck&hlkid=d3dc5ab195164ab19954a2c7203a037a&hctky=2577872&hdpid=cbb80600-b563-4c85-9556-10e61d36411a
McKinsey Consumer sentiment and behavior continue to reflect the uncertainty of the COVID-19 crisis, article, posted on July 8. 2020. https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/marketing-and-sales/our-insights/a-global-view-of-how-consumer-behavior-is-changing-amid-covid-19
McKinsey Banking models after COVID-19: Taking model-risk management to the next level, article, May 5. 2020. https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/risk/our-insights/banking-models-after-covid-19-taking-model-risk-management-to-the-next-level?cid=other-eml-alt-mip-mck&hlkid=2784fd8611e24462b62cacb72c4afccb&hctky=2577872&hdpid=cbb80600-b563-4c85-9556-10e61d36411a#
Modigliani F., Miller M. The cost of capital, corporation finance, and the theory of investment. American Economic Review. 1958; 48 :161–197. [ Google Scholar ]
Modigliani F., Miller M. Corporate income taxes and the cost of capital: A correction. American Εconomic Review. 1963; 53 :433–443. [ Google Scholar ]
Moussali M.A., Tsekoura I. COVID-19 marine: Cruise industry impact from coronavirus, Clyde and co report, posted on May 10. 2020. https://www.clydeco.com/insight/article/coronavirus-and-the-impact-on-the-cruise-industry
Myers S. The capital structure puzzle. Journal of Finance. 1984; 39 (3):574–592. [ Google Scholar ]
Myers S. Capital structure. Journal of Economic Perspectives. 2001; 15 (2):81–102. [ Google Scholar ]
Myers S., Majluf N. Corporate financing and investment decisions when firms have information those investors do not have. Journal of Financial Economics. 1984; 13 :187–221. [ Google Scholar ]
Nagarajan S. Carnival has its credit rating slashed as its return to the seas is likely crippled by an uptick in COVID-19 cases, business insider article, posted on June 24. 2020. https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/carnival-loses-investment-grade-rating-after-uptick-covid19-cases-2020-6-1029336911
OECD . Working Party on Shipbuilding; Paris: 2007. Report on ship financing, organisation for economic cooperation and development. [ Google Scholar ]
OMR Global Impact of COVID-19 on global cruise industry, and forecasts: 2019–2025, report. 2020. https://www.omrglobal.com/industry-reports/impact-of-covid-19-on-global-cruise-industry (April)
Pallis A., Parola F., Satta G., Notteboom T. Private entry in cruise terminal operations in the Mediterranean Sea. Maritime Economics & Logistics. 2018; 20 (1):1–28. [ Google Scholar ]
Panetta G. Cruise ship bookings for 2021 are already on the rise despite multiple COVID-19 outbreaks, business insider article, posted on April 12. 2020. https://www.businessinsider.com/cruise-ship-bookings-are-increasing-for-2021-despite-coronavirus-2020-4
Research and Markets Impact of COVID-19 on the global cruise industry, market report, June. 2020. https://www.researchandmarkets.com/reports/5017152/impact-of-covid-19-on-the-global-cruise-industry#rela0-5010882
Richter H. Cruising post-COVID-19: Lessons and challenges for the cruise ship industry, report, Sustainalytics, a Morningstar Company, posted on June 24. 2020. https://www.sustainalytics.com/esg-blog/cruising-post-covid-19-lessons-and-challenges-for-the-cruise-ship-industry/
Satta G., Parola F., Penco L., Persico L., Musso E. Motivation-based segmentation in the cruise industry: An exploratory study. International Journal of Transport Economics. 2016; 43 (1–2):155–184. [ Google Scholar ]
Ship Technology The cruise industry will struggle to cope with the effects of Covid-1, report, posted on March 18. 2020. https://www.ship-technology.com/comment/cruise-industry-effects-covid-19/
Syriopoulos T. In: Maritime transport: The Greek Paradigm, research in transportation economics, 21. Pallis A., editor. 2007. Financing Greek shipping: Modern instruments, methods and markets (Ch. 6) pp. 171–219. [ Google Scholar ]
Syriopoulos T. In: The handbook of maritime economics and business. 2nd ed. Grammenos C.T., editor. Routledge; Informa Law: 2010. Shipping finance and international capital markets (Ch. 28) pp. 811–849. [ Google Scholar ]
Syriopoulos T., Bakos G. Investor herding behaviour in globally listed shipping stock returns. Maritime Policy & Management. 2019; 46 (5):545–564. [ Google Scholar ]
Teye V., Leclerc D. The white Caucasian and ethnic minority cruise markets: Some motivational perspectives. Journal of Vacation Marketing. 2003; 9 (3):227–242. [ Google Scholar ]
UNWTO Impact of COVID-19 on global tourism made clear as UNWTO counts the cost of standstill, UNWTO Report, posted on July 28. 2020. https://www.unwto.org/news/impact-of-covid-19-on-global-tourism-made-clear-as-unwto-counts-the-cost-of-standstill
Veronneau S., Roy J. Global service supply chains: An empirical study of current practices and challenges of a cruise line corporation. Tourism Management. 2009; 30 (1):128–139. [ Google Scholar ]
Veronneau S., Roy J. In: The business and Management of Ocean Cruises. Vogel M., Papathanassis A., Wolber B., editors. CAB International; 2011. Cruise Lines’ purchasing and logistics management (Ch. 7) pp. 90–100. [ Google Scholar ]
Veronneau S., Roy J. In: The Blackwell companion to maritime economics. Wayne T.K., editor. Blackwell; 2012. Cruise lines and passengers (Ch. 8) pp. 138–160. [ Google Scholar ]
Veronneau S., Roy J., Beaulieu M. Cruise ship suppliers: A field study of the supplier relationship characteristics in a service supply chain. Tourism Management Perspectives. 2015; 16 :76–84. [ Google Scholar ]
WAC Cruise ships on order 2017–2025 (10th revision), Amem communication. 2019. www.amem.at
Wie B. A dynamic game model of strategic capacity investment in the cruise line industry. Tourism Management. 2005; 26 (2):203–217. [ Google Scholar ]
Wondirad A. Retracing the past, comprehending the present and contemplating the future of cruise tourism through a meta-analysis of journal publications. Marine Policy. 2019; 108 doi: 10.1016/j.marpol.2019.103618. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Wood R. Caribbean cruise tourism: Globalization at sea. Annals of Tourism Research. 2000; 27 (2):345–370. [ Google Scholar ]
Wood R. In: Tourism and transport: Issues and agenda for the new millennium. Lumsdom L., Page S., editors. Elsevier; 2004. Cruise ships: Deterritorialized destinations (Ch. 10) pp. 133–146. [ Google Scholar ]

