Wow Queen Anne

[david63]

24 minutes ago, WantedOnVoyage said:

if the market were there, more lines would be catering to it.

There are two sides to this.

 

1. The cruise lines wanting to use regional ports.

2. The regional cruise ports having the facilities to handle today's cruise ships.

 

It is a somewhat chicken and egg situation and currently it would appear that neither of the above are happening.

 

It all comes down to the UK ports not having the foresight to invest in the infrastructure coupled with the stranglehold that Carnival have with Southampton - and don't get me started on the fact that Southampton is not, or soon will not, be fit for purpose unless some drastic action is taken.

[ace2542]

2 minutes ago, david63 said:

It all comes down to the UK ports not having the foresight to invest in the infrastructure coupled with the stranglehold that Carnival have with Southampton - and don't get me started on the fact that Southampton is not, or soon will not, be fit for purpose unless some drastic action is taken.

If enough ports decide to "ban" at least the really large cruise ships then Royal and MSC will be forced into bankruptcy given they would have x number of ships they could not homeport nor sell and would be forced to scrap at a loss of countless billions I am sure. A situation which if that happens begs the question of why further develop southampton if that development is to house the really large ships which in that possible future are heading for the scrap heap?

 

And I don't tell me Southampton council hasn't thought about closing the terminal down because they have and they are under pressure to do so.

[margo2011]

14 hours ago, reeves35 said:

GBP25M doesn't seem a lot for a new terminal.  That sounds more like a big shed.

I believe the Initial costing is for the new landing stage alone the new owners have put out to tender (no pun intended)for new hotels and other infrastructure  required.

[D&N]

5 hours ago, ace2542 said:

So are those sailings majority german? Or it is still the majority mix of brits/americans?

On our Westbound the majority of non English speakers were French, Eastbound, which was continuing to Hamburg that was German and it was clear there were a large number of Germans or expat Germans on board, with US citizens who were heading for European trips.

The Westbound had been preceded by a round trip to Norway.

 

3 hours ago, david63 said:

There are not many places that I cannot get to from Manchester.

Not many to Nice. In high season (Aug 8th) there are 2 to Liverpool and 1 to Manchester. On same day there are 19 to London, 14 of them are Heathrow or Gatwick, which have similar transfer times to Southampton. 7 of those are BA to Heathrow so if you need to change the time of a flight it's easily done. Note that Nice is 3rd busiest airport in France after the two Paris airports. The frequency difference is similar to many European capitals and hubs.

 

3 hours ago, S1971 said:

 

But American passengers probably only equate to around 20% of the overall capacity, if not less.

On our crossings it was more like 45% UK, 35% US, 20% others with largest groups being French or German as mentioned above.

[margo2011]

6 hours ago, ace2542 said:

I am from Ormskirk getting in to the city is not that bad.

I am sure they can get the capacity. I am sure Olsen's suppliers can supply larger ships if they had to?

If the port isn't aiming to be a homeport for something beyond Fred Olsen then what is the point of it?  They get more and bigger ships than any other port outside of southampton with the exception of the scottish islands. But if the plan is not for a home base then what's the point?

Sorry I just remembered the initial media coverage of the new cruise terminal said it was so two ships could berth at the same time .

[ace2542]

14 hours ago, margo2011 said:

Sorry I just remembered the initial media coverage of the new cruise terminal said it was so two ships could berth at the same time .

Surely at least one eye must be on being able to homeport for a ship larger than fred olsen. Without homeporting and the benefits that brings for the city as a whole I don't really see the point to it. Could they do two ships a day regularly?

[david63]

20 minutes ago, ace2542 said:

Could they do two ships a day regularly?

Obviously they could if they geared up to do it, but I doubt that they could do it currently.

 

As I understand it at Southampton the majority of "port" staff are casual workers and whether that model would be viable in Liverpool is another matter.

[buchanan101]

On 6/3/2024 at 9:08 PM, Clewgarnet said:

No, there's no way the current cruise terminal could cope with that many guests.

 

Even if the plan to reopen the Cunard Building as the cruise terminal had gone ahead, the old booking hall would have been far too small.

That looks like the ceiling in the QM2 MDR!  

[exlondoner]

Just now, buchanan101 said:

That looks like the ceiling in the QM2 MDR!  

Or perhaps vice versa.

[buchanan101]

20 hours ago, ace2542 said:

If enough ports decide to "ban" at least the really large cruise ships then Royal and MSC will be forced into bankruptcy given they would have x number of ships they could not homeport nor sell and would be forced to scrap at a loss of countless billions I am sure. A situation which if that happens begs the question of why further develop southampton if that development is to house the really large ships which in that possible future are heading for the scrap heap?

 

And I don't tell me Southampton council hasn't thought about closing the terminal down because they have and they are under pressure to do so.

It’s huge business for Southampton though… saw a warning in their local paper about traffic chaos as 11 ships due over a long weekend…

[exlondoner]

The Cunard Building is primarily used by Liverpool City Council, lucky things. They used to offer tours, but that stopped before Covid, because, inevitably, of ‘security’, which probably really means it was a bit of a hassle. However, when I last tried, again before Covid, you could walk through the ground floor to the information/reception desk in the middle, and out the other side. Even that gives an impression of the splendours of the building’s interiors.

[Clewgarnet]

2 hours ago, exlondoner said:

The Cunard Building is primarily used by Liverpool City Council, lucky things. They used to offer tours, but that stopped before Covid, because, inevitably, of ‘security’, which probably really means it was a bit of a hassle. However, when I last tried, again before Covid, you could walk through the ground floor to the information/reception desk in the middle, and out the other side. Even that gives an impression of the splendours of the building’s interiors.

 

 

Last time I was in there, they still had a few steamer trunks in the old baggage room. Hopefully they were props left over from the tours, and not very delayed luggage!

 

I visit occasionally for work, and have once or twice been lucky enough to be meeting someone who's happy to show me round. It's a beautiful building, with plenty of the old glamour hanging around. The old waiting area on the top floor (first class only, naturally) has some stunning views.

 

Edited June 5 by Clewgarnet

[new to cuising]

On 6/4/2024 at 11:29 AM, david63 said:

Totally disagree. There are more potential passengers within three hours of Liverpool than there are Southampton and Manchester airport is about half the distance from Liverpool than Heathrow is from Southampton.

I have to disagree. Three hours from Southampton you can reach Plymouth, Bristol, Birmingham, Coventry, Northampton, and London so probably a third of the population