Welcome to Cruise Talk the Internet's most popular discussion forum dedicated to cruising. Stop by Cruise Talk anytime to post a message or find out what your fellow passengers and industry insiders are saying about a particular ship, cruise line or destination.
>>> Reader Reviews >>> CruisePage.com Photo Gallery >>> Join Our Cruise Club.
Latest News...Carnival Freedom is returning to service following a 35-day dry dock at Chantier Naval de Marseille in France, emerging with a redesigned funnel, expanded casino space and a series of interior upgrades. The ship departed the shipyard en route to Barcelona ahead of its first post-refurbishment sailing. The dry dock marks one of the vessel’s most significant updates in recent years and prepares...
Latest News...Princess Cruises has released its 2028–2029 Americas program, a wide-ranging deployment featuring more than 250 sailings across North, Central and South America, the Caribbean, the Pacific and Antarctica. The season includes the line’s first return to the Amazon River since 2014, along with expanded offerings in Canada & New England, Hawaii, Mexico, the California Coast, ...
Latest News...Holland America Line has outlined a series of Pan Am-themed experiences that will be featured on its 28-day Pan Am 100th Anniversary Legendary Voyage aboard Zuiderdam, departing October 30, 2027. The sailing, roundtrip from Miami, will retrace portions of Pan American World Airways’ historic routes through the Caribbean and Central America, incorporating onboard programming and shore...
I always wondered how today's global society would have viewed the SS France, as opposed to the SS Norway. What sort of chances would they had made to the SS France? I doubt that it would have followed NCL's example for the ship. It was doing world cruises. Something that was never implimented on the SS Norway's intinerary.
Had the French Line had been as successful as HAL, would the SS France had been a better candidate for preservation had it retained much of its original build as the SS Rotterdam V?
I could certainly imagine the SS France visiting Dubai, Hong Kong, and Australia. In contrast, the SS Norway never visited those far away places. I believe the SS France visited Melborne, Australia in 1974. It's too bad that the SS France was withdrawn from service. Otherwise, it would have rivaled the QE2, as far as gaining international iconic status was concerned.
[ 03-15-2008: Message edited by: Redlinekid2 ]
I doubt that the unions in France would accept such a situation for French line, thus they would not exist.
Of course only MHO.
An interesting questions is of course how another ship similar to QE2 would have affected QE2. Was the market (in the 70ies and 80ies) strong enough to support two 'very large word wide operating' (and bit more expensive) cruise ships?
quote:Originally posted by Ernst:An interesting questions is of course how another ship similar to QE2 would have affected QE2. Was the market (in the 70ies and 80ies) strong enough to support two 'very large word wide operating' (and bit more expensive) cruise ships?
That's very true--think back to how things were in the 1970s. We were in the midst of an oil crisis, with a bad economy world-wide. Ships were being taken out of service and scrapped every week or two. Lots of venerable, old steamship lines were eliminating passenger routes and ending business completely, after decades of operation. Everyone was predicting the demise of passenger shipping, and it was generally agreed that the QE2 was the 'last of her kind', and the world would never again see such a large ocean liner.
FRANCE was laid up because the French didn't want her and didn't know what to do with her. Both MICHELANGELO & RAFFAELLO were laid up after only 10 years of service. And literally scores of other liners disappeared, as well. Only a small handful of new cruise ships were being built in those years, and each one was thought to be a risky gamble, a fad that might not pay off.
QE2 even by herself was in danger. Cunard could easily have been shut down, since Trafalgar House apparently decided it was a bad investment. It was a very pessimistic time to be a ship lover; younger people today, being surrounded by more passenger ships than ever before, can't realize how tough it was during the '70s, and no, I don't see how FRANCE could have resurrected herself at that time.
It was a risky and brave gamble when Kloster bought her and gave her a new and longer life as NORWAY. And she served her new purpose well, developing the 7-day Caribbean cruise market. I don't think she would have done well on world cruises. She only made two such voyages as FRANCE, and they were not commercial successes.
Rich
quote:Originally posted by mike sa:Not a hope - the French unions would have ensured it never succeeded, if it did still exist it wouldn't be French - just like the UK, there are British ships around but owned by foreign corporations and crewed with international crews. Cunard ofr instance in not really Cunard any more, rather a company that trades on its history - it is merely a brand. I doubt that the unions in France would accept such a situation for French line, thus they would not exist.Of course only MHO.
I wondered if the unions would allowed the SS France to serve as a hotel ship, like the Queen Mary in 1974? That might have been a better fate for the ship, since fuel cost had always consume its potential profit margins. I once heard that the French Line regrets not building the two smaller ships that they had planned. The company could have retired the SS France as a hotel/musuem ship and wait until the 1980s to begin construction on the two smaller cruise ships. The SS France could have done very well as a hotel ship at that time. But the again, no one wanted to do that after seeing the failure of the Queen Mary and Queen Elizabeth in that role.
quote:Originally posted by Redlinekid2:[...]The SS France could have done very well as a hotel ship at that time. [...]
