Liverpool turn arounds back on the agenda

[insidecabin]

Because the river is nowhere near wide enough to take today's big cruise ship. The QE2 had difficulty entering a few years ago. It was windy and the ship had to wait one and a half hours at the mouth of the river for the wind to drop.

 

It's not about using Newcastle as a port for big ships you missed the point completely.

 

If they(northeners) won't use the ships they do have access to in the north then "north" is not that high on their list of priorities.

 

Convince people that "north" is important by booking the cruises that you have allready, increase demand convinces the likes of Thomsons to send more ships( or keep them for anothe year), when thomsons makes money from you guys the rest will follow. (ditto any cruiseline like FO).

 

You are getting the ships use them or loose them

[insidecabin]

Newcastle can handle the smaller cruise turnrounds, like Olsen and Thomson via the Ferry Terminal but presumably only when no North sea ferry is in port

It would not be able to embark the 2,000+ passenger ships which are now the market norm without considerable investment in upgraded facilities

Liverpool will have the same challenge when it eventually gets turnround status.

It will cost anything beyond £3m (for very basic facilities) up to £20-£30m for the Soton/Dover type terminal with overhead gangways and the like

Interesting to note that when Direct Holidays (the forerunner of Sun Cruises) ran a series of cruises with a 750 capacity vessel (cant remember the name) to the Med from Gladstone Dock about 10 yrs ago, it was full but a combination of the Irish Sea and the Bay of Biscay was a bit rich for quite a few passengers

I cant see that Liverpool is really in the right position for starting Baltic cruises compared to Newcastle, Harwich or Dover

 

Agree just cannot see where the cruises are going to go that willl attract all these Northeners.

 

Perhaps those that are so keen should identify them

 

When the Liverpool council Passenger tax is added to the fares i guess most willl change their minds

 

And where are all these cruise pax going to park their cars.

 

Both Southampton and Dover suffer from this issue Harwich has no problem their port is out of town.

[sidari]

Inside cabin .... Why should people have to use a certain cruise company just because they are there? for many people the Olsen and Thomson ships are not Big enough for what they want from a cruise but your suggestion to use them just because they are where they are is nonsense! strange that you seem to think that people from the South are the ones filling cruise ships! why should Liverpool impose a passenger Tax ? surely you are getting mixed up with Alaska.

 

southsea bubble ... liverpool is well placed for the Larger cruise ships going to the Baltic and Norway especially as Newcastle cannot handle them, and ships heading for Iceland and the North Cape would get there before any from Harwich or Dover and even Southampton.

[insidecabin]

Inside cabin .... Why should people have to use a certain cruise company just because they are there? for many people the Olsen and Thomson ships are not Big enough for what they want from a cruise but your suggestion to use them just because they are where they are is nonsense! strange that you seem to think that people from the South are the ones filling cruise ships! why should Liverpool impose a passenger Tax ? surely you are getting mixed up with Alaska.

 

southsea bubble ... liverpool is well placed for the Larger cruise ships going to the Baltic and Norway especially as Newcastle cannot handle them, and ships heading for Iceland and the North Cape would get there before any from Harwich or Dover and even Southampton.

 

Thats the point so people are happy to travel to the ships they want "from the north" is well down the list.

 

NO fly people don't fly and will cruise what is available.

 

Cruise from the north people well only if you send me the ship I want, don't cut it.

 

Which big ship cruise line do you think can fill a ship with no fly ins

 

P&O have had years to try,

RCI have Independence so do have a very good picture of UK demographics along with there med ships to understand the market and are not rushing to deply even a smaller of their ship futher north.

 

As for the tax how are they going to substitute the subsidies they will be missing.

 

 

Itineraries even the northern ones you describe will have limited appeal if they were atractive than that 2 points for thomsons but still rejected by the ship is more important.

[sidari]

So now you are trying to tell me that RCI fill the Indy each time it sails with people from the UK and that P and O and Caunard do the same? absolute rubbish, not one ship sails out of the UK regardless of who the owner is with just UK passengers! and even some of the people from the UK on them will have flown within the UK to get to their chosen ship so yes its a fly cruise however way you look at it.

 

NO fly people don't fly and will cruise what is available ... so they will cruise on a ship you are saying just for the hell of it and just because it departs the UK? more nonsense.