Travel, Tourism & Hospitality ›

Leisure Travel

Industry-specific and extensively researched technical data (partially from exclusive partnerships). A paid subscription is required for full access.

Revenue of the cruise industry Singapore 2018-2028

Revenue of the cruise market in Singapore from 2018 to 2028 (in million U.S. dollars)

Immediate access to 1m+ statistics
Incl. source references
Download as PNG, PDF, XLS, PPT

Additional Information

Show sources information Show publisher information Use Ask Statista Research Service

February 2024

2018 to 2028

Definition:

Additional Information:

The main performance indicators of the Cruises market are revenues, average revenue per user (ARPU), users and user penetration rates. Additionally, online and offline sales channel shares display the distribution of online and offline bookings. The ARPU refers to the average revenue one user generates per year while the revenue represents the total booking volume. Revenues are generated through both online and offline sales channels and include exclusively B2C revenues. Users represent the aggregated number of guests. Each user is only counted once per year.

The booking volume includes all booked travels made by users from the selected region, independent of the departure and arrival. The scope includes domestic and outbound travel.

For further information on the data displayed, refer to the info button right next to each box.

Statistics on " Accommodation in Singapore "

Share of the GDP of the tourism sector in Singapore 2013-2028
GDP from the accommodation industry in Singapore 2014-2023
Revenue of accommodation as share of tourism receipts Singapore 2022, by country
CPI of accommodation in Singapore 2014-2023
Hotel market revenue in Singapore 2018-2028
Hotels ARPU Singapore 2018-2028
Number of hotel users Singapore 2018-2028
Hotel sales channels Singapore 2018-2028
Number of hotels Singapore 2016-2023
Distribution of hotels in Singapore 2023, by size
Revenue per available hotel room (RevPar) in Singapore 2013-2022
Revenue of the vacation rental industry Singapore 2018-2028
Number of vacation rental users Singapore 2018-2028
Vacation rentals ARPU Singapore 2018-2028
Vacation rental sales channels Singapore 2018-2028
Number of Airbnb room listings in Singapore 2023, by room type
Number of Airbnb room listings in Singapore 2023, by length of stay
Backpackers hostels in Singapore 2016-2023
Backpackers hostels in Singapore 2023, by area
Backpackers hostel rooms in Singapore 2016-2023
Cruises market ARPU Singapore 2018-2028
Cruises sales channels Singapore 2018-2028
Cruise users Singapore 2018-2028

Other statistics that may interest you Accommodation in Singapore

Premium Statistic Share of the GDP of the tourism sector in Singapore 2013-2028
Premium Statistic GDP from the accommodation industry in Singapore 2014-2023
Premium Statistic Revenue of accommodation as share of tourism receipts Singapore 2022, by country
Premium Statistic CPI of accommodation in Singapore 2014-2023
Premium Statistic Hotel market revenue in Singapore 2018-2028
Premium Statistic Hotels ARPU Singapore 2018-2028
Premium Statistic Number of hotel users Singapore 2018-2028
Premium Statistic Hotel sales channels Singapore 2018-2028
Premium Statistic Number of hotels Singapore 2016-2023
Premium Statistic Distribution of hotels in Singapore 2023, by size
Premium Statistic Standard average occupancy rate (AOR) in Singapore 2013-2022
Premium Statistic Revenue per available hotel room (RevPar) in Singapore 2013-2022

Vacation rentals and B&Bs

Premium Statistic Revenue of the vacation rental industry Singapore 2018-2028
Premium Statistic Number of vacation rental users Singapore 2018-2028
Premium Statistic Vacation rentals ARPU Singapore 2018-2028
Premium Statistic Vacation rental sales channels Singapore 2018-2028
Premium Statistic Number of Airbnb room listings in Singapore 2023, by room type
Premium Statistic Number of Airbnb room listings in Singapore 2023, by length of stay
Premium Statistic Backpackers hostels in Singapore 2016-2023
Premium Statistic Backpackers hostels in Singapore 2023, by area
Premium Statistic Backpackers hostel rooms in Singapore 2016-2023
Premium Statistic Revenue of the cruise industry Singapore 2018-2028
Premium Statistic Cruises market ARPU Singapore 2018-2028
Premium Statistic Cruises sales channels Singapore 2018-2028
Premium Statistic Cruise users Singapore 2018-2028
Premium Statistic Number of cruise ship arrivals to Singapore 2013-2022
Premium Statistic Number of cruise ship passenger arrivals Singapore 2013-2022

Further Content: You might find this interesting as well

Eye on the Tropics
Trending Now (Opens in new window)
Central Florida Spotlight
Entertainment
Politics and Elections
Space and Technology
Central Florida Gets Real
9 in Your Neighborhood
Hour by Hour
Watch Live: WFTV Now
WFTV 24/7 News
Weather 24/7
The $pend $mart Stream
Law & Crime
Curiosity NOW
9 Investigates
Back to School (Opens in new window)
Steals and Deals (Opens in new window)
TV 27 Community Connection
Forever Family
Uplifting News (Opens in new window)
Health & Wellness
Care Connect
WFTV's Law Talk
Home Experts
Central Florida Guide (Opens in new window)
The Daily Two
Health Wellness (Parrish Healthcare)
Advertise With Us
Meet Our Team
Submit a Tip (Opens in new window)
WFTV Mobile Apps (Opens in new window)
Newsletter Sign-up (Opens in new window)
WFTV Listings
TV 27 TV Listings
Jobs at WFTV/WRDQ (Opens in new window)
WFTV Member Help
Visitor Agreement
Privacy Policy
Share Your Pics!

