Did P&O Order the Wrong Ships?

[Megabear2]

5 minutes ago, Cruisemeister2002 said:

I really think it's an age thing and what you are looking for in a cruise. I'm not saying because anyone is of an older generation doesn't want to trip the light fantastic, but many are looking for other things. For instance we, that's me and the wife want relaxation, entertainment, drinks, eats, a bit of sightseeing, some shopping. Taking in local dining and culture. Do I won't zip lines, climbing walls, dodgems, ice rinks, flumes ? No. But I fully understand there are those that do, especially families with children. There being two reasons why we take cruises early or late in the year. Firstly neither of us have any desire to roast ourselves on a sunbed and secondly because there is less likelihood of the ship being overrun with children. We have both brought our kids up and have Grandchildren who we love, but we don't want them 24/7. 

So assumedly you don't want to pay the extra cruise fare that these ships charge and the likes of P&O are better for you?

[Cruisemeister2002]

Just now, Megabear2 said:

So assumedly you don't want to pay the extra cruise fare that these ships charge and the likes of P&O are better for you?

I would say in the main, yes. Although who knows what the future holds for P&O. Obviously they like many cruise lines will be more interested in new clients/passengers of younger years than an old fart like me and I must admit I love cruising but I do budget when onboard. For instance we take out the Ultimate Package  which includes A facial or massage, 2 x specialist restaurant bookings, champagne flutes, formal photo's in a frame ( although don't know whether this will be available), Breakfast in cabin with 1/2 bottle of champagne and P&O dressing gown and slippers (Whoopee do). We also don't book many excursions as many places we have visited before or like when in New York we took a cab down the the Hudson and got a ferry across to the Statue of Liberty and Ellis Island and then back and another cab to Macy's and it still cost 50% less than if we had done a P&O excursion and we weren't limited to time either. But then cruise lines are after passengers who like getting a few down their necks and to heck with the expense.  

[emam]

23 hours ago, molecrochip said:

Geiranger cocked up with Geiranger. They took the booking, confirmed the ship would fit and provided information confirming it would fit.

 

As I understand it, from crew onboard Iona, Geiranger changed the mooring positions for the SeaWalk which now means you cannot safely moor Iona alongside.

 

Geiranger never told P&O and it was the first pilot of the season that noticed when they checked their paperwork the day before or so.

 

I understand from the same crew that Geiranger will review the mooring position again for next season.

 

I think that if P&O explained this they wouldn't get so much grief from some people. However she has been sailing for a year now, that's a long time to know she can't go there but to not tell people until they are on their cruise. 

Thank you for the explanation, not that it effects me, but it's good to read that something that's not going right isn't P&O's fault.

[davecttr]

8 hours ago, emam said:

 

I think that if P&O explained this they wouldn't get so much grief from some people. However she has been sailing for a year now, that's a long time to know she can't go there but to not tell people until they are on their cruise. 

Thank you for the explanation, not that it effects me, but it's good to read that something that's not going right isn't P&O's fault.

P&O's fault lay in not telling the full truth about the problem from the start resulting in a lot of upset passengers. So the latest real reason was that the port changed the mooring buoys position without telling P&O. The previous excuse was it was the pilots and the one before that incompatibility with the sea walk.

 

Too late P&O, Iona is a poor match for Fjord cruising so despite liking the ship I won't be considering her for my future Norway fix.

[Yorkypete]

1 hour ago, davecttr said:

P&O's fault lay in not telling the full truth about the problem from the start resulting in a lot of upset passengers. So the latest real reason was that the port changed the mooring buoys position without telling P&O. The previous excuse was it was the pilots and the one before that incompatibility with the sea walk.

 

Too late P&O, Iona is a poor match for Fjord cruising so despite liking the ship I won't be considering her for my future Norway fix.

Totally agree and we have cancelled one.  Whilst some are blaming the port authorities for not telling P&O various things you would think that before scheduling Iona for Norway someone would have checked ports out. High winds, ship too big, no berthing availability etc etc but it appears they were either very lax or did not do it. Gerainger is a main point  concerning all three!

