QM2 May 15th sailing

[ak1004]

3 hours ago, Megabear2 said:

ak1004 I was ready to give you the benefit of the doubt about your experience  - each to his own and all that!  However you just blew it for me - there's no ship anywhere that carries passengers in comfort in rough or any seas than the QM2.  Sorry but you are almost insulting the great ship here and I am compelled to say you speak rubbish with a forked tongue!!

You can definitely believe what you want, but we were not the only ones who felt the excessive movement. We spoke to many passengers who felt the same way, and also heard few who asked for help at the reception desk.

 

My apologies for "insulting" your baby!

 

1 hour ago, sogne said:

What were the weather conditions? The ship may have been out running a weather system I have done TA on QM2 in December storm 10 for 3 days ship was perfectly stable . Having spent much of my professional life at sea she is the best sea keeping vessel I have experienced. Incidentally I am sure the captain was not asleep for 5 days.

I don't know. I think we heard the captain mentioning rough sea on the first or second day, but I'm not 100% sure.

 

From my experience, weather conditions are much more important that the ship. We have experienced very smooth sailings on ships like Azamara and Oceania, and some rough sailings on ships like Allure of the Seas.

 

And yes, I'm well aware that the captain was not asleep for 5 days.. I thought Brits have good sense of humor. 🙂

[sogne]

6 hours ago, ak1004 said:

You can definitely believe what you want, but we were not the only ones who felt the excessive movement. We spoke to many passengers who felt the same way, and also heard few who asked for help at the reception desk.

 

My apologies for "insulting" your baby!

 

I don't know. I think we heard the captain mentioning rough sea on the first or second day, but I'm not 100% sure.

 

From my experience, weather conditions are much more important that the ship. We have experienced very smooth sailings on ships like Azamara and Oceania, and some rough sailings on ships like Allure of the Seas.

 

And yes, I'm well aware that the captain was not asleep for 5 days.. I thought Brits have good sense of humor. 🙂

Since you have been critical of much of Cunard's offerings on your recent TA I perhaps incorrectly thought that were including the captain since your list of complaints is somewhat extensive.

[sogne]

Just now, sogne said:

Since you have been critical of much of Cunard's offerings on your recent TA I perhaps incorrectly thought that were including the captain since your list of complaints is somewhat extensive.

Ps looking at my group name might give you a clue to my heritage.

[Victoria2]

10 hours ago, ak1004 said:

 

I agree with you 100%. After being locked down for 2 years, I would sail even on Royal Caribbean or Carnival.

 

That dais, our cruise in December 2021 on Oceania was hardly impacted by Covid. In fact, I don't think that the Cunard deficiencies I described have anything to do with Covid.  

I would agree with regards to your #65 comments which would suggest to me your comments were approaching Cunard from an Oceania perspective. Cunard is not Oceania and has a quite different approach to the cruise industry, as their literature indicates .

Just say no to the photographers. Quite an easy thing to say although the thought of photographers chasing passengers around the ship paints an amusing picture.

 

I think many of your termed deficiencies can be related to the impact Covid has had on Cunard, directly or indirectly even if it's just something simple as the economic impact the new internet charges have for World Club members. The 'free' eight hours was the only perk we regularly used and now we'll have to pay. I guess that could be termed nickel and dime but the Cunard coffers must be standing pretty empty and to quote the slogan of a large UK supermarket chain 'every little helps' and I suppose, if it helps keeps the line afloat it helps us, if only very indirectly, too.

 

C'est la vie and luckily, you have Oceania and many more cruise lines to choose from. Enjoy them.🙂

[ak1004]

2 hours ago, Victoria2 said:

I would agree with regards to your #65 comments which would suggest to me your comments were approaching Cunard from an Oceania perspective. Cunard is not Oceania and has a quite different approach to the cruise industry, as their literature indicates .

Just say no to the photographers. Quite an easy thing to say although the thought of photographers chasing passengers around the ship paints an amusing picture.

 

I think many of your termed deficiencies can be related to the impact Covid has had on Cunard, directly or indirectly even if it's just something simple as the economic impact the new internet charges have for World Club members. The 'free' eight hours was the only perk we regularly used and now we'll have to pay. I guess that could be termed nickel and dime but the Cunard coffers must be standing pretty empty and to quote the slogan of a large UK supermarket chain 'every little helps' and I suppose, if it helps keeps the line afloat it helps us, if only very indirectly, too.

