Selling the Shore: A Framing Analysis of Cruise Tourism Excursion Marketing

 

Halli Harwood

Strategic Communications, Elon University

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements in an undergraduate senior capstone course in communications

Abstract

Cruise excursions are an important factor in passengers choosing a cruise vacation, shaping how travelers interact with port communities and understand global identities. This study examines how three cruise lines – Carnival Cruise Line (CCL), MSC Cruises, and Royal Caribbean International (RCI) – frame port communities through excursion descriptions across nine ports in Alaska, the Caribbean, and the Mediterranean. Using a mixed-methods design, the study identifies how many excursions are marketed as cultural or historical using DEI-related website filters, then qualitatively analyzes the top five excursion descriptions per port. The findings reveal selective framing of destinations that often results in limited DEI representation, contributing insight into an understudied facet of cruise tourism and diverse cultural identities.

Keywords: cruise industry, tourism, framing analysis, DEI
Email: hharwood@elon.edu

I. Introduction

Cruise tourism has become one of the fastest growing sectors of global travel over the last few years. With dozens of cruise lines carrying millions of passengers each year, billions of dollars are generated, affecting economic growth around the world. By the end of 2025, the industry was projected to have a record fleet of 310 ocean-going vessels (CLIA, 2025) and more than 20.4 million passengers each year (Statista, 2023). With cruises marketed as a convenient and luxurious way to experience many countries in a single trip, cruise corporations rely heavily on infrastructure, labor, and resources of port communities worldwide. While port communities do experience the benefits of being cruise destinations, which include increased spending from tourists, employment opportunities, and visibility for lesser-known destinations, there are a variety of nuances that impact the relationship between cruise lines and the ports they visit. Some ports experience environmental damage, labor exploitation, or uneven economic distribution that impact the people in those destinations.

Understanding the consequences of this relationship allows stakeholders to determine who truly benefits from this industry and who bears the cost. As cruise lines emphasize themes of economic development and bridging the gap between cultures, their operations are framed as mutually beneficial in marketing materials. However, local residents and activists could frame these dynamics differently, challenging the narratives that are typically presented in media coverage of the industry.

Excursions are central to the cruising process. As one of the primary attractions offered by cruise lines during a passenger’s vacation, excursions serve as leisure experiences, but also as curated cultural events. Their descriptions, often being the only information passengers obtain before selecting excursions, are crucial in capturing the audience’s attention as they frame the culture, people, and history of a destination. With this, excursion marketing is a powerful way that cruise lines can connect with prospective passengers about the types of experiences they have the opportunity to participate in once the passenger disembarks in a port.

Recently, concepts tied to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) have become increasingly visible in the tourism industry, especially as it relates to marketing. According to a study conducted by Edelman, 71% of consumers stated they are more likely to trust a brand that showcases diversity in its advertising (Miller, 2024). Despite the cruise industry’s post-pandemic growth and influence within the tourism industry, it remains understudied in terms of how it presents cultures and communities, especially when it comes to excursion advertising. The gap in research surrounding how cruise lines frame port communities intersects with the industry’s reliance on traveling to regions with nuanced histories, prominent Indigenous cultures, and diverse identities.

This study examines how three major cruise corporations – CCL, MSC Cruises, and RCI – frame culture, history, and tradition through the excursions they offer and highlight in nine ports across three distinct regions: Alaska, the Caribbean, and the Mediterranean. The differences in these companies’ cruise ship capacities, number of destinations offered to passengers, home countries, history, and brand identity, make an ideal area to research. Furthermore, information from each company is accessible online, allowing for an in-depth analysis of the excursion details provided. Framing theory will be used in order to research how excursions in different regions are presented to audiences.

II. Literature Review

Cruise tourism has become a dominant force within the travel industry, developing at a rate faster than most other tourism sectors. Cruise tourism has become an industry synonymous with leisure and enjoyment for millions of people every year and that number continues to grow. However, the industry also functions on the involvement of global supply chains, labor systems ashore and on board, and international regulatory bodies. Companies can typically achieve low costs and high profits because they are able to sail under the radar when it comes to labor, wage, and environmental regulations, which complicates attempts to distribute the benefits of cruise tourism in an equitable manner (McWay, 2021).