 

[BouncingWheel]

There has always been talk of what is the next ship to leave the line. Will it be Aurora or Arcadia and when? Maybe we are all wrong and it will be Iona😉. It could go somewhere like P&O Australia or become a Princess etc... where it can be located for a better fit and P&O can have another one that will work better for UK to Norway cruises due to its climate and the country's ever increasing restrictions. 

[Britboys]

1 hour ago, BouncingWheel said:

There has always been talk of what is the next ship to leave the line. Will it be Aurora or Arcadia and when? Maybe we are all wrong and it will be Iona😉. It could go somewhere like P&O Australia or become a Princess etc... where it can be located for a better fit and P&O can have another one that will work better for UK to Norway cruises due to its climate and the country's ever increasing restrictions. 

That would be great for us smaller ship lovers but totally unlikely sadly. P&O Australia has recently received two Grand Class ships from Princess and I don't think they are ready for an Excel Class. Princess has two new ships currently on order to be delivered next year and in 2025, carrying around 4300 pax.

[Megabear2]

3 hours ago, BouncingWheel said:

There has always been talk of what is the next ship to leave the line. Will it be Aurora or Arcadia and when? Maybe we are all wrong and it will be Iona😉. It could go somewhere like P&O Australia or become a Princess etc... where it can be located for a better fit and P&O can have another one that will work better for UK to Norway cruises due to its climate and the country's ever increasing restrictions. 

Or maybe stop the obsession with Norwegian cruises for a while! Looking at the number of ships that get sent there you can see why they are making restrictions. Norway is light years ahead on environmental issues so surely to be expected and start to plan something else for Iona in the next batch released for 2024.  

[Britboys]

Now, this is second hand and I can't vouch for the accuracy. Just seen a post on another sm group from someone who was sailing on Iona in June. They say in their post that the local Pilots were thinking of boycotting working on her as she is too big for the environment. Obviously if there is truth in it, the same would apply to other ships of a similar size...

[jeanlyon]

4 hours ago, Britboys said:

Now, this is second hand and I can't vouch for the accuracy. Just seen a post on another sm group from someone who was sailing on Iona in June. They say in their post that the local Pilots were thinking of boycotting working on her as she is too big for the environment. Obviously if there is truth in it, the same would apply to other ships of a similar size...

Do not not think they might have thought of this before now?

[FamilyCruiserUK]

Port authorities and countries change like the wind. Look at Venice....no longer allowed to dock there so the cruise lines have spread out around the area. They still go but means longer transfers. Royal is 2-3 hr transfer from Venice to Ravenna. Id rather have a cleaner ship like iona then an older marine diesel ship anytime. So for me its the right technology for the current climate. Size wise its more revenue which equals more investment in furture eco ships. 

[Yorkypete]

27 minutes ago, FamilyCruiserUK said:

Port authorities and countries change like the wind. Look at Venice....no longer allowed to dock there so the cruise lines have spread out around the area. They still go but means longer transfers. Royal is 2-3 hr transfer from Venice to Ravenna. Id rather have a cleaner ship like iona then an older marine diesel ship anytime. So for me its the right technology for the current climate. Size wise its more revenue which equals more investment in furture eco ships. 

The only reason they are 'changing like the wind' is because at last, the countries they visit are taking note of the warming of the planet. I can see the time that Iona and such sized vessels are banned from many areas so it would not be bringing in extra revenue  in the future. As usual with business they are not looking to the future but to making a quick profit in the present no matter what, and at the same time losing customers by their PR attitude.

 

Edited August 10, 2022 by Yorkypete

[kalos]

23 minutes ago, Yorkypete said:

The only reason they are 'changing like the wind' is because at last, the countries they visit are taking note of the warming of the planet.

 

We're all guilty of aiding and abetting if we step onboard and cruise with them .

[jeanlyon]

2 hours ago, kalos said:

 

We're all guilty of aiding and abetting if we step onboard and cruise with them .

True.

