Liverpool's Loss as Fred. Olsen Cruises Pulls Out

[LauraS]

Check out the latest UK News from Cruise Critic:

 

Liverpool's Loss as Fred. Olsen Cruises Pulls Out

 

Continue reading for more details

 

More...

[John Bull]

The answer's simple - if Liverpool City Council and/or local entrepreneurs/investors chip in to repay the grant (£19m to £33m depending who's quoting the figures), they can do what they like with the new cruise terminal.

 

Portsmouth have just spent a chunk upgrading their x-channel ferry terminal, and have taken turnaround business from both Dover & Southampton despite continuing investment by both those ports. And good luck to them.

Their original investment years ago took that x-channel ferry business away from Southampton in the first place.

 

Other ports invest, so come on, Liverpool - stand on your own two feet instead of relying on hand-outs.

 

John Bull :)

[scrozuk]

The answer's simple - if Liverpool City Council and/or local entrepreneurs/investors chip in to repay the grant (£19m to £33m depending who's quoting the figures), they can do what they like with the new cruise terminal.

 

Portsmouth have just spent a chunk upgrading their x-channel ferry terminal, and have taken turnaround business from both Dover & Southampton despite continuing investment by both those ports. And good luck to them.

Their original investment years ago took that x-channel ferry business away from Southampton in the first place.

 

Other ports invest, so come on, Liverpool - stand on your own two feet instead of relying on hand-outs.

 

John Bull :)

 

Oh dear, standby for a backlash from the North.

 

I do agree with you JB about other ports investing in facilities privately, to make them more appealing to cruises, and other ferry business.

 

Southampton has done it, Portsmouth too (especially when you consider the amount of road works on the way into the city), Falmouth, Dover. I hear Newcastle are looking to improve facilities for cruises from there as well.

 

I'd be happy to sail from any of those places, not just Southampton, and not just because the cruise terminals are no more than 2 miles from the house.

 

If Liverpool had privately invested in their ports, then this argument wouldn't be happening, but the city took money from the public purse to be able to receive visiting ships, then changed their mind and said, "Hey, we could run a load of cruises from here". It's not about stealing trade from Southampton, there's plenty of it to go around, and logically Liverpool would be an ideal location for those who like to sail, but live in the north.

 

ScrozUK

[John Bull]

Oh dear, standby for a backlash from the North.

 

ScrozUK

 

You and me both :eek:

 

JB :D:D:D

[sidari]

Liverpool does not have a Terminal just a pier where cruise ships tie up and is closer to the city than the Southampton terminals are, i am sure the owners of the Manchester ship canal and most of Liverpool docks Peel Holdings could pay themselves for a building so that cruise ships could begin and end their journeys in Liverpool, whether they choose to will be another matter.

 

The news about olsen is not new to people in the North and even the story is wrong because there is not a Terminal at Liverpool, it would be funny though if the government agree with Liverpool.

 

The statement (Oh dear, standby for a backlash from the North.) is somewhat childish to say the least.

[John Bull]

........... is closer to the city than the Southampton terminals are,.

 

Hi Sid,

Something wrong with your geography there . ;)

Southampton's City Cruise Terminal is almost in spitting distance of the city's biggest shopping centre, West Quays Mall. And the other side of that, the main shopping street & the heart of the city, The Bargate. Main rail station close by too.

And the city's compact historic area starts about 300 yards from City terminal.

Altogether a much more compact & walkable city centre than Liverpool.

I fear that you know even less about Southampton than I do about Liverpool.:p

 

Not that any of this has anything to do with the two cities' different attitudes toward investment in cruising.

Regards

JB :)

[sidari]

JB ... having stayed in Southampton and also visited the shopping centre and what is left of the ancient walls and having cruised from there we were dissapointed with it! as for not knowing southampton i could take you to St Mary`s Firestation Blindfolded .... :eek:

 

Liverpool is much more compact as a shopping area and yes we have been there too.

