Why Cunard

[ak1004]

If only we could combine the entertainment and enrichment program of Cunard, the food of Oceania, the service and cabins of Silversea and the itineraries of Azamara, this would be a perfect ship!

 

btw, Silversea has 8 different restaurants, so you don't have to be on a big ship to have a good variety of food. 

[lissie]

10 hours ago, exlondoner said:

 

As a UK citizen, I would not say Cunard was very British or even quite British. For heaven's sake, they talk about tuxedoes and price things in dollars. Mid-Atlantic perhaps.

I agree - we sailed on an Australian based cruise on QE and it was international as far as the crew was concerned and at least 80% Australian as far as the passengers are concerned. Doing repositioning cruises this year I'll be curious to see how it changes. 

 

In Aussie waters we had an outdoor "Aussie BBQ" on the Lido deck, they did New  Vogue dancing rather than Sequence Dancing - I don't think that was preplanned just some of the Aussies took the entertainment lady in hand and explained names and speeds for New Vogue. 

 

We chose Cunard for the  dancing - Princess and the same itinerary for the same price and P&O Australia was cheaper (but more kids and not good dancing) . Quite excited to be getting back on board in 24 days and counting 

[bbtablet]

14 hours ago, exlondoner said:

 

Neither QE or QV regularly have anywhere near 2,500 patients. And they have lots of space to spread them around.

Well that's good to know!

[alc13]

15 hours ago, ak1004 said:

Cunard definitely provides more unique and special experience than many other lines, definitely more special than Celebrity. But this is still a mass market line, and even if you are in a suite, you are still on a 2,500 passengers ship.

 

The gap between mediocrity and luxury in the cruise industry is widening, and the gap between mainstream and Five-Star cruise pricing narrows.

We've done "luxury" (Crystal and Silversea) and prefer Cunard.  For about a million reasons, actually, but among them are elegant surroundings, consistently well-prepared food, live music (no electric pianos, thank you very much), some great bars, and first-class lectures.  Service is on a par with those others, in the Grills, anyway.  It may not be "luxury," meaning it's not all-inclusive and the ships are larger, but it sure is nice. 

[ak1004]

2 hours ago, alc13 said:

We've done "luxury" (Crystal and Silversea) and prefer Cunard.  For about a million reasons, actually, but among them are elegant surroundings, consistently well-prepared food, live music (no electric pianos, thank you very much), some great bars, and first-class lectures.  Service is on a par with those others, in the Grills, anyway.  It may not be "luxury," meaning it's not all-inclusive and the ships are larger, but it sure is nice. 

 

Luxury has nothing to do with all-inclusive. Luxury has everything to do with the size of the ships. I'm sure the experience is luxury in the Grills, but you are still on a big ship. Constantly waiting in lines is not luxury to me, but to each its own. My wife prefers her Honda over my Mercedes..

 

But I agree about lectures. No lines comes even close to Cunard in this department.

Edited June 30, 2022 by ak1004

[sogne]

What is the source for this for these figures?

 

Cunard WS states QM2 2691 pax and 2061 and 2081 for QV & QE. It could be wrong of course. 

 

Our preference for Cunard can be given in one word namely ambience.  Although in my case at least being at sea  is enough. 

[ak1004]

23 minutes ago, sogne said:

What is the source for this for these figures?

 

Cunard WS states QM2 2691 pax and 2061 and 2081 for QV & QE. It could be wrong of course. 

 

 

https://www.cruisemapper.com/wiki/761-cruise-ship-passenger-capacity-ratings

 

I think the upper range is for full capacity, including cabins with 3-4 passengers.

 

23 minutes ago, sogne said:

Although in my case at least being at sea  is enough. 

 

Same for us! There is no bad cruise!

[sogne]

1 hour ago, ak1004 said:

 

Luxury has nothing to do with all-inclusive. Luxury has everything to do with the size of the ships. I'm sure the experience is luxury in the Grills, but you are still on a big ship. Constantly waiting in lines is not luxury to me, but to each its own. My wife prefers her Honda over my Mercedes..

 

But I agree about lectures. No lines comes even close to Cunard in this department.

I once went on a TA to a lecture by Seth Gopin the subject was NY architecture not a subject i was  enthused about but he sold it to me by his command of subject, delivery , no reading from notes etc. rather in the way that a great conductor can enthuse me about a piece I am not usually enthused about. Svetlanov and Le Mer being  on example.