Vertical integration refers to a business strategy where one company owns multiple stages of its supply chain, typically to gain control of the industry and reduce costs (Corporate Finance Institute, 2023). Within the cruising industry, vertical integration is extremely common as companies operate ships, control excursion options, and host passengers on their own private islands (Soriani, et al., 2009). The use of private islands is especially important to consider as these destinations typically market “local” experiences while simultaneously excluding the actual communities surrounding them. For example, RCI’s private destination in Haiti is marketed with its zip line, roller coaster, and aqua parks, but information about the historic sites, daily “folkloric” shows, and native markets in the port is hard to come by. Vertical integration can be extremely damaging in certain industries (Abdela, 2019), including tourism, as such ownership consolidates power and limits the autonomy of local businesses as cruise ships dump their passengers off for a few hours each day in port communities around the world.

Industry advocates frame cruise tourism as a catalyst for local development, emphasizing its capacity to create jobs and bring in visitors. Recent research shows that while cruise ships bring large volumes of visitors to different locations, the economic benefit for locals isn’t always there, suggesting that the profitable economic distribution is extremely unequal. Studies across the Caribbean, the Mediterranean, and the Pacific Islands find that most of the profits are collected by cruise corporations, not by small-scale entrepreneurs or business owners (Chou, et al., 2024). For example, some excursions are subcontracted through cruise-owned partners, taking money away from locals and redirecting the money right back into the pockets of corporations. This is described as “tourism leakage” where most of the money spent by tourists does not remain in the local economy (Chaitanya & Swain, 2023). Even more damaging is the dependency on cruise arrivals by port communities, subsequently making their local economies fragile and increasingly prone to failure. When cruise lines have to suspend operations or alter itineraries, due to weather concerns or politics, among other issues, local workers face immediate financial loss, which has the potential to lead to an entire region or country’s economic collapse. Smaller island ports face even more challenges than major ports like Cozumel or Barcelona, including unequal labor relations or cultural commodification, signifying that cruise-port relationships do not only promote an inequitable distribution of economic power, but further reinforce broader global inequalities in representation and cultural power (Mahoney & Collins, 2019).

Moving past economics, the relationship between cruise companies and port communities is complex. Cruise lines determine itineraries, fees, and the level of interaction vendors can have with tourists based on their excursion options, giving very little opportunity for port authorities to negotiate or protect their citizens, especially because cruise lines can easily shift their routes if regulations don’t fit their interests. These consequences compel port authorities to offer incentives or overlook regulations in order to maintain cruise traffic, further damaging the locals in their communities (Pallis, 2015). This creates the latest example of a “race to the bottom” where destinations compete to attract ships by lowering costs rather than improving local benefits (Legal Information Institute). In some instances, cruise lines have surpassed port authorities and bought their own “private terminals” that are marked as part of the host nation but instead are controlled by the company and completely fenced off from surrounding local communities, as Carnival has done in Honduras, and as previously mentioned, Royal Caribbean in Haiti.

Furthermore, in a variety of instances, port cities are framed as “partners,” but that isn’t the case most of the time, with ports having to be more dependent on cruise lines rather than being an equal (London & Lohmann, 2014). There are structural inequalities when it comes to the work ports have to do and what the cruise lines get out of it. For instance, ports must invest heavily in infrastructure, especially moving forward with environmental consciousness and having to provide an option for shore power, but the profit-making operations, from ticket sales to onboard spending to excursions, are often controlled by the cruise lines, which are foreign entities from the perspective of the ports.

Framing theory provides an understanding of how corporations see these unequal relationships and communicate them to their stakeholders. Frames are used to transform locations and cultures into desirable experiences in order to shape how travelers interpret their surroundings (MacCarthy, 2023). When talking specifically about the cruising industry, framing becomes a branding technique that shapes perceptions of the company and the destination. Tourism marketing often relies on selective storytelling that has the potential to reinforce stereotypes, erase local identities, and strengthen economic inequality (Huang & Hsu, 2009). Common phrases used by cruise lines to describe their relationship with port communities include “cultural exchange,” “energizing communities,” and “economic empowerment.” These narratives reflect the operation as mutually beneficial when that is not always accurate. Furthermore, cruise lines promote themselves through a lens of “luxury,” “safety,” and “adventure.” The differences between the two descriptions portray the industry leaders as “saviors” as they support development and intercultural connection (MacCarthy, 2023).