 

C'est la vie and luckily, you have Oceania and many more cruise lines to choose from. Enjoy them.🙂

 

If you read my initial post, I mentioned many things that we liked on Cunard, along with many things we didn't like. As much as I like Oceania, Cunard beats it easily in the entertainment and enrichment department. In fact, I would not take TA on Oceania, exactly for those reasons (unless I wanted just relax and finish few books).

 

I also mentioned that I came with proper expectations, knowing that Cunard is not Oceania. My main issue is that Cunard is marketing itself as a luxury line, which is far from the reality. Many people might love Cunard, for different reasons. Many people also love Carnival and Royal Caribbean - it doesn't make them luxury lines, and they don't pretend to be. Cunard is in the same category as Celebrity, Princess and Holland America, and should be compared to those lines.

 

It's easy to blame everything on Covid, but how Covid impacted the chaotic and inefficient embarkation? According to several reviews, it was exactly the same pre-Covid. How Covid impacted the food? I know it didn't on Oceania, why would it on Cunard? 

 

I do agree that Cunard is different from most lines and provides a special and unique experience. For some people it's enough to compensate for other deficiencies. For me it's not. As you mentioned, luckily we have some choices.

 

That said, I won't say that we will never return to Cunard. There are few lines that we can say with 100% certainty that we will not be sailing on them again - Cunard is not one of them. I believe that constructive criticism is always good, it helps all of us to improve.

[Victoria2]

2 hours ago, ak1004 said:

 

If you read my initial post, I mentioned many things that we liked on Cunard, along with many things we didn't like. As much as I like Oceania, Cunard beats it easily in the entertainment and enrichment department. In fact, I would not take TA on Oceania, exactly for those reasons (unless I wanted just relax and finish few books).

 

I also mentioned that I came with proper expectations, knowing that Cunard is not Oceania. My main issue is that Cunard is marketing itself as a luxury line, which is far from the reality. Many people might love Cunard, for different reasons. Many people also love Carnival and Royal Caribbean - it doesn't make them luxury lines, and they don't pretend to be. Cunard is in the same category as Celebrity, Princess and Holland America, and should be compared to those lines.

 

It's easy to blame everything on Covid, but how Covid impacted the chaotic and inefficient embarkation? According to several reviews, it was exactly the same pre-Covid. How Covid impacted the food? I know it didn't on Oceania, why would it on Cunard? 

 

I do agree that Cunard is different from most lines and provides a special and unique experience. For some people it's enough to compensate for other deficiencies. For me it's not. As you mentioned, luckily we have some choices.

 

That said, I won't say that we will never return to Cunard. There are few lines that we can say with 100% certainty that we will not be sailing on them again - Cunard is not one of them. I believe that constructive criticism is always good, it helps all of us to improve.

Ah. Constructive Criticism. A phrase I occasionally liken to an antiphrasis, not of course, that you are using it in such a manner. I prefer the word 'feedback'. More accurate and less likely to get backs up! 

 

Luxury is so subjective, don't you think? 

One person's luxury, is another's' acceptable. I have never taken any notice of the word luxury when frequently used as a marketing tool, preferring to experience a product myself and make my own decisions and as we're lucky enough to travel well, air, land and sea,  and are more than happy with the little extras which go with it, I call Cunard comfortable. If that's luxury, fine, if not, I couldn't care less! The word is meaningless to me. However, if I happened to be a marketing executive, to call anything 'comfortable' in a competitive environment would probably get me a position downgrade so maybe a degree of leeway is acceptable in 'luxury' terminology. 

 

 I can't argue any NY boarding is a luxurious experience  but I still say Covid has a lot to answer for in staffing. Internet? never a Cunard strong point and even less so for us now we have to pay for it.. Coffer filling ? Food, again, one person's luxury is another's acceptable. Hot Dog and fries on a Gala night, might be a luxury experience as a pure change.  There again, some dishes which might be regarded as a 'fine dining' experience by someone, might leave me totally underwhelmed.

 

I think we will have to agree to disagree on a few things but agree how lucky we are to be able to comment on the whole subject. 🙂

 

 

 

[exlondoner]

16 minutes ago, Victoria2 said:

 

 

Food, again, one person's luxury is another's acceptable. Hot Dog and fries on a Gala night, might be a luxury experience as a pure change.  There again, some dishes which might be regarded as a 'fine dining' experience by someone, might leave me totally underwhelmed.

