PDA

View Full Version : WOW!!! 3rd Ship


tam012864
02-03-2005, 11:17 AM
This is an article in the Florida today paper...Disney Officials speaking of a
third ship..
http://www.floridatoday.com/!NEWSROOM/moneystoryMAIN0203DISNEY1.htm

How cool!!!!!

Lynderella
02-03-2005, 11:19 AM
Jocelyn, the woman who helps you rebook on board, said it wasn't expected until 2008.

jrabbit
02-03-2005, 11:42 AM
Heres the clickable link to the article (http://www.floridatoday.com/!NEWSROOM/moneystoryMAIN0203DISNEY1.htm)

perdidobay
02-03-2005, 11:45 AM
"Waiting for a favorable exchange rate"... It may be alongggggggg time. :hourglass

LIFERBABE
02-03-2005, 11:47 AM
If they base a ship out of Cali, will they still have a private island? I wonder if there are any islands Disney has it's eye on?

missmulan
02-03-2005, 11:48 AM
what GREAT news to open first thing this morning! Thanks for sharing!

Lloyd Dobler
02-03-2005, 11:51 AM
Jocelyn, the woman who helps you rebook on board, said it wasn't expected until 2008.

That may well be right. If they started it today, a new ship wouldn't be in service until almost 2007. Seeing as they haven't even signed a contract with a shipyard, it is very likely they won't start building until (at least) next year, making 2008 about right.

jrabbit
02-03-2005, 12:07 PM
In reality, this isn't anything new to us - it's the same song and dance we've been getting for a long time -- now its just more public (which isn't a bad thing)

ivanova
02-03-2005, 12:17 PM
If they base a ship out of Cali, will they still have a private island? I wonder if there are any islands Disney has it's eye on?
Whatever island they get won't be off the coast of California - it would probably have to be off of the coast of Mexico. But if they ever considered cruises to Alaska, they then couldn't include trips to the private island if it were off the coast of Mexico (or even Calif. since they'd be cruising to Alaska out of Seattle or Vancouver).

mickeyfan1
02-03-2005, 12:29 PM
It's too bad they wouldn't consider building it here. There are so many shipyards that have the space necessary, the people with the skills, and this country needs the work! There is enought room to build in San Pedro, Norfolk, Bath, Portsmouth, and in Alabama/Mississippi. They have already dry docked in Norfolk, so they are familiar with that ship yard. I think it's a shame that they don't try to spend the money at home. Our economy could use the teeny boost.

Mboothby
02-03-2005, 12:50 PM
Well, I'm excited to hear they're making more public and am thrilled to hear California mentioned as a port. It's about time.

dreamingdisney
02-03-2005, 01:05 PM
Come on California!!! :cool1: :cool1: :cool1:

jhemond
02-03-2005, 01:10 PM
It's too bad they wouldn't consider building it here. There are so many shipyards that have the space necessary, the people with the skills, and this country needs the work! There is enought room to build in San Pedro, Norfolk, Bath, Portsmouth, and in Alabama/Mississippi. They have already dry docked in Norfolk, so they are familiar with that ship yard. I think it's a shame that they don't try to spend the money at home. Our economy could use the teeny boost.

It would be SOOOO cool if they built it in Portsmouth!! We could go visit it every weekend. Wanna come with me Marsha?? ROAD TRIP!!!!

mickeyfan1
02-03-2005, 01:26 PM
I'm so there! I even have a free room anytime, one of my sisters lives in Williamsburg.

Bath Maine is also a nice place, just to damn cold right now!

jhemond
02-03-2005, 02:01 PM
I'm so there! I even have a free room anytime, one of my sisters lives in Williamsburg.

Bath Maine is also a nice place, just to damn cold right now!

Cool! :cool1:

dreaminofdisney
02-03-2005, 02:09 PM
A Disney ship docked in Seattle :earseek: I could see it from my parents livingroom!!! Now that would be cool. :cloud9: We all will just have to wait and see what happens. :rolleyes1

HumanCookie
02-03-2005, 02:11 PM
BY DONNA BALANCIA
FLORIDA TODAY

Disney Cruise Line is expected to play an increasingly important role at The Walt Disney Co., company executives said Wednesday.

That includes a third cruise ship to add to the Disney fleet that now includes the Magic and the Wonder, both based at Port Canaveral.

