Honestly, I think it's best if Carnival dissolves P&O Cruises Australia, cancel the transfers of the Golden Princess and Star Princess, and transfer the Pacific Explorer back to Princess Cruises.
I assure you, these decisions are not made on what someone "thinks". Very extensive comparisons are done by very smart people with access to data we will never have. This analysis does not include feelings, but rather hard facts, like financial comparisons, operating costs, marketing projections, opportunity cost for removing the ship from other markets, crewing costs, taxes and fees in the operational area, countries likely to open first, etc.
Assuming they cancel the transfers on your recommendation, what difference does it make? Princess Cruises ships are idle and P&O Australia ships are idle. Whatever the brand, Carnival Corp has to pay the bills and they are struggling to do so. Why would they waste money on transfer costs, registration costs, paint, branding and signage on moving Pacific Explorer to Princess and have her be idle under a Princess name? Or why not just send her back to HAL? At least she is already painted dark blue and they have promotional material of her.
Also, companies tend to think a little longer term. Assuming Carnival survives, but dissolved P&O Australia. Five years from now they've then lost their market share to Royal Caribbean or some other competitor.
After all, having a cruise line only operate only one vessel during the pandemic is bound to fail.
In case you missed it, almost no-one is operating their ships. Why is having one (nearly or completely amortized) ship idle more risky than having twenty new ships (with financing attached to them) idle in the Caribbean? If getting a ship working again was as simple as sending it to another brand, we wouldn't have seen the cruise ships on the beach in Turkey.