 

 

 

 

 

As you imply, food is extremely subjective, and my standards may be inadequate, but it seemed to me that the food and menus on my only post-Covid cruise were superior to those on the last couple of cruises before Covid, though I thought those were pretty good. But, as I say, I may lack discernment.

[Victoria2]

11 minutes ago, exlondoner said:

 

As you imply, food is extremely subjective, and my standards may be inadequate, but it seemed to me that the food and menus on my only post-Covid cruise were superior to those on the last couple of cruises before Covid, though I thought those were pretty good. But, as I say, I may lack discernment.

I'm sure in many eyes, I lack discernment too as my eclectic Cunard dinner tastes run the gamut of caviar to burger [without the bun] and a salad! Oh and not forgetting the table fries!  

Good job I take no notice of those whose tastes [in many things] are perceived far superior to mine!  🙂

 

[Lakesregion]

6 hours ago, ak1004 said:

 

If you read my initial post, I mentioned many things that we liked on Cunard, along with many things we didn't like. As much as I like Oceania, Cunard beats it easily in the entertainment and enrichment department. In fact, I would not take TA on Oceania, exactly for those reasons (unless I wanted just relax and finish few books).

 

I also mentioned that I came with proper expectations, knowing that Cunard is not Oceania. My main issue is that Cunard is marketing itself as a luxury line, which is far from the reality. Many people might love Cunard, for different reasons. Many people also love Carnival and Royal Caribbean - it doesn't make them luxury lines, and they don't pretend to be. Cunard is in the same category as Celebrity, Princess and Holland America, and should be compared to those lines.

 

It's easy to blame everything on Covid, but how Covid impacted the chaotic and inefficient embarkation? According to several reviews, it was exactly the same pre-Covid. How Covid impacted the food? I know it didn't on Oceania, why would it on Cunard? 

 

I do agree that Cunard is different from most lines and provides a special and unique experience. For some people it's enough to compensate for other deficiencies. For me it's not. As you mentioned, luckily we have some choices.

 

That said, I won't say that we will never return to Cunard. There are few lines that we can say with 100% certainty that we will not be sailing on them again - Cunard is not one of them. I believe that constructive criticism is always good, it helps all of us to improve.

Could you possibly be confusing luxury the same was so many confuse "smart casual" Cunard while they use the term luxury are really selling a "traditional" old world/British sailing where passenger dressed for dinner etc. Yes it does not equal some of the pricey but totally lacking in tradition luxury of some lines but it certainly is way above the mass market lines with their zip lines, buckets of beer and lack of linen in many of their dining establishments.

[david,Mississauga]

I have been lucky to have enjoyed the four restaurant "classes" on the QM2 and Britannia and Princess Grill on the QE. (I say lucky because our first time in Princess Grill was an upgrade and our only two crossings in Queen's Grill were also upgrades.)

 

I won't get into the discussion of whether the Britannia Restaurant or the Club are luxury, although the table settings of fine china and silver cutlery are not seen on all ships these days. I would say that the two Grills seemed very luxurious to me. The larger accommodations were very nice indeed, but that is not the main reason we like the Grills.

 

I have not been on Cunard since the pandemic and we are on the QE in about a fortnight and the QM2 in the autumn, so we shall see whether standards have fallen. 

[ak1004]

10 hours ago, Victoria2 said:

Ah. Constructive Criticism. A phrase I occasionally liken to an antiphrasis, not of course, that you are using it in such a manner. I prefer the word 'feedback'. More accurate and less likely to get backs up! 

 

Luxury is so subjective, don't you think? 

One person's luxury, is another's' acceptable. I have never taken any notice of the word luxury when frequently used as a marketing tool, preferring to experience a product myself and make my own decisions and as we're lucky enough to travel well, air, land and sea,  and are more than happy with the little extras which go with it, I call Cunard comfortable. If that's luxury, fine, if not, I couldn't care less! The word is meaningless to me. However, if I happened to be a marketing executive, to call anything 'comfortable' in a competitive environment would probably get me a position downgrade so maybe a degree of leeway is acceptable in 'luxury' terminology. 

 

 I can't argue any NY boarding is a luxurious experience  but I still say Covid has a lot to answer for in staffing. Internet? never a Cunard strong point and even less so for us now we have to pay for it.. Coffer filling ? Food, again, one person's luxury is another's acceptable. Hot Dog and fries on a Gala night, might be a luxury experience as a pure change.  There again, some dishes which might be regarded as a 'fine dining' experience by someone, might leave me totally underwhelmed.

