Queen Anne Grills Terrace access

[Victoria2]

12 minutes ago, exlondoner said:

I assume that was on a later voyage than the one we shared. It looks as if the tables are quite differently arranged, apart from by the immovable banquettes.

This one was our shared cruise, the first one was our second cruise. Where you sat next to the other two top, the round table was set for three.

[exlondoner]

26 minutes ago, Victoria2 said:

This one was our shared cruise, the first one was our second cruise. Where you sat next to the other two top, the round table was set for three.

Yes, I can see the table where ours was, but I don’t remember that large round table in the foreground of the other at all. You would have been next to it?

[exlondoner]

Interestingly the table for three does manage to give everyone a view.

[Victoria2]

7 minutes ago, exlondoner said:

Yes, I can see the table where ours was, but I don’t remember that large round table in the foreground of the other at all. You would have been next to it?

I don't remember it either but the date on the photo is definitely 10th May,

Maybe the table configuration was changed? We were first in the restaurant and this was taken before the restaurant opened?

 

and we were next to the three two tops, not a round table.

Edited September 6 by Victoria2

[exlondoner]

13 minutes ago, Victoria2 said:

I don't remember it either but the date on the photo is definitely 10th May,

Maybe the table configuration was changed? We were first in the restaurant and this was taken before the restaurant opened?

 

and we were next to the three two tops, not a round table.

Very interesting. I think you must be right.

[3rdGenCunarder]

I this the large round you're talking about? It's under the chandelier, behind the entry podium. Taken June 6. It would be difficult to move, as it looks like it "belongs" centered under the chandelier. 

 

 

[exlondoner]

8 minutes ago, 3rdGenCunarder said:

I this the large round you're talking about? It's under the chandelier, behind the entry podium. Taken June 6. It would be difficult to move, as it looks like it "belongs" centered under the chandelier. 

 

 

I really don’t remember that.

[Victoria2]

Just now, exlondoner said:

I really don’t remember that.

Nor do I. In any case, the three two tops are not in the same position as in one of my photos. I don't think 'under the chandelier' has any bearing on table position.

As to difficulty in moving, no problem. Tab;es large and small are moved all the time.

[3rdGenCunarder]

1 hour ago, Victoria2 said:

Nor do I. In any case, the three two tops are not in the same position as in one of my photos. I don't think 'under the chandelier' has any bearing on table position.

As to difficulty in moving, no problem. Tab;es large and small are moved all the time.

 

I know they can be moved, but it just looks so perfectly placed under that chandelier.

[Victoria2]

29 minutes ago, 3rdGenCunarder said:

 

I know they can be moved, but it just looks so perfectly placed under that chandelier.

It certainly does and thinking about it further, it was in that position in July as a lovely American family were sat there. However, I'm fairly sure it wasn’t there in May.

Flexibility is all.

[exlondoner]

2 minutes ago, Victoria2 said:

It certainly does and thinking about it further, it was in that position in July as a lovely American family were sat there. However, I'm fairly sure it wasn’t there in May.

Flexibility is all.

I don’t remember it from May, though I may have been banquette-fixated, though we did in fact have a chair each.

[Victoria2]

4 minutes ago, exlondoner said:

I don’t remember it from May, though I may have been banquette-fixated, though we did in fact have a chair each.

Whatever the layout, the photos show a lovely, airy restaurant and a delight to dine there, unless seated at a banquette and you are uncomfortable!

 

[Victoria2]

10 hours ago, Victoria2 said:

Whatever the layout, the photos show a lovely, airy restaurant and a delight to dine there, unless seated at a banquette and you are uncomfortable!

 

I must add to the banquette debate, Gary Bembridge [he of the wonderful 'Tips for Travellers'] sat just down from us on a banquette and quite liked it.

So it's not all gloom and doom for anyone assigned to the benches, as Gary calls them.

[exlondoner]

26 minutes ago, Victoria2 said:

I must add to the banquette debate, Gary Bembridge [he of the wonderful 'Tips for Travellers'] sat just down from us on a banquette and quite liked it.

So it's not all gloom and doom for anyone assigned to the benches, as Gary calls them.

The benefit of the banquette is you get the view. We hardly saw the couple between us and GB, because they dined much earlier, but she did tell me that it wasn’t nearly as uncomfortable as it looked.

[Victoria2]

6 minutes ago, exlondoner said:

The benefit of the banquette is you get the view. We hardly saw the couple between us and GB, because they dined much earlier, but she did tell me that it wasn’t nearly as uncomfortable as it looked.

Same with the dining chairs.

I was amongst the 'can't we have decent dining chairs' brigade but once seated, they are very comfortable and that's the 'armless' [which aren't in fact] style.

 

That's why I say to those who haven't experienced the place/the ship, don't knock it until you've tried it.

[Victoria2]

As this thread seems to be a QA/QG thread for the most part, can I promote, if allowed, Gary's 'Tip for Travellers' July 2nd post.

