New Ships

What about a smaller Cunard ship maintaining the Cunard style with the base level Britannia Club;

say 550 passengers , 250 Britannia Club, 180 Princess Grill, 120 Queens Grill;

I think there would be a market for it and it would lend itself to very different itineraries.

Rob.

At a BC minimum price point it would be difficult to sell inside staterooms.

Honestly I can't the OP's point. Carnival has a variety of brands each one with it's own caracter, so why mix-up things?

No point other than to open a conversation. I have no hidden agenda if that is what you were thinking.

I wish Cunard offered more itineraries. For example, the whole of the west coast of America including Alaska is available. I can just imagine cruising the Alaskan glaciers in a Cunard ship - wonderful. And with their ability to attract really good speakers, what a joy that would be. Can't see it happening though which is a real shame. And yes, I know there are other ships that visit Alaska, I've done it with Celebrity, but I'd like to do it with Cunard. Is that really too much to hope for?

Babs: Thanks for starting this thread. Interesting. IMHO, Cunard need not worry too much about attracting younger people. They do, in small and consistent numbers. Some other lines (no need to name them) need to worry more about this issue as their customers skew above age 80 and die on board. I seriously wonder how they will survive, unless it is possible to always replace the the super-old with the next group who enter the super-old category. Full disclosure: I'm way into senior citizenry, but I do prefer cruise lines that make some way for youth and think it's questionable business practice to be super old fashioned so that they are positively creepy. Cunard is not in this category, IMHO.

I really doubt that any cruise line has a passenger average age of 80, even the one small line "no need to mention".

Die on board?. No need to take a flight to Switzerland, do it in comfort with S....

Let's get real.

David

What about a smaller Cunard ship maintaining the Cunard style with the base level Britannia Club;

say 550 passengers , 250 Britannia Club, 180 Princess Grill, 120 Queens Grill;

I think there would be a market for it and it would lend itself to very different itineraries.

Rob.

Sounds a bit like Caronia.

DAVID.

...However, the idea of another ship in the line, but one that allows a slightly more relaxed dress code may well encourage those people to 'step up to the mark' and try the other three ships in the fleet...

How would you define a "slightly more relaxed dress code"? One has only to see what happened to lines the dropped "formal night" in favor of "chic" or "elegant" night. Browse the boards and you will find the dress standards are so non-existent that some ask why the cruise line bothers calling them "elegant nights" at all.

Rather then encourage others to 'step up to the mark' and try the other three ships in the fleet the opposite would happen. Passengers would show up for dinner as they did on the more "relaxed" ship. And those who expected Cunard standards would be completely disappointed by the "relaxed" ship.

It wouldn't be a true Cunard ship.

I think Carnival has Seabourn in the small ship upscale niche so is less likely copy this with Cunard.

Sent from my SM-J700T using Forums mobile app

Sounds a bit like Caronia.

 

DAVID.

Ahh, she was a sweet little ship. We used to say she looked like a baby QE2.

How would you define a "slightly more relaxed dress code"? One has only to see what happened to lines the dropped "formal night" in favor of "chic" or "elegant" night. Browse the boards and you will find the dress standards are so non-existent that some ask why the cruise line bothers calling them "elegant nights" at all.

 

Rather then encourage others to 'step up to the mark' and try the other three ships in the fleet the opposite would happen. Passengers would show up for dinner as they did on the more "relaxed" ship. And those who expected Cunard standards would be completely disappointed by the "relaxed" ship.

 

It wouldn't be a true Cunard ship.

I agree. Adding a less-formal ship to Cunard would only muddy the waters. As it is, people are pushing the evening dress code. On the QM2 Christmas cruise, there was a sort of gala Christmas lunch in the buffet with ice carvings and special decorations. It was very nice, and I wondered if the decorations would be out at dinner. So on the way to the dining room that night I walked through the buffet to see if they were doing anything special at dinner. They weren't. And neither were the passengers. Cargo shorts and sloppy t-shirts at dinner??? I thought there was some semblance of an after-6PM dress code (like no shorts) for the buffet crowd.