 

I think we will have to agree to disagree on a few things but agree how lucky we are to be able to comment on the whole subject. 🙂

 

 

 

 

Yes, luxury is subjective, but there are still some objective factors that most experts agree on them. But as you said, if it works for you, what do you care if it's called luxury or not? People who like Carnival know it's not a luxury line, but they don't really care.

 

And yes, completely agree that we are lucky to be able to sail of any of those lines, luxury or not.

 

6 hours ago, Lakesregion said:

Could you possibly be confusing luxury the same was so many confuse "smart casual" Cunard while they use the term luxury are really selling a "traditional" old world/British sailing where passenger dressed for dinner etc. Yes it does not equal some of the pricey but totally lacking in tradition luxury of some lines but it certainly is way above the mass market lines with their zip lines, buckets of beer and lack of linen in many of their dining establishments.

 

When you are talking about zip lines and buckets of beer, you are talking about lines like Royal Caribbean, NCL etc. I agree that Cunard is in a different league, but they are not Cunard competitors. Cunard competitors are Celebrity, Princess and Holland America. Personally I would rank Cunard slightly above those lines (mostly because of entertainment and enrichment), but below Oceania and Azamara (not to mention Silversea or Seabourn).

 

Dressing up for dinner is not equal luxury. But I agree that Cunard is special and unique.

 

6 hours ago, david,Mississauga said:

I have been lucky to have enjoyed the four restaurant "classes" on the QM2 and Britannia and Princess Grill on the QE. (I say lucky because our first time in Princess Grill was an upgrade and our only two crossings in Queen's Grill were also upgrades.)

 

I won't get into the discussion of whether the Britannia Restaurant or the Club are luxury, although the table settings of fine china and silver cutlery are not seen on all ships these days. I would say that the two Grills seemed very luxurious to me. The larger accommodations were very nice indeed, but that is not the main reason we like the Grills.

 

I have not been on Cunard since the pandemic and we are on the QE in about a fortnight and the QM2 in the autumn, so we shall see whether standards have fallen. 

 

Agree. But I'm sure you would agree that being on Britannia and on Grills is like being on two different ships. The price point of the Grills is also completely different - you are paying significantly more than veranda on Oceania or Azamara, but you are still on a large ship, with all the cons of a large ship (but also some pros of course).

[escrick]

I would not rate Azamara above Holland America, Celebrity, or Cunard.  An Azamara cruise is totally different to those lines, and so it may not be fair to compare them.  Frankly, I have enjoyed all the cruises I have taken, albeit on very different lines.  

[Lakesregion]

10 hours ago, ak1004 said:

 

Yes, luxury is subjective, but there are still some objective factors that most experts agree on them. But as you said, if it works for you, what do you care if it's called luxury or not? People who like Carnival know it's not a luxury line, but they don't really care.

 

And yes, completely agree that we are lucky to be able to sail of any of those lines, luxury or not.

 

 

When you are talking about zip lines and buckets of beer, you are talking about lines like Royal Caribbean, NCL etc. I agree that Cunard is in a different league, but they are not Cunard competitors. Cunard competitors are Celebrity, Princess and Holland America. Personally I would rank Cunard slightly above those lines (mostly because of entertainment and enrichment), but below Oceania and Azamara (not to mention Silversea or Seabourn).

 

Dressing up for dinner is not equal luxury. But I agree that Cunard is special and unique.

 

 

Agree. But I'm sure you would agree that being on Britannia and on Grills is like being on two different ships. The price point of the Grills is also completely different - you are paying significantly more than veranda on Oceania or Azamara, but you are still on a large ship, with all the cons of a large ship (but also some pros of course).

Your continual kvetching reminds one of the term. Beating a dead horse. Time to possibly move on to a different topic other than trying to convince people that Cunard is not a luxury buy.

[ak1004]

10 minutes ago, Lakesregion said:

Your continual kvetching reminds one of the term. Beating a dead horse. Time to possibly move on to a different topic other than trying to convince people that Cunard is not a luxury buy.

 

I'm not trying to convince anyone. I couldn't care less which lines people sail. I'm just presenting the facts. And as I said, if it works for you, you couldn't care less if it's a luxury line or not. Many people drive a Toyota for their whole live and are very happy with it, don't feel the need to try a Mercedes. It's perfectly fine.

[Megabear2]

54 minutes ago, ak1004 said:

 

I'm not trying to convince anyone. I couldn't care less which lines people sail. I'm just presenting the facts. And as I said, if it works for you, you couldn't care less if it's a luxury line or not. Many people drive a Toyota for their whole live and are very happy with it, don't feel the need to try a Mercedes. It's perfectly fine.