Ford's 1Q net income falls 24% as combustion engine unit sees sales and revenue decline

Earns Ford FILE - A worker walks past neon signs for Ford at the Auto Shanghai 2023 show in Shanghai, Tuesday, April 18, 2023. Ford reports their earnings on Wednesday, April 24, 2024. (AP Photo/Ng Han Guan, File) (Ng Han Guan/AP)

DETROIT — (AP) — Ford Motor Co.'s first-quarter net income fell 24% from a year ago as the company's combustion engine vehicle unit saw revenue and sales decline.

The Dearborn, Michigan, automaker said Wednesday it made $1.33 billion from January through March, compared with $1.76 billion a year earlier.

Excluding one-time items, Ford made 49 cents per share, enough to beat analyst estimates of 43 cents, according to FactSet.

Revenue for the quarter was up 3.2% to $42.78 billion, but that fell short of Wall Street estimates of $42.93 billion.

Ford Blue, the combustion engine unit, made $905 million before taxes, down $1.7 billion from a year ago. Revenue was down 13%. The company blamed the declines on lower inventories and selection of F-150 pickups due to updating factories for a new model.

Chief Financial Officer John Lawler told reporters Wednesday that Ford will recover sales volume and selection later in the year, positioning the company for strong earnings.

Ford Pro, the commercial vehicle unit, offset some of the decline, posting pretax earnings of just over $3 billion, more than double the same period last year. Pro revenue was up 36%.

“We’re very profitable now, but we believe that this business will be profitable and durable for many years to come,” CEO Jim Farley said of the commercial unit.

But Model e, the electric vehicle business, lost $1.3 billion, almost $600 million more than the first quarter of last year. The company said it's cutting costs, but those have been erased by electric vehicle price declines across the industry.

Farley said the EV business is the “main drag” on Ford’s performance right now. But he pledged further cost cuts, and profits on the next generation of electric vehicles coming out in the next two to three years. A small team at the company is working on underpinnings for smaller more affordable EVs, the company said.

“We're going to build a sustainably profitable EV business," Farley said. "And it needs to return the cost of capital on its own and not be subsidized.”

The company held its full-year pretax earnings forecast at $10 billion to $12 billion, but Lawler predicted it would be toward the high end of the range.

It lowered an estimate of full-year capital spending to $8 billion to $9 billion, down from earlier guidance of $8 billion to $9.5 billion. The company said the reduced spending shows its commitment to using capital efficiently.

Lawler said Ford expects U.S. auto prices to fall 2% to 3% this year, but said that drop didn’t materialize in the first quarter. Prices, he said, held up across the industry.

Still, Ford expects the price drop to happen later in the year.

“So far, the consumer stayed relative strong, industry has remained strong,” he said.

Shares of Ford rose 3% in trading after Wednesday's closing bell.

Marion County deputies ask for help finding woman reported missing under ‘suspicious circumstances’

What should you do if you encounter a wrong-way driver?

‘Doesn’t sit right’: Cruise line raises price by thousands after consumer confirms booking

Records: Man killed after shooting at police in downtown Orlando shot at his ex earlier this week

Mega Millions: $1 million winning ticket sold in Kissimmee

Gilead posts quarterly loss on acquisition charge, revenue rises 5%

Medium Text

Gilead Sciences Inc pharmaceutical company is seen during the outbreak of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19), in California

Company Gilead Sciences Inc Follow

Reporting By Deena Beasley Editing by Bill Berkrot

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. New Tab , opens new tab

Business Chevron

Japanese national flag waves at the Bank of Japan building in Tokyo

BOJ keeps rates steady, projects inflation staying near 2% in coming years

The Bank of Japan kept interest rates unchanged on Friday and issued fresh estimates projecting inflation to stay near its 2% target in the next three years, signalling its readiness to hike borrowing costs later this year.

Passersby walk in front of an electric screen displaying Japan's Nikkei share average outside a brokerage in Tokyo

You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser to improve your experience.

Royal Caribbean lifts annual profit view as cruise demand soars

(Reuters) – Royal Caribbean Group on Thursday raised its annual profit forecast for a second time, benefiting from record demand for cruises and robust onboard spending.

Shares of the cruise operator rose about 5% in premarket trade, as the company also beat first-quarter revenue estimates.

The boom in demand for cruise vacations has sustained through an inflationary environment as people opted for vacations at sea over land-based alternatives that are often more expensive.

The industry is expecting 35.7 million passengers to set sail this year, a 20% increase from pre-pandemic levels, according to estimates by the Cruise Lines International Association.

Cruise operators also plan to hike ticket prices and encourage onboard spending.

Royal Caribbean now expects annual adjusted profit between $10.70 and $10.90 per share, compared with its earlier forecast of profit between $9.90 and $10.10 per share.

It reported first-quarter revenue of $3.73 billion, compared with market expectations of $3.69 billion, according to LSEG data.

(Reporting by Juveria Tabassum and Doyinsola Oladipo; Editing by Devika Syamnath)

Current Weather

Weather information is not currently available at this location.

Tesla profits drop 55%, company says EV sales ‘under pressure’ from hybrids

Tesla profits fell 55% to $1.13 billion in the first quarter from the same year-ago period as a protracted EV price-cutting strategy and “ several unforeseen challenges” cut into the automaker’s bottom line.

Tesla reported revenue of $21.3 billion in the first quarter, a 9% drop from the first quarter of 2023. Analysts polled by Yahoo Finance expected earnings of $0.51 per share on $22.15 billion in revenue. Tesla reported operating income of $1.2 billion in the first quarter, a 54% decrease from the same year-ago period.

