Lengthening, of Enchantment of the Seas!

A Sun, 01 Aug 2004 21:26:12 GMT, Benjamin Smith
escribió:
If you can just go that one extra step, Ben, to say that
just because a small subset of the market feels something is
negative doesn't actually make it negative, I think we'd
have found a point of consensus.
What's negative to someone isn't validated in numbers. Personal life
experiences are brought into the equation of individual judgments. The
power of position may prove itself through time, even if unpopular at
one time.

That's common self-serving rhetoric -- often an attempt to
avoid the inevitable conclusion when a microscope is cast on
an assertion such as yours. Validation through
preponderance of evidence makes the difference between hopes
and facts.

Markets and masses have shown that what's popular can be going in an
unrealistic direction through time. A book by Robert Menschell (of
Goldman Sachs) titled Markets, Mobs and Mayhem lists some examples from
the tulip craze in Holland to the dot.com bubble burst.

This is very true. It also is true is that style and
fashion dictate far more of purchasing behaviors than those
things rationally warrant. Much is driven by these
behavioral issues.

We should not all agree about the altering
of a ship or base our opinions on the finance of a company.

Of course. I've said several times that "liking" and
"feeling" are totally defensible positions. The only point
of contention here is what these companies should do.


--
bicker®
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/GMA/D...ry_040602.html

A Sun, 01 Aug 2004 20:42:16 GMT, Benjamin Smith
escribió:
Not all discussions must lead down to the same, tired road.

Seems so, given your penchant for beating the same horse so
long...


--
bicker®
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/GMA/D...ry_040602.html

A Sun, 01 Aug 2004 20:42:16 GMT, Benjamin Smith
escribió:
Not all discussions must lead down to the same, tired road.

Seems so, given your penchant for beating the same horse so
long...


--
bicker®
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/GMA/D...ry_040602.html

A Sun, 01 Aug 2004 20:42:16 GMT, Benjamin Smith
escribió:
Not all discussions must lead down to the same, tired road.

Seems so, given your penchant for beating the same horse so
long...


--
bicker®
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/GMA/D...ry_040602.html

"Lee Lindquist" wrote in message
...
I thought a couple weeks ago you told us you were going to
reduce your cruising to one cruise per year, on an upscale
line to an exotic destination.

I suppose I could google the post, but I'm sure you remember
the comments.

Why would you care about deck space on carribbean princess?
FYI: it's neither upscale, nor sails exotic itineraries.

--
- Lee


I did say that, and that is my intention so you googleing the post is not
necessary. Go ahead if you like, although I'm not sure what it will prove?
What does it have to do with you answering my question?

I'm interested in all aspects of the cruise industry regardless of what
ships I choose to sail on. I never said I will never sail on a mass-market
ship again. I'm basically taking a break. For me, it's more than just a
vacation on ship .... it's a genuine interest in the industry that goes
beyond just being a cruise passenger. Why else would I visit r.t.c. and
other cruise boards almost everyday? Certainly not to find out how much to
tip or what time the midnight buffet is. FYI, there are several just like
me on r.t.c. and the other boards, and we find it interesting to discuss
passenger ships of all types, and the industry in general. But then again
I'm sure you already know that.

Ernie

"Lee Lindquist" wrote in message
...
I thought a couple weeks ago you told us you were going to
reduce your cruising to one cruise per year, on an upscale
line to an exotic destination.

I suppose I could google the post, but I'm sure you remember
the comments.

Why would you care about deck space on carribbean princess?
FYI: it's neither upscale, nor sails exotic itineraries.

--
- Lee


I did say that, and that is my intention so you googleing the post is not
necessary. Go ahead if you like, although I'm not sure what it will prove?
What does it have to do with you answering my question?

I'm interested in all aspects of the cruise industry regardless of what
ships I choose to sail on. I never said I will never sail on a mass-market
ship again. I'm basically taking a break. For me, it's more than just a
vacation on ship .... it's a genuine interest in the industry that goes
beyond just being a cruise passenger. Why else would I visit r.t.c. and
other cruise boards almost everyday? Certainly not to find out how much to
tip or what time the midnight buffet is. FYI, there are several just like
me on r.t.c. and the other boards, and we find it interesting to discuss
passenger ships of all types, and the industry in general. But then again
I'm sure you already know that.

Ernie

*bicker* wrote:

A Sun, 01 Aug 2004 21:26:12 GMT, Benjamin Smith
escribió:

If you can just go that one extra step, Ben, to say that
just because a small subset of the market feels something is
negative doesn't actually make it negative, I think we'd
have found a point of consensus.

What's negative to someone isn't validated in numbers. Personal life
experiences are brought into the equation of individual judgments. The
power of position may prove itself through time, even if unpopular at
one time.


That's common self-serving rhetoric -- often an attempt to
avoid the inevitable conclusion when a microscope is cast on
an assertion such as yours. Validation through
preponderance of evidence makes the difference between hopes
and facts.


So says the judge

Ben S.

*bicker* wrote:

A Sun, 01 Aug 2004 21:26:12 GMT, Benjamin Smith
escribió:

If you can just go that one extra step, Ben, to say that
just because a small subset of the market feels something is
negative doesn't actually make it negative, I think we'd
have found a point of consensus.

What's negative to someone isn't validated in numbers. Personal life
experiences are brought into the equation of individual judgments. The
power of position may prove itself through time, even if unpopular at
one time.


That's common self-serving rhetoric -- often an attempt to
avoid the inevitable conclusion when a microscope is cast on
an assertion such as yours. Validation through
preponderance of evidence makes the difference between hopes
and facts.


So says the judge

Ben S.

*bicker* wrote:

A Sun, 01 Aug 2004 20:42:16 GMT, Benjamin Smith
escribió:

Not all discussions must lead down to the same, tired road.


Seems so, given your penchant for beating the same horse so
long...



And bicker gets the last word! (after he responds to this)

Ben S.

--
bicker®
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/GMA/D...ry_040602.html

*bicker* wrote:

A Sun, 01 Aug 2004 20:42:16 GMT, Benjamin Smith
escribió:

Not all discussions must lead down to the same, tired road.


Seems so, given your penchant for beating the same horse so
long...



And bicker gets the last word! (after he responds to this)

Ben S.

--
bicker®
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/GMA/D...ry_040602.html