Although all major cruise lines use similar communication styles, their brand identities subtly shape the differences in framing strategies. For example, Royal Caribbean’s brand emphasizes technological innovation and responsibility, and the company typically frames ports as “playgrounds” for exploration. On the other hand, Carnival markets itself as a lower-cost, “fun” trip for adventure-lovers and those wanting entertainment while on board and ashore. While these differences may seem trivial, they do have an impact in the way consumers perceive the ethical and economic relationships between a cruise line and the destinations it goes to.

While scholars have looked into the economic, environmental, and social effects of cruise tourism, there is little information analyzing the framing of these dynamics, especially in a way that specifically relates to excursions offered in different port destinations. A comparative analysis of Royal Caribbean (Florida headquarters), Carnival (Florida headquarters), and MSC (Geneva, Switzerland headquarters) excursion narratives can expand the literature available in a variety of ways that challenges the way port communities are discussed in current communication.

Research questions

Research questions to guide the research include the following:

1.     How frequently do cruise lines offer excursions categorized within DEI standards across different regions and in different ports?

2.     How do cruise lines narratively frame port communities within their excursion description, and what patterns emerge across regions and companies?

Through an analysis of both the quantity and content of excursion offerings, this study provides insight into how cruise lines represent identities, culture, and tradition in various ports in different regions around the world. The findings address a significant gap of research surrounding cruise lines and contribute to broader conversations about DEI within the tourism industry.

III. Methods

This study used a mixed-methods approach with a quantitative assessment of excursion availability and a qualitative framing analysis of excursion descriptions. This design allowed the study to measure how often cruise lines offer DEI-related excursions in addition to how cruise lines present DEI-content within their marketing of the excursions. Three regions were selected due to their prominence in cruise tourism and strong cultural diversity:

Alaska: Icy Strait Point, Juneau, Ketchikan.

Caribbean: Cozumel, Nassau, St. Thomas.

Mediterranean: Istanbul, Mykonos, Naples.

Furthermore, each port is regularly visited by CCL, MSC Cruises, and RCI, allowing for a cross-company comparison. With CCL, MSC Cruises, and RCI (as a part of its parent company, Royal Caribbean Group) being the three largest cruise lines in the world, ranked by passenger volume and revenue shares, these corporations serve as an ideal sample for analyzing how cruise lines describe and market excursion options to consumers (Synytsia, 2025).

Information about excursion offerings were available on each cruise line’s website and could be filtered by region and port. From there, built-in website filters were used to collect quantitative data regarding DEI-options for each port in Alaska, the Caribbean, and the Mediterranean.

After the DEI content was collected, the filters were reset and screenshots were taken of the first five excursions listed for each cruise line in each port. From there, a qualitative coding analysis was performed to determine themes and patterns for 135 excursions across the three regions.

IV. Results

Quantitative Results

The study first applied the cruise lines’ built-in website filters connected to DEI, including: “Culture,” “History,” “Culture & History,” “City Tour,” and “Scenic Route.” These filters were applied to each port page for each cruise line. The total number of filtered excursions was recorded and compared to the total number of available excursions offered by the cruise line for the specified port. The data is reflected in the following table.

Quantity of DEI-related excursions by cruise line and filter

Region Port CCL DEI-Filtered Excursions MSC DEI-Filtered Excursions RCI DEI-Filtered Excursions Total DEI-Filtered Excursions Total Excursions
Alaska Icy Strait Point 2 3 0 5 48
Alaska Juneau 6 6 0 12 129
Alaska Ketchikan 14 9 3 26 124
Caribbean Cozumel 15 10 8 33 179
Caribbean Nassau 4 8 9 21 117
Caribbean St. Thomas 4 4 11 19 106
Mediterranean Istanbul 10 9 11 30 37
Mediterranean Mykonos 10 2 5 17 34
Mediterranean Naples 20 12 9 41 77

These findings were used to determine the number of DEI-related excursions offered in each port, revealing themes in how cruise lines categorize cultural and historical content. Furthermore, the collection of this data identified whether DEI content is more relevant in specific regions or by a specific cruise line. RCI offered the highest number of DEI excursions in the Mediterranean ports but the fewest in Alaska, including zero DEI excursions in Juneau and the Icy Strait Point ports. Carnival remained more consistent with the number of DEI excursions offered across regions, with slightly more content in Cozumel and Naples. Lastly, MSC showed findings comparable to Carnival, with relatively limited offerings across all regions.