The company said in its Q1 earnings report that it experienced “numerous challenges” in the first quarter, including the Red Sea conflict and the arson attack at Gigafactory Berlin and the gradual ramp of the updated Model 3 at its factory in Fremont, California. Tesla also noted that global EV sales continue to be under pressure as many carmakers prioritize hybrids over EVs. On the upside, that hybrid approach has meant automakers continue to buy regulatory credits; Tesla earned $442 million in zero emissions tax credits in the first quarter.

“The EV adoption rate globally is under pressure and a lot of other auto manufacturers are pulling back on EVs and pursuing plug in hybrids instead,” Tesla CEO Elon Musk said in opening remarks on the earnings call. “We believe this is not the right strategy, and electric vehicles will ultimately dominate the market.”

Shares pop on future promises

The results, posted after markets closed Tuesday, sent shares up as much as 12% following the release as investors appeared to be more focused on Tesla’s forward-looking remarks about future products, including an upended product roadmap to bring multiple cheaper vehicles to market by 2025.

Despite the downward trend in profits, Tesla used the first-quarter report to focus on the future, namely about using AI to make advances in autonomy and the introduction of new products, including those built on a next-generation vehicle platform. The company spent $1.1 billion on research and development in the first quarter, a 49% increase from the same quarter in 2023.

Musk emphasized that despite the downward pressure, the company was focused on — and investing in — the future. Specifically, the company is accelerating work on a new vehicle lineup with production expected in early 2025, if not late this year, Musk said.

“These new vehicles, including more affordable models, will use aspects of the next-generation platform as well as aspects of our current platforms,” he said. “And we’ll be able to produce on the same manufacturing lines as our current vehicle lineup.”

The cost of price cuts

Tesla has seen EV sales grow over the past several years, topping out to a new record of 1.8 million vehicles in 2023. But the company’s profits have suffered thanks to repeated price cuts that started in late 2022.

While those price cuts did provide a temporary bump in sales, it hasn’t had a lasting effect. Tesla delivered 386,810 vehicles in the first quarter of 2024, down 20% from the 484,507 it delivered in the final quarter of 2023. This wasn’t just a quarter-over-quarter blip either; Tesla delivered 8.5% fewer cars than the first quarter of 2023. Automotive gross margins, excluding regulatory credits, shrank to 16.35% in the first quarter compared to 18.96% in the same year-ago period.

Tesla warned in January that growth of its vehicle sales “may be notably lower” in 2024, noting at that time it was between “two major growth waves” and prepping for the launch of a new vehicle platform to build a smaller EV that costs around $25,000. The company has also been prepping a “robotaxi” built on the same platform. In the meantime, Tesla’s only new model is the expensive (and fussy) Cybertruck ; the company has launched new variants on existing models, including the Tesla Model 3 Performance .

Musk said during the company’s earnings call in January the smaller and cheaper EV would go into production in late 2025 at the company’s factory in Texas and eventually expand to a yet-to-be-built factory in Mexico.

Three months later, Musk appears to have changed the company’s low-cost EV playbook. Musk reportedly replaced the plan for a low-cost EV purpose-built on the new platform. Instead, he now wants to plow headlong into the robotaxi, which will be revealed in some capacity in August, while also launching “new models” that somehow use what’s being developed for that new platform.

Less than two weeks after announcing the robotaxi launch date, Musk oversaw a 10% reduction in headcount and a restructuring that puts autonomy in sharp focus. Two high-profile executives — Drew Baglino, Tesla’s SVP of Powertrain and Energy, and Rohan Patel, VP of Public Policy and Business Development — also left the company. Tesla CFO Vaibhav Taneja said Tuesday during the earnings call that the savings generated from the workforce reduction is expected to be well in excess of $ 1 billion on an annual basis.

Other revenue sources

While automotive revenues fell, there were gains in other parts of the business, notably energy storage.

The company reported that energy storage deployments increased to a record 4.1 GWh. That pushed revenue for energy generation (meaning solar) and storage to 1.6 billion in the first quarter, a 7% increase from the same quarter last year. Tesla noted that most of that growth came from increased Megapack deployments, which was partially offset by a decrease in solar installs.

The company also reported $2.28 billion in revenue from services, including capital generated from its Supercharger network. That revenue source should increase as more automakers, including Ford, GM, Rivian and VW adopt Tesla’s technology known as North American Charging Standard.

Tesla Semi delayed

While Tesla pushes forward on autonomy and a new product roadmap, other projects continue to be delayed. Mass production of the Tesla Semi, which was first revealed in November 2017 , is now being pushed out another year.

The Tesla Semi, which was originally planned to go into production in 2019, has been repeatedly delayed. The company did reveal a production-ready Semi in December 2022 and delivered a handful to Pepsi, its first customer, for a pilot. But it has yet to scale up volume production.

Last June, Musk said the company wouldn’t begin producing the Class 8 big rig until the end of 2024 . The first production Semi vehicles are now planned for late 2025 with external customers starting in 2026, according to Tesla.

Tesla is finalizing the engineering for the Semi to allow for “super cost effective high production,” according to information shared on the call. The company shared in its first-quarter earnings report that it has started construction of a Tesla Semi factory near its so-called Gigafactory in Sparks, Nevada.

We've detected unusual activity from your computer network

To continue, please click the box below to let us know you're not a robot.

Why did this happen?

Please make sure your browser supports JavaScript and cookies and that you are not blocking them from loading. For more information you can review our Terms of Service and Cookie Policy .

For inquiries related to this message please contact our support team and provide the reference ID below.

Cruise Industry News Annual Report and Industry Growth Forecast

Preview Pages
Table of Contents PDF

The Cruise Industry News Annual Report 2022 is the only information resource of its kind — presenting the entire worldwide cruise industry in 400 pages with cruise industry analytics and statistics , in print and PDF formats. Click here to order.

About the Annual Report:

The 400-page report covers everything from new ships on order to supply-and-demand scenarios from the early 1990s through 2027+.

