CARNIVAL PLC - Quarter Report: 2012 May (Form 10-Q)

Table of Contents

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-Q

(Mark One)

For the quarterly period ended May 31, 2012

OR

For the transition period from              to             

Commission file number: 1-9610				Commission file number: 1-15136
Carnival Corporation (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)				Carnival plc (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Republic of Panama (State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)				England and Wales (State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)
59-1562976 (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)				98-0357772 (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)
3655 N.W. 87th Avenue Miami, Florida 33178-2428 (Address of principal executive offices)				Carnival House, 5 Gainsford Street, London SE1 2NE, United Kingdom (Address of principal executive offices)
(Zip Code)				(Zip Code)
(305) 599-2600 (Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)				011 44 20 7940 5381 (Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)
None (Former name, former address and former fiscal year, if changed since last report)				None (Former name, former address and former fiscal year, if changed since last report)

Indicate by check mark whether the registrants (1) have filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrants were required to file such reports), and (2) have been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.    Yes  x    No  ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrants have submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web sites, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).    Yes  x    No  ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrants are large accelerated filers, accelerated filers, non-accelerated filers, or smaller reporting companies. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

Indicate by check mark whether the registrants are shell companies (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).    Yes  ¨    No  x

Table of Contents

CARNIVAL CORPORATION & PLC

TABLE OF CONTENTS

2

Table of Contents

PART I - FINANCIAL INFORMATION

Item 1. Financial Statements.

CARNIVAL CORPORATION & PLC

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS

(UNAUDITED)

(in millions, except per share data)

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

3

Table of Contents

CARNIVAL CORPORATION & PLC

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

(UNAUDITED)

(in millions, except par values)

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

4

Table of Contents

CARNIVAL CORPORATION & PLC

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

(UNAUDITED)

(in millions)

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

5

Table of Contents

CARNIVAL CORPORATION & PLC

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(UNAUDITED)

NOTE 1 – Basis of Presentation

Carnival Corporation is incorporated in Panama, and Carnival plc is incorporated in England and Wales. Carnival Corporation and Carnival plc operate a dual listed company (“DLC”), whereby the businesses of Carnival Corporation and Carnival plc are combined through a number of contracts and through provisions in Carnival Corporation’s Articles of Incorporation and By-Laws and Carnival plc’s Articles of Association. The two companies operate as if they are a single economic enterprise, but each has retained its separate legal identity.

The accompanying consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Carnival Corporation and Carnival plc and their respective subsidiaries. Together with their consolidated subsidiaries, they are referred to collectively in these consolidated financial statements and elsewhere in this joint Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q as “Carnival Corporation & plc,” “our,” “us,” and “we.”

The accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheet at May 31, 2012, the Consolidated Statements of Operations for the three and six months ended May 31, 2012 and 2011 and the Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the six months ended May 31, 2012 and 2011 are unaudited and, in the opinion of our management, contain all adjustments, consisting of only normal recurring adjustments, necessary for a fair presentation. Our interim consolidated financial statements should be read in conjunction with the audited consolidated financial statements and the related notes included in the Carnival Corporation & plc 2011 joint Annual Report on Form 10-K. Our operations are seasonal and results for interim periods are not necessarily indicative of the results for the entire year. Certain balance sheet and cash flow reclassifications of prior period information have been made to conform to the current period presentation.

Cruise passenger ticket revenues include fees and taxes levied by governmental authorities and collected by us from our guests. The portion of these fees and taxes included in passenger ticket revenues and commissions, transportation and other costs were $110 million and $95 million and $237 million and $203 million for the three and six months ended May 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively.

NOTE 2 – Costa Concordia and Costa Allegra

During the first quarter of fiscal 2012, we wrote-off the euro-denominated net carrying value of Costa Concordia (“the ship”) in the amount of $515 million (or €381 million) and recorded a short-term insurance recoverable for the same amount since the ship was deemed to be a constructive total loss. In May 2012, we received $508 million (or €395 million) of euro-denominated hull and machinery insurance proceeds for the total loss of the ship and recognized $17 million (or €14 million) of proceeds in excess of the net carrying value of the ship as a reduction to other ship operating expenses. In addition, during the six months ended May 31, 2012, we recognized $30 million for incident-related expenses that are not covered by insurance, substantially all of which were recognized in the first quarter of fiscal 2012, including a $10 million insurance deductible related to third party personal injury liabilities. These incident-related expenses are principally included in other ship operating expenses.

