I think the problem is that P&O had a very loyal following of elderly Brits. P&O obviously want to attract the 'younger set' so newer ships (Arcadia & Ventura) are more modernist in decor. I think this has alienated some of the traditional clientèle who also regard these ship as being too big and impersonal.

I think when P&O lost 'Victoria' some of there passengers jumped ship to cruise with Olsen and Saga.

[ 06-07-2009: Message edited by: Malcolm @ cruisepage ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by lasuvidaboy:
I guess these long-time P&O 'oldsters' forgot how their beloved Canberra or Oriana (1) were originally decorated nearly 50-years ago.

---

Would you like to explain what you mean by were originally decorated nearly 50 year ago !

For their generation both ships furnishings were very modern !

P & O was also the first passenger ship company to introduce stabilizers on their ships !

I think the answer lies more in the fact that P&O usn't british anymore : it is american. It looks british, like Tom says : the food and the passengers, and the childfree ships etc, but its soul is american, and i guess that is what is ultimately felt.

BTW Tom, you have really become a cruising aficionado : 10 cruises in 4 years !!

Many tiffs, arguments and moans often come between the old time forever P&O Loyalists and the 'newcomers'. There are some cruisers who know nothing other than P&O. Their grandparents cruised P&O, their parents cruised P&O and of course they did as children and now themselves cruise P&O. They will go on and on in forums about P&O being the best line, nothing can compete; they've done 50, 60, 70 cruises and more, nothing beats P&O. Then you find out that all those cruises have been on nothing but P&O, the same ships repeatedly over & over. Fine, they enjoy & love their cruises, so carry on, but with nothing to compare their experiences to, the 'newcomers' take offense at being told P&O is the best, when they know themselves that there are many other lines offering a wealth of different types and style of cruising, each with their own good and bad points. P&O cannot be the best at everything... so the arguments start and the bad points thrown out of all proportion.

P&O Loyalists who may take a step on another line will of course nit pick every bad point they can find and blow them out of proportion too, retiring back to P&O forevermore.

Good comments Tom. I agree in the main. The food is not as good as it could be, the 'slops' at lunch can be dreadful. But there is at least Silver Service in the evening, but not on all of the ships, and there is a half decent cheese board. [Gone however is the morning cuppa & biscuits auto delivered by your steward though]. Of course any British line should have a good curry; it is I'm told now traditional British fare Great evening curries, but the lunchtime ones can be all bone and runny. American based lines cannot compare at all here and don't know what a curry is

Service; I prefer the not in your face and meaningful, genuine chat v the oh so false chit chat, but everyone differs, and yes the onboard penny pinching is far less on P&O, well any British based line, but still worse than it used to be and the drinks prices are now far higher than a decade ago [in comparison, not just inflation].

I prefer FOCL some prefer P&O, others prefer Saga [but I can't sail them yet]. All very different to the US based lines & Cunard, however one wishes to categorise them - Anglo American as Malcolm says, or more American Anglo.

It's great there are so many choices these days and something can be found to suit most people. It's those who are adamant that because they enjoy something others must too, and vice versa, that cause the rifts.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Neil Whitmore ( Bob ex P&O Cruises):

Would you like to explain what you mean by were originally decorated nearly 50 year ago !

For their generation both ships furnishings were very modern !

---

Why are you so excited??

Is'nt it obvious what I meant? P&O featured very contempory interiors nearly 50-years ago w/Canberra. Passengers who sailed on Canberra on her maiden voyage back in '61 would'nt be shocked by the contemporary interiors onboard Arcadia and Ventura. Granted Canberra was cheapened-up later in life w/her 'hotel-at-the-airport' interiors but she along w/other pre and postwar P&O ships offered contemporary interior decor.

Who is actually running P&O? It the Brits or the American owners back in Miami? It does'nt seem that difficult to me to offer a 100% British product if Brits are in charge in Southampton.

[ 06-07-2009: Message edited by: lasuvidaboy ]

In an effort to grab market share and increase profits (nothing wrong with that at all - I'm a shreholder) they are looking to fill lots of ships with lots of people - many of whom have little or nothing in common.

