Cunard UK says QE2 held back "luxury fleet"

[Jim Avery]

I am not agreeing or disagreeing with you. I just would like to know your reasoning for saying that the Cunard ships are far from being a "luxury line"?

 

I would suggest sailing SeaDream, Seabourn, Silversea, or Regent. Then you will know. IMHO, Cunard is much like Holland America with the singular exception of QM2 being able to perform the Transatlantic liner function, in short, mass market.

[The Real PM]

I would suggest sailing SeaDream, Seabourn, Silversea, or Regent. Then you will know. IMHO, Cunard is much like Holland America with the singular exception of QM2 being able to perform the Transatlantic liner function, in short, mass market.

 

 

Seeing I haven't been on those lines, and most likely won't in the near future, could you possibly give me a few specifics? I am not asking to bring about an argument, I just really would like to know.

[NomDePlume]

Gail--Babette explained that very nicely on page 2 in a thread by the same name in another place... :rolleyes:

[The Real PM]

Gail--Babette explained that very nicely on page 2 in a thread by the same name in another place... :rolleyes:

 

Oh, I guess I didn't read it. Did you agree?

[NomDePlume]

Oh, I guess I didn't read it. Did you agree?

 

It is not a question of agreeing or not--the lady knows her business...

[Bramcruiser]

I would suggest sailing SeaDream, Seabourn, Silversea, or Regent. Then you will know. IMHO, Cunard is much like Holland America with the singular exception of QM2 being able to perform the Transatlantic liner function, in short, mass market.

 

Exactly. Cunard tends to be more mass market than luxury where the luxury is really only at the Grills level. Nothing wrong with it as I like Cunard the way it is but lets stop calling an apple an orange.

 

David

[hollihedge]

One of the Carnival lackies gets it wrong - again - when will they realise that cookie cutter interior design gimmicks and faux glitz do NOT mean luxury and certainly do not mean elegance and class. I am frankly appalled at his public remarks. The QE2 with her impeccable class, heritage and world repute has carried them. Please save us from these Carnival yes people (I include, of course, Carol Marlow in this).

[TBirdFrank]

Unfortunately Skanky is one of ours - let's be honest - if he was a graduate of "Have a Nice Day" indoctrination you might understand it - but he is just the epitomy of a brown nosing ladder climberout of "The Office" - read his blog about the departure on 11/11 to get the full (bleugh) flavour of his management style

 

http://wearecunard.com/tag/peter-shanks/

 

Its the "Farewell voyage blog" for the full weasel version

[dougnewmanatsea]

The idea that QE2 was holding back Cunard from being a "luxury" line is, frankly, just silly. Mr. Shanks is certainly correct that her departure makes Cunard's product more consistent, but more "luxury"? Agreeing with that would require me to consider the current two ships "luxury", and if I did (which I do not), I'd consider QE2 to be as well.

 

Anyway, Cunard stopped competing in the "luxury" market (as defined in cruise industry jargon) when it gave ROYAL VIKING SUN and the Sea Goddess twins to Seabourn.

[Brian Raine]

Not having travelled on the QE2 ,but just returned from the QV I can agree with the comments about "what is luxury". To me the QV is just a Carnival fun ship in "formal clothing", no better no worse than any other cruise ship. There is however a "snob" attitude attached to the Cunard brand which is not revelent on the other lines. I spoke to several passengers who stated "Cunard was the only line for them" maybe this is what Carnival are banking on, charge em high prices and make them think price equals quality, which anyone with sense knows it does not always work that way.

After QV this passenger will not visit Cunard again.

[stephen@stoneyard.co.uk]

I am cross with Cunard management. I can accept that QE2 had to retire but the attitude of the management of the company has made me furious. I cannot see how my Queen Victoria experience can described as luxury. The cabins are fine but with a few design faults and full of plastic coated furniture. Stewards are just cleaners with everything else done by Room Service. Do not get me started on the Britannia. Poor food, slow service and waiters suggesting we go to the Lido.

 

My midrange Britannia Grade cabin on Queen Victoria was only slightly cheaper than a bottom of the range Princess Grill Cabin on Queen Elizabeth 2. Perhaps that is how QE2 was holding back Cunard.

 

Best wishes, Stephen.

 

PS. To me luxury is about attentive, unobtrusive and personal service provided in comfortable and quiet surroundings. Is that what Cunard provide? If anywhere, it was onboard QE2 in the Penthouses.

[david,Mississauga]

From the interviews given on British TV I could sense he wasn't too bothered about the departure of the ship. He came a accross as cold businesslike, lukewarm and slightly annoyed by the emotional response of the people around him. As a lot of people of his likes do he hide behind silly corporate jargon like "we move on with our other liners...." Typical Carnival man

 

I do agree that some accommodations on 4-5 were not up to date with nowadays standards. However people knew about them and booked it.

 

But isn't luxury also about your fellow passengers and general atmosphhere? If that is not up scratch it'll look like porridge anyway. I found that on QE2 very exclusive despite climbing into a bunk bed at night ;-))

 

We mustn't forget that for many years the QE2 was a two-class ship whilst operating on Atlantic crossings. The cabins on Four and Five deck were all Tourist Class, later called Transatlantic Class. At the time of our first crossing in 1973, Cunard was bragging that "Many of our tourist cabins (or staterooms) are larger than many other ships' first class cabins." Obviously they weren't referring to the smaller rooms with upper and lower berths. In recent years many of the larger Four deck cabins were "promoted" to Caronia Restaurant class. We liked the three-bed cabins (the ones with the extra sofa-bed in an alcove by the porthole) which at the end were C3s.

 

I know many of the younger members of the board are shocked that ships were once divided into two or three classes, but this wasn't necessarily a bad thing. We travelled many times in two-class ships in the 1970s and early 1980s and naturally we were happier in First Class than Tourist. But there were significant savings to be had on ships like the QE2 if one didn't mind being banned from certain rooms, such as the Queens Room. The issue of dress standards was very simple: First Class - formal; Tourist - respectable informal. Just as in recent years, there was little difference in the menus between the Britannia/Tables of the World/Mauretania Restaurant and the Columbia/Caronia Restaurant, whether in two-class crossings or one-class cruising.

 

I concede that a two-class ship would be a hard sell these days, even though multi-class travel is quite acceptable on aeroplanes, trains and even hotels, although the latter offer an experience similar to the Cunard Grills as opposed to strictly divided classes.