[ak1004]

1 minute ago, sogne said:

I once went on a TA to a lecture by Seth Gopin the subject was NY architecture not a subject i was  enthused about but he sold it to me by his command of subject, delivery , no reading from notes etc. rather in the way that a great conductor can enthuse me about a piece I am not usually enthused about. Svetlanov and Le Mer being  on example.

 

Cunard enrichment program is outstanding. No argument here. So is the entertainment.

 

But it also depends on the type of the cruise. Cunard definitely shines on TA sailings, I would not sail TA on Oceania. But on port intensive European cruise, this is less important because your main goal is to see ports, not to be on the ship (at least for us). This is where smaller ships really shine. Not only they can go to ports that bigger ships cannot, but other things become more important - such as being off the ship as quickly as possible, smaller tour groups etc. And when I'm back on the ship, I want to go to dinner when I want (not on set time) and have a high quality food with high quality service.

 

But then again, I'm comparing Britannia, not Grills.  

[exlondoner]

I'm not sure what luxury is. For me it may not amount to much more than not having to make my own bed, and having people bring me things when I want them. But I should have thought a large ship (like QM2) could seem more luxurious than small, because of higher ceilings, larger windows, bigger indoor spaces, and longer Vistas.

[escrick]

Thank you for this post and comments.  My husband and I will take our first Cunard cruise next year, and we have a deposit on another one in 2024.  We have taken many cruises on different lines, on small,  medium, and large ships.  On a Celebrity cruise about five years ago, we found it very gimmicky.  It was not to our personal liking.  Note that I said “personal.”  Taste is an individual phenomenon.  I am sure that hundreds on the cruise enjoyed the gimmicks.  I am looking forward, though,  to a more traditional cruise.

 

[ak1004]

3 minutes ago, exlondoner said:

I'm not sure what luxury is. For me it may not amount to much more than not having to make my own bed, and having people bring me things when I want them. But I should have thought a large ship (like QM2) could seem more luxurious than small, because of higher ceilings, larger windows, bigger indoor spaces, and longer Vistas.

 

Luxury means different things to different people. To me luxury means:

 

• Smaller ships with more intimate service without a crowded feel. 
• High space-to-passenger ratio and crew to guest ratio.
• Ability to dine where you want and when you want without assigned dining times or tables.
• More extensive and flexible menus. High quality food. Ability to customize your menu and get items that are not on the menu.
• No lines. Ever.

 

[Tonopah]

We love Cunard for the atmosphere, the dancing (hoping it isn’t going away/diminished on the Queen Anne), the food, the dancing, PROPER G&T’s, the dancing, the lectures, the dancing, the atmosphere, Homer Simpson, the dancing…

 

We are complete t-shirt-and-shorts people but it is so nice to dress up and be with others who also dress up, even for just a few days.

[Windsurfboy]

You can't say why Cunard without comparison to alternatives

 

Thus it was fine to introduce the passenger space ratio into the conversation.  Cunard is better than many especially big ships , but doesn't compare to the space offered by Seabourn,  SS,  etc , similar to Celebrity .

 

The comparison of Cunard to Claridges  , and P&O to Butlins , is biased beyond belief. Cunard is not  Claridges àlthough QG may come very close, but QG is only 5% of a Cunard ship. P&O is certainly not Butlins, I don't understand the unjustifiable denigration of other lines.

 

What is luxury,  I would agree in many ways with ak1004,  except that luxury is intimate service , which is theoretically possible on bigger ship , ship within ship concept.

 

1 hour ago, ak1004 said:

 

Luxury means different things to different people. To me luxury means:

 

•  intimate service without a crowded feel. 
• High space-to-passenger ratio and crew to guest ratio.
• Ability to dine where you want and when you want without assigned dining times or tables.
• More extensive and flexible menus. High quality food. Ability to customize your menu and get items that are not on the menu.
• No lines. Ever.

 

 

If luxury is what you want question is why QG not another similiar ship within a ship , or a small ship  "luxury" line.  To me that depends on where you are going, we wouldn't do a TA in a small ship , but would do a fly Caribbean or Mediterranean.  Also not a believer that all inclusive means luxury,  prefer quality over quantity, so like to pay for  very good wine but only drink at night with meal. Champagne at breakfast isnt luxury.  Do you want the order off menu facility in QG , or the multiple restaurants of other lines. All a balance .  

 

But for most the question is why Cunard vs other bigger ships. The answer is not in the numbers space ratios etc. 

