Post on 18-Jan-2015
description
Port & Destination Association Development
CRUISE BALTICOne Sea – Oceans of adventuresInternational Cruise Summit – Madrid – October 2013 Director Cruise Baltic & Cruise Copenhagen NetworkBo Larsen bnl@woco.dk
Cruise Copenhagen
Cruise Baltic
Agenda
i. NEWS - Skagen- Copenhagen- Malmö
ii. Challenging Legislative Environment - Port Service Standards- Waste Reception Study - ECA 2015
iii. Economic Impact Studies
iv. Guest Satisfaction
NEWS
Cruise Baltic Port number 28
Ocean Quay in Copenhagen
Malmö, Sweden
“Boutique Destination”
5-6 annual calls last 10 years
Interesting tour options
Geographical phenomena
New pier available 2015
Skagen, Denmark Destination number 28
New Pier 2015 Skagen, Denmark
Copenhagen, Denmark New Ocean Quay - 2014
• Width 70 m - operation area 18 m• Water depth 10 m• Parking area for 200 cars • Adequate waste reception facilities
New Ocean Quay – 2014 $ 100 million investment
New Ocean Quay – 2014 1.1 km. new pier7 km. to city hall square
New Ocean Quay – 2014 3 terminal buildings each 3.300 sqm
Malmø, Sweden
Malmø, Sweden
Aarhus, Denmark
Historical Perspective
2008
• 11 new ships • Headlines: Shipbuilding• Dialogue: New exciting destinations• CB: Marketing to travel agents • Baltic: +20.5% - 3.1mill guests
2013
• 6 new ships • Headlines: Regulation• Dialogue: Efficient itineraries• CB: Cruise Line Collaboration • Baltic: +4.7% - 4.3mill guests
Challenging Environment
• New Regulations - Waste Reception - ECA
• Fuel Costs
Cruise Baltic Port Service Standards
Cruise Baltic Port Service Standards
Launched in MarseillesNovember 2012
BackgroundA lot of various “marketing standards” in our industry
Extremely positive feedback as it results in:
- Efficiency among cruise line operators
- Benchmark and competition within Baltic ports
Cruise Baltic Port Service Standards
Launched in MarseillesNovember 2012
BackgroundA lot of various port “marketing standards” in our industry
This tool is different and created to create:- Efficiency among cruise line operators - Benchmark and competition within Baltic ports
Facts: Evaluation of each Baltic pier Made in collaboration with CLIA and operators New updates twice yearly
Cruise Baltic Port Service Standards
Essential – 17 different standards – examples:Pilotage service availableCleared and well signaled entrance / exit and from the pierBunkers available
Desirable – 6 different standards – examples:Designated and marked parking spaces for vehiclesFixed sign / map of the port with directions between port and city
City maps available at pier
Cruise Baltic Port Service Standards
Evaluation of each Baltic pier Made in collaboration with CLIA and Cruise Line Operators New update twice yearly Latest update: pictures of each pier and new rating system
Cruise Baltic Port Service Standards
Reception Facilitiesoperational compliance strategy
Background
• The implications and expectations of new legislation not fully explained
• Revised annex V special area requirements for the Baltic requires information. - Cruise ship operators vs. the port waste reception facilities
• Cruise Baltic as a respected port association should get involved
Potentially become part of Cruise Baltic Port Service Standards
Processexample of the relevant stakeholders
Port Reception Facilitiesoperational compliance strategy
Three phases: 1. Template and information retrieval2. Pilot test on one major port 3. Evaluation on all other ports
Phase OneDetailed information retrieval on the Baltic Ports including but not limited to prior studies, resulting in a template and methodology with questionnaire on adequacy. Phase twoRoll out a template and procedures to one major Baltic port. Any findings and feedback will be examined and if appropriate incorporated in thefinal methodology with questionnaire on adequacy. Phase threeThis will involve ALL other ports within Cruise Baltic, where the methodology will be used to determine the Adequacy and any missing components via a Gap Analysis.