Plus there is a future outlook through 2027 , completely independent cruise industry statistics , growth projections for each cruise line, cruise industry market reports , and detailed ship deployment by region and market, covering all the cruise lines.

Projections for capacity growth going forward take into account pandemic effects, ship delivery timeline adjustments and more.

Bought by suppliers, ports banks, financial analysts, cruise lines, and more. Useful in planning budgets and for key industry stakeholders for future forecasting.

There is also a comprehensive directory of cruise lines as well as their key executives. There is also historical data exclusive to Cruise Industry News’ 30+ years in the business.

If you are looking for a complete past, present and future global briefing on the cruise industry, look no further.

All this and more for $1195 in the United States; $1295 to all international destinations.. In addition, a PDF version is available.

The Annual Report has been published since 1988.

Preview Pages of the Annual Report | 2022 Table of Contents |

• If you are a cruise line executive: CINA 2022 gives you a total and objective overview of the industry, including profiles and growth forecasts for all the cruise lines through at least 2027.

• If you are a financial analyst : CINA 2022 gives you independent company and market growth forecasts, including supply/demand scenarios through 2027.

• If you are a port executive : CINA 2022 tells you about each line’s ship deployments in your region, and tracks the growth of each port and each sailing region.

• If you are a supplier : CINA 2022 gives you the information you need to make informed decisions about your involvement in the cruise industry.

• If you are a new supplier: CINA 2022 gives you the market intelligence and sales leads you need to target the industry.

Click here to order.

Who buys this report? Cruise lines, ports, suppliers, accounting firms, consulting companies, investment banks, think-tanks, universities and many more!

Macro Level: Big picture data and cruise industry analytics for the major and minor players, showing their footprints in 2021 and projected out through 2027.

Micro Level: Additional data includes just about everything pertaining to deployment, berth breakdown, capacity projections, historical trends and much more. 400 pages of detailed information at your fingertips.

Brand Level Data : CINA goes ship by ship, brand by brand, with data reflecting market capacity, berths, market share and more.

Ship by Ship: Every ship in the global cruise fleet is accounted for in our research, from the latest mega ships to niche expedition vessels.

Region Analysis: Each major cruise region is broken down by brand, with number of ships, projected market capacity and market shares, with past data showing trends.

Get the latest breaking cruise news . Sign up.

54 Ships | 122,002 Berths | $36 Billion | View

Highlights:

Mkt. Overview
Record Year
Refit Schedule
PDF Download
Order Today

2033 Industry Outlook
All Operators
Easy to Use
Pre-Order Offer
Advertising
Cruise News
Magazine Articles
Quarterly Magazine
Annual Report
Email Newsletter
Executive Guide
Digital Reports

Privacy Overview

Regent Seven Seas Cruises

Best of Moscow by high speed train

By shuguley , February 15, 2014 in Regent Seven Seas Cruises

Link to comment

Share on other sites.

If you are considering this on the 2015 June Baltic cruise on Voyager; my suggestion is don't. There is so much to do in St. Petersburg and although a train is one of my favorite ways to travel the time would be far better spent in St. P.

Thanks for the advice. Yes, this would be on the Voyager during the 2015 season but not yet sure exactly which cruise.

We did the Moscow excursion "on a different luxury line", but from your brief description it sounds very much like the same trip, so I will operate on that assumption. It is a VERY long day! We left the ship at 5:30 AM and returned at 12:30 AM. The highspeed train trip is comfortable, and while they call it "Business Class" it does not compare well to the equivalent class on say Rail Europe. When we did it in 2011, we did have highspeed both ways, and the trip back seemed much longer as the adrenaline and excitement had worn off!:D

Moscow itself is not that terribly different from any other big city in the world, but this Cold War kid never thought he would ever stand in Red Square, never mind walk the grounds of The Kremlin, or tour The Kremlin Palace, or see (but not visit) Lenin's Tomb, or visit The Armoury. But he did, and he loved every minute of it! Yes, it is a long day, and you barely scratch a scratch on the surface, but it is worth it. There is a tremendous amount to see in St. Petersburg, but every Baltic cruise goes to St. Petersburg, so you can go back if you choose to. Not every cruiseline offers you the chance to see Moscow.

I have not personally done this tour, but our last time in St Petersburg, the private guide that we hired for a day was leading the regent tour to Moscow on the high speed train the next day. He said it was way better than the previous alternative, which was flying to Moscow and back. He said that you actually got to Moscow faster because you didn't have to deal with airline checkin etc. it did seem like a very long day to me, and there is so much to see and do in st. Petersburg that I didn't consider doing it.

countflorida

We toured to Moscow from St. Petersburg via the hi-speed SAPSAN train last September, from a Baltic cruise on the Oceania Marina. You need to have a two-night, three day port call in St. Petersburg to take this tour because the tour typically leaves the ship around 5:00 - 5:30 AM and doesn't return until after midnight the next day. We didn't take the ship's tour; we made private arrangements with TravelAllRussia for three days of touring, the first and third days in St. Petersburg and the second day the tour to Moscow by train. Our cost for the private tour for three days was about the same as what the ship charged for the excursion to Moscow alone. There are a number of private tour agencies that operate in St. Petersburg and offer the Moscow train tours; we would strongly recommend them over the ship's tours.

All three days had private guides with car and driver. The second day, the driver picked us up at the ship and took us to the train, but we were alone on the train, and met in Moscow by the guide on the station platform. After our tour and dinner, we were brought back to the train and after the return train trip met by the driver and taken back to the ship. Because you are alone on the train you must have your own Russian visas.

If this is your first visit to St. Petersburg, I would agree there is much more to see there. We found Moscow somewhat a disappointment, particularly Red Square. The Kremlin and the cathedral in Red Square were also worth seeing. But the best thing we saw was the Moscow subway! I worked for the Washington Metro system back in the 1980s as it grew from 40 to 80 miles and although I was in the computer area, I learned a lot about the challenges of running a subway system. We used the Moscow system to get across the city from where we had dinner to the train station, and I was amazed at the cleanliness', speed of operation, the short headways maintained, and the courtesy of everyone involved. A very impressive experience!

