1. Port & Destination Association Development
CRUISE BALTIC
One Sea – Oceans of adventures
International Cruise Summit – Madrid – October 2013
Director
Cruise Baltic & Cruise Copenhagen Network
Bo Larsen
bnl@woco.dk

2. Cruise Copenhagen

3. Cruise Baltic

4. 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

5. NEWS
 Cruise Baltic Port number 28
 Ocean Quay in Copenhagen
 Malmö, Sweden

6. Skagen, Denmark
Destination number 28
 “Boutique Destination”
 5-6 annual calls last 10 years
 Interesting tour options
 Geographical phenomena
 New pier available 2015

7. New Pier 2015
Skagen, Denmark

8. Copenhagen, Denmark
New Ocean Quay - 2014

9. New Ocean Quay – 2014
$ 100 million investment
•
•
•
•
Width 70 m - operation area 18 m
Water depth 10 m
Parking area for 200 cars
Adequate waste reception facilities

10. New Ocean Quay – 2014
1.1 km. new pier
7 km. to city hall square

11. New Ocean Quay – 2014
3 terminal buildings each 3.300 sqm

12. Malmø, Sweden

13. Malmø, Sweden

14. Aarhus, Denmark

15. 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

16. Challenging Environment
• New Regulations
- Waste Reception
- ECA
• Fuel Costs

17. Cruise Baltic
Port Service Standards
Background
A 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 Marseilles
November 2012

18. Cruise Baltic
Port Service Standards
Background
A 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
Launched in Marseilles
November 2012

19. Cruise Baltic
Port Service Standards
Essential – 17 different standards – examples:
Pilotage service available
Cleared and well signaled entrance / exit and from the pier
Bunkers available
Desirable – 6 different standards – examples:
Designated and marked parking spaces for vehicles
Fixed sign / map of the port with directions between port and city
City maps available at pier

20. 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

21. Reception Facilities
operational compliance strategy
Potentially become part of Cruise Baltic Port Service Standards
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

22. Process
example of the relevant stakeholders

23. Port Reception Facilities
operational compliance strategy
Three phases:
1.
2.
3.
Template and information retrieval
Pilot test on one major port
Evaluation on all other ports
Phase One
Detailed information retrieval on the Baltic Ports including but not limited to prior studies,
resulting in a template and methodology with questionnaire on adequacy.
Phase two
Roll out a template and procedures to one major Baltic port.
Any findings and feedback will be examined and if appropriate incorporated in the
final methodology with questionnaire on adequacy.
Phase three
This 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.

24. Phase 1
template and information retrieval
Receiving Station Information
Name of Cruise
Port
Cruise Terminal
Reference
Direct Shore
Connection
Maximum Flow
Rate
Standard
Connection
Barge
Maximum Flow
Rate
Standard
Connection
Tank Trucks
Maximum Flow
Rate
Standard
Connection
Sewage Receiving
Bio-Residue
Receiving
Fats & Oil
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……….
Food Waste Re
Water Receivi

25. Cruise Terminal
Reference
Direct Shore
Direct Shore
Connection
Connection
Copenhagen
Gdansk
Gdynia
Helsinki
Helsinki
Kalmar
Karlkrona
Kemi
Klaipeda
Kotka
Malmo
Mariehamn
Ronne
Rostock
Saaremaa
Sassnitz
Stockholm
Tallin
Turku
Visby
Insert Yes or No ififthe Terminal has Direct Shore Connenctions
Insert Yes or No the Terminal has Direct Shore Connenctions
available for the maximum number of Cruise Ships
available for the maximum number of Cruise Ships
Maximum Flow
Standard
Maximum Flow
Rate
Connection
Rate
Insert Yes or No if the Terminal uses Tank Trucks as part of the
PRF.
Insert Yes or No if each Barge Facility has Standard Connections
available in accordance with MARPOL Regulation
Receiving Station Information
Maximum Flow
Standard
Maximum Flow
Standard
Barge
Barge
Rate
Connection
Rate
Connection
Define the lowest of the maximum flow rates from the Barge
Facilities avaible at the Terminal
Define the lowest of the maximum flow rates from the Barge
Facilities avaible at the Terminal
Insert Yes or No if the Terminal uses Barges as part of the PRF.
Insert Yes or No if the Terminal uses Barges as part of the PRF.
Insert Yes or No if each Direct Shore Connections have Standard
Insert Yes or No if each Direct Shore Connections have Standard
Connections available in accordance with MARPOL Regulation
Connections available in accordance with MARPOL Regulation
Define the lowest of the maximum flow rates from the Direct
Define the lowest of the maximum flow rates from the Direct
Shore Connections avaible at the Terminal
Shore Connections avaible at the Terminal
Name of Cruise
Port
Insert each individual Terminal Reference number or name.
Phase 1
- template and information retrieval
 Instructions on each of the 22 criteria
Tank Trucks