[insidecabin]

So now you are trying to tell me that RCI fill the Indy each time it sails with people from the UK and that P and O and Caunard do the same? absolute rubbish, not one ship sails out of the UK regardless of who the owner is with just UK passengers! and even some of the people from the UK on them will have flown within the UK to get to their chosen ship so yes its a fly cruise however way you look at it.

 

NO fly people don't fly and will cruise what is available ... so they will cruise on a ship you are saying just for the hell of it and just because it departs the UK? more nonsense.

 

That is not what I said,

RCI have Independence so do have a very good picture of UK demographics

What the information will be telling them is there are not enough people cruising from the north to fill the ships if we relocate them.

 

 

Again you miss the point.

 

Of cource they don't fill the ships with only UK people some fly in from all over the world we have done enough round britains to have an idea of the demographics not many brits, but if the ship starts in Liverpool they will have a much harder time getting people to fly in, and then they have to get UK people to fill those places and all the places that were previously filled by UK people from the south.

 

They have thinformation you can't fill a big ship if you base it in the north.

[sidari]

but if the ship starts in Liverpool they will have a much harder time getting people to fly in, ......... what do you base that on ? after all Liverpool has a larger airport than Southampton but people still fly there! and it is closer to the city centre than any of the London airports are to Southampton.

 

They have the information you can't fill a big ship if you base it in the north....... And you have the Proof of that of course? and people from other parts of the UK would not travel to liverpool you are saying despite wanting to travel on the IOS !

[John Bull]

but if the ship starts in Liverpool they will have a much harder time getting people to fly in, ......... what do you base that on ?

 

Hey, c'mon Sid. It's simple logistics.:rolleyes:

 

Go onto the airport websites - or sit at the end of the runways :D - and count the international flights going into Heathrow & Gatwick. And give half-marks for those into Luton, Stansted, Bristol, Birmingham. Don't bother with the titchies like Southampton or Bournemouth.

 

Then do the same for Liverpool & Manchester. And give half-marks for Birmingham & any other decent-sized airport in the same radius of Liverpool.

 

Compare the numbers & you've got your answer.

 

Simples!

 

JB :)

[sidari]

So what is to stop airlines increasing International flights to Manchester ? then the short trip to Liverpool by coach, plus Liverpool has space for expansion... and any cruise line basing a Large ship in Liverpool would be working with certain airlines to get their passengers there.

 

Look how long it takes to get through the crap hole at LHR! the worst airport we have ever been through, no idea about Gatwick but will find out in December.

[John Bull]

So what is to stop airlines increasing International flights to Manchester ? then the short trip to Liverpool by coach, plus Liverpool has space for expansion... and any cruise line basing a Large ship in Liverpool would be working with certain airlines to get their passengers there.

 

Look how long it takes to get through the crap hole at LHR! the worst airport we have ever been through, no idea about Gatwick but will find out in December.

 

It doesn't take a lot of figuring out, Sid.:rolleyes:

 

:) P&O could pull out of Barbados & choose, say, Samana instead. That's cos most passengers are Brits, & they charter planes departing mebbe 5 or 6 UK airports, all reasonably handy for cruisers. They just have to tell the pilot its a different destination. Simples!

 

:( But for folk flying into UK to cruise, it doesn't work. There's hundreds of places all over the globe that cruisers fly from. Cruiselines can't fill hundreds of planes. So they use scheduled flights. Most of which go to London.

 

And even their preferred carriers wouldn't set up more scheduled flights to Manchester just cos once in a while a couple of dozen cruisers will want to go there.

 

Heathrow's not my favourite airport either, but I've flown from dozens far far worse. Hardly "crappy" but big & crowded & sometimes slow check-in & security lines. Gatwick is big, but not as big as Heathrow.

 

If you're flying from South terminal with a chunk of time to kill, go out of the terminal, turn right & down the ramp. Snack trailer between the private-hire & coach parks. Super bacon butties as lay-by prices, not airport prices. :)

 

JB :)

[blackpool belle]

Spent a great day in Liverpool today (looking for a wedding outfit).