Phase 1 template and information retrieval
Name of Cruise Port
Cruise Terminal Reference
Receiving Station Information
Direct Shore Connection
Maximum Flow Rate
Standard Connection Barge Maximum Flow
RateStandard
Connection Tank Trucks Maximum Flow Rate
Standard Connection Sewage Receiving Bio-Residue
ReceivingFats & Oil Receiving
Food Waste Reject Water Receiving
Copenhagen Gdansk Gdynia Helsinki Helsinki Kalmar
Karlkrona Kemi
Klaipeda Kotka
Malmo Mariehamn
Ronne Rostock
Saaremaa Sassnitz
22 different criteria per pier in each port
Receiving Station information e.g. Administration e.g.
Direct shore connection Port waste management plan
Maximum flowrate Port reception facilities database completed
Standard connection Advanced notification form circ 644a implemented
Barge No special fee system
Tank trucks Inadequacy reported
Sewage receiving………. Inadequacy report cleared……….
Instructions on each of the 22 criteria
Name of Cruise Port
Cruise Terminal Reference
Receiving Station Information
Direct Shore Connection
Maximum Flow Rate
Standard Connection Barge Maximum Flow
Rate
Copenhagen
Insert each individual Terminal
Reference number or name.
Insert Yes or No if the Terminal has
Direct Shore Connenctions
available for the maximum
number of Cruise Ships
Define the lowest of the maximum flow rates from the Direct Shore
Connections avaible at the
Terminal
Insert Yes or No if each Direct Shore Connections have
Standard Connections available in
accordance with MARPOL
Regulation
Insert Yes or No if the Terminal uses Barges as part of
the PRF.
Define the lowest of the maximum flow rates from
the Barge Facilities avaible at the Terminal
GdanskGdyniaHelsinkiHelsinkiKalmar
KarlkronaKemi
KlaipedaKotka
MalmoMariehamn
RonneRostock
SaaremaaSassnitz
StockholmTallinTurkuVisby
Phase 1 - template and information retrieval
Direct Shore Connection
Maximum Flow Rate
Standard Connection
BargeMaximum Flow
RateStandard
ConnectionTank Trucks
Maximum Flow Rate
Inse
rt Y
es o
r No
if th
e Te
rmin
al h
as D
irect
Sho
re C
onne
nctio
ns
avai
labl
e fo
r the
max
imum
num
ber o
f Cru
ise
Ship
s
Defin
e th
e lo
wes
t of t
he m
axim
um fl
ow ra
tes
from
the
Dire
ct
Shor
e Co
nnec
tions
ava
ible
at t
he T
erm
inal
Inse
rt Y
es o
r No
if ea
ch D
irect
Sho
re C
onne
ction
s hav
e St
anda
rd
Conn
ectio
ns a
vaila
ble
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith M
ARPO
L Reg
ulati
on
Inse
rt Y
es o
r No
if th
e Te
rmin
al u
ses
Barg
es a
s par
t of t
he P
RF.
Defin
e th
e lo
wes
t of t
he m
axim
um fl
ow ra
tes
from
the
Barg
e Fa
ciliti
es a
vaib
le a
t the
Ter
min
al
Inse
rt Y
es o
r No
if ea
ch B
arge
Fac
ility
has
Stan
dard
Con
necti
ons
avai
labl
e in
acc
orda
nce
with
MAR
POL R
egul
ation
Inse
rt Y
es o
r No
if th
e Te
rmin
al u
ses T
ank
Truc
ks a
s par
t of t
he
PRF.
Defin
e th
e lo
wes
t of t
he m
axim
um fl
ow ra
tes
from
the
Tank
Tr
uck
Facil
ities
ava
ible
at t
he T
erm
inal
Stockholm’s 10 different facilities…………..
Direct Shore Connection
Maximum Flow Rate
Standard Connection
No Special Fee System
ImplementedStockholm Bouy1 YesStockholm Frihamnen634 yes 300 Yes YesStockholm Frihamnen638 yes 300 Yes YesStockholm Frihamnen650 yes 300 Yes YesStockholm Nybroviken5 No YesStockholm Nynashamnbouy No YesStockholm Stadsgarden160 Yes 100 Yes YesStockholm Stadsgarden167 yes 300 Yes YesStockholm Skeppsbron106 Yes 50 Yes YesStockholm Värtahamnen523 Yes 50 Yes Yes
Receiving Station InformationName of Cruise
PortCruise Terminal
Reference
Phase 2 pilot test on one major port
Phase 3
• After having evaluated Stockholm, we expect to deliver gap analysis in June 2014
Port Reception Facilitiesoperational compliance strategy
Objective • IMO procedures need to be modified and in alignment with special areas
• Ongoing activities and information retrieval within the ports- through a collective partnership and not through a fragmented methodology.