 

You do have to worry though why the port of Southampton are so worried about Liverpool getting turnaround facilities! maybe it has something to do with the crackpot idea by Southampton council to try to charge the cruise lines a passenger tax to pay for the road infrastructure down there :rolleyes:

[John Bull]

......... the crackpot idea by Southampton council to try to charge the cruise lines a passenger tax to pay for the road infrastructure down there :rolleyes:

 

 

We've all got our crosses to bear, Sid.

Fortunately they were quickly slapped down but yep, crackpot councillors.

 

One-nil to Sid. :mad:

 

But do you remember Liverpool council's deputy leader, Derek Hatton?

Now there's a crackpot who brought the city to its knees. :eek:

What a belting equaliser :D

 

Sid 1 - JB 1

JB wins on the away-goals rule :D

 

Regards,

JB ;)

[sidari]

Jb ... it was not Derek on his own that caused the problem! I believe that the councillors down there are still even now trying to bring in a cruise passenger tax despite being told by the cruise lines that they will leave Southampton if they go ahead with it! stupidity rules it seems.

 

Liverpool will eventually get turnaround facilities after all it has been a Major player where ships are concerned previously.

[southsea bubble]

Firstly, to be fair, the local councillors in Soton only put forward the possibility of a cruise tax as a way of improving transport links into the city,ie as a discussion point rather than a fait accompli.

 

Problem is there is no grant aid down this neck of the woods to assist with development projects, unlike Liverpool which seems to get it in spades.

 

Good luck to liverpool with its cruise aspirations but for their sake hope this can be funded as a stand alone commercial activity rather than a European/NWDA facility.

 

If you look at the commercial case for the original calling cruise terminal at the pier head area, it is already well short of the original projections but who cares as it is only £20m of someone else's money.

 

Meanwhile interesting to see that London appears to be getting a 'proper' terminal but this is unlikely to affect Liverpools aspirations

[David&Heather]

No backlash - just a suggestion that those from the South try visiting Liverpool before criticising the city - you will find an waterfront with iconic buildings, well located near to the city centre and transportation links.

 

I can also fully understand Fred Olsen pulling out of the Langton terminal as it is located in a run down and industrial part of the port, very similar to Southampton's Mayflower terminal which is similaly located.

 

Time for the Southerners to take a look at places north of London, we get verry vocal about those who criticise our city without thought or reason, Borris the Buffoon (mayor of london) is the most recent recipient of the city of Liverpools wrath:mad:

 

The port of Liverpool would be a good pickup point for many cruises (especially transatlantic), don't forget that it is the historic home of many of the ship lines and that I believe is something to celebrate.

[David&Heather]

I fear that you know even less about Southampton than I do about Liverpool.:p

 

Evidently so, Liverpool has undergone major redevelopment over the past decade which has shifted the city's centre of gravity back towards the waterfront.

 

I know both my adopted city of Liverpool and Southampton well and despite all the protests eminating from the South Liverpool has a justifiable case for development of it's cruise terminal.

[John Bull]

Evidently so, Liverpool has undergone major redevelopment over the past decade which has shifted the city's centre of gravity back towards the waterfront.

 

I know both my adopted city of Liverpool and Southampton well and despite all the protests eminating from the South Liverpool has a justifiable case for development of it's cruise terminal.

 

Hi, D & H, :)

Just like Liverpool, regeneration has shifted Southampton's centre of gravity closer to the docks. Mebbe cos it was foul weather when I last visited Liverpool, but I thought the area around the Echo centre etc was rather bleak and bare compared to the city centre. But my post was more about defending Southampton against Sid's misguided post, which brought the subject up.

 

I've seen no protests whatsoever from the south on this forum or elsewhere about Liverpool's case for a turnaround facility. Can you quote examples? :confused:

 

The protests, as acknowledged by many Liverpudlians, are about Liverpool's attempts to get that turnaround facility at the expense of the taxpayer. :mad:

As my first post, "Other ports invest, so come on, Liverpool - stand on your own two feet instead of relying on hand-outs"

 

JB :)

[David&Heather]

The protests, as acknowledged by many Liverpudlians, are about Liverpool's attempts to get that turnaround facility at the expense of the taxpayer. :mad:

JB :)

 

As someone who pays quite a lot of tax I am happy to see it invested in my home city:)

 

Southampton have four cruise terminals, Liverpool wants one, does Southampton perceve Liverpool as a big threat given the vast number of people who live north of London who would prefer a much shorter journey to join a cruise?