He gives a very fair opinion of Our Annie and in particular, concentrating on the PG and QG 'ship within a ship' opinion.

 

I find him very very fair indeed and he is a Cunard traveller.

[buchanan101]

6 minutes ago, Victoria2 said:

As this thread seems to be a QA/QG thread for the most part, can I promote, if allowed, Gary's 'Tip for Travellers' July 2nd post.

He gives a very fair opinion of Our Annie and in particular, concentrating on the PG and QG 'ship within a ship' opinion.

 

I find him very very fair indeed and he is a Cunard traveller.

Watch all his Cunard ones, and recently Alaska ones in general (as booked QE there next September) 

 

He was put in a rubbish table in QG and asked to be moved. His tip, and mine - go to lunch on embarkation day…

 

His ship within a ship conclusion is that Cunard are less compartmentalised than many. 

[vsbc]

17 hours ago, exlondoner said:

I assume that was on a later voyage than the one we shared. It looks as if the tables are quite differently arranged, apart from by the immovable banquettes.

One of the waiters told me that they sometimes rearrange the tables on embarkation day depending on what seating preferences the passengers of the next cruise have asked for.

[buchanan101]

20 minutes ago, vsbc said:

One of the waiters told me that they sometimes rearrange the tables on embarkation day depending on what seating preferences the passengers of the next cruise have asked for.

That’ll be for 2s or 6s. More important to me - if possible - is location. A good one if possible, failing that an ok one. 

 

Book early seems to be the conclusion on this thread to have a good chance of best tables. 

[Victoria2]

3 hours ago, buchanan101 said:

That’ll be for 2s or 6s. More important to me - if possible - is location. A good one if possible, failing that an ok one. 

 

Book early seems to be the conclusion on this thread to have a good chance of best tables. 

along with 'being known' and booking a fairly high category of the restaurant in question.

 

Many variables.

[buchanan101]

1 hour ago, Victoria2 said:

along with 'being known' and booking a fairly high category of the restaurant in question.

 

Many variables.

Suspect the vast majority of cruisers aren’t known to restaurant staff. My QM2 cruises are going to be 4 years apart - no one will remember me. 
 

But high category and full Cunard fare should count. 

[Victoria2]

20 minutes ago, buchanan101 said:

Suspect the vast majority of cruisers aren’t known to restaurant staff. My QM2 cruises are going to be 4 years apart - no one will remember me. 
 

But high category and full Cunard fare should count. 

I based my comment on the fact I'm aware of quite a few repeaters who ARE known to staff [rather than just a specific ship] so why I say it helps to be known and thus preferences known too.

 

As we book on day of itinerary release, are known to staff and the cabin helps, we always get our preferred table.

[buchanan101]

3 hours ago, Victoria2 said:

I based my comment on the fact I'm aware of quite a few repeaters who ARE known to staff [rather than just a specific ship] so why I say it helps to be known and thus preferences known too.

 

As we book on day of itinerary release, are known to staff and the cabin helps, we always get our preferred table.

It’s quite right that those who spend lots* of money with Cunard should get the tables they want. But for the majority of us that’s not relevant.

 

(*I’m spending lots - for me - about £5k a year with Cunard - but that’s one cruise in PG. Seeing as in 4 years that’s 3 different ships I very much doubt I am known to staff so have to hope that other factors get us good tables. Worked last time - booking on day of release.  Lots in the context I use here is several cruises/cruise legs a year in the top cabins! I’d love to cruise more but that’s probably going to have to wait until we both retire… and not sure it’ll be PG then!) 

 

 

[Victoria2]

13 minutes ago, buchanan101 said:

It’s quite right that those who spend lots* of money with Cunard should get the tables they want. But for the majority of us that’s not relevant.

 

(*I’m spending lots - for me - about £5k a year with Cunard - but that’s one cruise in PG. Seeing as in 4 years that’s 3 different ships I very much doubt I am known to staff so have to hope that other factors get us good tables. Worked last time - booking on day of release.  Lots in the context I use here is several cruises/cruise legs a year in the top cabins! I’d love to cruise more but that’s probably going to have to wait until we both retire… and not sure it’ll be PG then!) 

 

 

Amount spent doesn't come into frequency.

 

'Insiders' are frequent passengers just as well as those in the  bigger cabins. Staff get to know the preferences of those they see frequently. It all helps.

Edited September 7 by Victoria2
frequency

[buchanan101]

18 minutes ago, Victoria2 said:

Amount spent doesn't come into frequency.

 

'Insiders' are frequent passengers just as well as those in the  bigger cabins. Staff get to know the preferences of those they see frequently. It all helps.

Amount spent is a function of price per cabin x frequency. It’s right that those people are recognised as such. I don’t think we have an argument there! 
 

I do find the official benefits for frequent users rather pathetic though. $45 off an internet package. Wow… 

Edited September 7 by buchanan101