"We have the designs for the new ship," Walt Disney World President Al Weiss said. "It's just a matter of waiting for a favorable exchange rate."

One of the three ships likely would be based in California.

Most large cruise ships are built in Europe, and with the dollar's weakness against the euro, Weiss said now is not the best time to be buying a ship. Weiss and other high-ranking Disney officials were in Orlando on Wednesday to meet with Central Florida business leaders.

The cruise industry is a vital component of a $1 billion-a-year tourism industry in Brevard County. Disney Cruise Line has about 3,000 employees on the ships, at Port Canaveral and in the Orlando area. Disney -- which employs about 54,000 people at its Orlando-area attractions -- is Central Florida's largest employer.

As Disney prepares for the 50th anniversary of Disneyland in Anaheim, Calif., all theme parks and properties will get an infusion of new attractions or features. As part of the 18-month-long anniversary celebration, the Disney Magic will be deployed to the Port of Los Angeles from May through September and will offer seven-day voyages through the Mexican Riviera.

It is a dry run for putting another ship into action. The company's projections for success are so high, the only thing that's keeping them from adding a ship right now is money.

Weiss said the cruise ships combine the best of all worlds, because of the "immersion" of the visitor into the full Disney experience.

"The ships are where we experience the highest customer satisfaction," he said. "The visitors get a chance to have total immersion in the Disney experience. The children can experience the great Disney programs, and the cruises are great for families."

On May 14, the Disney Magic will depart from Port Canaveral on a 14-day "repositioning cruise" to the Port of Los Angeles at San Pedro. It will make port-of-call stops in the Bahamas, Curacao, Acapulco, Mazatlan and Cabo San Lucas. Beginning May 28, and ending in August, Magic will sail seven-night trips from California to Mexican ports of call. Then, the Magic will offer another 14-day repositioning cruise, returning to Port Canaveral Sept. 3.

Lou Liebig, a self-proclaimed "Disney freak" from Suntree, said he and his wife are taking a seven-day Disney cruise from California to Mexico.

"We love the cruises," Liebig said. "We've been on all the different legs they have available. We knew they were going to offer these cruises in California, so my wife and I decided to go."

It's repeat customers like the Liebig family that the cruise line depends on.

Travel representative Adrienne Anderson of Gadabout Travel said she anticipated similar deals to what the company offers in Florida.

"They're probably going to offer land-and-sea packages," she said. "Cruises are a great value. You unpack once but visit multiple destinations."

Analysts say it is worth the wait, rather than investing the possibly hundreds of millions of dollars into one ship now.

"It's no surprise Disney is moving ships around," said Marilyn Green, cruise editor of Travel Trade magazine of New York City. "The gap between the euro and the dollar is pretty daunting. If you go to London, your lunch money goes on a cup of coffee. That gives you an idea of how crucial it is the company to conserve. Disney's ships in general have been quite expensive because of the bells and whistles. Clearly, they haven't gotten the deal they want yet. That's why they're moving ships around, rather than adding one."

allears
02-03-2005, 02:44 PM
Pretty much the same thing we've been hearing. During the bridge tour on our September cruise, the cast memeber told us that most of the designing was done, though he gave away very little detail. Other than to say if the new ship is bigger it would be height wise, adding a deck or two. They will still probably build it to go through the panama canal.

It is an exciting thought to have a third ship to choose from. From what I've read other places and hear from senior crew members, building cruise ships in the US is simply way too expensive. We as a nation have apparently priced ourselves out of that market. Which is too bad. Apparently that's why companies like NCL bought the SS United States. They can re-furbish it (someday) overseas, but because they will use the foundations of the ship which were built in the US, they can sail it to places like Hawaii that have regulations about only ships built and registered in the US, sailing to their ports.

DCLgodess
02-03-2005, 02:55 PM
i am glad they are moving ahead. I know its the same story, but it's good they have gone public with it.

DrCavin
02-03-2005, 05:15 PM
How many ships are built in the US? I have always seen them built elsewhere. The Euro was gaining ground early last week, but have not heard anything since (probably not a good sign)....

I don't think Disney will be doing an Alaskan cruise from them saying it will be based in California. They will probably do the same as in Florida with the land/sea packages.