Port authorities
Regulators Waste
receptioncompanies
Cruise Ship Owners
Deployment impact of ECA 2015
No easy answer…………….
• Many different operators – Many different strategies
Emission Control Area 2015
• Many different operators – Many different strategies:- Different source markets - Fly-Cruise (US, Italy, Spain, France) - EX-UK-Germany-Holland cruising- Large vs. Small operators - Ship efficiency and technology - Destination focused ships - Competitive considerations based on market share/source markets
+ Cost of fuel in St. Petersburg…………..
Emission Control Area 2015statements from operators
“Deployment 2015 is not fully closed yet, but plans are currently similar to 2014 regarding number of port, calls and itineraries”
“We will reduce capacity in NE, but not in the Baltic. We will slow down ships in ECA, but increase length of stay in ports. We have ships that are less effected by ECA and we are still in the process of making that puzzle”
“Not final decision yet. We may remove one ship in 2015, but that decision is not linked to ECA”
“2015 won’t be much different to 2013, 2014. Looking at scrubber solution before we can confirm future deployment”
Emission Control Area 2015
“We may have to skip the Baltic for the 2015 season due to our tonnage. We would like to offer the Baltic to our guests again in 2016 though”
“We will continue with ”X ship” again in 2015, but in addition to our Baltic Sea Cruises we may offer a few Norwegian cruises as well.
We finalize deployment early November”
“We will finalize Baltic itineraries for 2015 at a meeting tomorrow and I expect that the Baltics will come out better than 2014 despite ECA regulations”
“We will certainly be trading in the Baltic in 2015. We have just started the process of scheduling, and I will get back asap with an
indication, since impact of the ECA is still being worked out”
“2015 is still in discussion – i.e. I don’t have proper numbers so far. But I don’t expect major changes in volume”.
Helsinki, Finland
Economic Impact Studiesvital strategic tool
Arendal
Aalborg Riga
Kiel
Outcome:A. SpendingB. Jobs createdC. Guest satisfaction
Results: • Changed political focus• Increased investments in cruise networks• New products • Infrastructure investments
Total Baltic impact study:• Primo 2014
• 80% of the guests have very high (33%) or high (47%) expectations prior to their Cruise Baltic experience.
Satisfaction vs. expectations
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
17% 47% 33%
Guest expectations prior to cruise (Scale 1-5)
Very low Low Neither nor High Very high
4,16
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
9% 34% 54%
Guest satisfaction (Scale 1-5)
Very dissatisfied Dissatisfied Neither nor Satisfied Very satisfied
4,40
• 9 in 10 guests are very satisfied (54%) or satisfied (34%)
Recommendation
• 88% of all guests are very likely (59%) or likely (29%) to recommend a cruise in the Baltic Sea.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
9% 29% 59%
Guests’ likeliness to recommend (scale 1-5) Very unlikely Unlikely Neither nor Likely Very likely
4,42
Likelihood of returning2011 vs. 2013
• Increase in proportion of guests who are likely to return on a cruise
2011
2013
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
12%
10%
13%
12%
21%
20%
22%
29%
33%
30%
Likely to return on a cruise (Scale 1-5) Very unlikely Unlikely Neither unlikely, nor likely Likely Very likely
2011
2013
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
10%
5%
7%
5%
19%
14%
25%
33%
39%
43%
Likely to return on a holiday to a city (scale 1-5) Very unlikely Unlikely Neither unlikely, nor likely Likely Very likely
3,57
4,06
3,51
3,77
Malmö, Sweden
2013 Season49 Cruise Lines and 86 Ships in 2013
• No major operational issues
• Great guest satisfaction
• High temperatures for North Europe (luxury challenge)
2013 SeasonHighlights
Challenges:• Hop-On Hop-Off products
• Sankt Petersburg and independent Tour Operators
Port & Destination Association Development
CRUISE BALTICOne Sea – Oceans of adventuresInternational Cruise Summit – Madrid – October 2013 Director Cruise Baltic & Cruise Copenhagen NetworkBo Larsen bnl@woco.dk