26. Phase 2
pilot test on one major port
 Stockholm’s 10 different facilities…………..
Receiving Station Information
Name of Cruise
Port
Cruise Terminal
Reference
Stockholm
Stockholm
Stockholm
Stockholm
Stockholm
Stockholm
Stockholm
Stockholm
Stockholm
Stockholm
Bouy1
Frihamnen634
Frihamnen638
Frihamnen650
Nybroviken5
Nynashamnbouy
Stadsgarden160
Stadsgarden167
Skeppsbron106
Värtahamnen523
Direct Shore
Connection
Maximum Flow
Rate
Standard
Connection
yes
yes
yes
No
No
Yes
yes
Yes
Yes
300
300
300
Yes
Yes
Yes
100
300
50
50
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No Special Fee
System
Implemented
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

27. Phase 3
• After having evaluated Stockholm, we expect to deliver gap analysis in June 2014

28. Port Reception Facilities
operational 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.
Cruise Ship
Owners
Waste
reception
companies
Port
authorities
Regulators

29. Deployment impact
of ECA 2015
No easy answer…………….
• Many different operators – Many different strategies

30. 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…………..

31. Emission Control Area 2015
statements 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”
“2015 won’t be much different to 2013, 2014.
Looking at scrubber solution before we can confirm future deployment”
“Not final decision yet.
We may remove one ship in 2015, but that decision is not linked to ECA”

32. 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”.

33. Helsinki, Finland

34. Economic Impact Studies
vital strategic tool
Outcome:
A. Spending
B. Jobs created
C. Guest satisfaction
Results:
•
•
•
•
Changed political focus
Increased investments in cruise networks
New products
Infrastructure investments
Total Baltic impact study:
• Primo 2014
Arendal
Aalborg
Riga
Kiel

35. Satisfaction
vs.
expectations
• 80% of the guests have very high (33%) or high (47%)
expectations prior to their Cruise Baltic experience.
Guest expectations prior to cruise (Scale 1-5)
Very low
Low
17%
0%
Neither nor
High
Very high
47%
20%
40%
33%
60%
80%
4,16
100%
• 9 in 10 guests are very satisfied (54%) or satisfied (34%)
Guest satisfaction (Scale 1-5)
Very dissatisfied
9%
0%
Dissatisfied
Neither nor
34%
20%
Satisfied
Very satisfied
54%
40%
60%
4,40
80%
100%

36. Recommendation
• 88% of all guests are very likely (59%) or likely (29%) to recommend
a cruise in the Baltic Sea.
Guests’ likeliness to recommend (scale 1-5)
Very unlikely
9%
0%
Unlikely
Neither nor
29%
20%
Likely
Very likely
4,42
59%
40%
60%
80%
100%

37. Likelihood of returning
2011 vs. 2013
• Increase in proportion of guests who are likely to return on a cruise
Likely to return on a cruise (Scale 1-5)
Very unlikely
2013
10%
2011
12%
12%
Unlikely
20%
13%
0%
Neither unlikely, nor likely
29%
21%
20%
Likely
30%
22%
40%
60%
Very likely
3,57
33%
80%
3,51
100%
Likely to return on a holiday to a city (scale 1-5)
Very unlikely
2013
5% 5%
2011
10%
0%
14%
7%
Unlikely
33%
19%
20%
Neither unlikely, nor likely
Very likely
43%
25%
40%
Likely
4,06
39%
60%
80%
3,77
100%

38. Malmö, Sweden

39. 2013 Season
49 Cruise Lines and 86 Ships in 2013

40. 2013 Season
Highlights
• No major operational issues
• Great guest satisfaction
• High temperatures for North Europe (luxury challenge)
Challenges:
• Hop-On Hop-Off products
• Sankt Petersburg and independent Tour Operators

41. Port & Destination Association Development
CRUISE BALTIC
One Sea – Oceans of adventures
International Cruise Summit – Madrid – October 2013
Director
Cruise Baltic & Cruise Copenhagen Network
Bo Larsen
bnl@woco.dk