Anyone know of some islands for sale on the left coast that would be close enough to reach in one day??

pppiglet
02-03-2005, 05:24 PM
Maybe they will buy Catalina Island, kick everyone off and make it their own! Hee Hee!

allears
02-03-2005, 06:05 PM
I don't think many cruise ships, if any are currently being built in the US. It is a shame that for I suppose a number of reasons, we have priced our selves out of the industry.

I do think it's exciting to know that someday, hopefully in the not too distant future, another ship will be launched. Perhaps that will help drive the price of Disnsey crusises down, though probably only a little. They have such a big demand for their product, they just don't have to offer a lot of deals and discounts, like the lines who have multiple ships to fill do.

It will be really fun to see what enhancements, improvements and new magical touches they will add to a new ship. I do hope the over all classic design is kept. I love the old time ocean liner feel of the Disney ships, and they are so distinctive compared to most of the other ships that generally look like large white floating boxes.

Horace Horsecollar
02-03-2005, 07:00 PM
For those of you who think this news article is "cool" or who are "glad they are moving ahead," I'm sorry to rain on your parade, but...

From the article:
"We have the designs for the new ship," Walt Disney World President Al Weiss said. "It's just a matter of waiting for a favorable exchange rate."
Translation:
"We have the designs for the new ship, but the plans are gathering dust. Although other cruise lines are ordering new ships despite the rising Euro, the top execs at Disney are unwilling to do so. But they don't mind overpaying for broadcast and cable, because that's what they really love."
Here's more:
DCL started a planning project in early 2001 to expand their fleet.
In mid-2001, Disney took on substantial new debt to purchase the Fox Family Network (now ABC Family) for $5.3 billion.
The DCL fleet expansion project calendar was put on hold by the events of 9/11, according to ships' officers on the Disney Magic in Spring 2002.
Since 9/11, other cruise lines have taken delivery of new ships and even resumed ordering additional ships.
The exchange rate between the US Dollar and the Euro has made European goods (including cruise ships) more expensive.
Several times over the past year or two, there have been news articles in which Disney officials have made statements along the lines of Al Weiss's statement.
The Euro continues to rise, and there is no reason to believe that the Dollar will strengthen substantially anytime soon.
Although the Euro exchange rate is the official story, another plausible explanation is that Disney is still paying off a substantial debt load.
Disney hasn't contracted with a shipyard, and DCL's fleet expansion plans are gathering dust.
DCL may remain a 2-ship cruise line for many years to come, or Michael Eisner's eventual successor may see a DCL fleet expansion as good way to revive real growth at Disney. Only time will tell.
There's no reason to get excited about the article.

pdarrah
02-03-2005, 10:28 PM
I am fairly sure that prior to the 1970's the USA was a producer of luxury type ships and yachts. Then a tax was instituted that was supposed to get lots of money from the rich people who buy yachts and the "luxury" businesses that buy ships. The result was that all those rich folks and corporations took their $$$ overseas and bought their ships and yachts elsewhere. One of the advantages of being rich is that you have a lot of choice on where to spend your money! Rather than making lots of money off of rich folks in taxes, the result was regular, middle class people who worked building those ships and yachts lost their jobs.

Unfortunately, even if the tax laws have changed, we no longer have the skilled workers or shipyards or any other infrastucture for this industry. If you are going to spend millions on a boat, you probably don't want to hire a company that has never built a luxury ship before!

pdarrah

LiserAnn
02-03-2005, 10:46 PM
If they base a ship out of Cali, will they still have a private island? I wonder if there are any islands Disney has it's eye on?

A friend of ours goes fishing for a particular type of fish down off of the 90 mile bank near the Coronado Islands in Mexico (which is very different than Coronado Island in San Diego). His upcoming trip had to be re-scheduled to another area in Mexico altogether (which means catching a different type of fish) because Disney just bought one of the Islands in the Coronado Islands area. They have made the waters all around that island off limits...to the extent a boat can't even get near it to check it out. The charter he uses said the rumor with the mexican locals is the island is going to be for the cruise line. Mexico is a very hard place to buy land, so it would have to be something worthwhile that would bring $$ to the economy (like a Disney cruise) for the Government to sell it.........It will be interesting to see what it ends up being. :scratchin:

smchan
02-03-2005, 11:10 PM
I am fairly sure that prior to the 1970's the USA was a producer of luxury type ships and yachts. Then a tax was instituted that was supposed to get lots of money from the rich people who buy yachts and the "luxury" businesses that buy ships. The result was that all those rich folks and corporations took their $$$ overseas and bought their ships and yachts elsewhere. One of the advantages of being rich is that you have a lot of choice on where to spend your money! Rather than making lots of money off of rich folks in taxes, the result was regular, middle class people who worked building those ships and yachts lost their jobs.