We had been to St. Petersburg before, and so had the time to take a day and go to Moscow. Also, I really like trains, and the SAPSAN is a German train set running on Russian rails. Seats are like first class domestic air, spacious but not too plush or comfortable, but with enough room. Not too much recline, and almost 8 hours on the train in two shots is a lot for an old man. They come through and sell drinks, candy, etc. but the sellers don't speak English and no one around us helped, so we had just poor coffee once coming, and brought stuff with us for the trip back. Not too much to see from the train either, particularly on the return when it is night the whole way.

If you decide to go, take a private tour and avoid the overly expensive ship's tour. I'm glad we did it, but wouldn't bother to repeat the tour; we've seen Moscow.

Thanks so much to all of you for the thorough and thought insight. Yhe information you have provided is most helpful.

countflorida: Your detailed post is very helpful. We are not quite ready for a Baltic cruise but should do so within a year. Time enough to do our pre travel research, bookings and visa gathering.:) Thank you!

Emperor Norton

Sure would appreciate someone who has taken "Best of Moscow by high speed train" from St. Petersburg could please share their impressions of this shore excursion. From the description this sounds like a very long day. Wondering how the 4 hour train trip was in terms of accommodations, etc. Also what time did you leave the ship and what time at night did you return? Were both legs of the trip on the high speed rail (I read that slower trains also travel the same tracks)? My wife and I are considering this excursion. We thought that if we are making all the effort to go to Russia then how could we pass up going to Moscow, walking in Red Square, seeing St. Basil, etc.

I did this on Seabourn. IMO DONT. Take Aeroflop (er Aeroflot). The train has non folding seats where you are literally knee to knee with your fellow passenger (facing each other). Further they don't believe in air conditioning. It's also the worlds slowed bullet train. I think I would have found more enjoyment wandering around the St. Petersburg and Moscow airports.

Countflorida,

This is a little off topic,, however we had planned a river cruise in Russia but decided we would rather stay on land and have booked about two weeks with Travel-All-Russia using the private guide and driver. I'm curious as to how you found them as a tour company.

The guides they provided were fine. We had a different guide each of the days in St. Petersburg, but both were flexible, pleasant, knowledgeable and spoke English very well, as did the guide in Moscow, incidentally. She was a bit aloof, distant, not too friendly, but otherwise fine. In fact, she was the one who suggested taking the Metro, which unexpectedly became one of the highlights of the Moscow excursion. If I have a complaint with AllTravelRussia, it is with their plan and its execution (more later).

I had requested emphasis on World War II (in Russia, the Great Patriotic War) sites and info. In scheduling us, they weren't careful about dates and a couple of the sites we wanted to see were scheduled on the third day, after we'd been to Moscow. But both sites were closed that day of the week, and that info was readily available, right on web sites describing them. Also, the included meals (lunches in St. Pete, dinner in Moscow) were not what we asked for: light meals with some choices, so we could avoid things we didn't like and choose things we did like. My request was ignored; we were given full Russian meals with a fixed menu, no choice. On the first day, a fish dish was the entre, but I am allergic to fish. Fortunately, I had the e-mail I'd sent with me and showed it to the guide, and she was able to change my entre to chicken, which was very good actually. But we didn't want a 3-4 course lunches or dinner (in Moscow). We had the guide drop the lunch the third day, although we never got any credit or refund. But, particularly in contrast to the ship's tours, the prices were so reasonable we didn't worry too much about it.

The people who were on the ship's tour to Moscow saw us boarding the same train for which they were forced to queue up and wait on the way back, and asked us what we had done. I was candid and open so they were not happy when I explained what we had arranged and particularly what it had cost. Also, when we returned to the ship, we found they had laid on a late supper for those who had gone to Moscow, so up we went and had something. Well, it turns out the late supper was supposed to be just for those on the ship's tour, but we and others on 'independent' tours, there were a dozen or more of us, crashed the party, actually got there first, and they didn't realize it until the larger group arrived and there weren't enough tables/places set. By that time, the 'independents' had all gotten served and were eating; what could they do?

A couple from the larger group sat down with us and asked us about our tour, and they were the ones I told about our arrangement and its cost. They turned to others who’d been with them and announced the details, loudly enough so the whole room heard, which started a lot of bitching and complaining. I gathered they weren't very happy with the ship's tour to begin with, and this was the straw that broke the camel's back. We finished up and beat it out of there, but overheard later that one of the excursion staff came to check on something and ran into a real mess. I caught a cold on the trip, which forced me to bed the second day following in Tallinn, so by the time we reappeared we heard about the contretemps' but apparently no one recalled who started it, thankfully.

Because of what happened to us, I would probably not use AllTravelRussia if I were to go again, or if I did, I would be sure to get confirmation of every detail of the tour. They do have good reviews generally, and we were certainly helped by their visa department and liked the guides and drivers. Their weakness, I say now with full 20:20 hindsight, is that once the sales person who plans the tour, sells it to you and collects your money, he (or she) transfers the plan to their Russia office for implementation; there is no follow-up to make sure it gets done right. And that is where our problems arose; we paid for a custom tour but got a standard package with a few destinations switched, and no one checked them out, even to see when they were open the day we were scheduled to go. If you check every detail that’s important to you, it should be OK, but that’s a hell of a way to have to do business, in my opinion.

Thank you for the 20/20 hindsight observation on your Russian tour operator, and better priced than the ship's excursion cost.

Thanks very much for the feedback.

