Live on a cruise ship for $30k per year | Hacker News Reader

Live on a cruise ship for $30k per year

cnn.com

47 pointspr337h4m76 comments

Recommended read by David Foster Wallace: https://harpers.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/HarpersMagazi.... Read if you'd never like to step foot on a cruise again.

David Foster Wallace was very funny, but saw the disappointing and sad nature of just about everything. He's sort of the pinnacle of depression literature before widespread anti-depressant use.

Maybe we should listen to the people who warned us about certain aspects of society that could have potentially led to the need for widespread anti-depressant use.

He also gave one of the best commencement speeches ever: https://youtu.be/OsAd4HGJS4o

Look at a cruise ship as akin to a floating, polluting, germ-infested mall and I think you'll never have any desire to step foot on one.

I look at it like a germ-infested McDonalds ball pit for adults. I felt pretty uncomfortable on a cruise ship even before COVID. Now, I would break out in a sweat just looking at one.

Not that Covid is anything to be dismissed, but I'd be way more afraid of Norovirus. Critically, Covid doesn't last long on surfaces, so the chances of touching a contaminate surface and getting infected from that is small. Meanwhile Norovirus can last for up to 4 weeks on a surface and leads to vomiting and diarrhea, which sounds extremely not-fun in a small confined space, with a limited number of bathrooms.

Nowhere has an unlimited number of bathrooms.

I don't know about you, but I don't use more than one bathroom at a time. Thus if number of bathrooms >= people, I wouldn't call them unlimited, but given an extremely contagious disease that causes vomiting and diarrhea, that sounds a lot better than having to share 1 bathroom with multiple people!

“promising to tick off 375 ports around the world, visiting 135 countries and all seven continents. The ship will cover more than 130,000 miles over the three years, taking in iconic sights from Rio de Janeiro’s Christ the Redeemer statue and India’s Taj Mahal, to Mexico’s Chichen Itza, the pyramids of Giza, Machu Picchu and the Great Wall of China. It even slots in trips to 103 “tropical islands.” Of those 375 ports, 208 will be overnight stops, giving you extra time in the destination.“

Sounds epic for retired people who want to see the world! But is it profitable for the cruise company… what happens if they realise this half way through the journey and are forced to cancel the rest of the trip?

Sounds painful. You're on a boat filled with tourists making stops at tourist traps.

After the 30th "tropical island" port, will you even bother to get off the boat?

To wander around souvenir shops or try the local cuisine, again.

I’ve done a few cruises and there’s nothing stopping you from doing your own thing. When we went to Korea, for example, we just had a driver and hit all the stops we wanted for the day.

I think the issue is more with the depth of the experience, because as you say it's only what you want "for the day." In the shorter timeframes you're allowed the worry might be that you only see what the material aspects of life are like, but never really get a sense of what it's like to inhabit that world.

Though even with that in mind I guess different people could be looking for different things when they visit a place.

I've admittedly only done a cruise once, but I saw it as sampling from tasting menu. After my cruise there where two places (out of 8) we'd stopped that I really felt I wanted to see more of, so I went back to those places on later vacations and explored them more.

One person’s dream is another one’s nightmare. I’ve been on cruises as a child and they felt claustrophobic. But got to see some cool places and you can definitely do your own thing in each port or just stay onboard relaxing. I think that as a way to go around the world and see 130+ countries in a year it would be awesome. You’d be pretty sick of it by the end but at least you’re not stuck rotting in some retirement community doing puzzles and watching daytime TV. Again one person’s pleasure is another’s poison.

At many stops, “local” cuisine includes Jimmy Buffet Margaritaville.

Isn't that the way most Westerns go on holiday anyways? Doing the same things at the same places like everyone else?

Calm down your biases. Take a trip to Australia and tell me that Japanese and Chinese tourists don’t do the exact same thing. Turns out tourist traps exist for a reason. People seem to enjoy them.

Perhaps. But that doesn’t mean people would want to do that 103 times in just 3 years.

Taj Mahal? That’s hundreds of miles from the coast. I guess this company is hoping to make the real money by offering excursions to people who are tired of being on the ship long term.

I think the Great Wall is even further, unless you can dock in Pyongyang. Utterly ridiculous.

> Carnival Corporation (...) took in $4.75 billion in ticket revenue, and sailed 36.4 million passenger days. That comes out to $131 per person, per day.

This would be about $47.815 per year. Not that far off.

[1] https://www.cruzely.com/how-much-a-cruise-costs-in-2020/

It feels like it’s either a move of desperation or they’re just filling empty space and you’ll inevitably get lesser service and upsells everywhere.

> Just one word of warning: You’d need not just a cruise ship but a time machine to visit some of the stops listed on its “13 wonders of the world” list, which includes places like the Lighthouse of Alexandria, the Colossus of Rhodes, the Temple of Artemis at Ephesus and the statue of Zeus at Olympia – all of which were destroyed in antiquity.

Is this a joke? This thinly-veiled promotional advertising masquerading as an article also admits that the destinations listed on the official website is false?

It's 130 sqft

https://news.yahoo.com/want-live-sea-see-inside-202436140.ht...

> 13[0] square feet “Virtual Inside” staterooms – which start at $30K per person per year,

So that's $60K/yr for 2 people to share a room.

Plus taxes and fees, no doubt. I don't pay tax on my apartment rent.

A small single bed (well, mattress, a bed will typically be at least slightly larger) is 30"×75", which is 15.625 sq ft.

13 sq ft a little bigger than midway between that and a standard crib mattress (28"×52", 10.1+ sq ft)

This...must be a typo.

This sounds like my worst nightmare TBH, even before 2020. :) The price isn't bad though. Room, board, office, nice views, free drinks, housekeeping? Might be cheaper than living on dry land.

For that price, I would happily sign for all those services for a room with sea view. That would be a dream.

But if the room is on a big noisy, vibrating vehicle consuming lot of fuel and I’m not allowed to go walking/cycling outside in the forest, the dream become a nightmare.

> The price isn't bad though. Room, board, office, nice views, free drinks, housekeeping? Might be cheaper than living on dry land.

Reviews I've read sound like living in a floating overcrowded mall meets water park meets casino.

I don't know how one could possibly tolerate that for more than a few days at a time without either going nuts or alcoholic.

There are plenty of places on dry land that are a LOT cheaper than 30k/year. Probably would be more comfortable too.

For reference, a fully loaded resort experience in Camaroon, which ranked 97th out of 197 countries for cost of living, will still cost you $91+/day. $30k for the year works out to $82.

You have to compare like-to-like. You can go camping to minimize housing costs. Unfortunately the buffet service is sub par and the drink service is non-existent. There's not even a service class of people that will clean your tent for you and fold cute towel animals while you enjoy am afternoon of bocce ball.

In the UK you could stay in a small hotel for that price and have a lot more space.

Really? You can find a hotel for £68.29 per night which includes all food, unlimited soft drinks and alcohol with meals? That's in an area with a wide range of touristy things to do (as the ship will be docking at various interesting locations versus a hotel in the middle of nowhere)?

I toured the UK for two months last summer and never paid more than 60 GBP per night and in many cases under 40 GBP. Granted that none of those included evening meals or alcohol but some included breakfast and an evening meal and a beer isn't much extra.

Per person for a couple? I think you can start to get pretty close aside from the bigger and more expensive cities. I'm pretty sure you could do a walking trip in England for not that much more. And keep in mind that's the starting at price. Also, the UK is expensive. You can absolutely do trips to other parts of the world for that sort of money.

If it's the sort of extended trip someone is into, it might well be a decent deal. But it's not an absolute bargain relative to other alternatives one could put together.

The price is OK though I expect a lot of people this might appeal to already own their homes.

But it's hard for me to imagine being in this regimented existence for 3 months let alone 3 years. And while people can presumably take a break and meet the ship at another port, the practical issues for, again, the sort of people this might appeal to seem considerable.

You have to sign up for three years though. Three. Years. That’s $100k and a duration that takes it out of the realm of “a fun thing to try” and into “too risky to contemplate” for me.

I wonder how this works with taxes? HR department at work gets freaked out if people work a few weeks from abroad, or even another state.

I think it's fair to say that no one with a remotely normal job can reasonably work from there.

How about a normally remote job?

Where you're in who knows what timezone? Presumably want to actually spend time in the places you're visiting? Probably have somewhat sporadic Internet (how is Starlink in Antarctica?). To say nothing of the HR/payroll, "Yeah I'll be working somewhere in the world."

I imagine you can get off with it if you're some sort of independent freelancer/consultant who doesn't need to coordinate much. But I doubt any HR department would touch you. I sure wouldn't. Sounds like way more potential for problems than I would want to deal with. Hard pass.

The cheapest option is

> 13 square feet “Virtual Inside” stateroom

I can't wrap my mind with how this works, is it like a capsule? For 3 years?!

They forgot trailing zero. It should be 130 sq ft[1]. Looks like no window too.

[1] https://www.lifeatseacruises.com/pricing-and-cabins

It's 130 sqft. CNN can't even proofread their advertiser press release retypes.

https://news.yahoo.com/want-live-sea-see-inside-202436140.ht...

It couldn't work. 6 feet by 2.1666667 feet by 1 foot (edit: or any height, since it's sqft)? A normal sized adult person could not fit in such a space without breaking their shoulders

It’s square feet. Not cubed feet. The height of the ceiling doesn’t play in to that. So it would be a 6 by 2.1 ft room with a 7 or 8 foot ceiling.

Regardless, it sounds like 130 square feet is the actual measurement.

Even a small single bed is about 13 sq. ft so it has to be wrong.

There are multiple cruise ship condos afloat or nearing completion. Would be a great setting for post apocalyptic TV show.

https://www.rvtravel.com/trade-land-yacht-real-ocean-abode-1...