[Windsurfboy]

3 hours ago, Yorkypete said:

The only reason they are 'changing like the wind' is because at last, the countries they visit are taking note of the warming of the planet. I can see the time that Iona and such sized vessels are banned 

 

 

Firstly it's carbon emissions  per passenger that matter , given that, then Iona emits less than 5 ships carrying 1000 passengers each, especially diesel ones.

 

Secondly,  we all make choices about our carbon emissions. Personal choice what you do , where you save carbon , where you don't..  To cruise or  long haul  flights or whatever.  But must take a complete inventory of EVERYTHING THAT EMITS CARBON ALONG IT'S TOTAL CHAIN.  just to be contentious the carbon footprint of a pet dog is same as a small car, never heard a word said about dogs, thats because holidays are easy pickings. 

 

 

[Solent Richard]

On 8/5/2022 at 12:11 AM, Britboys said:

The Excel Class ships are cheaper to run, using LNG as opposed to diesel and it has been suggested that they can run okay at 40% occupancy. They may prove to be more profitable than a Royal Class ship...?

 

Pretty Spot on there. When it comes to profit the Carnival boys know what they are doing.

[Yorkypete]

1 hour ago, Solent Richard said:

Pretty Spot on there. When it comes to profit the Carnival boys know what they are doing.

I presume you are being sarcastic? Carnival is £25billion in debt. They will lose passengers if they are so big they cannot berth in many ports.

[jeanlyon]

30 minutes ago, Yorkypete said:

I presume you are being sarcastic? Carnival is £25billion in debt. They will lose passengers if they are so big they cannot berth in many ports.

Seems to me that the younger brigade don't worry about ports, the ship is the theme park?

[Solent Richard]

37 minutes ago, Yorkypete said:

I presume you are being sarcastic? Carnival is £25billion in debt. They will lose passengers if they are so big they cannot berth in many ports.

 

38 minutes ago, Yorkypete said:

I presume you are being sarcastic? Carnival is £25billion in debt. They will lose passengers if they are so big they cannot berth in many ports.

 

As a Yorkshireman I'd have thought you'd have had a grasp on the difference between 'Debt' and 'Profit'.

 

 

[terrierjohn]

35 minutes ago, Yorkypete said:

I presume you are being sarcastic? Carnival is £25billion in debt. They will lose passengers if they are so big they cannot berth in many ports.

You seem to relate Carnival to the criticism leveled at P&O, they are are only a minor part of the overall Carnival cruising operations. However being the major cruise operator does mean they have the strength to sort out problems in any one area, without jeopardising the entire organisation.

[Britboys]

43 minutes ago, Yorkypete said:

I presume you are being sarcastic? Carnival is £25billion in debt. They will lose passengers if they are so big they cannot berth in many ports.

Prior to Covid they were making a healthy profit and no doubt they will again in the future.

[gsmt47471015]

1 hour ago, jeanlyon said:

Seems to me that the younger brigade don't worry about ports, the ship is the theme park?

I think you hit the nail on the head there

[terrierjohn]

1 hour ago, jeanlyon said:

Seems to me that the younger brigade don't worry about ports, the ship is the theme park?

 

32 minutes ago, gsmt47471015 said:

I think you hit the nail on the head there

I can advise that having sailed on 2 RCI ships lots of passengers do go ashore at all the ports of call. But the younger children do love to get back on board so they can enjoy Splash away Bay,  which is far superior to anything on P&O. However it will be interesting to see what Arvia's children water park looks like.

[Yorkypete]

3 hours ago, Solent Richard said:

 

 

As a Yorkshireman I'd have thought you'd have had a grasp on the difference between 'Debt' and 'Profit'.

 

 

Oh dear. There I was thinking my Accountancy qualification may stand me in good stead.   Never mind...being my own accountant in my own retail businesses  counts for nothing, but it was 40 years ago!

 

[glynboy]

4 hours ago, Yorkypete said:

Carnival is £25billion in debt.

Prior to covid they were making annual profits in excess of $3bn, so they obviously did know what they were doing !