At this rate there will be no ports left

[ToadOfToadHall]

In 2012 we went on a St Petersburg and Baltic cruise for 14 nights. We had 8 ports of call. In 2013 we went on the same cruise, but this year there were 7 ports of call (but still 14 nights).

 

Now I've just noticed that the same cruise is 2014 in still 14 nights, but now it only stops at 6 ports.

 

So if they keep going at this rate, by 2020 there will be no ports on the cruise at all !!

[BlueRiband]

In 2012 we went on a St Petersburg and Baltic cruise for 14 nights. We had 8 ports of call. In 2013 we went on the same cruise, but this year there were 7 ports of call (but still 14 nights).

 

Now I've just noticed that the same cruise is 2014 in still 14 nights, but now it only stops at 6 ports.

 

So if they keep going at this rate, by 2020 there will be no ports on the cruise at all !!

 

Perhaps some ports were poorly rated? Or maybe tendering in was problematic? Or Cunard would rather avoid port charges and have people spend money on board?

[deck chair]

Hi

 

I have been on two 14 day Baltic cruises, one with HAL and most recently with Cunard on QE in 2012. There were no tendering ports and it is hard to imagine that any of the places we visited could be poorly rated. They are all beautiful and interesting. Anyone going on a Baltic cruise will want to see as much as possible. Hard to say why Cunard would cut back on stops if the competitors do not. Of course, perhaps the Cunard ships are spending more time in some of the ports while dropping others.

 

Deck Chair

Edited November 21, 2013 by deck chair

[ToadOfToadHall]

I'd be leaning towards your 3rd option.

[david,Mississauga]

The trend towards fewer port days pleases me. In recent years the trend was to have more days in port. I concede that is popular with a huge number of people. On other forums and blogs I see comments complaining about even one sea day, which I find amusing.

 

In the 1980s and early 90s we had three cruises on P&O's Canberra. Each was 14 days and had five ports of call. That was perfect for us and for many others who loved the Canberra. Thankfully there have been cruises that are port-intensive for those who like that and cruises for those who love the sea. Obviously, transatlantic and the former Royal Mail services between England and South Africa remain my favourite. But we enjoy a cruise now and then.

[cunardaddict]

In 2012 we went on a St Petersburg and Baltic cruise for 14 nights. We had 8 ports of call. In 2013 we went on the same cruise, but this year there were 7 ports of call (but still 14 nights).

 

Now I've just noticed that the same cruise is 2014 in still 14 nights, but now it only stops at 6 ports.

 

So if they keep going at this rate, by 2020 there will be no ports on the cruise at all !!

 

With increasing traffic of cruise ships ports in the Baltic tend to be overcrowded. So the cruise lines will reduce their ports subsequently.

 

In 2011 QE had to cancel Oslo to go to Luebeck instead where she was most welcomed.

[balf]

All the Baltic ports we have visited warranted a one day stay except St Petersburg. There is so much to see there and I would welcome a two nights or more.

 

And no Cunard ship can transit the Keil canal, a highlight when Caronia was sailing.

 

David.

[Ray66]

Compared with when I went two years ago, the ports that seem to be missing is that there's now only one in Norway instead of two (Oslo and Kristiansand) and either Tallinn or Helsinki - not both.

 

We had two days in St Petersburg.

[Mr&MrsHendricks]

With increasing traffic of cruise ships ports in the Baltic tend to be overcrowded. So the cruise lines will reduce their ports subsequently.

 

In 2011 QE had to cancel Oslo to go to Luebeck instead where she was most welcomed.

 

I think we were on this cruise - called at Travermunde for Lubeck. Travermunde was such a lovely small port and the welcome so great from the people that we didn't get to Lubeck. We 'had' to book another cruise with the excuse of going to Lubeck. I'd go back to Travermunde on a Cunard ship for the welcome / sailaway tomorrow if I could!

 

However, I don't think I'd be able to choose which Baltic port to drop as we enjoyed every one of them,

 

MrsH

[Ray66]

 

In 2011 QE had to cancel Oslo to go to Luebeck instead where she was most welcomed.

 

If you mean the QE maiden Baltic 31st May 2011, it was Kristiansand that was cancelled for Travemunde, not Oslo.

[DDBINK1]

I like sea days.

You can rest, eat, read books, see shows, play games, gamble, and drink to your hearts content.

And for some, think of things to complain about. :eek:

 

Sounds like a cost saving measure. Ports charge money to dock a ship. The sea day is free except for the fuel. It would be good to alternate the ports from year to year then you could do the same cruise and see different lands. ??

[Dcoy]

My understanding is less ports = less fuel. When your not stopping, you can travel slower with the extra day at sea between ports.

 

Don

[cunardaddict]

If you mean the QE maiden Baltic 31st May 2011, it was Kristiansand that was cancelled for Travemunde, not Oslo.

 

Almost right. Kristiansand was cancelled in favour of Oslo as Oslo was too busy on the origional day. We prepared this as an alternative during the Panama Canal crossing in january.

 

Travemuende enjoyed the visit of QE as well.

[Ray66]

From my notes:

 

...we had a change of port from Kristiansand (first port day) to Travemunde (third port day) because there were too many ships in Copenhagen on the third port day which was then brought forward a day.

 

Should have been:

 

31st May – embark

1st June – at sea

2nd June – Kristiansand

3rd June - Oslo

4th June – Copenhagen

 

Actual:

 

31st May – embark

1st June – at sea

2nd June – Oslo

3rd June – Copenhagen

4th June – Travemunde

[glojo]

My understanding is less ports = less fuel. When your not stopping, you can travel slower with the extra day at sea between ports.