As a result of the ship incident, litigation claims, enforcement actions, regulatory actions and investigations, including, but not limited to, those arising from personal injury, loss of life, loss of or damage to personal property, business interruption losses or environmental damage to any affected coastal waters and the surrounding areas, have been and may be asserted or brought against various parties, including us. The existing assertions are in their initial stages and there are significant jurisdictional uncertainties. We are currently evaluating the possible merits of these matters and their ultimate outcome cannot be determined at this time. However, we have insurance coverage for third-party claims such as those mentioned above.

Since the ship incident, we have separately presented short-term insurance recoverables and short-term claims reserve in our Consolidated Balance Sheets. At May 31, 2012, substantially all of our aggregated short-term and long-term insurance recoverables relate to crew, guest and other third party claims for the ship incident. At May 31, 2012, primarily all of our aggregated short-term and long-term claims reserves also relate to the ship incident. At May 31, 2012 and November 30, 2011, our long-term insurance recoverables and long-term claims reserve are included in other assets and other long-term liabilities and deferred income, respectively, and are not significant. We expect to continue to incur incident-related costs in the future. Although at this time these costs are not yet determinable, we do not expect them to have a significant impact on our results of operations because we believe these additional costs will be recoverable under our insurance coverage.

In February 2012, Costa Allegra suffered fire damage and, accordingly, we decided to withdraw this ship from operations resulting in $34 million of impairment charges recognized during the first quarter of fiscal 2012. These impairment charges are included in other ship operating expenses. At May 31, 2012, the remaining carrying value of this ship is not significant.

6

Table of Contents

NOTE 3 – Debt

At May 31, 2012, substantially all of our unsecured short-term borrowings of $541 million consisted of commercial paper with an aggregate weighted-average interest rate of 0.6%.

In May 2012, we borrowed $383 million under an unsecured euro-denominated export credit facility, the proceeds of which were used to pay for a portion of AIDAmar’s purchase price. This facility bears interest at EURIBOR plus a margin of 20 basis points (“bps”) and is due in semi-annual installments through May 2024.

In May 2012, we borrowed $560 million under an unsecured export credit facility, the proceeds of which were used to pay for a portion of Carnival Breeze’s purchase price. This facility bears interest at LIBOR plus a margin of 160 bps and is due in semi-annual installments through May 2024.

NOTE 4 – Contingencies

Litigation

In the normal course of our business, various claims and lawsuits have been filed or are pending against us. Most of these claims and lawsuits are covered by insurance and, accordingly, the maximum amount of our liability, net of any insurance recoverables, is typically limited to our self-insurance retention levels. Management believes the ultimate outcome of these claims and lawsuits will not have a material adverse impact on our consolidated financial statements. See Note 2 above for a discussion of loss contingencies related to the ship incident.

Contingent Obligations – Lease Out and Lease Back Type (“LILO”) Transactions

At May 31, 2012, Carnival Corporation had estimated contingent obligations totaling $419 million, excluding termination payments as discussed below, to participants in LILO transactions for two of its ships. At the inception of these leases, the aggregate of the net present value of these obligations was paid by Carnival Corporation to a group of major financial institutions, who agreed to act as payment undertakers and directly pay these obligations. As a result, these contingent obligations are considered extinguished and neither the funds nor the contingent obligations have been included in our accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets.

In the event that Carnival Corporation were to default on its contingent obligations and assuming performance by all other participants, we estimate that we would, as of May 31, 2012, be responsible for a termination payment of $43 million. In 2017, we have the right to exercise options that would terminate these LILO transactions at no cost to us.

