Frequent contributor Bill Wells has some thoughts on the recent exchange between U.S. Senator Jay Rockefeller and Carnival Cruise Lines, in which the senator suggested that Carnival should pay the cost of assistance provided by the Navy and Coast Guard to Carnival’s “Triumph” and “Splendor” cruise ships. Bill looks back on the history of asking for renumeration, and suggest there is precedence for this. “Adapted to Their Condition and Necessities,” Paying for Rescues
There is also another post, representing alternate view, by a former Coastie, Mario Vittone, “The Cost of Rescue: Why Carnival Shouldn’t Pay and the U.S. Shouldn’t Accept”
gCaptain is reporting that Carnival Corp. is bowing to pressure from U.S. Senator Jay Rockefeller, said it will reimburse the U.S. for costs related to the breakdowns at sea of its Triumph and Splendor cruise ships. There is some additional background here.
Thoughts of my own:
- Somewhere in between charging nothing and charging the fully prorated lifecycle cost of the asset there is also the possibility of asking for reimbursement of the marginal cost attributed solely to the rescue.
- Did Carnival ask for our help or did we volunteer it?
- Obviously the Navy did not figure costs the same way the CG did, otherwise the hourly cost of an aircraft carrier would have dwarfed the hourly cost of a 378.
- Some of us remember when the Coast Guard was your friendly free towing service for boats that frequently ran out of gas. That doesn’t happen as much anymore.
- Maybe we just need to collect more in the way of fees from the foreign flag ships that make up the cruise industry.