Perhaps you're thinking of the luxury tax that George Bush (the first one) signed into law in the early 90's? That one reportedly killed the boat building business, but I suspect that had little to do American shipyards not building cruise ships. The tax also applied to jewelry, fur coats and expensive cars. Furthermore, the boat building industry was hurt because buyers staged a boycott. It had nothing to do with these folks taking their business overseas. (Didn't matter if you bought a Ferrari or a Cadillac - you paid the tax.) Anyways, until a few years ago, the last cruise ships built in the US was back in the 50s, so this tax has nothing to do with the demise of cruise ship building in the US.

More recently, NCL's Pride of America was partially built in Mississippi having been commissioned by American Classic Voyages. ACV went bankrupt and NCL bought the unfinished ship but it was finished out overseas.

You can read more about Congress' attempt to jump start the cruise ship building industry at this link (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/project-america.htm). The US knows how to build ships but according to this article, we've been too busy focused on Navy contracts to worry about building cruise ships.

Sam

Horace Horsecollar
02-03-2005, 11:17 PM
I am fairly sure that prior to the 1970's the USA was a producer of luxury type ships and yachts.
There are still luxury yachts being built in the United States for rich individuals. But comparing a yacht with a modern cruise ship is like comparing a mountain cabin with a mega-highrise building.

The S.S. Brasil and the S.S. Argentina (both launched 1958) were the last large passenger ships built in the United States. They were built as luxury ocean liners, and later became cruise ships. At around 15 thousand GRT, they were small compared to the 85 thousand GRT Disney ships. But that was the end of the passenger ship building era in the United States.

More than 40 years later, there was an unsuccessful attempt to revive the American passenger ship business. American Classic Voyages contracted with Litton Ingalls Shipbuilding of Pascagoula, Mississippi, for two modern "Project America" cruise ships, with an option for a third. Construction began, but ran behind schedule and over budget. American Classic Voyages folded, and NCL bought the hulls. NCL had the hulls towed to Germany for completion. The NCL-America Pride of America will begin service this year and the Pride of Hawaii will begin service next year. They'll be U.S.-flagged, even though primarily German-built.

See The Strange Story of the Ship that Died Twice (http://www.baycrossings.com/Archives/2004/03_April/the_strange_story_of_the_ship_that_died_twice.htm) .

Donalds_best_pal
02-03-2005, 11:30 PM
That news story is the same old thing I have been hearing for a while. lol I got more information from my friend Tom McAlpin then that news article. :)

Matt

pppiglet
02-04-2005, 12:10 AM
So if DCL has it's own island someday off of Mexico, what do you think they should or would call it? Can you think of any names?

ivanova
02-04-2005, 12:14 AM
Logically you would think they'd sign a contract now, before the dollar-euro gets even worse. Oh well. I'm not holding my breath for a 3rd DCL ship any time soon. :(

Horace Horsecollar
02-04-2005, 09:23 AM
Logically you would think they'd sign a contract now, before the dollar-euro gets even worse. Oh well. I'm not holding my breath for a 3rd DCL ship any time soon. :(
As recently as 2002, the Euro and the Dollar were at parity -- US$1 would buy 1. Now, it takes around US$1.30 to buy 1.

Without taking any other factors in account, a 400 million cruise ship that would have cost US$400 million in 2002 would now cost $520 million.

Take a look the excdange rate over the past two years at http://finance.yahoo.com/currency/convert?from=EUR&to=USD&amt=1&t=2y

Why didn't Disney order new ships in 2002?

I'm not holding my breath either.

LiserAnn
02-04-2005, 11:17 AM
And the euro keeps getting stronger and stronger. My mom is Greek, living here in America for the last 45 years and had planned to retire to Greece. Well, the euro has blown her plan out of the water because it doesn't make economic sense. And, at least in Greece, they're not happy about the euro situation because things have gotten more expensive for them to buy although their personal economic situation has stayed the same (salaries, etc) or even gotten worse and they've seen a drop in tourism because Americans aren't interesting in make their vacation costs higher to come to Europe. And even if Americans do travel to Europe, they spend less than they used to on purchases because it's so much more expensive. So, I can't see Disney forking out so much more money to build a new ship, not in Europe anyway. But then it does beg the question as to why Disney purchased that island in Mexico anyway...why make the expensive if it will many years before they'll build a new ship (if the Island really is for DCL).