I appreciate ambiance, and the dining room, theater, and bars with everyone dressed up does make for a special evening, whether it's a holiday or just any formal night. I don't want to see that diluted.

I think that in the event of an additional ship being incorporated into the Cunard fleet it should be a special build, specifically constructed for Cunard. I would suggest smaller than all existing ships and be available for exclusive itineraries only small ships can follow and the standards particularly on dress be the same or higher. A bit like a boutique hotel or club.

Regards John

Again lots of interesting comments, mainly re the dress code.

Could we now look at itineraries. I can't be the only one who would appreciate a bigger choice. Would love visiting Alaska on a Cunard ship. A magnificent scenery seen from the deck of a magnificent ship seems appropriate.

Again lots of interesting comments, mainly re the dress code.

 

Could we now look at itineraries. I can't be the only one who would appreciate a bigger choice. Would love visiting Alaska on a Cunard ship. A magnificent scenery seen from the deck of a magnificent ship seems appropriate.

As Westies, we would love the opportunity for a Cunard Alaska voyage. I agree it would be a magnificent fit.:D Wouldn't mind a Cunard Mexican voyage either.

As Westies, we would love the opportunity for a Cunard Alaska voyage. I agree it would be a magnificent fit.:D Wouldn't mind a Cunard Mexican voyage either.

Sadly these cruises would be lacking of many English who make Cunard Cunard. Having an entire ship filled with Americans is even as an American a nightmare not to my liking.

Sadly these cruises would be lacking of many English who make Cunard Cunard. Having an entire ship filled with Americans is even as an American a nightmare not to my liking.

I'm not so sure of that. On our Holland America Line cruise to Alaska there were quite a few international passengers. Several from Europe and, despite the distance, Australia. There will be surely be at least as many if not more Americans than a typical TA crossing but it won't be like a 3-day Bahamas cruise.

Also, Cunard tends to attract a specific type of traveler so the demographic may not be all that different in Alaska.

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

I've often thought that Carnival should combine Cunard and HAL into a single operating company with two separate brands. Of all the brands out there, they are most similar. Both with deep histories and traditions and passengers who appreciate such things. Also, the QE & QV are modified Vista hulls shared with most of the HAL fleet.

 

In a way they already have.

In the UK, which is Cunard's true headquarters, it's basically combined with P&O.

In the US, which is really just a marketing and sales arm (no operations really), Cunard falls under the "Holland America Group" as does Princess, HAL, and Seabourn.

Cunard is just a "brand" and not its own company.

Unfortunately I don't think we will see any significant growth in Cunard for the near future. The brand will grow slightly when QV is refurbished and the aft end is extended like QE. Unfortunately her good looks will disappear but it will mean slightly more revenue for Cunard, especially compounded over the course of the ship's life.

There is just not a huge market for Cunard. The type of traditional and formal style of cruising experience that Cunard offers is a dying breed, or really it's already dead except for Cunard. Pretty much every other line, even luxury lines have done away with any formal attire and structured dining.

All this being said, I hope Cunard doesn't change. Many of us feel the dress code has already been dumbed down, and I don't want to see it degraded any further. Besides, why should Cunard be like everyone else? If I want casual dress and open seating dining, I have about fifty other cruise lines I can choose from. Cunard is the ONLY line I can sail where I can expect a traditional and elegant experience, with formal attire and it won't even break the bank. Those that complain that Cunard is too formal are just not suited for Cunard. They should be sailing on something else and not trying to change Cunard to suit themselves. There are too many other choices that offer what they want. If Cunard does change, then there is really no reason to sail on them over something like Celebrity. Service and food are just as good on Celebrity and many others lines, but it's the formality and atmosphere that set Cunard apart. Right now they are unique in this industry with what they offer, and while it may not be popular enough to expand the brand, it does appear popular enough to sustain a three-ship brand, and hopefully that is enough to satisfy Carnival Corp.