In certain cases, if the credit ratings of the financial institutions who are directly paying the contingent obligations fall below AA-, then Carnival Corporation will be required to replace these financial institutions with other financial institutions whose credit ratings are at least AA or meet other specified credit requirements. In such circumstances, we would incur additional costs, although we estimate that they would be immaterial to our consolidated financial statements. The two financial institution payment undertakers subject to this AA- credit rating threshold each have a credit rating of AA. If Carnival Corporation’s credit rating, which is BBB+, falls below BBB, it will be required to provide a standby letter of credit for $42 million, or, alternatively, provide mortgages for this aggregate amount on these two ships.

Contingent Obligations – Indemnifications

Some of the debt agreements that we enter into include indemnification provisions that obligate us to make payments to the counterparty if certain events occur. These contingencies generally relate to changes in taxes and changes in laws that increase lender capital costs and other similar costs. The indemnification clauses are often standard contractual terms and were entered into in the normal course of business. There are no stated or notional amounts included in the indemnification clauses, and we are not able to estimate the maximum potential amount of future payments, if any, under these indemnification clauses. We have not been required to make any material payments under such indemnification clauses in the past and, under current circumstances, we do not believe a request for material future indemnification payments is probable.

7

Table of Contents

NOTE 5 – Comprehensive (Loss) Income

Comprehensive (loss) income was as follows (in millions):

NOTE 6 – Fair Value Measurements, Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities

Fair Value Measurements

U.S. accounting standards establish a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs used to measure fair value. The hierarchy gives the highest priority to unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (Level 1 measurement) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3 measurement). This hierarchy requires entities to maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs. The three levels of inputs used to measure fair value are as follows:

Fair value is the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between independent and knowledgeable market participants at the measurement date. Therefore, even when market assumptions are not readily available, our own assumptions are set to reflect those that we believe market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability at the measurement date.

The fair value measurement of a financial asset or financial liability must reflect the nonperformance risk of the counterparty and us. Therefore, the impact of our counterparty’s creditworthiness was considered when in an asset position, and our creditworthiness was considered when in a liability position in the fair value measurement of our financial instruments. Creditworthiness did not have a material impact on the fair values of our financial instruments at May 31, 2012 and November 30, 2011. Both the counterparties and we are expected to continue to perform under the contractual terms of the instruments. Considerable judgment may be required in interpreting market data used to develop the estimates of fair value. Accordingly, certain estimates of fair values presented herein are not necessarily indicative of the amounts that could be realized in a current or future market exchange.

Financial Instruments that are not Measured at Fair Value on a Recurring Basis

The estimated carrying and fair values and basis of valuation of our financial instrument assets and (liabilities) that are not measured at fair value on a recurring basis were as follows (in millions):

8

Table of Contents

Financial Instruments that are Measured at Fair Value on a Recurring Basis

The estimated fair value and basis of valuation of our financial instrument assets and (liabilities) that are measured at fair value on a recurring basis were as follows (in millions):

We measure our derivatives using valuations that are calibrated to the initial trade prices. Subsequent valuations are based on observable inputs and other variables included in the valuation models such as interest rate, yield and commodity price curves, forward currency exchange rates, credit spreads, maturity dates, volatilities and netting arrangements. We use the income approach to value derivatives for foreign currency options and forwards, interest rate swaps and fuel derivatives using observable market data for all significant inputs and standard valuation techniques to convert future amounts to a single present value amount, assuming that participants are motivated, but not compelled to transact. We also corroborate our fair value estimates using valuations provided by our counterparties.

Nonfinancial Instruments that are Measured at Fair Value on a Nonrecurring Basis

The reconciliation of the changes in the carrying amounts of our goodwill, which goodwill has been allocated to our North America and Europe, Australia and Asia (“EAA”) cruise brands, was as follows (in millions):

9

Table of Contents

As of July 31, 2011, we performed our annual goodwill impairment reviews by comparing the estimated fair value of the cruise brand to the carrying value of the net assets allocated to that cruise brand. At July 31, 2011, all of our cruise brands carried goodwill, except for Seabourn. No goodwill was considered to be impaired at that time because the estimated fair value of each cruise brand significantly exceeded its respective carrying value, except for Ibero Cruises (“Ibero”), as discussed below. Accordingly, we did not proceed to step two of the impairment analysis.