We had the same experience as you so far as price. We originally booked a Viking Cruise but, hearing some things about the river cruises that made us unhappy, looked into other options. T-A-R cost the same or less than a cruise and had us in hotels for 11 days. We opted for the private tour. They have three tour levels, based on hotels. We originally opted for the four star as it did not cost much more than the three star hotels. Finally we decided to throw it all in and upgraded to five star. In Moscow we will be at the newly opened Kempinsky which is two blocks from Red Square. In St. Petersburg it is the Grand Hotel Europe, one of the most vaunted luxury hotels in Russia. Location is important for us as the tours use up only part of the day so being in the center of everything for our independent touring is important. As with many other cities, the less you pay, the farther out of the center of town you are.

We have been working with our salesman in D.C. and he seems to get back to us with the changes we want. He recently returned from Russia so is up on everything. When I asked they said they paid the full TA commission if I wanted so I got my usual TA on board so he is watching our back and giving us that extra level of comfort. He also set up our air, which I know pays him little or nothing, and got us business class for much less than T-A-R wanted for economy, though it took working for a while with a consolidator. He's happy to get his 10 percent on this trip without having booked it. He also took care of the trip insurance. We've been doing a lot of research on the CC sister site Trip Advisor and will write a report there. We will, I guess, become a source of info for CC members after having spent 5 days in Moscow and 6 in SP.

4 months later...

scubacruiserx2

Anybody considering a day trip to Moscow from St. Petersburg on the Sapsan may want to look at our travelogue filled with pictures.

http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=1927687

Very informative. Thanks dor sharing. Jeff

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in

Welcome to Cruise Critic
ANNOUNCEMENT: Set Sail Beyond the Ordinary with Oceania Cruises
ANNOUNCEMENT: The Widest View in the Whole Wide World
New Cruisers
Cruise Lines “A – O”
Cruise Lines “P – Z”
River Cruising
Cruise Critic News & Features
Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
Special Interest Cruising
Cruise Discussion Topics
UK Cruising
Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
Canadian Cruisers
North American Homeports
Ports of Call
Cruise Conversations

Announcements

New to Cruise Critic? Join our Community!

Write Your Own Amazing Review !

Click this gorgeous photo by member SUPERstar777 to share your review!

Features & News

LauraS · Started 11 hours ago

LauraS · Started 12 hours ago

LauraS · Started 17 hours ago

LauraS · Started Wednesday at 08:38 PM

Existing user? Sign in OR Create an Account
Find Your Roll Call
Meet & Mingle
Community Help Center
All Activity
Member Photo Albums
Meet & Mingle Photos
Favorite Cruise Memories
Cruise Food Photos
Cruise Ship Photos
Ports of Call Photos
Towel Animal Photos
Amazing, Funny & Totally Awesome Cruise Photos
Write a Review
Live Cruise Reports
Member Cruise Reviews
Create New...

IMAGES

Royal Caribbean Cruises' Revenue by Segment (2016-2023)
Cruise lines set sail toward sales recovery
Cruise Industry to Generate $6.6B in Revenue in 2021, Almost Five Times
Cruise industry stands to lose almost $20bn in revenue, study finds
Cruise Market Size, Share, Trends And Growth Report, 2030
Royal Caribbean Cruises: revenue by segment 2023

