Liverpool's Loss as Fred. Olsen Cruises Pulls Out

[insidecabin]

I was thinking further

 

look at what the locals do in Greenock .

 

http://www.inverclydetouristgroup.co.uk/

 

from a pier they now have a great little terminal building

 

and Invergorden they are trying the same approach

 

http://www.visitinvergordon.com/

 

what do liverpool do?

 

OK sidari, invergordon might have the extra do ing east coast only so lets look at the main competitors on the west coast

 

Dublin( OK a bit south and gets some of the short trips thea go no further north.

http://www.dublinport.ie/information-centre/cruise-liners/

85 in 2010

61 for the rest of this year

 

Belfast( probably the closest comparible port)

http://www.cruise-belfast.co.uk/system_pages/list_of_ships.aspx

32 for this year

 

Greenock

http://www.cruiseeurope.com/news/greenock-welcomes-11-new-ships-2011

36 ok they also have hebridean with is local western isles cruising.

[southsea bubble]

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.

 

Note that the £25m 'Tin Hut' was paid for by the Port of Southampton but actually designed to Carnival's specification and underwritten by a 20 yr contract. Carnival's requirement was 'Functionality' ie processing up to 7,000 passengers, stores and baggage between a 10 hr turnround period.

Apparently they are pleased with the outcome

Cruise companies want their ship to be the focus, not a wonderfully ornate terminal but the main driver is moving passengers on/off ship quickly

 

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.

 

Dover has. Harwich has.Newcastle has. Tilbury has. All to different standards

 

In proper commercial environment, investment in upgraded terminal facilities should be reflected in higher port charges.

New entrants will have to face this challenge and the fact that the 2 major cruise lines ie Carnival and RCCL/Celebrity have reportedly contractually committed themselves to Southampton for up to 20 yrs.

There is a rumour that MSC have also signed a term deal

[sidari]

Southsea bubble ... The building is a Glorified Tin Hut with a worse PA system than most railway stations! regardless of who designed it or which cruise line sails from it, as for a 20 year contract do not forget that the cruise lines can walk away anytime they want to taking their ships to wherever they see fit that suits their Financial gains for thier Investors.

 

"Apparently they are pleased with the outcome

Cruise companies want their ship to be the focus, not a wonderfully ornate terminal but the main driver is moving passengers on/off ship quickly"

 

So the ship is the focus? then how come Port Everglades built the New Ornate building for Oasis and Allure along with RCI ? if they did not want cruise passengers to be interested in it!

[John Bull]

... The building is a Glorified Tin Hut

 

 

Getting boring now, Sid - time to knock the anti-Southampton jibes on the head ?

As Scrozuk says, the thread's supposed to be about why Fred pulled out of Liverpool.

Which doesn't even have a tin hut :p

JB ;)

[southsea bubble]

Southsea bubble ... The building is a Glorified Tin Hut with a worse PA system than most railway stations! regardless of who designed it or which cruise line sails from it, as for a 20 year contract do not forget that the cruise lines can walk away anytime they want to taking their ships to wherever they see fit that suits their Financial gains for thier Investors.

 

Re the contractual obligations. I guess the port would have been fairly keen to ensure the contract they signed with Carnival

was pretty watertight

"Apparently they are pleased with the outcome

Cruise companies want their ship to be the focus, not a wonderfully ornate terminal but the main driver is moving passengers on/off ship quickly"

 

So the ship is the focus? then how come Port Everglades built the New Ornate building for Oasis and Allure along with RCI ? if they did not want cruise passengers to be interested in it!

 

I have never visited Port Everglades but have spent time in Port Canaveral and have visited the wonderfully ornate Disney Terminal there which, incidentally, was part modelled on the old Ocean Terminal in Sothampton.The Port Ops Manager there told me that, with hindsight, they and Disney should not spend out so expansively on the Terminal design

Likewise the Red Hook terminal in Bayonne is a relatively 'cheap and cheerful' design, as I understand it

I have it on reasonable authority that the reason why Broward County were able to 'push the boat out' with their terminal design was aid from the local taxpayer (similar I guess to the Liverpool grant aid)as well as a decent term deal from the user

[sidari]

As Scrozuk says, the thread's supposed to be about why Fred pulled out of Liverpool

 

why is it that those from the South have a chip on their shoulder regarding turnaround facilities in liverpool?