marmitecat

The film's lukewarm response from the critics may well affect Cunard's (inevitable) plans to put photos all over the next Cunarder magazine. Oh dear.

Still, it may focus their minds on giving paying customers the deal they have bought in future, instead of just double-selling the time/space on board....

Phil's post is interesting.

We'd asked for a later boarding time, which would have resolved all our issues - a few more hours in NY would have been welcome.

But Cunard gave us a noon boarding time (13 hours ahead of departure) and then refused to communicate with us. Like all meek customers, we felt we had no choice but to turn up at noon or risk problems with boarding. Had Cunard put on mini-buses or cabs to take those who wanted to be there back into Manhatten, they may have found it would have preserved customer relations. Instead, I suspect they've isolated more people than they imagine.

Some on board said the ship did visit the manufactured Carnival resort on the Caribbean leg? Another device to prop up profit levels if that was the case.

It does feel like Cunard are now taking their customers for fools.

If the impact of the premiere was so insignificant, I wonder why Cunard refused to deal with us or our travel agent until the day of sailing over concerns raised?

Perhaps the answer to that is in the detail of their response, already detailed on this thread, which constitutes an insult or joke, depending on the recipient's state of mind!

Perhaps part of the answer also came from the head of public relations on board, who told me personally there had been many complaints.

We have a follow up complaint with them, which I assume will be dismissed. So it will be ABTA as the next stop - they sold us something, replaced it with something inferior and then refused to talk to us.

Gives confidence in putting money their way in future, doesn't it?

The head of customer service on board confirmed there had been many complaints from guests.

Cunard were very helpful to us, with a response on the day to a request for information made weeks before by our travel agent, after they had consistently ignored our questions.

We should have felt lucky, because the late departure allowed us to see the Statue of Liberty in the dark and illuminated.

(of course, it isn't dark and the statue isn't illuminated at the regular 5pm departure time in December. At least not in the deranged world of Cunard).

Was the answer an insult or a joke from Cunard? I'm really not sure. What is beyond doubt is the way it illustrates the contempt they show towards those who pay for their services.....

At a guess, those who 'can't see any reason for discontent' will be those who have not paid to be on board for this trip.

They may well be unable to 'see any reason for discontent' that Cunard has simply refused to talk about this situation with me so far, despite using three separate channels of communication.

That refusal to communicate - for me - indicates there really is a reason to feel discontent and Cunard know that, so are avoiding the issue.

That's quite right, but there is a difference between the situations.

I think the difference with ports being changed and this is that ports is probably (or at least should be) down to external influences, such as weather.

This one is entirely the choice of Cunard. The unavoidable is unavoidable. This one was avoidable, or at least should have been had it been for Cunard's irresistible desire to make a profit twice over. And then not to communicate with those who've paid a dare to complain??

Brigittetom has hit the nail on the head - wonderful photo ops for the QM2, aka, good publicity for Cunard. At the expense of those who have already paid to use the ship.

The pinnacle of arrogance and cynicism, as I have said previously. And as the days pass, still no contact from Cunard (which is no longer a surprise to us).....

If you wait to see what's available when you get on board, I suspect you'll be sorely disappointed, moldgirl.

Cunard's offer so far has been a 20 per cent discount on (doubtless expensive) theatre tickets and no transport to get there or back.

If that's as deep as they want to dig for those who have already paid up at this point, it is difficult to imagine a crater of generosity suddenly opening up when passengers step on board...

I may be wrong, of course. But Cunard's refusal to even discuss the matter with me would suggest my prognosis is accurate! Let's wait and see.

You might expect the premiere disruption to be mentioned in current literature for those who have not yet booked.

But that would be to assume Cunard cared about its customers. It doesn't. It just cares about relieving them of money, then doing exactly what the company wants in order to make even more money.

As I said, the pinnacle of cynicism and arrogance.

Still no response from Cunard to our requests for a phone back or written emailed reply to our concerns. No surprise there, of course. Our travel agent has still had no response after making the same enquiries on our behalf.

Nice firm to deal with, after taking customers' money, refuse to talk to them when the goalposts are moved. Something all should remember.

And the muster time will remain as normal, meaning boarding times can't just be shifted back by six or seven hours. Muster could be done later, of course, under normal circumstances with a midnight departure. But we wouldn't want fare-paying passengers getting in the way of the film premiere, would we?

Arrogance and cynicism in its purest form from Cunard, I'm sad to say.

Cunard still won't talk to us about this! No response to email (should be within four days). No response to call back request (should be within 24 hours).

Yet they have the audacity to call us "valued customer" in emails. The only value Cunard attach any importance to is money and clearly a Hollywood film company is giving them rather more than we are. So despite having paid up, we get elbowed aside to make way.

Aside from that situation, our check in time is noon, so what happens if we turn up at 3pm?

Also what time is the muster - its a few years since we've done this trip, I'm thinking just before the 5pm departure?

Any guidance would be appreciated.

It isn't just the delayed departure that offends, its the fact that some - and I suspect a lot - of public areas will be out of bounds on the first evening.

Arrogance on the part of Cunard - they'll obviously make more in terms of cash and (perceived) prestige, so why bother that they're grabbing something repeat customers have already paid for?

They speak of "valued customers" in their correspondence. The real valued customer is the film company and its large cheque. When that gets waved around, they lose interest in regular passengers. But I bet they'll continue to bombard us with brochures. Well, more fool them.

The fact they won't talk to me, our travel agent or the firm selling the overall package speaks volumes, I think.

Cunard won't talk to me about this. Or our travel agent, it seems. Taken our cash for a Princess Grill, so an expensive trip, but now there's the lure of making a quick buck by renting out the ship. Or at least space on the ship we've paid to use. And they pretend this is somehow exciting for the suckers left with second best. I think they're in breach of contract and should do something significant to make amends. Our boarding time is noon, 12 hours ahead of departure. Who will pay the $100 bill for a return cab trip back to Manhatten? Can't see us booking too quickly again in future - shame as the Atlantic crossings have been fun previously. Cunard's arrogance and cynicism have already spoiled the trip for us.