In determining the estimated cruise brand fair values, we considered both their (a) discounted future cash flow analysis and (b) market multiples of comparable publicly-traded companies. The principal assumptions used in our cash flow analysis related to forecasting future operating results, include net revenue yields, net cruise costs including fuel prices, capacity changes, including the expected deployment of vessels into, or out of, the cruise brand, weighted-average cost of capital for comparable publicly-traded companies, adjusted for the risk attributable to the cruise brand including the geographic region in which it operates, that ranged from 10% to 13%, and terminal values, which are all considered level 3 inputs.

At July 31, 2011, Ibero’s estimated fair value only exceeded its carrying value by 2%, or $12 million of headroom, therefore, minor changes to these assumptions would have led to an Ibero impairment. At February 29, 2012, given the current state of the Spanish economy and considering the low level of Ibero’s headroom, we performed an interim impairment review of Ibero’s goodwill. The interim discounted future cash flow analysis that was used to estimate Ibero’s fair value was primarily impacted by slower than anticipated Ibero capacity growth. As a result, Ibero’s estimated fair value no longer exceeded its carrying value. Accordingly, we proceeded to step two of the impairment analysis and recognized a goodwill impairment charge of $153 million during the first quarter of fiscal 2012, which represented Ibero’s entire goodwill balance. At May 31, 2012, accumulated goodwill impairment charges were $153 million.

The reconciliation of the changes in the carrying amounts of our intangible assets not subject to amortization, which represent trademarks that have been allocated to our North America and EAA cruise brands, was as follows (in millions):

As of July 31, 2011, we also performed our annual trademark impairment reviews by comparing the estimated fair values of our trademarks to their carrying values. The cruise brands that have trademarks recorded are AIDA Cruises (“AIDA”), Ibero, P&O Cruises (Australia), P&O Cruises (UK) and Princess Cruises (“Princess”). We believed the estimated fair value for each of our recorded trademarks significantly exceeded its respective carrying value at that time and, therefore, none of our trademarks were impaired. We estimated fair values based upon a discounted future cash flow analysis, which estimated the amount of royalties that we are relieved from having to pay for use of the associated trademarks, based upon forecasted cruise revenues and royalty rates that a market participant would use. The royalty rates are estimated primarily using comparable royalty agreements for similar industries.

At February 29, 2012, we also performed an interim impairment review of Ibero’s trademarks, which resulted in a $20 million impairment charge, based on the reduction of revenues primarily as a result of slower than anticipated Ibero capacity growth and a lower estimated royalty rate. At May 31, 2012, Ibero’s remaining trademark carrying values are not significant.

The determination of our cruise brand and trademark fair values includes numerous assumptions that are subject to various risks and uncertainties. We believe that we have made reasonable estimates and judgments in determining whether our goodwill and trademarks have been impaired. However, if there is a material change in assumptions used in our determination of fair values or if there is a material change in the conditions or circumstances influencing fair values, then we may need to recognize a material impairment charge.

Other than for Ibero, there have not been any events or circumstances subsequent to July 31, 2011, which we believe would require us to perform additional interim goodwill or trademark impairment reviews. Specifically, we believe the ship incident will not have a significant long-term impact on our business and, accordingly, we do not believe a Costa Cruises (“Costa”) interim impairment review is required.

At May 31, 2012 and November 30, 2011, our intangible assets subject to amortization are not significant to our consolidated financial statements.

10

Table of Contents

Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities

We utilize derivative and nonderivative financial instruments, such as foreign currency forwards, options and swaps, foreign currency debt obligations and foreign currency cash balances, to manage our exposure to fluctuations in certain foreign currency exchange rates, and interest rate swaps to manage our interest rate exposure in order to achieve a desired proportion of fixed and floating rate debt. In November 2011, we implemented a fuel derivatives program to mitigate a portion of the risk to our future cash flows attributable to potentially significant fuel price increases, which we define as our “economic risk.” Our policy is to not use any financial instruments for trading or other speculative purposes.

