Not to much bias, When this ship was launched the media coverage was huge and according to them it was the best thing since sliced bread, But now that it failed it gets only a small buried article.
"We've never understood why it was not successful . . . We should've been sailing full," Carnival spokesman Tim Gallagher told the Miami Herald.
It's easy to understand, Cruise ships are supposed to be fun and People who are that whiney about a little smoke are the most miserable, Un-fun people there is, So they are not going to be going on Cruises.
1 posted on
02/05/2004 7:19:23 PM PST by
qam1
To: qam1
Dopes!!!
2 posted on
02/05/2004 7:21:21 PM PST by
szweig
To: *puff_list; Just another Joe; SheLion; Max McGarrity; Conspiracy Guy; lockjaw02; Gabz; Mears; ...
Non-Smokers not making up for the loss of Smokers
PING
3 posted on
02/05/2004 7:21:33 PM PST by
qam1
(Are Republicans the party of Reagan or the party of Bloomberg and Pataki?)
To: qam1
"We've never understood why it was not successful . . . We should've been sailing full," Carnival spokesman Tim Gallagher told the Miami Herald. Golly Timmy, treating 25 percent of your potential customer base like lepers and criminals might have had something to do with it.
4 posted on
02/05/2004 7:22:57 PM PST by
Johnny_Cipher
(Making hasenfeffer out of bunnyrabbits since 1980)
To: qam1
"People who are that whiney about a little smoke are the most miserable, Un-fun people there is, So they are not going to be going on Cruises."
I think you hit it right on the head.
Wasn't there a non-smoking casino in LV that went belly up?
6 posted on
02/05/2004 7:31:15 PM PST by
Lokibob
(All typos and spelling errors are mine and copyrighted!!!!)
To: qam1
"We've never understood why it was not successful . . . We should've been sailing full,"I've never like the word, and I especially dislike when people use it in conversations but,
"DUH!"
To: qam1
But there were not enough takers to keep the idea going. Carnival had a hard time booking groups, and as a result the Paradise will lose its smoke-free status in September, when it is redeployed to California.We keep telling them, talk about pig headedness.
18 posted on
02/05/2004 8:04:19 PM PST by
Great Dane
(You can smoke just about everywhere in Denmark.)
To: qam1; *puff_list; Just another Joe; Great Dane; Max McGarrity; Madame Dufarge; MeeknMing; ...
"We've never understood why it was not successful . . . We should've been sailing full," Carnival spokesman Tim Gallagher told the Miami Herald. Yea, right!
I just wish the airlines would see the err of THEIR ways and bring back the smoking sections.
33 posted on
02/05/2004 8:39:46 PM PST by
SheLion
(Curiosity killed the cat BUT satisfaction brought her back!!!)
To: qam1
Stupid smoke gnatzies never cease to amaze me.
CG
46 posted on
02/06/2004 4:18:54 AM PST by
Conspiracy Guy
(Smokers are people too, most are good people. But Will Rogers never met me.)
To: qam1
But there were not enough takers to keep the idea going. Carnival had a hard time booking groups, and as a result the Paradise will lose its smoke-free status in September, when it is redeployed to California. This is all well and good. The marketplace is functioning as it should. No government mandates were involved. Cruise ship owners can/should make their own rules and live with the results. Smokers win this one.
50 posted on
02/06/2004 5:48:05 AM PST by
TheRightGuy
(ERROR CODE 018974523: Random Tagline Compiler Failure)
To: qam1
I have sailed on the Paradise twice and loved it. It was great being able to go to a casino or lounge without having smoke blown in my face. You could walk around any deck and not have to inhale that disgusting second-hand smoke. I never had to smell the lingering stale tobacco odor in the cabin. Call me whiney, but I can't stand the smell of cigarette smoke, and it was wonderful having a smoke free vacation. I will miss the Paradise.
74 posted on
02/06/2004 9:04:34 AM PST by
BloomNTn
To: qam1
Say WHAT?!? How on earth can one enjoy a cruise in the Caribbean without a fine cigar?!? Someone at Carnival needs to be keelhauled!
86 posted on
02/06/2004 3:47:17 PM PST by
Redcloak
(PLEASE! STOP THE MADNESS: NO MORE JANET JACKSON BOOB THREADS!!!)
To: qam1
Personally, I like to set my clothes on fire, you know, just smoldering, no flames, and then consuming a four star meal. Oh sure other diners are hacking and coughing, but hey, it's a free world, I can do as I like. For dessert, I usually take off my socks and burn them so I can breath in that good smoke. God I love it so!
At home, I usually invite the neighbors over and then we all sit around breathing in fumes from my smoldering trash. Each neighbor brings a surprise piece of trash and throws into to the mix. Old turpentine cans are really fragrant and get deep into your lungs for that good smoke feeling.
Cigarettes? Their for weenies. When you need real smoke, burn something powerful. Who the hell cares what it is or if it offends someone, I'm a Libertarian and I do what ever I want and the government be damned,...along with my bronchioles!
To: qam1
And the same can be said for the airlines ... they wonder why no one flys.....
104 posted on
02/07/2004 9:33:12 AM PST by
LynnHam
To: qam1
I'm glad I nixed a family get together cruise.
ANd the American Taliban lose one.
109 posted on
02/09/2004 12:15:15 PM PST by
swarthyguy
(Russia doesn't conduct negotiations with terrorists -- it destroys them," Vlad Putin)
To: qam1
Again it proves that non-smokers do not take up the slack like they promised, but we knew they wouldn't.
122 posted on
02/18/2004 1:27:07 PM PST by
Great Dane
(You can smoke just about everywhere in Denmark.)
To: qam1
One more article you'll never hear anything about on TV.
124 posted on
09/17/2004 1:51:12 PM PDT by
Pagey
("How did Hillary Clinton become a Senator"? Have you ever asked yourself that question?)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson