Life at Sea Cruises, a three-year cruise around the world, was canceled just two weeks before it was supposed to sail from Amsterdam.

Passengers who booked trips have been told refunds will be issued in monthly installments

…

Life at Sea Cruises’ first three-year sailing was announced in March and promised passengers willing to fork out at least $29,999 per year

  • money_loo@1337lemmy.com
    184·
    1 year ago

    Is it just me or does 10k a year for full accommodations seem wildly cheap?

    Fml I need coffee

    • SatanicNotMessianic@lemmy.ml
      281·
      1 year ago

      Even at $30k per year it was ridiculously cheap. I have a friend of a friend that was going to do this for his retirement. $2500 per month for a room and board that allows you to spend your life sailing from port to port is actually a great deal, and if/when you need more medical care you simply move back off of the ship. The idea was that passengers could just buy another ticket and keep sailing for as many years as they wanted.

      I called this one.

      1. It sounded too good to be true. I had a feeling that they wouldn’t launch and if they did it’d be a floating Fyre Festival except with senior citizens who would not be able to escape.
      2. Cruise ships are Petri dishes as it is. The idea of a cruise consisting of mostly elderly people who stay on board and mingle with crowds in the various ports of call sounds like a death cruise. Just imagine a viral outbreak on that ship that was killing passengers, resulting in a lockdown.
      3. It was basically someone watching Wall-E and deciding that the dystopian part was actually a pretty idea.
      • edric@lemm.eeEnglish
        23·
        1 year ago

        To be fair, 2.5k a month is what some people spend on rent+food+utilities. Assuming all food onboard is paid for, it’s sounds like an ok deal for someone who actually wants to temporarily live on a cruise ship and has the income/savings to pay for all of it upfront.

        • Ramόn Sánchez @lemmy.worldEnglish
          10·
          1 year ago

          I agree. The only major difference I see, is you most likely have to at least pay for one year up front. I have heard of people doing exactly as you suggested, so it’s not really as crazy of an idea as it may sound.

          If I could afford the upfront cost, I would definitely try it.

          • tsonfeir@lemm.ee
            71·
            1 year ago

            It does kinda sound like a fun way to spend 3 years, but it will probably suck. It’s not going to be a good room. You’re gonna get sick no matter what you do. And unless you actually have money leftover, you’re not going to be doing much in the ports. Also, you’ve got no storage for 3 years of souvenirs.

            Oh and if you miss the boat, you’d have to fly to the next port to get back on.