All derivatives are recorded at fair value. The changes in fair value are immediately included in earnings if the derivatives do not qualify as effective hedges, or if we do not seek to qualify for hedge accounting treatment, such as for our fuel derivatives. If a derivative is designated as a fair value hedge, then changes in the fair value of the derivative are offset against the changes in the fair value of the underlying hedged item. If a derivative is designated as a cash flow hedge, then the effective portion of the changes in the fair value of the derivative is recognized as a component of accumulated other comprehensive income (“AOCI”) until the underlying hedged item is recognized in earnings or the forecasted transaction is no longer probable. If a derivative or a nonderivative financial instrument is designated as a hedge of our net investment in a foreign operation, then changes in the fair value of the financial instrument are recognized as a component of AOCI to offset a portion of the change in the translated value of the net investment being hedged, until the investment is sold or liquidated. We formally document hedging relationships for all derivative and nonderivative hedges and the underlying hedged items, as well as our risk management objectives and strategies for undertaking the hedge transactions.

We classify the fair values of all our derivative contracts and the fair values of our hedged firm commitments, if any, as either current or long-term, depending on whether the maturity date of the derivative contract is within or beyond one year from the balance sheet date. Our derivative fair value amounts are included in prepaid expenses and other assets and accrued and other liabilities as the amounts are not significant. The cash flows from derivatives treated as hedges are classified in our accompanying Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows in the same category as the item being hedged. Our cash flows related to fuel derivatives, if any, will be classified within investing activities.

The effective portions of our net foreign currency derivative (losses) and gains on cash flow hedges recognized in other comprehensive (loss) income in the three and six months ended May 31, 2012 and 2011 totaled $(4) million ($45 million in 2011) and $(11) million ($82 million in 2011), respectively.

The effective portions of our net foreign currency derivative gains and (losses) on net investment hedges recognized in other comprehensive (loss) income in the three and six months ended May 31, 2012 and 2011 totaled $54 million ($(5) million in 2011) and $55 million ($(24) million in 2011), respectively.

We recognized net unrealized losses of $145 million and $124 million in the three and six months ended May 31, 2012 on our fuel derivatives. There were no realized gains or losses recognized in the three and six months ended May 31, 2012 on our fuel derivatives.

There are no credit risk related contingent features in our derivative agreements, except for bilateral credit provisions within our fuel derivative counterparty agreements. These provisions require interest-bearing, non-restricted cash to be posted or received as collateral to the extent the fuel derivative fair value payable to or receivable from an individual counterparty, respectively, exceeds $100 million. At May 31, 2012, no collateral was required to be posted to or received from our fuel derivative counterparties.

The amount of estimated cash flow hedges’ unrealized gains and losses that are expected to be reclassified to earnings in the next twelve months is not significant. We have not provided additional disclosures of the impact that derivative instruments and hedging activities have on our consolidated financial statements as of May 31, 2012 and November 30, 2011 and for the three and six months ended May 31, 2012 and 2011 where such impacts were not significant.

Foreign Currency Exchange Rate Risks

Overall Strategy

We manage our exposure to fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates through our normal operating and financing activities, including netting certain exposures to take advantage of any natural offsets and, when considered appropriate, through the use of derivative and nonderivative financial instruments. Our primary focus is to manage the economic foreign currency exchange risks faced by our operations, which are the ultimate foreign currency exchange risks that would be realized by us if we exchanged one currency for another, and not accounting risks. Accordingly, we do not currently hedge foreign currency exchange accounting risks with derivative financial instruments. The financial impacts of the hedging instruments we do employ generally offset the changes in the underlying exposures being hedged.