I recall hearing that Cunard onboard operations and rules were changed to reflect Princess procedures after the Carnival Corp reshuffle following the Princess merger. While the brands are different, it seems (at least in the US) that Cunard is closely tied to Princess but less so to HAL or Carnival cruise line. My CWC number is the same as my Princess number (and I gained credit for some Cunard cruises in the database merger) and the fax number is the same.

It makes sense that a brand/company like Cunard needs to piggyback on a larger organization to keep costs down and maintain a viable business. Looking at Carnival's portfolio of brands, the two closest are HAL and Cunard. Looking at the postings on Cunard's forum here, if another line is mentioned, it's most likely Celebrity. In general, for US cruisers, if a Cunard passenger is looking for a cruise that isn't offered by Cunard, they now first look to Celebrity. By more closely linking Cunard with HAL, that could be changed. I'd love to get joint CWC/Mariner's credits for a HAL cruise.

Princess is moving more and more to being a "Carnival/Royal Caribbean plus" and has embraced a more contemporary spirit with less of an embrace of past traditions than HAL.

I also realize that I'm looking at this from the US. I've left out P&O in the discussion of Cunard brands. It also may be part of the "historic brands" group. To be frank, I've been unclear about its association with Princess (and Carnival Corp) over the past 20 years.

-Mark

... Many of us feel the dress code has already been dumbed down, and I don't want to see it degraded any further. ...

Indeed it has. On my crossings aboard the QE2 every night was formal (in First Class) except the first and last and a jacket and tie was the minimum standard for all restaurants. Admittedly, the earlier crossings were a mere five nights. When First and Tourist classes were done away with, the QE2 became essentially a one-class ship with Grills in the present style. Formal nights became normal in the former Tourist restaurant. When the QE2 crossings were lengthened to six nights there were, of course, four formal nights. On my earlier crossings (six nights) on the QM2 there were four formal nights. Later, even though the crossings became seven nights the number of formal nights dropped to three.

As others have said, I would like to see some Alaska cruises with Cunard. I recently had an Alaska cruise from Vancouver on Holland America and it was all right - and actually quite good in a few aspects - but we would have enjoyed it more if it was a Cunard ship. Regarding clientèle on an Alaska cruise, on our voyage the nationality of the passengers in order of the highest numbers down: the top four were people from Britain, Australia, USA and Canada.

Indeed it has. On my crossings aboard the QE2 every night was formal (in First Class) except the first and last and a jacket and tie was the minimum standard for all restaurants. Admittedly, the earlier crossings were a mere five nights. When First and Tourist classes were done away with, the QE2 became essentially a one-class ship with Grills in the present style. Formal nights became normal in the former Tourist restaurant. When the QE2 crossings were lengthened to six nights there were, of course, four formal nights. On my earlier crossings (six nights) on the QM2 there were four formal nights. Later, even though the crossings became seven nights the number of formal nights dropped to three.

 

As others have said, I would like to see some Alaska cruises with Cunard. I recently had an Alaska cruise from Vancouver on Holland America and it was all right - and actually quite good in a few aspects - but we would have enjoyed it more if it was a Cunard ship. Regarding clientèle on an Alaska cruise, on our voyage the nationality of the passengers in order of the highest numbers down: the top four were people from Britain, Australia, USA and Canada.

I waited for years and years to Cunard to go to Alaska and eventually gave up and went with Holland America. I don't recall the passenger nationalities, but in general, Alaska is an international draw. However, Alaska is pretty crowded with mass-market ships, so Cunard would have to offer something special to justify their higher price. Perhaps John Watson's suggestion of a "boutique ship" would work well there. A smaller ship can get into some of the smaller less-visited ports.

And to reference Holland America again (I think "Cunard lite" is apt, or was until they dumbed down formal nights and made other cuts), they use the small Prinsendam as a boutique ship, going on interesting itineraries in Europe.