 

Don

That was going to be my query

[paulista1950]

"The trend towards fewer port days pleases me. In recent years the trend was to have more days in port. I concede that is popular with a huge number of people. On other forums and blogs I see comments complaining about even one sea day, which I find amusing. "

 

Ditto!

 

The ideal cruise for me is 2 sea days for each 1 in port. And I LOVE crossings.

Again, to each his own.

[bobby1119]

My understanding is less ports = less fuel. When your not stopping, you can travel slower with the extra day at sea between ports.

 

Don

 

Exactly. The bean counters have done the sums and have concluded that sailing slower saves fuel.

 

In addition to savings on fuel, overall docking fees are reduced, while onboard services (bars, photography, Spa, shops, casino, specialty dining, etc.) increase onboard revenue.

 

It pains me to see an impressive transatlantic liner the likes of Queen Mary 2 reduced to dawdling about at speeds anywhere between 15-18 knots.

[Scrapnana]

Exactly. The bean counters have done the sums and have concluded that sailing slower saves fuel.

 

In addition to savings on fuel, overall docking fees are reduced, while onboard services (bars, photography, Spa, shops, casino, specialty dining, etc.) increase onboard revenue.

 

It pains me to see an impressive transatlantic liner the likes of Queen Mary 2 reduced to dawdling about at speeds anywhere between 15-18 knots.

 

So in 25 years we will have world cruises that are "scenic cruising" only with just a few ports to lay in supplies and refuel.:rolleyes:

[glojo]

So in 25 years we will have world cruises that are "scenic cruising" only with just a few ports to lay in supplies and refuel.:rolleyes:

Last year I followed the Cunard ships whilst they were on those journeys and all three seemed to sail at between 14 -18 knots between the various ports. I guess at those sort of speeds it gives the captain a degree of flexibility to allow for unexpected incidents. The plus way of looking at World cruise trips are that they all usually sell out way before any special offer date might have to be considered, which hopefully might suggest they are a profit making sector for the cruise industry?

 

Note:

I have only checked out the FULL World cruises for Cunard and P&O and both ships have sold their full allocation of berths. For the 'exotic' type cruises offered by the other Cunard ships not doing a circum-navigation, I believe just a few of the cheapest cabins are still available for their FULL cruise itineraries. I love to see the ships being sold out, making a decent profit which might help to stop this unpleasant penny pinching. :)

Edited November 22, 2013 by glojo

[rhkennerly]

It's my understanding that there's a lot of horse trading season to season among the lines. After all most cruises begin and end on the same day in the same ports...more or less.

 

Happens in Alaska all the time, plus there's a federal lottery to actually go up into Glacier Bay National Park.

 

There's also limited pier-side "passenger class" docking as well as busses for excursions in most places. As well, there is just a limit to the number of cruise passengers a site can hold.

 

Once a line or two pioneer an itinerary and it's successful, then every other cruise line is poaching in the new waters.

 

In short, too many passengers on too many ships on too many lines competing for limited space in the castles and in the streets. I'll bet that if one tracked all of the cruise lines and all of the itineraries worldwide over a few years, there would be an ebb & flow that "evened out."

 

The answer is to shop itinerary and make the line and ship secondary.

[glojo]

We are seeing bigger and bigger ships being built as is there more profit to be made with this style of vessel? (for balf) ;):o definite attempt at humour

 

Would a smaller ship become more popular if it could access ports that these larger ships could not access even via their tenders?

[balf]

 

Would a smaller ship become more popular if it could access ports that these larger ships could not access even via their tenders?

 

Yes I think it would be very popular. P&O have made a success of a small ship with Adonia, which is priced above the other larger ships. Caronia always did well also.

 

I don't think it will happen though, Cunard have joined all the others racing to the bottom.

 

David

[glojo]

Yes I think it would be very popular. P&O have made a success of a small ship with Adonia, which is priced above the other larger ships. Caronia always did well also.

 

David

 

Excellent point David but I fear your last one might prove to be the more accurate :o:o

 

Is the pricing of Adonia below that of the small, six star vessels? :)

[balf]

 

Is the pricing of Adonia below that of the small, six star vessels? :)

 

Yes though it tends to be a bit higher than the other ships in the P&O fleet. Of course it lacks a lot that the bigger have: a show lounge instead of a theatre etc.

 

But it can go where the big ships can't (or won't) and the atmosphere aboard is very different. However she is an older ship refurbished and re named.

 

Imagine a brand new build Cunard smaller ship. I would pay premium prices to sail on that, though below the six starers, that do not appeal at any price to me. Better by far than a joke Titanic theme vessel.

 

I don't think I would be the only one.

 

David.

[glojo]

Yes though it tends to be a bit higher than the other ships in the P&O fleet. Of course it lacks a lot that the bigger have: a show lounge instead of a theatre etc.

 

But it can go where the big ships can't (or won't) and the atmosphere aboard is very different. However she is an older ship refurbished and re named.

 

Imagine a brand new build Cunard smaller ship. I would pay premium prices to sail on that, though below the six starers, that do not appeal at any price to me. Better by far than a joke Titanic theme vessel.

 

I don't think I would be the only one.

 

David.

Thanks for taking my post in the spirit it was meant and I totally agree with your sentiments.