They are indeed "facts", however they are your facts and your adaption of them not everyone else's so perhaps instead of going on about these "facts" you might consider that the other folk are not for turning.  You are entitled to your opinion, have stated it and debated it.  Perhaps now might just the the time to let it rest?  

 

And by the way "my baby" is very much that and no matter your "facts" she is acknowledged worldwide as extremely stable and unique.  There aren't many ships left in the world where crowds gather to watch them sail in and out so I'm presumably not alone in this opinion.

[ak1004]

Just now, Megabear2 said:

They are indeed "facts", however they are your facts and your adaption of them not everyone else's so perhaps instead of going on about these "facts" you might consider that the other folk are not for turning.  You are entitled to your opinion, have stated it and debated it.  Perhaps now might just the the time to let it rest?  

 

And by the way "my baby" is very much that and no matter your "facts" she is acknowledged worldwide as extremely stable and unique.  There aren't many ships left in the world where crowds gather to watch them sail in and out so I'm presumably not alone in this opinion.

 

Waiting 2 hours to embark the ship are "my facts"? Having the most slow and unstable internet are "my facts"? Not having soap bars, conditioner, robes etc are "my facts"?

[Megabear2]

6 minutes ago, ak1004 said:

 

Waiting 2 hours to embark the ship are "my facts"? Having the most slow and unstable internet are "my facts"? Not having soap bars, conditioner, robes etc are "my facts"?

Indeed they are.  I'm sure the shore side staff did not intentionally pick on you but they aren't actually Cunard are they, rather port employees.  If you'd bothered to read up on the internet situation you could have decided if this type of voyage on a ship of this nature was actually for you.  If it's any consolation on the recent Celebrity Edge and Apex voyages passengers complained repeatedly that the internet didn't work - two new ships on one of the lines you've chosen to lump Cunard with.

 

The toiletries you refer to are gradually being removed by all lines due to pollution issues.  I assume from your complaint on this issue you have no regard for environmental issues.  I'm delighted to hear Cunard have taken their responsibility in this regard seriously as they were at risk of falling behind some other lines, perhaps they moved slowly as they feared passengers such as yourself being offended.

[ak1004]

9 minutes ago, Megabear2 said:

 

The toiletries you refer to are gradually being removed by all lines due to pollution issues.  I assume from your complaint on this issue you have no regard for environmental issues.  

 

Actually it's exactly the opposite.

 

https://tabitha-whiting.medium.com/should-you-swap-to-soap-bars-to-reduce-your-environmental-impact-d9b4e5f77209

https://www.greenmatters.com/p/soap-bad-for-environment

 

"Bar soap is generally considered the most sustainable soap option, with 10 times less of an environmental impact than liquid soap. "

[Victoria2]

2 hours ago, ak1004 said:

 

I'm not trying to convince anyone. I couldn't care less which lines people sail. I'm just presenting the facts. And as I said, if it works for you, you couldn't care less if it's a luxury line or not. Many people drive a Toyota for their whole live and are very happy with it, don't feel the need to try a Mercedes. It's perfectly fine.

Just as the traveller chooses the ship to suit their preferences, the motorist might have a 911 in the garage along with the Toyota and just because he's seen driving the Toyota, it doesn't mean he doesn't know how a high performance car drives.

 

Luxury is subjective [very] and is a  loose term [very] but if you take the Times Best Luxury Lines '22, Cunard comes in at number five. Mind you they have Virgin at number one  but even so, the word luxury is tossed around. 

 

There will always be levels of luxuriousness but that isn't the point which was raised in posts #2&3 [Cunard not a luxury line].

I'm not entering an is it or it isn't debate but the word luxury has been applied to Cunard by a well-known newspaper. Is Cunard as luxurious as Silversea?  I have no idea as I haven't sailed Silversea but I would very much doubt it when taking the whole ship, as opposed to just QG, into consideration but that doesn't detract from the fact the word has been applied to Cunard according to The Times. 

 

Agree or not, Cunard uses the word luxury in its literature but as to the level of luxury, that's too tedious to even consider commenting on and I couldn't care less anyway. 🙂

[Host Hattie]

I hesitate to wade into this but I gather from your list of complaints that you booked a Britannia grade cabin of some sort, lots of things you mentioned would have been included if you had booked the Grills.

I can't believe that the price of an Oceania cruise is comparable to Cunard Britannia so it's a very unfair comparison. There is a more luxurious experience available on Cunard, you chose not to take it.

[exlondoner]

One thing I did notice was that Silverseas out-Cunard's Cunard, by having three different dress codes, two of which require a jacket, just like Cunard in the old days. Don't know how luxury that makes them.

[ak1004]

17 minutes ago, Victoria2 said:

Just as the traveller chooses the ship to suit their preferences, the motorist might have a 911 in the garage along with the Toyota and just because he's seen driving the Toyota, it doesn't mean he doesn't know how a high performance car drives.

 

Luxury is subjective [very] and is a  loose term [very] but if you take the Times Best Luxury Lines '22, Cunard comes in at number five. Mind you they have Virgin at number one  but even so, the word luxury is tossed around. 

 

There will always be levels of luxuriousness but that isn't the point which was raised in posts #2&3 [Cunard not a luxury line].

I'm not entering an is it or it isn't debate but the word luxury has been applied to Cunard by a well-known newspaper. Is Cunard as luxurious as Silversea?  I have no idea as I haven't sailed Silversea but I would very much doubt it when taking the whole ship, as opposed to just QG, into consideration but that doesn't detract from the fact the word has been applied to Cunard according to The Times. 

 

Agree or not, Cunard uses the word luxury in its literature but as to the level of luxury, that's too tedious to even consider commenting on and I couldn't care less anyway. 🙂

 

I don't disagree. At the end of the day the only opinion that matters is yours. If you like the product, you shouldn't really care what others say.

12 minutes ago, Host Hattie said:

I hesitate to wade into this but I gather from your list of complaints that you booked a Britannia grade cabin of some sort, lots of things you mentioned would have been included if you had booked the Grills.

I can't believe that the price of an Oceania cruise is comparable to Cunard Britannia so it's a very unfair comparison. There is a more luxurious experience available on Cunard, you chose not to take it.

 

Yes, we were in Britannia balcony. Just couldn't justify paying $4k USD for a 7 nights cruise. But I agree that Grills experience is completely different (although it would not make a difference for internet, and very little difference on embarkation).

 

I agree that comparing Oceania to Cunard Britannia is not apples to apples - this is exactly why I mentioned that we came with proper expectations. However, price wise, you would be surprised how small the difference could be. On a typical 10-14 days European cruise, Oceania veranda is around $450-500 CAD per night while Cunard Britannia balcony is around $350-400 CAD. When you consider all the inclusions (Oceania price includes complimentary specialty restaurants, Internet, still and sparkling waters, soft drinks, specialty coffees and teas, and in many cases gratuities), the price difference is really negligible. 

 

1 minute ago, exlondoner said:

One thing I did notice was that Silverseas out-Cunard's Cunard, by having three different dress codes, two of which require a jacket, just like Cunard in the old days. Don't know how luxury that makes them.

 

To me, the dress code is not what defines luxury. Silversea has the most formal dress code, Regent the least formal, but they are both in the top 5 luxury lines.

 

Of course I strongly object people coming to dinner in shorts and t-shirts like you often see on RCI ships, but you won't see it on Oceania or Azamara.

[mcloaked]

It does vary from voyage to voyage as to whether more or less passengers are dressing 'smartly, or not. On QM2 last week the vast majority of people were dressing smartly even on non-Gala evenings. A few interpreted 'smart casual' as 'casual' but they were a tiny minority.

[exlondoner]

3 minutes ago, mcloaked said:

It does vary from voyage to voyage as to whether more or less passengers are dressing 'smartly, or not. On QM2 last week the vast majority of people were dressing smartly even on non-Gala evenings. A few interpreted 'smart casual' as 'casual' but they were a tiny minority.

 

This was the case too on our QE voyage in April.

[ak1004]

51 minutes ago, mcloaked said:

It does vary from voyage to voyage as to whether more or less passengers are dressing 'smartly, or not. On QM2 last week the vast majority of people were dressing smartly even on non-Gala evenings. A few interpreted 'smart casual' as 'casual' but they were a tiny minority.

 

Smart casual according to Cunard: "a dress shirt and trousers, jacket and tie optional".

 

And yet some people are surprised and sometimes shocked that about 50% of the gentleman did not wear jackets. Does a jacket automatically makes you look smart? Do you look smarter if you wear a cheap jacket from Walmart, compared to someone wearing a nice dress shirt from Hugo Boss? Or you wear a cheap rented Tuxedo compared to someone wearing a $2,000 suit?