Percentage of DEI-filtered excursions per port

Port Total DEI-Filtered Excursions Total Excursions % DEI-Filtered
Icy Strait Point 5 48 10.42%
Juneau 12 129 9.30%
Ketchikan 26 124 20.97%
Cozumel 33 179 18.44%
Nassau 21 117 17.95%
St. Thomas 19 106 17.92%
Istanbul 30 37 81.08%
Mykonos 17 34 50.00%
Naples 41 77 53.25%

Across the nine ports studied, the Caribbean and Alaska had the lowest number of DEI-relevant excursions, while the Mediterranean showed a substantially higher concentration. A further breakdown by region is displayed in the table below.

Summary of regional DEI-excursion availability

Region Total DEI-Filtered Excursions Total Excursions % DEI-Filtered
Alaska 43 301 14.29%
Caribbean 73 402 18.16%
Mediterranean 88 148 59.46%

In terms of regional patterns, DEI-filtered excursions represented approximately 18% of all excursions offered in the Caribbean region. Alaska displayed the lowest DEI-concentration, with DEI excursions representing only 14% of total offerings in the region. Mediterranean ports by far had the highest concentration of DEI excursions with approximately 59% of total excursions in the region being filtered.

Qualitative Results

After the DEI-filter counts were recorded for the quantitative results, all filters were removed for the following content gathering. The first five excursions displayed by each cruise line in each port were recorded. This sampling decision was chosen because the first excursions shown to passengers typically represent what each company prioritizes, as they are the first options a consumer sees. For each excursion the excursion title and description were collected. In total, 135 excursion descriptions were analyzed, with 15 from each port from a total of nine ports.

Framing theory was used for the analysis by focusing on how cruise lines emphasize certain narratives, portray identities, and detail history. Both deductive and inductive coding was used, as set codes were created and patterns emerged from the data during analysis. The following deductive codes were examined:

  1. Cultural representation
    1. Well-rounded depth of culture, traditions, and heritage
  2. Historical framing
    1. Detailed, rich history of religion, people, architecture, etc.
  3. Indigenous representation
    1. Deep understanding of the Indigenous population(s)
  4. Culture-as-entertainment
    1. Culture is something to superficially observe, rather than in which to participate

The following inductive codes emerged during analysis:

  1. Nature-as-identity framing
    1. Region framed primarily through scenery, rather than people
  2. Indigenous overlooking
    1. Brief references to Indigenous culture, tradition, or heritage, without elaboration
  3. People are cultural representatives, not just service providers
    1. Locals appear as more than vendors
  4. Leisure-dominant framing
    1. Focus is on beaches, relaxation, drinks, and fun

Each excursion description was coded for the presence or absence of these themes in the 135 descriptions.

Coded deductive and inductive themes by region

Theme # in Alaska # in Caribbean # in Mediterranean Total Occurrences Theme %
Cultural Representation 7 6 26 39 28.90%
Historical Framing 17 11 33 61 45.19%
Indigenous Representation 4 5 16 25 18.52%
Culture-as-Entertainment 3 12 11 26 19.26%
Nature-as-Identity Framing 37 31 14 82 60.74%
Indigenous Overlooking 8 15 8 31 22.96%
Cultural Representatives, not Just Service Providers 33 11 28 72 53.33%
Leisure-Dominant Framing 5 40 15 60 44.44%

The results in the table demonstrate that leisure-oriented themes appeared in the majority of Caribbean descriptions, while historical depth dominated the Mediterranean region. Alaska showed the strongest nature-based framing, often replacing people with landscape themes.

V. Discussion

The coded themes reveal differences in how Alaska, the Caribbean, and the Mediterranean are represented in excursion descriptions from each cruise line. The most prominent theme across all regions is “Nature-as-identity” framing, as over 60% of the 135 excursions analyzed incorporated some aspect of “scenery,” “views,” or “wildlife.” Alaska shows the strongest reliance on this framing, with 37 instances, reflecting its branding around wilderness, glaciers, and landscapes. Similarly, the Caribbean also uses nature extensively, with 31 instances, while the Mediterranean uses it far less, in 14 instances, with more emphasis placed on history and culture.