 

Cunarders feel the difference is in the intangibles.  The lecture program,  which of course is very personal, it depends on the subjects chosen. Cunard has fine tuned this to it's clientele. You can only look at what is on offer to make a personal choice. It is a very personal choice. If anyone could post daily programme 

 

Similiarly Atmosphere.  If you like formal nights then all the British based ships have a similiar number and identical dress codes. Pre covid I would say that across all the UK lines , the % of men in a Tuxedo was similiar  well into 90% on all ships,  but Ladies on Cunard did take the elegant dress more seriously. 

 

The Queens (and other ships of their age) have a more classic look , more wood and more or a nod to the pre war ocean liners.

 

 

Whether it's luxury or main stream , the question is why not. 

 

We are trying different lines. Set your parameters for lines you wouldn't touch, for us no party lines (Disney,  Virgin And other ) otherwise,  our view is why not give it a go. So why not Cunard , you will enjoy it,  as we have every new line we try. It may not  become your go to line for every cruise, but you won't regret it.

 

 

Edited June 30, 2022 by Windsurfboy

[exlondoner]

Several have commented on the excellent lecture programme often provided by Cunard, and I too have enjoyed some brilliant lectures, including one where the Italian wars of Reunification were cogently explained in 50 minutes to an audience of about 800. As this is the case, it seems quite ludicrous of Cunard not to publish details of which lecturers are expected to be aboard which ships when.

[ak1004]

1 hour ago, Windsurfboy said:

QG is only 5% of a Cunard ship.

 

 

 

Exactly! Many people describe the wonderful experience they had on Cunard cruises, but forget to mention that they sailed in QG. Britannia provides a very different experience in terms of food and service. Still not bad, especially compared to other mainstream lines, but not even close to QS and the luxury lines.

 

Another thing on a luxury line is that everyone is treated equal, regardless of the cabin they book. Everyone gets the same food and service, the only difference is the cabin size (and maybe few small perks).

[Victoria2]

20 minutes ago, ak1004 said:

 

Exactly! Many people describe the wonderful experience they had on Cunard cruises, but forget to mention that they sailed in QG. Britannia provides a very different experience in terms of food and service. Still not bad, especially compared to other mainstream lines, but not even close to QS and the luxury lines.

 

Another thing on a luxury line is that everyone is treated equal, regardless of the cabin they book. Everyone gets the same food and service, the only difference is the cabin size (and maybe few small perks).

Luxury

Why are you so hung up on that word? I don't think the Cunard regulars could really care less.

 

I'll admit we travel well and are used to that fact but not having had a holiday for over two years anything where I won't have to cook, clean or shop will bit  luxury at the moment. The fact we can do it on a very pleasant ship with lovely people around to look after us will be pure luxury, and if we finally get to board the ship after having had so many cruises cancelled, that will be utter luxury!

20 minutes ago, ak1004 said:

 

 

 

Edited June 30, 2022 by Victoria2
no idea why the post duplicated itself

[ak1004]

15 minutes ago, Victoria2 said:

Luxury

Not having had a holiday for over two years anything where I won't have to cook, clean or shop will bit  luxury at the moment. The fact we can do it on a very pleasant ship with lovely people around to look after us will be pure luxury, and if we finally get to board the ship after having had so many cruises cancelled, that will be utter luxury!

Why are you so hung up on 'luxury'? I don't think any regulars can be bothered with the word.

 

 

After being stuck at home for two years, I would probably sail even on Carnival.. 

 

But yes, everything is relative. For most people, almost any cruise ship would be considered a luxury vacation. So lets not lose perspective. 

 

But people still like to compare. It's a human nature. We were on Oceania in December and on Cunard in May, so we have a basis for comparison. We enjoyed both, and would sail on both again, but they offer a different experience. Don't come to Oceania for entertainment and enrichment, and don't come to Cunard for food..

Edited June 30, 2022 by ak1004

[BklynBoy8]

1 hour ago, exlondoner said:

Several have commented on the excellent lecture programme often provided by Cunard, and I too have enjoyed some brilliant lectures, including one where the Italian wars of Reunification were cogently explained in 50 minutes to an audience of about 800. As this is the case, it seems quite ludicrous of Cunard not to publish details of which lecturers are expected to be aboard which ships when.

 

We too are looking forward to the lectures but feel left out with the listings that once were on the website gave us the insight of the names and subjects.