[John Bull]

As someone who pays quite a lot of tax I am happy to see it invested in my home city:)

 

Southampton have four cruise terminals, Liverpool wants one, does Southampton perceve Liverpool as a big threat given the vast number of people who live north of London who would prefer a much shorter journey to join a cruise?

 

Hi again, D & H,

 

Companies have invested in four cruise terminals in Southampton. And a fifth on the way. And a long-overdue re-furb of the old and tatty QE2 terminal.

All at no cost to you or me.:)

 

Before I retired, a fair amount of my work came from cruise ships. Whilst you'd be happy to see your taxes invested in your home city, I'd be very grieved if my taxes were used to take my job away by subsidising others.:mad:

 

I don't think Southampton sees Liverpool as a big threat. Access to London, wide choice of trans-atlantic & european flights, and most cruise routes out of the UK, mean that the north is never likely to take a huge amount of business from the south.

Portsmouth is a bigger threat, and they've already taken some business.

But Portsmouth's new facilities weren't subsidised.

Thus there were no howls of protest.

 

Yes, there's plenty of cruisers from the north, and Scotland/Ireland, who might welcome a more convenient departure point, at the expense of a longer sea leg to the Med, etc.

So there's business to be done for a Liverpool turnaround.

But it'd be unfair for Liverpool to use a huge taxpayers' subsidy to compete with other ports - in the north as well as the south.

 

I think you'll find that places like Newcastle and Rosyth (smart new privately-funded terminal) take the same view as Southampton.

 

Regards, JB :)

[southsea bubble]

JB

 

I think you have summed up the issues as seen from this neck of the woods, and elsewhere I may add, re the £20m grant aid enjoyed by Liverpool and to be fair the BILLIONS (I had to check to ensure this was true) on developing their waterfront and downtown area.

Anyway all that aside the challenge for Liverpool now is repaying some/all of the £20m grant aid which provided for the calling cruise pontoon, as well as upgrading (more ££millions) for the required turnround facilities.

There was absolutely no commercial case for the £20m, in fact the number of calling cruises is currently at least 50% less than projected in the grant submission so it will be intersting to see how they progress to the next stage.

All thats being asked for is a level playing field, not a loss making grant aided local aspiration.

Wonder how it will all pan out??

[sidari]

JB .... How was my post misguided ? I said i prefer liverpool to Southampton and believe it has a better City centre which is closer to the pier than Southampton is and nowhere have i said that Liverpool should not repay the money to get turnaround facilities!

 

As for the Tin hut that the QV,QE and QM2 use it echoes sound so bad from the pa system that no one can understand it and it has to be the worst cruise terminal we have ever been in.

 

The main reason southampton has the number of ships calling there is down to other parts of the country not having had turnaround facilities for cruise ships to sail from! the next 10 years will be the challenge to see if southampton can hold onto their cruise ships as the cruise lines look for New venues to sail from and cheaper docking fees.

[John Bull]

JB .... How was my post misguided ? I said ........... City centre which is closer to the pier than Southampton is

 

 

As for the Tin hut that the QV,QE and QM2 use it echoes sound so bad from the pa system that no one can understand it and it has to be the worst cruise terminal we have ever been in.

 

Hi Sid,

Southampton's traditional city centre (Above Bar/High St) has always been pretty close to the docks. I vaguely remember that the centre of Liverpool was around Lime Street?

Now both city centres have migrated towards the docks as under-used/dis-used land has been re-developed & the nearest city centre shops etc are about the same in both ports, no more than a ten minute walk.

Sorry, "misguided" was poor phraseology. P'raps cos all of that is irrelevant to the thread, p'raps cos I'm fired up about so much tax money going north. My business rates jumped one time in the 1990's by over 50% in order to reduce the already-lower business rates in the north. :mad:

I don't know whether the north is poorer than the south (ignoring London, which I don't regard as "the south") but I do know there's one helluva lot of folk up north way more affluent than me, so it really grieves me to be subsidising them.