A second pattern present in the data is the high frequency of “Cultural representatives,” or local populations appearing in a position as more than a vendor or source of entertainment. The high percentage of excursions within this code suggest that tourism materials tend to present local people as authentic versions of themselves, rather than just workers in a service industry. In particular, Alaska, with 33 instances, and the Mediterranean, with 28 instances, feature this framing as the descriptions position residents as storytellers or guides. This may signal that cruise lines are moving away from merely stereotyping the local populations present in the ports visited by passengers.

“Historical framing” is another clear pattern, as it is present in 45.19% of excursion descriptions. The Mediterranean is especially dominated by historical framing as many excursions offer historical sites, monuments, and cultural narratives. On the other hand, Alaska and the Caribbean incorporate historical framing significantly less, with 17 and 11 instances respectively, which ultimately reflects differences in the way in which history shapes these destinations.

Lastly, “Indigenous representation” accounts for only 18.52% of excursions analyzed while “Indigenous overlooking” appears at a slightly higher rate of 22.96%. These findings suggest that even when Indigenous presence is acknowledged, it is often overshadowed by other elements of an excursion. The Caribbean overwhelmingly leads in “Leisure” framing, with 40 instances, reinforcing the branding of the region as a destination for relaxation and pleasure, rather than for historical commentary.

Overall, the data indicates that tourism narratives within the 135 excursions examined rely heavily on nature, history, and selective cultural framing, depending on the region. The Caribbean focuses on leisure and entertainment, the Mediterranean on culture and history, and Alaska around nature. With each region having their own specific dominant frame, across the board, Indigenous representation remained limited. These patterns highlight the ongoing challenge of creating representations that fully reflect the cultural nuances of each region.

VI. Conclusion

This study finds that while cruise lines offer some cultural or historical excursions, DEI-oriented content is not prioritized, no matter the port. Representations vary by region, with the Mediterranean reciting the richest cultural framing, and overall, Carnival Cruise Line demonstrating the strongest DEI presence in terms of numerical availability while no cruise line consistently demonstrated strong DEI framing across all regions. These framing strategies matter because they directly shape the way in which millions of passengers each year come to understand the places they visit.

With the Caribbean consistently being framed as a destination for fun and relaxation, the nuanced colonial histories and Caribbean identities are minimized. When Alaska is primarily marketed by its nature appeal, Indigenous communities risk being treated as invisible among excursion narratives of the wilderness. Even in the Mediterranean, where cultural framing is the strongest, local communities are often overshadowed by monumental historical events rather than highlighting contemporary society.

From a DEI perspective, these patterns reveal tension within the cruising industry when it comes to framing excursions. Ultimately, culture is valued when it is visually appealing (e.g., city tours with “sight-seeing”) and marketable. Excursion descriptions reinforce cultural hierarchies as they put specific destinations and communities on pedestals while simultaneously excluding others. By presenting culture as secondary to adventure or leisure, cruise lines limit opportunities for more inclusive, community-centered engagement within the ports they visit.

Understanding these dynamics is essential for scholars, industry stakeholders, and travelers alike. As cruise tourism continues to grow, the narratives constructed through excursion descriptions will continue to play an increasingly powerful role in shaping perceptions of global culture and identity. Recognizing the current limitations in excursion framing opens the door for more equitable and representative approaches to destination storytelling in the future.

Limitations and Future Research

In terms of limitations, DEI filters were only used to count offerings, not select samples. While this allows for unbiased sampling, it does limit deeper comparisons between DEI-filtered and non-filtered excursions. While the qualitative sampling reflects visibility, it does not reflect total content offered by cruise lines, with some ports offering over 40 excursion options for passengers. Other excursions further down in the listing may provide richer cultural narratives that were not analyzed. Furthermore, no visual analysis was included in this study, with the only content examined being written descriptions of the excursions. Different findings may be possible if images were included. Lastly, only three regions with nine ports were included in the study, limiting generalizability.

When looking at the possibility of future research, different routes could be taken to further explore this topic. Images, videos, and branding materials presented by different cruise lines could provide further insight into DEI representation in offered excursions. Interviews with local port community members could also add insight into the findings from digital materials and the dataset could be expanded to include other cruise lines, regions, and ports.

This study finds that while cruise lines offer some cultural or historical excursions, DEI-oriented content is rare and not prioritized, no matter the port. Representations vary by region, with the Mediterranean having the richest cultural framing, and overall, Carnival demonstrating the strongest DEI-related framing. The excursion descriptions ultimately construct a narrative where culture is simplified and secondary to adventure or leisure, reinforcing established framing within the global tourism industry.

Acknowledgements

Thank you so much to Dr. Jane O’Boyle as this research would not have been possible without her guidance, feedback, and encouragement. Additionally, I would like to thank Dr. Barbara Gaither for introducing me to undergraduate research and for her support throughout this research project and others.

References

Abdela, A., Karlsson, K., & Steinbaum, M. (2019, April). Vertical integration and the market power crisis. The Roosevelt Institute. https://rooseveltinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/RI-Vertical-Integration-and-Market-Power-Crisis-Issue-brief-201904.pdf

Chaitanya, A. K., & Swain, S. K. (2023). Economic leakages in tourism: A comprehensive review of theoretical and empirical perspectives. Tourism Economics, 30(5), 1306–1323. https://doi.org/10.1177/13548166231204648

Chou, M.-T., Huang, C.-J., Hsu, C.-T., & Kang, C. K.-T. (2024). Environmental, economic, and social impacts of cruise development. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 209, 117279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2024.117279

Cruise tourism economic impact. (n.d.). Tourism economics. https://www.tourismeconomics.com/press/latest-research/cruise-tourism-economic-impact/

Huang, J., & Hsu, C. H. (2009). Interaction among fellow cruise passengers: Diverse experiences and impacts. Journal of Travel Tourism Marketing, 26(5–6), 547–567. https://doi.org/10.1080/10548400903163103

Race to the bottom. (n.d.). Legal Information Institute. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/race_to_the_bottom

London, W. R., & Lohmann, G. (2014). Power in the context of cruise destination stakeholders’ interrelationships. Research in Transportation Business & Management, 13, 24–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rtbm.2014.11.004

MacCarthy, M. (2023). “It will be like a town here, things are really coming up!”: Inequality in village-based cruise ship tourism in the Trobriand Islands. The Contemporary Pacific, 35(1–2), 61–93. https://doi.org/10.1353/cp.2023.a924452

Mahoney, I., & Collins, V. E. (2019). The capitalist voyeur: Commodification, consumption and the spectacle of the cruise. Leisure Studies, 39(2), 280–293. https://doi.org/10.1080/02614367.2019.1670721

Miller, A. (2024, May 8). How DEI initiatives transform destination experiences. Travel Alliance Partnership. https://travelalliancepartnership.com/how-dei-initiatives-transform-destination-experiences/#:~:text=Just%20last%20week%2C%20the%20New,increased%20brand%20loyalty%20and%20advocacy.

McWay, R. (2021). Cruising through school: General equilibrium effects of cruise ship arrivals on Employment and Education. The American Economist, 67(1), 5–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/05694345211054515

New 2025 state of the cruise industry report shows cruising is a vibrant tourism sector growing steadily to meet rising consumer demand and delivering significant global economic impact. (2025, May 22). Cruise Lines International Association (CLIA). https://cruising.org/news/new-2025-state-cruise-industry-report-shows-cruising-vibrant-tourism-sector-growing-steadily

Number of global cruise passengers by region 2022. (2023, August 29). Statista. https://www.statista.com/statistics/287111/cruise-passengers-by-source-country/#:~:text=In%202022%2C%20North%20America%20was,roughly%205.4%20million%20cruise%20passengers.

Pallis, T. (2015). Cruise shipping and urban development. International Transport Forum Discussion Papers. https://doi.org/10.1787/5jrvzrlw74nv-en

Soriani, S., Bertazzon, S., Cesare, F. D., & Rech, G. (2009). Cruising in the mediterranean: Structural aspects and evolutionary trends. Maritime Policy & Management, 36(3), 235–251. https://doi.org/10.1080/03088830902861128

Synytsia, M. (2025, June 20). Top cruise line brands and market share. AltexSoft. https://www.altexsoft.com/blog/cruise-lines/

Vertical integration. (2023, November 6). Corporate Finance Institute. https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/management/vertical-integration/#:~:text=Vertical%20integration%20can%20be%20achieved%20by:%20*,Integration**%20Obtaining%20some%20stake%20in%20a%20supplier

We are #SailingSustainably. (n.d.). Cruise Line Industry Association (CLIA). https://cruising.org/en/environmental-sustainability