Passengers who booked trips have been told refunds will be issued in monthly installments

...

Life at Sea Cruises' first three-year sailing was announced in March and promised passengers willing to fork out at least $29,999 per year

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 126 points 2 years ago (14 children)

Cruise ships really need to disappear if we are gonna keep this planet somewhat livable. Mega polluters.

  • source
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 51 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    The problem isn't the ships it's the insane amount of diesel they suck down. We already run giant ships powered by nuclear reactors.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 44 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    Honest question: do the use diesel? A lot of big ships when they are not in a nation's waters burn bunker oil which is significantly worse.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago

    While googling this, it seems like there is an international cap on marine fuels for 0.5% sulphur.
    https://www.cruisemapper.com/wiki/752-cruise-ship-engine-propulsion-fuel
    A lot of ports and shipping areas require 0.1% sulphur content.

    A lot of places I've read say things along the lines of "cruise ships run on diesel, specifically MDO or MGO".
    E.g.
    https://luxurytraveldiva.com/what-does-a-cruise-ship-use-for-fuel/

    Here's a thing about MDO and MGO.
    https://maritimepage.com/what-are-mgo-and-mdo-fuels-marine-fuels-explained/
    MGO is 0.1% sulphur content.
    MDO is 2% sulphur content.
    For comparison, car diesel sulphur content is like 0.001%.
    Best source I can find for bunker fuel is 3.5%. So, MDO/MGO are better than bunker fuel, I guess. Feels like a rebrand with minor improvements, so everyone can say "yeh, it's just diesel. Not bunker fuel".

    But 2% MDO is still a 40% improvement over 3.5% bunker fuel.

    Seems like there is a lot of changing and outdated information on this.
    And it being related to international trading, laws and standards... There doesn't seem to be a reliable definitive source on it.

    My takeaway is "yeh, it's not bunker fuel. It's diesel. But it's not diesel as we know it from driving cars, trucks, tractors and other plant"

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • [–] 28 points 2 years ago* (4 children)

    Cruise ships are pretty big polluters, yes. Cruise passengers have about 8x the emissions that they'd have from a comparable land-based vacation.

    But when people talk about ship pollution, they're usually talking about non-carbon pollution.

    For example, ships often burn heavy fuel oil, which produces tons of sulfur dioxide, which causes acid rain, and NOX, which depletes the ozone and causes smog and asthma.

    Cruise ships are bad for the environment, but there's honestly bigger fish to fry. Gas power plants are way, way worse for the planet.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago*

    From the comparisons I've made in the past, they're also relatively cheap compared to land based vacations. For some reason, it's cheaper to make your hotel float.

    Then there's places where ships are more inherent to the experience, like transiting the Panama canal, or coastal regions of Alaska or Norway. Places that are too remote to get to by most other means.

    But fuck Caribbean cruises. That's a boat taking you from one tourist outdoor shopping mall to another.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 114 points 2 years ago (29 children)

    Cruises oughta be banned for how polluting they are. Rich folks can have em back when theyve cleaned up their climate mess.

  • source
  • hideshow 29 child comments
  • [–] 39 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    No they may not. We acknowledge they’re filthy, rife with noro and other viruses, and aside from other pollution, dump raw sewage into open water.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 36 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)

    when theyve cleaned up their climate mess.

    Ah, a doe eyed optimist, I see.

    This oligarch party ain't stopping until everything that can burn does. At this point hope is irrational, a side effect of rational despair.

    No one tells the wealth class anything. They tell us, and we obey like good lil capital generating livestock.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (21 replies)
    [–] 110 points 2 years ago (5 children)

    Refund paid in monthly installments seems like a huge red flag too…yikes. Hopefully these passengers can come out of this mostly okay at least.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 29 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Was wondering if I floated a bad thousand dollar check if my restitution would be allowed in monthly installments.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    (with a few extra steps) yes

    Wage garnishment, repayment plans, etc. The difference is for you it typically requires litigation before you're "allowed" to. Technically it's probably the same for them if someone challenged it, but they have the benefit of litigation costing less than all the paid lump sums, where your proverbial thousand-dollar check would not.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 74 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    So they sold tickets to a cruise... But they didn't have the ship ready.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 61 points 2 years ago (15 children)

    Mmmm. What fun. Stewing in a disease-ridden floating money-sponge for three years. Marvellous.

  • source
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 49 points 2 years ago

    Idk man. You go hang out on a cruise for a bit you will find some old people who have made cruising their entire retirement plan. Basically just staying on boats going from port to port until they die.

    Which actually doesn’t sound all too bad. I’d think it’d get old after the first few weeks (I never heard Cupid Shuffle so many damn times in one week), but hey, whatever floats your boat.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 43 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    It's cheaper than a lot of retirement homes in America. Cruises outside of Caribbean voyages in peak season are like 90% retirees. It's a more viable option for a lot of people. If this 3yr cruise was a lot cheaper per day, it would make a lot of sense for them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Plus if you tick that little box, you (your estate/ descendants) save on funeral fees with a ‘navy burial’ at sea. The cabin boy-things garb your corpse in whatever finest they discover in your wardrobe/suitcase and slip you off a Teflon-coated plank into the gentle deep and sharks.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 44 points 2 years ago (11 children)

    So… if I wanted to do a scam… and I’d sell tickets to a cruise ship for 3 years, upfront payment of $90k… let’s say I sell 2000 seats for $180mil.

    Is that enough money to disappear forever and live under a false identity?

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • load more comments (5 replies)
    [–] 23 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Why are we linking to a Fox News affiliate?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 14 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (8 children)

    Is it just me or does 10k a year for full accommodations seem wildly cheap?

    Fml I need coffee

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 31 points 2 years ago

    Even at $30k per year it was ridiculously cheap. I have a friend of a friend that was going to do this for his retirement. $2500 per month for a room and board that allows you to spend your life sailing from port to port is actually a great deal, and if/when you need more medical care you simply move back off of the ship. The idea was that passengers could just buy another ticket and keep sailing for as many years as they wanted.

    I called this one.

    1. It sounded too good to be true. I had a feeling that they wouldn’t launch and if they did it’d be a floating Fyre Festival except with senior citizens who would not be able to escape.
    2. Cruise ships are Petri dishes as it is. The idea of a cruise consisting of mostly elderly people who stay on board and mingle with crowds in the various ports of call sounds like a death cruise. Just imagine a viral outbreak on that ship that was killing passengers, resulting in a lockdown.
    3. It was basically someone watching Wall-E and deciding that the dystopian part was actually a pretty idea.
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 23 points 2 years ago (4 children)
  • [+] 23 points 2 years ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)
  • [+] 10 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago*

    It does kinda sound like a fun way to spend 3 years, but it will probably suck. It’s not going to be a good room. You’re gonna get sick no matter what you do. And unless you actually have money leftover, you’re not going to be doing much in the ports. Also, you’ve got no storage for 3 years of souvenirs.

    Oh and if you miss the boat, you’d have to fly to the next port to get back on.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago

    Lmao this small business paper where I grew up just did a little blurb on a local executive "living at sea" for three years - article came out days after this was all canceled

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/local12.com/amp/news/local/work-cruise-ship-cincinnati-exec-will-3-years-life-at-sea-cruises-clever-lucy-keri-witman-remote-ship

    Womp womp

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›