 

I've been in worse, but yes the QE2 terminal is a shabby barn & long overdue even a lick of paint. It's also by far the worst-sited for passenger access, deep into the port amongst ro-ro ships. So mebbe their long-term plans don't include a cruise terminal there.

Never been in Liverpool's Langton terminal, but I can imagine it. ;)

 

Regards

JB :)

[David&Heather]

Hi Sid,

I don't know whether the north is poorer than the south (ignoring London, which I don't regard as "the south") but I do know there's one helluva lot of folk up north way more affluent than me, so it really grieves me to be subsidising them. I can assure you that the North is far poorer than the South, you simply cannot exclude London in this context.

I've been in worse, but yes the QE2 terminal is a shabby barn & long overdue even a lick of paint. It's also by far the worst-sited for passenger access, deep into the port amongst ro-ro ships. I dont consider it to be your worst terminal.

So mebbe their long-term plans don't include a cruise terminal there.

Never been in Liverpool's Langton terminal, but I can imagine it. ;) Marginally worse than your mayflower terminal - the views are similar with vast piles of scrap metal awaiting export:mad:

 

Regards

 

D&H

[John Bull]

Hi, D & H.

 

Been digging thro statistics :eek:

 

The north-west is marginally richer than the north-east & Wales, & marginally poorer than the south-west, but significantly poorer than the south-east, though higher income tax & house prices (thus mortgages & council tax) in the SE significantly reduce the net difference.

 

So, yes, in overall terms the north, and the SW and Wales, are poorer than the south-east.

Ignore London - just for the moment.

 

The biggest factor is the higher level of unemployment, which brings down the average income for a region, though individuals' incomes, employed or unemployed, are similar nationwide.

For instance, unemployed folk receive the same direct aid regardless of geography, and there are stacks of nationally-agreed wage deals (govt employees etc) which means those folk are on the same income nationwide.

So because government subsidies are skewed toward the north, a teacher in the south-east is subsidising a teacher in the north despite being on the same income.

 

In the main, Govt subsidies are targetted at those who bring down the average income. Quite right too, areas of high unemployment should get subsidies - job creation, etc.

But judging by various debates on CC & elsewhere, Liverpool's cruise terminal seems to be all about kudos for the city, and a more-convenient place from which to set off on a cruise, rather than jobs. Hardly the sort of reason for pumping in taxpayers' money.

 

Unemployment of course depends on what work is available, but the proportion of people on incapacity benefits in the NW is 30% higher than the national average - is it such an unhealthy place to live?

 

London is a separate region. All statistics accept this, govt statistics, property price statistics, cost of living, London "weighting" allowances, everything. London can't be lumped in with "the south-east", though there's lots of commuters with high-earning jobs in London who push up the SE average income.

 

Statistics are what anyone wants to make of them ("3 types of lie - lies, damned lies, and statistics")

But I do begrudge paying higher taxes to subsidise those with a higher income & standard of living than my own.

 

Regards,

JB ;)

[ISLANDCRUSO]

JB .... many people who now live in the North of the UK ie Northumberland, yorkshire and parts of Lancashire are from the South! regardless of East or West and moved there after making a killing on selling their over priced/over inflated Houses, these are the people that you should be moaning about because it is they who have created the problem for the South and then run away having increased house prices up here.

 

Many people certainly in the North West of England which includes Liverpool,Manchester,Blackpool and Blackburn many people earn the national wage and less! how many in the Affluent South earn way more ? the south is looked after by various governments way more than they do the North and that can be seen in the unemployment figures, even the national lottery is biased toward the South in how it distributes its money.

 

As for teachers in the North subsidising those in the South i have never heard such rubbish! though i fail to see why any of this is relevent to Liverpool obtaining turn around facilities ?

[scrozuk]

And there was me thinking that this topic was originally about Fred Olsen pulling out of Liverpool.

 

I think with the projected growth of the cruise industry, facilities can only improve in places like dover, Newcastle, Falmouth, Portsmouth, Southampton, liverpool, hopefully offering more choice for the masses. The critical thing is how these developments are funded.

 

Instead of funding a facility for the few, the money could be better spent preventing the swathe of cuts you see across many public services.