 

Going in September makes us feel we won't know if we board. Is it because of C19 will not allow a sure thing to be printed due to a last minute cancellation.

 

Hoping return of tradition...

[Victoria2]

30 minutes ago, ak1004 said:

 

After being stuck at home for two years, I would probably sail even on Carnival.. 

 

But yes, everything is relative. For most people, almost any cruise ship would be considered a luxury vacation. So lets not lose perspective. 

 

But people still like to compare. It's a human nature. We were on Oceania in December and on Cunard in May, so we have a basis for comparison. We enjoyed both, and would sail on both again, but they offer a different experience. Don't come to Oceania for entertainment and enrichment, and don't come to Cunard for food..

I presume you've eaten in QG in order to make that overarching comment on Cunard's food and so are comparing Oceania's offering with QG which is probably a more suitable comparison than Britannia.. 

 

If so and you're going to continue to bang on about your luxury lines, I think the food in QG is excellent although there will be those used to 3* Michelin meals at home cooked by their own chef, who might take issue with that comment. 

[exlondoner]

On our last voyage in April, the QG pleasingly achieved a consistently high standard in cooking. In 2019, this was not really the case. We had quite a lot of splendiferous dishes, but my spouse was served extremely tough roast lamb. Very bad, and something that should not happen in a restaurant that aims to be highly regarded. And even I can roast lamb so it isn't tough. 😀

[ak1004]

10 minutes ago, Victoria2 said:

I presume you've eaten in QG in order to make that overarching comment on Cunard's food and so are comparing Oceania's offering with QG which is probably a more suitable comparison than Britannia.. 

 

If so and you're going to continue to bang on about your luxury lines, I think the food in QG is excellent although there will be those used to 3* Michelin meals at home cooked by their own chef, who might take issue with that comment. 

 

No I was comparing food in Britannia since this is where most guests eat (only 5% eat in the QG). I'm sure the food in the QG is excellent, and I don't know what a suitable comparison would be. When we compare lines, we usually compare the cheapest veranda with cheapest veranda. In terms of pricing, QG would be typically much more expensive than veranda on Oceania, so I'm not sure if this is a suitable comparison either.

[Windsurfboy]

Looking at cost per night should compare Oceania basic balcony  with Brittania  Club. Can't comment never sailed in either.

 

On Cunard except for the restaurant you dine in, the Grills lounge and  priority  embarkation,  QG passengers treated same as everyone else thoughout the vast majority of ship where people mix. No Queue jumping no special treatment everyone treated the same.  Some may say that's good, some may not .

 

 

[ronpes]

After 35 cruises mainly with RCCL and also with a couple of Celebrity and MSC sailings added to the mix, we finally took the plunge and sailed with Cunard for the first time this year. 

We did a transatlantic on the QM2 from Southampton to New York.

 

Before we sailed we were a bit anxious whether we would enjoy the whole “Cunard experience” so to balance things out, rather than risk staying on 14 nights for the return journey, we booked ourselves on Anthem of the Seas for the return leg home.

This was also because my wife did not want to fly long haul whilst Covid was still an issue. 

 

We have done many transatlantic trips before in other lines as we love seas days. 

 

To cut to the chase, we absolutely loved the whole experience in the QM2.

 

We loved the fantastic service onboard combined with the elegance and style. 

So much so that we booked several more transatlantic trips for next year for the QM2 and we wished we could have stayed on when we got to New York

 

I agree with another poster that  the  shore side of things definitely could have been better organised and yes, the ship could do with a lick of paint and a spruce up. However, it did not take anything away from our overall enjoyment. 

 

We did also enjoy our return trip on Anthem which is also a beautiful ship but if asked to chose which ship did we prefer?  we would say the QM2 because of its elegance and sty and the fantastic onboard service.

[Victoria2]

1 hour ago, exlondoner said:

On our last voyage in April, the QG pleasingly achieved a consistently high standard in cooking. In 2019, this was not really the case. We had quite a lot of splendiferous dishes, but my spouse was served extremely tough roast lamb. Very bad, and something that should not happen in a restaurant that aims to be highly regarded. And even I can roast lamb so it isn't tough. 😀

Even I can do roast lamb but I like mine pink so I rely on my butcher for the quality.

 

I've had seared Tuna, more cooked than seared on the odd  occasion and I have sent back the occasional beef fillet but that was about the quality rather than the cooking. I suppose out of well over 250 nights, to count on a few fingers the number of meals which failed to live up to expectations, isn't too bad  really!