Lisa

ivanova
02-04-2005, 11:36 AM
Lisa,

Assuming the really did buy an island ;) it could be that the opportunity was too good to pass up (i.e. dirt cheap). The thinking might be, buy the island and worse case if we don't use it we turn around and sell it. Where I doubt ships appreciate it in value over time, land almost always does appreciate.

Horace Horsecollar
02-04-2005, 11:51 AM
But then it does beg the question as to why Disney purchased that island in Mexico anyway...why make the expensive if it will many years before they'll build a new ship (if the Island really is for DCL).
The story that "Disney purchased that island in Mexico" is a rumor, at best. And it's a rumor that I personally don't believe.

There are a vast number of small islands in the Bahamas, and when DCL was formed, Disney intended to call on such an island 4 times each week. (Remember, the Wonder and Magic both originally did only 3- and 4-night cruises.) So there was availability and a need.

In contrast, there are very few islands off of Baja California, whether in the Pacific Ocean or the Gulf of California. These islands tend to be larger, and protected by the government of Mexico as ecological preserves. With steep, rocky coasts, they're not at all like Castaway Cay.

Yes, I suppose it's possible that there's an appropriate island that Disney could purchase (or more likely lease). But such an international transaction would be international news if it had already happened.

Finally, a Disney Cruise does not require a private island. The Disney Magic won't call on a private isalnd this summer, and none of the other cruise lines that operate out of California call on private islands.

Actually a private beach might make more sense than a private island. Baja California has a long, largely undeveloped coast.

Mickeyhugger
02-04-2005, 12:12 PM
Thank you Horace Horsecollar. (Are you a Disney advisor? They should hire you! ;) )

invaderzim
02-10-2005, 08:14 PM
Maybe they will consider two itineraries like they have out of Florida. But instead of every other week, they could do summers in Alaska and winters in the Mexican Riviera. All they'd have to do is add retractable roofs over the pools and Topsiders (or whatever they'll call it on the new ship). That would definitely be an excuse to take cruises out of California for at least two tours!

GenieDana
02-10-2005, 08:42 PM
Maybe they will consider two itineraries like they have out of Florida. But instead of every other week, they could do summers in Alaska and winters in the Mexican Riviera. All they'd have to do is add retractable roofs over the pools and Topsiders (or whatever they'll call it on the new ship). That would definitely be an excuse to take cruises out of California for at least two tours!

...and butress the hulls (Magic and Wonder were designed for Caribbean cruising - calmer seas, and slower speeds in rough water); and if Alaska, refit the engines with smokeless replacements...

If Disney wants a permanent presence in the Pacific, it makes more sense to build a ship for it. If the other unfounded rumor of the Magic sailing left-coast when a new ship comes on-line to replace the Caribbean market, the Magic might only sail warm-water Pacific.

seaulater
02-11-2005, 08:01 PM
Just bumping up.

Horace Horsecollar
02-11-2005, 08:43 PM
...and butress the hulls (Magic and Wonder were designed for Caribbean cruising - calmer seas, and slower speeds in rough water); and if Alaska, refit the engines with smokeless replacements...
Are you saying that the Disney Wonder and Disney Magic somehow have hulls with thinner steel plates than other cruise ships that sail in both Caribbean and Alaska waters?

And are you saying that the diesel-electric motors in the Disney Wonder and Disney Magic are incapable of operating as cleanly as the diesel-electric motors of other cruise ships?

What is the basis for these statements?

I'm not saying you're wrong, but I never read or heard anything that would lead me to believe that the Disney ships were built to lower standards, or that they are incapable of operating anywhere but the Caribbean (or other warm water). In fact, the Disney ships were built to Panamax standards so that they would not be confined.
If Disney wants a permanent presence in the Pacific, it makes more sense to build a ship for it. If the other unfounded rumor of the Magic sailing left-coast when a new ship comes on-line to replace the Caribbean market, the Magic might only sail warm-water Pacific.
It's common for cruise lines to introduce new ships in established markets such as Florida ports and to reposition older ships to newer markets like California -- where those older ships are "new." There are exceptions, such as the recent Mitsubishi-built Princess ships.