 

Weather perfect. Lots of things for our European and North American friends to see and do but no cruise ships ;)

[sidari]

BB ... shame you picked the wrong day to shop in Liverpool! the Crown Princess is there tomorrow Sunday 24th and Crystal Serenity on the 28th, then the Crown is back on the 20th August with the Arcadia there on the 27th.

 

Septemeber will see the QE on the 8th and QM2 on the 15th.

[blackpool belle]

20th August is my birthday and I am hoping to board the Grand Princess on that day but not before that looooooooong trek to Southampton ;):D

[sidari]

Anyone know why Southampton are delaying the building of the New Terminal building ?

[Ray66]

Competition from Liverpool is being blamed for the decision to put plans for a £30 million fifth cruise terminal at Southampton on hold for at least a year.

 

http://blogs.mirror.co.uk/captain-greybeard/2011/08/cruise-terminal-battle-turns-n.html

 

http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/9175715.Fifth_cruise_terminal_plan_put_on_hold/

[scrozuk]

Although part of me would be sad that we don't get a fifth terminal, another part of me is a bit relieved, because it's all well and good building another terminal, but there's no improvement in the surrounding infrastructure to support it.

 

The announcement to postpone the building of the terminal isn't too much a surprise, it could be one of the following:-

 

1, ABP Southampton, waiting for results of Government findings on Liverpool's bid.

2, ABP Southampton, may realise they don't see a long term profit of a fifth terminal.

 

The main cruise lines go from Southampton, Cunard, P&O, Princess Cruises, Royal Caribbean, Celebrity and MSC. Who else could they get to operate from Southampton? Or would the fifth terminal have been the carrot to get Celebrity and/or RCI to operate more ships from Southampton.

 

ScrozUK

[sidari]

thanks Ray and Scrozuk for the replies, i had a feeling it may have been to do with Liverpool. I guess it also begs the question of Does Southampton really need a 5th Terminal?

[sidari]

Just when will these people who write these reports actually chack and get their facts right? it Did not and Does not have a Cruise Terminal!! I wonder how many of the owners port staff at Southampton have been canvassing these "other" ports.

 

Fight over Liverpool's Terminal Gets Bigger

Aug 30 - It's been a while since we checked in on the controversy over Liverpool's cruise terminal.

The city received a subsidy to build an additional state-of-the-art cruise terminal with the provision that it is used only for ships making port calls at Liverpool, not for ships making turnarounds. Now the city wants to use it for turnarounds too. At first it was only Southampton crying foul, but now other ports have been joining the chorus and more or less ganging up on Liverpool

[John Bull]

Just when will these people who write these reports actually chack and get their facts right? it Did not and Does not have a Cruise Terminal!! I wonder how many of the owners port staff at Southampton have been canvassing these "other" ports.

 

Fight over Liverpool's Terminal Gets Bigger

Aug 30 - It's been a while since we checked in on the controversy over Liverpool's cruise terminal.

The city received a subsidy to build an additional state-of-the-art cruise terminal with the provision that it is used only for ships making port calls at Liverpool, not for ships making turnarounds. Now the city wants to use it for turnarounds too. At first it was only Southampton crying foul, but now other ports have been joining the chorus and more or less ganging up on Liverpool

 

Hi Sid,

CND are not renoun for news hot-off-the-press , and there's nothing new in their "update" ;)

 

Yep, the first part of their quote is wrong :rolleyes: - the Grant has provided only the new pier. I'm sure the rest of the infrastructure (roads etc) could cope, and systems, logistics, suppliers would follow, but adding a teminal building would need another £20m plus.

 

But the second part of their quote is wrong too. :rolleyes: Other ports - notably Dover - have already been fighting the proposed use of grant money to compete with the facilities they have provided out of their own pockets.

And of course all the ports are working in unison - as would any organisations with common objectives.

 

 

JB :)

[sidari]

Hi JB .... Still think a few are worried by Liverpools bid! what is puzzling is why Peel ports are not involved seeing as they own most of the mersey and all the Manchester ship canal, and have made Millions selling of Salford docks and the surrounding land.

[John Bull]

Hi JB .... Still think a few are worried by Liverpools bid! what is puzzling is why Peel ports are not involved seeing as they own most of the mersey and all the Manchester ship canal, and have made Millions selling of Salford docks and the surrounding land.