11

Table of Contents

Operational and Investment Currency Risks

Our European and Australian cruise brands subject us to foreign currency translation risk related to the euro, sterling and Australian dollar because these brands generate significant revenues and incur significant expenses in euro, sterling or the Australian dollar. Accordingly, exchange rate fluctuations of the euro, sterling and Australian dollar against the U.S. dollar will affect our reported financial results since the reporting currency for our consolidated financial statements is the U.S. dollar. Any strengthening of the U.S. dollar against these foreign currencies has the financial statement effect of decreasing the U.S. dollar values reported for cruise revenues and expenses. Weakening of the U.S. dollar has the opposite effect.

Most of our brands have non-functional currency risk related to their international sales operations, which has become an increasingly larger part of most of their businesses over time, and primarily includes the euro, sterling and Australian, Canadian and U.S. dollars. In addition, all of our brands have non-functional currency expenses for a portion of their operating expenses. Accordingly, these brands’ revenues and expenses in non-functional currencies create some degree of natural offset for recognized transactional currency gains and losses due to currency exchange movements.

We consider our investments in foreign operations to be denominated in relatively stable currencies and of a long-term nature. We partially mitigate our net investment currency exposures by denominating a portion of our debt and other obligations, including the effect of foreign currency forwards, in our foreign operations’ functional currencies, generally the euro or sterling. As of May 31, 2012 and November 30, 2011, we have designated $3.9 billion and $3.6 billion of our euro and sterling debt and other obligations, respectively, which debt matures through 2024, as nonderivative hedges of our net investments in foreign operations. Accordingly, we have included $272 million and $204 million of cumulative foreign currency transaction non-derivative gains in the cumulative translation adjustment component of AOCI at May 31, 2012 and November 30, 2011, respectively, which offsets a portion of the losses recorded in AOCI upon translating our foreign operations’ net assets into U.S. dollars. During the three and six months ended May 31, 2012 and 2011, we recognized foreign currency non-derivative transaction gains and losses of $128 million ($(110) million in 2011) and $68 million ($(220) million in 2011), respectively, in the cumulative translation adjustment component of AOCI.

Newbuild Currency Risks

Our decisions regarding whether or not to hedge a non-functional currency ship commitment for our cruise brands are made on a case-by-case basis, taking into consideration the amount and duration of the exposure, market volatility, currency exchange rate correlation, economic trends, our overall expected net cash flows by currency and other offsetting risks. Our shipbuilding contracts are typically denominated in euros. In the past, we have used foreign currency derivative contracts and nonderivative financial instruments to manage foreign currency exchange rate risk for some of these ship construction contracts.

At May 31, 2012, none of our newbuilds under contract that are exposed to currency exchange risk are hedged. In June 2012, we entered into zero cost collars that are designated as cash flow hedges for a portion of Royal Princess’ euro-denominated shipyard payments. These zero cost collars mature in May 2013 at a weighted-average ceiling rate of $1.30 to the euro, or $560 million, and a weighted-average floor rate of $1.19 to the euro, or $512 million. As of June 25, 2012, substantially all of our remaining currency exchange risk relates to one Princess and one P&O Cruises (UK) euro-denominated newbuild contracts with remaining commitments totaling $1.3 billion.

The cost of shipbuilding orders that we may place in the future for our cruise brands that is denominated in a currency that is different than their functional currency is expected to be affected by foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations. Given the movement in the U.S. dollar and sterling relative to the euro over the past several years, the U.S. dollar and sterling cost to order new cruise ships has been volatile. If the U.S. dollar or sterling declines against the euro, this may affect our desire to order future new cruise ships for U.S. dollar or sterling functional currency brands.

Interest Rate Risks

We manage our exposure to fluctuations in interest rates through our investment and debt portfolio management strategies. These strategies include purchasing high quality short-term investments with floating interest rates, and evaluating our debt portfolio to make periodic adjustments to the mix of fixed and floating rate debt through the use of interest rate swaps and the issuance of new debt or the early retirement of existing debt. At May 31, 2012, 57% and 43% (65% and 35% at November 30, 2011) of our debt bore fixed and floating interest rates, respectively, including the effect of interest rate swaps.