My guess is that DCL would like to be able to attract return passengers in Florida by having at least one brand new ship at Port Canaveral, and that DCL would like to expand to the West Coast with an existing ship that would be "new" to most West Coast passengers.

As far as summer DCL cruises in Alaska are concerned, it's a question of what it would take to retrofit an existing ship. I have no doubt some open areas could be enclosed and heated, including retractable covers over one or more pools. I don't think that an existing ship would require a new hull and new engines (the cost of which would be prohibitive). But I would be very interested if somebody had some authoritative information that would either substantiate GenieDana's remarks or my speculation.

JimmyJackJunior
02-11-2005, 09:27 PM
It's too bad they wouldn't consider building it here. There are so many shipyards that have the space necessary, the people with the skills, and this country needs the work! There is enought room to build in San Pedro, Norfolk, Bath, Portsmouth, and in Alabama/Mississippi. They have already dry docked in Norfolk, so they are familiar with that ship yard. I think it's a shame that they don't try to spend the money at home. Our economy could use the teeny boost.

European shipyards really produce a far better product than anything in North American. Hope they do go there.

GenieDana
02-11-2005, 09:39 PM
Are you saying that the Disney Wonder and Disney Magic somehow have hulls with thinner steel plates than other cruise ships that sail in both Caribbean and Alaska waters?

And are you saying that the diesel-electric motors in the Disney Wonder and Disney Magic are incapable of operating as cleanly as the diesel-electric motors of other cruise ships?

What is the basis for these statements?



No and No(well maybe)

What I said was a hull designed for the Caribbean will not average the same speeds over a cruising season in rougher seas.

The second statement is that some newer ships are using engine designs with significantly less emmissions and some have been retrofitted that sail the Alask market, With Alaska, the regulatory environment for vessels operating in their coastal wasters is more likely to be impacted by tightening emmision standards.

The engines on the Magic and Wonder are not the most environmentally friendly out there.

Here are a few examples for further reading (my basis):

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FCP/is_2_23/ai_78256219

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FCP/is_1_26/ai_n6100061

http://alaska.nwcruiseship.org/article.cfm?menuId=28&articleId=102

http://bluewaternetwork.org/reports/rep_ss_mspetition.pdf

http://www.serconline.org/cruiseShipPollution.html

http://www.hklaw.com/Publications/Newsletters.asp?IssueID=536&Article=2870

Horace Horsecollar
02-11-2005, 10:42 PM
What I said was a hull designed for the Caribbean will not average the same speeds over a cruising season in rougher seas.
But you previously wrote, "and buttress the hulls" -- which would mean to reinforce the hulls.

Also, the Alaska inside passage route is offen protected from the open ocean by islands -- that's why it's called the "inside passage" -- so it's generally quite calm.

Finally, is it really true that the Disney ships have a different hull design than other lines' modern cruise ships? What is the basis for this statement? After all, other cruise lines move ships between the Caribbean and Alaska. Yes, old ocean liners were designed differently, but I thought modern cruse ships are generally similar.

The second statement is that some newer ships are using engine designs with significantly less emmissions and some have been retrofitted that sail the Alask market, With Alaska, the regulatory environment for vessels operating in their coastal wasters is more likely to be impacted by tightening emmision standards.
But you previously wrote, "refit the engines with smokeless replacements" -- that's quite different than retrofitting existing diesel electric engines to lower emissions.

Thank you for clarifying your concerns about using an existing DCL ship for Alaska cruises. So there's not a need to reinforce the hull and replace the engines after all.

invaderzim
02-12-2005, 12:57 PM
Finally, is it really true that the Disney ships have a different hull design than other lines' modern cruise ships? What is the basis for this statement? After all, other cruise lines move ships between the Caribbean and Alaska. Yes, old ocean liners were designed differently, but I thought modern cruse ships are generally similar

I agree with Horace...

Lest we forget, both Disney ships were sailed from Italy through the North Atlantic -- much rougher seas than anything in the Caribbean. Since the ship disasters of the earlier 20th Century (like the Titanic and Andrea Doria), all passenger liners have to be built to meet certain specifications for durability and safety. Hence, the Disney Ships would not be built any less sturdy than any other ship -- whether it be for Caribbean passage, or Mediterranean passage or Northern Atlantic or Pacific sailings.