 

Meanwhile back to the cruise ships, to cope with the demand, we're going to need more of the companies to bring more ships over here, like royal Caribbean and msc who both have a relatively sizeable fleet.

 

Scrozuk

[insidecabin]

I thought I would do a bit of research(quick and dirty)

 

Why is this news now anounced over a years ago

http://www.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/liverpool-news/regional-news/2010/05/27/liverpool-to-lose-its-new-cruise-ship-92534-26513993/

 

Forget turnaround get the ships in and pax spending money first

 

according to this

 

http://liverpool.gov.uk/leisure-parks-and-events/information-for-tourists/cruise-visits-to-liverpool/

 

13 ships and about 26k pax.

 

Invergorden which is just a pier in a remote part of Scotland get 46 ships and 75k pax.

 

Focus on making the port attractive to the passing ships as an addition/alternative to Dublin,Glasgo and Belfast.

 

The only real market as an embarkation port is long trips south(round UK don't sell well to brits) for the UK market and not sure any cruise line is ready to try this, RCI have based the Inde in Southampton and struggle over the winter to get good rates.

[John Bull]

Hi Cruso,

 

JB .... many people who now live in the North...... are from the South! .... and moved there after making a killing on selling their over priced Houses, ..... they who have created the problem for the South and then run away having increased house prices up here.

Sorry, you've competely lost me. :confused:

And probably everyone else :D

You're blaming the north's problems on migration from the south? Even though the population has shrunk in parts of the north? Even though the population in the south has risen more than in the north?

 

Many people certainly in the North West of England ... earn the national wage and less! how many in the Affluent South earn way more ?

there's plenty of low-earners in the south too. Certainly we've got more fat-cats than the north, but sadly most of us aren't fat-cats.

 

.............the south is looked after by various governments way more than they do the North and that can be seen in the unemployment figures, You're just so way way off-beam with that one.:rolleyes: High unemployment automatically means lower govt income from taxes & higher govt expenditure on benefits. I don't have a problem with that, but it is a fact.

And try googling "Enerprise zones" to see how more money migrates from south to north.

 

even the national lottery is biased toward the South in how it distributes its money.

Any chance of a link to back up that claim? This one

http://www.lottery.culture.gov.uk/PreDefinedAreaSummary.aspx?ID=PDACR

gives the figures by region from day 1, & clearly shows that the north-west has consistently received more funding than the south-east. Merseyside has received seven grants of over £1m (including £24m for Liverpool Museum & £14m for St Georges Hall) Not one grant of £1m or more has gone to my home county of Hampshire.

Not that I'm complaining, you're the one who brought it up.

 

As for teachers in the North subsidising those in the South i have never heard such rubbish!

Read it in context. It was an example. Instead of teachers I could've used butchers or bakers or candlestick-makers. Those in the south with the same income as their counterparts in the north are paying for govt subsidies skewed to the north. Don't rubbish it, it's a statistical fact.

 

though i fail to see why any of this is relevent to Liverpool obtaining turn around facilities ?

As previous posts throughout this thread, it has nothing to do with Liverpool obtaining turnaround facilities, but everything to do with who pays for them.

 

 

I'm not keen to prolong this already-boring debate about north/south, but couldn't let your post go un-challenged. So if you want to just agree to disagree, that's fine by me. ;)

 

I think insidecabin has hit the nail on the head about the viability of Liverpool as a turnaround. Though there's plenty of Americans who want to visit Liverpool - I guess because of the city's past trans-Atlantic shipping links, Liverpool FC, and the Beatles.

No problem berthing even large cruise ships at the new jetty, the problem is gonna be persuading the US ships to up their calls.

 

Regards to all

JB :)

[sidari]

Insidecabin .... With regard to the Indy in Winter a big mistake by RCI was not to have a covered pool and having the ship sail out of the UK despite many wanting the ship in the Caribbean during those months.

 

Invergordon possibly gets more ships than Liverpool currently does because it is used as a stopping point for ships on their way to Norway and Iceland as well as the round UK ones,as you rightly point out not many people from the UK book the round UK trips maybe due to knowing they will likely have rubbish weather.