VIDEO

Cruise Line Revenue Management
CRUISE SHIP COMPANY THAT IS HIRING NOW

COMMENTS

Cruise Industry and Cruise Ships
Revenue share of sales channels of the cruise industry worldwide from 2018 to 2028. Cruise ships 8 ... Worldwide cruise company market share 2022.
Royal Caribbean (NYSE:RCL) Surprises With Q1 Sales
Cruise vacation company Royal Caribbean (NYSE:RCL) reported Q1 CY2024 results beating Wall Street analysts' expectations, with revenue up 29.2% year on year to $3.73 billion. It made a non-GAAP ...
Carnival Corp. Reports Q1 2024: Record Revenue
March 27, 2024. Carnival Corporation announced financial results for the first quarter 2024 and provided an outlook for the full year and second quarter 2024. Record first quarter revenues of $5.4 billion with record net yields (in constant currency) and record net per diems (in constant currency) both significantly exceeding 2023 levels.
Royal Caribbean lifts annual profit view as cruise demand soars
Royal Caribbean's Icon of the Seas, the largest cruise ship in the world, is docked at Costa Maya Cruise Port, in the village town of Mahahual, Quintana Roo state, Mexico, February 6, 2024.
2022 ANNUAL REPORT
• For our cruise segments, revenue per passenger cruise day ("PCD") for the fourth quarter of 2022 ... partner relationships and a growing sales force. While building back demand and enhancing our revenue ... of a blend of marine biofuel. These investments, along with the company's fleet optimization and itinerary reviews, are expected ...
Royal Caribbean sees record bookings as demand for experiences ...
Revenue grew 29.2% to $3.73 billion, above the FactSet consensus of $3.69 billion, as passenger ticket revenue jumped 34% to $2.54 billion and onboard and other revenue increased 19.9% to $1.19 ...
Carnival Corp. Reports Record 2023 Revenue and Fourth Quarter Earnings
The company made debt payments of $6 billion, reducing its debt balance by $4.6 billion from its peak in the first quarter of 2023 and ended the year with $5.4 billion of liquidity. The company entered 2024 with its best booked position on record, for both price and occupancy; Fourth Quarter 2023
The Global Cruise Industry in Numbers: 2021 Annual Report Out Now
The 2021 Cruise Industry News Annual Report is now available, projecting the growth and ship deployment of every cruise brand and cruise company.. The 34th edition of the 400-page Cruise Industry News Annual Report projects the industry's growth through 2027 based on new ship orders (there are no orders past 2027) and known or expected ship deployments.
Carnival's 2023 Record Revenue & Capacity
Record-Breaking Revenues Carnival Corporation's annual revenues reached an all-time high of $21.6 billion in 2023, thanks to the company's successful strategies and the growing popularity of cruises.
Global: cruises market revenue 2019-2028
The global revenue in the 'Cruises' segment of the travel & tourism market was forecast to continuously increase between 2024 and 2028 by in total 6.6 billion U.S. dollars (+21.92 percent). After ...
Change in revenue of top global cruise lines 2023
Worldwide cruise company market share 2022; Revenue of Carnival Corporation & plc worldwide 2008-2023, by segment ... Premium Statistic Share of sales channels of the global cruise industry ...
Royal Caribbean Cruises Revenue 2010-2023
Royal Caribbean Cruises annual/quarterly revenue history and growth rate from 2010 to 2023. Revenue can be defined as the amount of money a company receives from its customers in exchange for the sales of goods or services. Revenue is the top line item on an income statement from which all costs and expenses are subtracted to arrive at net income.
Norwegian Cruise Line's (NYSE:NCLH) Q4 Sales Top Estimates, Stock Soars
Cruise company Norwegian Cruise Line (NYSE:NCLH) reported Q4 FY2023 results topping analysts' expectations, with revenue up 30.8% year on year to $1.99 billion. It made a non-GAAP loss of $0.18 ...
Revealed: How Much Cruise Companies Earn Per Passenger
The company carried 5.5 million passengers during the year. That comes out to revenue of $1,596.82 per passenger carried. This figure is in line with what's seen for Carnival Corporation. Royal Caribbean Group: 2022 Revenue: $8.84 billion. 2022 Passengers Carried: 5.5 million. 2022 Revenue Per Passenger: $1,596.82. Source data.
2021 Cruise Line Revenue Still Far From 2019 Levels
Also Read: 10 Carnival Cruise Line Stock Benefits and Tips. The cruise industry generated more than $40 billion in revenue worldwide in 2019. In 2009, the global ocean cruise industry carried ...
The global cruise industry: Financial performance evaluation
The global cruise industry has experienced persistent growth dynamics over the last two decades, with an impressive rebound after the 2008 financial crisis, unlike commercial shipping. Globalization, restructurings, mergers and a diverse bundle of travel and tourism services to cater for different passenger profiles have boosted robust revenue ...
2023 Annual Report
revenue results. In addition, these efforts enabled us to attract more new-to cruise and more new-to brand guests compared to 2019. We are building momentum in closing the value gap to land-based alternatives, capturing over 3.5 million new-to cruise guests in 2023 and remain well-positioned to take share from land-based alternatives.
Singapore: cruises market revenue 2028
The revenue in the 'Cruises' segment of the travel & tourism market in Singapore was forecast to continuously increase between 2024 and 2028 by in total 78.9 million U.S. dollars (+23.42 percent). After the eighth consecutive increasing year, the indicator is estimated to reach 415.8 million U.S. dollars and therefore a new peak in 2028.
GM Releases 2024 First-Quarter Results and Raises Full-Year Guidance
DETROIT , April 23, 2024 /PRNewswire/ -- General Motors Co. (NYSE: GM ) today reported first-quarter 2024 revenue of $43.0 billion , net income attributable to stockholders of $3.0 billion and EBIT-adjusted of $3.9 billion . GM is also updating its 2024 full-year earnings guidance: Updated 2024
Cruise Line Onboard Revenues Are Off the Charts
November 9, 2021. Cruise lines are seeing record onboard revenues on a per passenger basis thanks to pent up demand, bundling strategies and consumers with fresh wallets. "Our onboard revenues for guests are off the charts, and our Net Promoter Scores have been exceptionally strong," said Arnold Donald, CEO at Carnival Corporation, on the ...
Ford's 1Q net income falls 24% as combustion engine unit sees sales and
DETROIT — (AP) — Ford Motor Co.'s first-quarter net income fell 24% from a year ago as the company's combustion engine vehicle unit saw revenue and sales decline. The Dearborn, Michigan ...
Gilead posts quarterly loss on acquisition charge, revenue rises 5%
For full-year 2024, Gilead said it still expects product sales of $27.1 billion to $27.5 billion, but lowered its earnings outlook to include the recent charge as well as incremental expenses ...
Royal Caribbean lifts annual profit view as cruise demand soars
(Reuters) - Royal Caribbean Group on Thursday raised its annual profit forecast for a second time, benefiting from record demand for cruises and robust onboard spending. Shares of the cruise operator rose about 5% in premarket trade, as the company also beat first-quarter revenue estimates. The ...
Hertz Shares Plunge to Record Low as It Unwinds Tesla Fleet
Hertz Global Holdings Inc. reported a loss that was nearly three times worse than analysts expected as it accelerated sales of electric vehicles to reduce its fleet of Tesla Inc. models that have ...
Cruise industry in the United States
That year, the revenue of Carnival Corporation & plc, a British-American cruise operator responsible for a wide range of cruise lines, totaled above 12 billion U.S. dollars. Even though Carnival ...
Tesla profits drop 55%, company says EV sales 'under pressure' from
Tesla reported revenue of $21.3 billion in the first quarter, a 9% drop from the first quarter of 2023. ... Tesla profits drop 55%, company says EV sales 'under pressure' from hybrids. Kirsten ...
Bristol Myers Beats on Revenue as Revlimid Sales Decline Slows
Bristol Myers Squibb Co. shares fell the most in four years as sales of key drugs missed Wall Street's expectations and the company announced job cuts as part of a $1.5 billion cost-reduction ...
Sanofi Posts Strong Sales Growth With New Hemophilia Therapy
Sanofi posted first-quarter revenue that exceeded estimates as strong demand for its new hemophilia medicine helped make up for some unfavorable currency movements. Sales reached €10.5 billion ...
Cruise Industry News Annual Report and Industry Growth Forecast
The Cruise Industry News Annual Report 2022 is the only information resource of its kind — presenting the entire worldwide cruise industry in 400 pages with cruise industry analytics and statistics, in print and PDF formats. Click here to order. About the Annual Report: The 400-page report covers everything from new ships on order to supply-and-demand scenarios from the early 1990s through ...
Best of Moscow by high speed train
Sure would appreciate someone who has taken Best of Moscow by high speed train from St. Petersburg could please share their impressions of this shore excursion. From the description this sounds like a very long day. Wondering how the 4 hour train trip was in terms of accommodations, etc. Also wha...