 

Hi Sid,

Oh yes, there's always a worry when there's a new kid on the block. Turnarounds would impact on other ports & perhaps put projects such as Southampton 5 on ice, even if the Liverpool facility were financed with private enterprise money. But I don't see it would actually jeopardise ports like Southampton, Dover & Harwich, especially if a took a little from each. But mebbe Newcastle & Rosythe?

 

I think I'm right that Peel own Langton dock, but have nothing to do with the new cruise pier.

And there was concern at one time that they might object to the turnaround facility because it might take trade away from Langton.

But now that Fred has turned his back on Langton, Peel have nothing to lose - and possibly could invest in a turnaround terminal????

Presuming, of course, that they can remember what the word "invest" means ;):D

 

Regards to all scali scousers

JB :)

[scrozuk]

Hi JB .... Still think a few are worried by Liverpools bid! what is puzzling is why Peel ports are not involved seeing as they own most of the mersey and all the Manchester ship canal, and have made Millions selling of Salford docks and the surrounding land.

 

Would agree with you on that front, it's just unfortunate that Liverpool has a big target for other ports to keep hammering, e.g. the public funding received.

 

If Liverpool were developing a fully functioning turnaround terminal using nothing but private sector money, then the other ports would have nothing to shout about, and just see it as natural competition.

 

You can see this sort of 'bullying the new kid on the block' with regards the Apple iPad and Samsung Galaxy battle. Apple got an injunction to stop Samsung selling their new tablet PCs, knowing it might damage Samsung's sales margins, reputation etc.

 

As regards Southampton Terminal 5, I can't see how the local infrastructure could cope with the extra traffic etc, so ABP and Southampton Council really need to come together to sort that out. Until they do, the fifth terminal is a no go. Also not being funny, why build a new terminal when they have a terminal which for most parts of the year is sitting idle, e.g. QE2 berth. I think I've only seen about 4-5 ships berthed there all year.

 

Anyway I digress.

 

ScrozUK

[John Bull]

As regards Southampton Terminal 5 //.....// why build a new terminal when they have a terminal which for most parts of the year is sitting idle, e.g. QE2 berth. I think I've only seen about 4-5 ships berthed there all year.

ScrozUK

 

Been puzzling me too.:confused:

QE2 seems to be very much an overflow terminal, & although there's days when a fifth terminal is needed, they're very few & far between.

 

If Liverpool were to get their turnaround facility, they reckon it'd be used something like (from memory) 35 days a year. Since they're not prepared to repay all the grant, presumably that's not a viable number for the total investment needed.

So I can't see that Southampton's T5 would be anything like viable at the moment, regardless of the Liverpool outcome.

 

Two thoughts:

QE2 terminal is deep in the docks, inconvenient compared to the other 3 and the fruit terminal (mooted as T5).

And it's long overdue a refurb - perhaps that's no co-incidence.

If / when T5 is built, mebbe it'll simply replace QE2.

 

QE2 could then be used for other purposes, for example a ro-ro facility like its neighbour.

 

Or there's the option then to re-build or refurbed QE2 - it would then be several years before there are 5 terminals, by which time perhaps there will be the need. And the infrastructure.

 

Time will tell

 

JB :)

[Lindy028]

Just read this thread for the 1st time and am staggered at the bias against Liverpool. I really thought all this 'scalli scouser' bias had long since been confined to history. How wrong can you be ! :(

The sooner Liverpool get a turn around facility the better , I for one hate the journey to Southampton.

[John Bull]

Just read this thread for the 1st time and am staggered at the bias against Liverpool. I really thought all this 'scalli scouser' bias had long since been confined to history. How wrong can you be ! :(

The sooner Liverpool get a turn around facility the better , I for one hate the journey to Southampton.

 

 

Oh dear, Lindy, you do have a chip on your shoulder.

There's no bias anywhere in this thread against Liverpool having a turnaround - read through it.

The bias is against everyone else having to pay for it :(

 

Other ports, including ports in the north, have invested their own money.

Liverpool hasn't.

And folk in the other ports, including ports in the north, object to Liverpool holding out its hand instead of getting a local consortium - Peel Holdings & the like - to invest their own money.

 

North vs South it ain't.

A level playing field is what its all about.

 

JB :)