Cruise ships are nothing but pure evil. A bunch of rich people showing their money off in a giant pollution machine just so they can go patronize other cultures like a zoo. Reminds me of that video of those victorian-era royals throwing bread on the ground next to impoverished Africans for entertainment, just sitting there watching these starving people scamper around for scraps. Makes me sick.

That's not even considering the effects on marine life. We have a bunch of useless noise-makers just patrolling water endlessly for no good reason. After 9/11 when all the traffic near New York was forced to stop, whales were shown to be more relaxed than ever before because they didn't have to listen to our constant racket for a few days.

> Cruise ships are nothing but pure evil.

Oh come on. Either your evil meter is out of whack or your bar for "pure evil" is hysterically low.

Those victorian-era people throwing bread probably thought they weren't doing anything wrong too. I think your bar for evil isn't low enough.

> I think your bar for evil isn't low enough.

I'm sure you do, but I don't mind. A bar for "evil" that counts cruise ships as "pure evil," is a step or two away from being like someone raving on a street-corner with a sandwich board, telling everyone they're evil and going to hell.

I don't care for cruise ships in general. But aside from your over the top comment, I don't actually expect the average cruise ship passenger is especially rich. It seems like a pretty middle class activity by Western standards.

In the world I see you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center. You'll wear leather clothes that will last you the rest of your life. You'll climb the wrist-thick kudzu vines that wrap the Sears Towers. And when you look down, you'll see tiny figures pounding corn, laying stripes of venison on the empty car pool lane of some abandoned superhighways.

I'd love to hear your opinion on the perils of museums.

Museums are for education and archives, a cruise is nothing but mindless rich people stuff. A museum just sits there like any other building, a cruise ship actively pollutes and wastes. I'm not sure why you bring museums into the conversation, it's not even similar.

I bring museums into the conversation because it is similar. Museums are often lavishly adorned palaces, largely serving the purpose of leisure.

To that it appears you may have fallen for, and are attempting to spread some discredited outrage porn/flamebait[0][1], possibly due to confirmation bias and the strength of your beliefs. Obviously since video was a fairly new media at this time, I'll agree that this attempt at depicting charity is a little more than off-color now, regardless of the precise contents.

I would check the HN Guidelines[2] since this whole comment kind of qualifies as fulminating and is kind of extremely political and ideological.

[0] https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2022/sep/09/facebook-p...

[1] https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-queenelizabeth-foo...

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

I must have missed the rule against political conversation when I signed up. I think this rule is just a cheap excuse for those in power here to restrict opinions they disagree with. I see political comments on here all the time from a right-wing perspective. Kinda funny how it's only "political" when it's against those in power.

I fail to see how these types of discussion "trample curiosity" as the guidelines put it. I think it's rather obvious that restricting the conversation is what tramples curiosity.

Server software can run decades without intervention.

Imagine trying to predict the next two years of legislation that applies to you at the local, county, state, federal, and multilateral levels. It's hopeless because it's a system composed of the most complicated systems we know of -- people.

If you can't predict it, then controlling it is also hopeless. Control being one of the basic things a hacker seeks out.

Now if you convince a county of people to unanimously trust consumer electronics to process their vote fairly in a ballot measure, that and every facet about how you did that is obviously interesting.

Textual chads about what expressions of wealth inequality are egregious or harmful aren't terribly interesting or easy to read about.

On the other hand, there probably aren't very many neo-Puritans on board.

Whatever floats your boat, so to speak.

You should spend more time outside.

Which part of caring about the environment implied I don't go outside? I do construction, you go outside.

Sounds like a poor man's version of https://aboardtheworld.com/

Which in turn is the poor man's version of https://www.aman.com/aman-yachts ;-)

But seriously, where are we going if old people are gonna have to confine themselves into cruises? I get the cost opportunity, but...

I've only visited the world, but frankly I'd have no problem spending retirement like that

> However, the cruise also includes free high-speed Wi-Fi,

doubt.jpeg

Presumably something like Starlink.

But I would still file reliable, performant, unmetered Internet in the aspirational category.

Their website says it’s Starlink, not sure how much bandwidth though

Kinda reminds me of recession-time travel industry deals.

E.g. in 2008 where many went for a 100k mile bonus credit card offer for British Airways miles.

I expect that once you dig into the details you'd find that you were paying a lot more than the "Prices starting at" sticker.

Sounds great, price is decent for room + food + drinks for a year.

Can’t imagine disconnecting from everyone for 3 years though.

> Star link internet

> Always stay connected to the real world with the fastest internet available at sea

> fastest internet available at sea

Now there's a high bar!

Is 13 sq ft a typo or am I missing something?

130 mate. https://www.lifeatseacruises.com/pricing-and-cabins Hilarious typo

The price is per person as well and you’ll be sharing as a couple. If you go as a single you will pay 1.7x the per person rate.

13 square feet? No.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com