We would all agree that other than being ships the cruise experience on Oriana is very different from that on Ventura for instance - so different in fact they could be from different lines. The hardware is very different, the decor totally different, the pax totally different.

The comments already posted are spot on, P&O was until recently a cruise line for traditional British cruisers - IMO Ventura and Azura and even Oceana should have been marketed seperately with their own brand values etc leaving P&O with Arcadia, Oriana, Aurora and perhaps Artemis.

Those who try to be Everything to Everyone cannot hope to please their target market and will ultimately suffer.

quote:

---

We would all agree that other than being ships the cruise experience on Oriana is very different from that on Ventura for instance - so different in fact they could be from different lines. The hardware is very different, the decor totally different, the pax totally different.

---

Actually, I'm not sure that's entirely true. The two P&O ships I've been on are Oriana and Ventura, and I was struck by the similarities between them. The policies were the same at that time, and dress-code observance on Ventura was very high. On our cruises the passengers were actually very similar - we, in our 50s, were definitely among the younger on both cruises. The hardware is certainly very different, but good in different ways. While Ventura hasn't got anything to equal Oriana's Crows Nest, there are plenty of areas where Ventura has the edge. And I have to say that it was on Oriana and not Ventura that we encountered a few examples of truly poor service.

Of course, we chose our Ventura cruise carefully: a 12-nighter to the Canary Islands in late September/October, with very few children aboard (mainly babies & infants).

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tom Burke:
.. I think, explains why the Ventura experience creaks a bit when she's really full.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Malcolm @ cruisepage:
Of course if P&O don't capture famalies and the younger crowd, they will run out of passengers in the next decade or two!

---

Won't there always be older passengers that want a comfortable cruise experience? It seems that as people age, most want a comfortable and familiar setting. These same people may have loved the cutting edge interior design of Canberra 45-years ago but today many want cushy comfort.

quote:

---

Originally posted by lasuvidaboy:
Won't there always be older passengers that want a comfortable cruise experience?

---

Of course and there's an ageing population too. However one might argue the new 'greys' might have quite different tastes to the old guard. They may no longer want to ballroom dance and dress for diner etc.

From what I have understood from many P&O regulars, allot have gone on Grand Princess and love it. They are really noticing that the extra deck makes the ship more crowded and that is something P&O regulars will not tolertate. They are sun lovers and must have a deck chair on deck during the day, seating in the dining room is important to them as is a seat in the theatre. P&O ran Ventura along the same lines as Oceana - a family friendly ship and Oceana appears to be working well for them. I think the big problem with Ventura is the fact that the ship is really not that much bigger than the rest of their ships yet caters to way too many passengers.

The Aurora and Oriana appear to the the heart and soul of P&O and they are what the company really is. Arcadia fits in well and does have a loyal following, it is not Aurora or Oriana and they know it so it may get a few bad reviews. Overall I found it to fit in well with the P&O fleet.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Malcolm @ cruisepage:

Anyway, most cruise lines want a juicy slice of the mass-market which is getting younger.

---

P&O do World Voyages and need a panama canal transiting ship. It would make sense to build more ships along that size.

Arcadia came into the P&O fleet by accident, I am not sure if they will be allocated another ship like that. They seem to be getting Princess desinged ships probably because they owned Princess outright and controlled it before they joined Carnival.

With a ship life of 30 to 40 years there is plenty of life left in Aurora and Oriana and even Arcadia for World Cruises. Ultimately P&O will have to build those size ships again to cater to world cruising, so is it likely that they can recycle the Aurora and Oriana design.

Mass market lines like P&O are unfortauntely unlikely to see new smaller ships ever again, economy of scale dictates that bigger is better.

quote:

---

Originally posted by lasuvidaboy:
It's not rocket science to design a good-looking ship.

---

As you already know, it's simply a matter of money. Why design something new when there is an existing design that fits the brand? I would love to see something new for P&O, but then again I can say the same thing about almost every Carnival brand.

I think you also know that designing something aesthetically pleasing is also more expensive. I think Royal Caribbean and Disney are the two best examples. They are willing to spend more to add some curves and essentially create something that is more than a floating square box. Apparently they feel that passengers will notice where as Carnival doesn't seem as concerned.