Fuel Price Risks

Our exposure to market risk for changes in fuel prices substantially all relate to the consumption of fuel on our ships. We use our fuel derivatives program to mitigate a portion of our economic risk attributable to potentially significant fuel price increases. We designed our fuel derivatives program to maximize operational flexibility by utilizing derivative markets with significant trading liquidity. As part of our fuel derivatives program, we will continue to evaluate various derivative products and strategies.

12

Table of Contents

During the three and six months ended May 31, 2012, we entered into additional zero cost collar fuel derivatives on Brent that established ceiling and floor prices. These derivatives are based on Brent prices whereas the actual fuel used on our ships is marine fuel. Changes in the Brent prices may not show a high degree of correlation with changes in our underlying marine fuel prices. We will not realize any economic gain or loss upon the maturity of our zero cost collars unless the price of Brent is above the ceiling price or below the floor price. We believe that these derivatives will act as economic hedges, however hedge accounting is not applied.

At May 31, 2012, our outstanding fuel derivatives consisted of zero cost collars on Brent to cover a portion of our estimated fuel consumption as follows:

Concentrations of Credit Risk

As part of our ongoing control procedures, we monitor concentrations of credit risk associated with financial and other institutions with which we conduct significant business. Our maximum exposure under foreign currency and fuel derivative contracts and interest rate swap agreements that are in-the-money, which were not significant at May 31, 2012, is the replacement cost, net of any collateral received, which includes the value of the contracts, in the event of nonperformance by the counterparties to the contracts, all of which are currently our lending banks. We seek to minimize credit risk exposure, including counterparty nonperformance primarily associated with our cash equivalents, investments, committed financing facilities, contingent obligations, derivative instruments, insurance contracts and new ship progress payment guarantees, by normally conducting business with large, well-established financial institutions and insurance companies, and by diversifying our counterparties. In addition, we have guidelines regarding credit ratings and investment maturities that we follow to help safeguard liquidity and minimize risk. We normally do require collateral and/or guarantees to support notes receivable on significant asset sales, long-term ship charters and new ship progress payments to shipyards. We currently believe the risk of nonperformance by any of our significant counterparties is remote.

We also monitor the creditworthiness of travel agencies and tour operators in Europe and credit card providers to which we extend credit in the normal course of our business. Our credit exposure includes contingent obligations related to cash payments received directly by travel agents and tour operators for cash collected by them on cruise sales in most of the European Union for which we are obligated to provide credit in a like amount to these guests even if we do not receive payment from the travel agents or tour operators. Concentrations of credit risk associated with these receivables and contingent obligations are not considered to be material, primarily due to the large number of unrelated accounts within our customer base, the amount of these contingent obligations and their short maturities. We have experienced only minimal credit losses on our trade receivables and related contingent obligations. We do not normally require collateral or other security to support normal credit sales.

13

Table of Contents

NOTE 7 – Segment Information

We have three reportable cruise segments that are comprised of our (1) North America cruise brands, (2) EAA cruise brands and (3) Cruise Support. In addition, we have a Tour and Other segment. Our segments are reported on the same basis as the internally reported information that is provided to our Chief Operating Decision Maker, the Chairman of the Boards of Directors and Chief Executive Officer of Carnival Corporation and Carnival plc.

Our North America cruise segment includes Carnival Cruise Lines, Holland America Line, Princess and Seabourn. Our EAA cruise segment includes AIDA, Costa, Cunard, Ibero, P&O Cruises (Australia) and P&O Cruises (UK). These individual cruise brand operating segments have been aggregated into two reportable segments based on the similarity of their economic and other characteristics, including types of customers, regulatory environment, maintenance requirements, supporting systems and processes and products and services they provide. Our Cruise Support segment represents certain of our port and related facilities and other corporate-wide services that are provided for the benefit of our cruise brands. Our Tour and Other segment represents the hotel and transportation operations, and also the tour operations in 2011, of Holland America Princess Alaska Tours and our two owned ships that we charter to an unaffiliated entity.

14

Table of Contents

Selected information for our Cruise and Tour and Other segments was as follows (in millions):