Why do you think that?Don't forget that she was much younger back then.
quote:Originally posted by Ernst:Why do you think that?Don't forget that she was much younger back then.
That's true. Although the SS United States was 22 years old at the time as well. To think that the Big U and the SS France could have been the youngest floating hotels at that time. The Big U in New York City, and the SS France in Le Havre, France. And perhaps, the SS Nieuw Amsterdam in Amsterdam, Netherlands. Too bad no one had the foresight to see that potential at that time. It's only now that people are starting to look at this option because all of the classic ships of the 1950s and 1960s are rapidly disappearing.
Liners and cruise ships are designed to sail the seas and not be tied up to a dock for years at a time. Today's cruiseships possibly could be used as hotel ships due to their unique design. Larger cabins w/verandahs, spacious elevators to transport guests quickly between decks, larger outdoor lidos (for warmer climates) multiple restaurant options etc. etc.
Had NCL not come along and purchased ss France, she most likely would have ended her days in a scrapyard on Taiwan-like so many still-in-their- prime ships went to in the 1970s and 80s.
quote: That's very true--think back to how things were in the 1970s. We were in the midst of an oil crisis, with a bad economy world-wide.
Linerich: Have you looked at the papers recently?
Great article about gas cost comparisons between then and now:
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=6440
Life and Times in 1972:The average yearly income in 1972 was $7,933, a house cost $38,500, a new car 4,500. Milk was 77 cents a half gallon, 10 lbs. of potatoes cost 1.05 and 1.10 cents would bring home the bacon. Back then we could buy a loaf of bread at the supermarket for 35 cents, about the same as a gallon of gas at 36 cents.
Love these sites that can calculate the 'cost' of things from then to now:
http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl
http://www.measuringworth.com/calculators/ppowerus/
When will people learn - ships do not leand themselves to be turned into anything other than what they were designed for, if you want a hotel build one, if you want a ship the only thing it will ever be successful at is strangly enough sailing !
Rotterdam is potentially going to be a success - will it ever pay back its development/refurbishment costs - HIGHLY UNLIKELY, thus as a financial project it is most likely to be a failure. Arguably QM is a success, unless you take into account the financial aspect of the project - she doesn't even cover the maintaninance costs - thus she to is a failure. Queen Elizabeth made more than one group of investors bankrupt. etc etc. I suspect the same holds true for any project of this nature.
Proably time to stop suggesting every old ship is converted into a hotel.
quote:Originally posted by mike sa:France as a hotel would have been a bigger diaster than laying up finance wise, where would she operate at, who would have stayed on her ? No if it had not been for NCL she would have been turned into baked bean tins along time ago.When will people learn - ships do not leand themselves to be turned into anything other than what they were designed for, if you want a hotel build one, if you want a ship the only thing it will ever be successful at is strangly enough sailing !Rotterdam is potentially going to be a success - will it ever pay back its development/refurbishment costs - HIGHLY UNLIKELY, thus as a financial project it is most likely to be a failure. Arguably QM is a success, unless you take into account the financial aspect of the project - she doesn't even cover the maintaninance costs - thus she to is a failure. Queen Elizabeth made more than one group of investors bankrupt. etc etc. I suspect the same holds true for any project of this nature.Proably time to stop suggesting every old ship is converted into a hotel.
Mike,Maybe you should tell that to the current owners of the SS Rotterdam about your dire predictions. And NO, I never believed that every single ship should be saved. I don't know if the SS Rotterdam will be profitable or not. But at least she will go to the place where she belongs: Her Homeland! No one can take that AWAY from her.
And if you have doubts about the MS Kungsholm, then write to the person who wants to buy the ship by telling him that his pet project will be a failure.
Stop comparing the SS Rotterdam V to the Queen Mary or the Queen Elizabeth. The QE was a failure because it was placed in the WRONG location: Port Everglades of 1968. The QE should have been placed in NYC.
The SS Rotterdam is the FIRST retired ship to become a hotel in its homeland. The Queen Mary never had that opportunity to be retired to England, where it belonged. Moreover, if the Swedish project gets the green light, the MS Kungsholm will be the SECOND ship to be retired to its homeland. These ships are going to be docked in their respected countries where the people will appreciate them. That would be enough to satisfy my interests.
The QE2 will be the first 960 ft. oceanliner, since the Queen Mary to become a hotel ship in over 40 years. The only other 900 ft. oceanliner that needs to be there is the Big U. With the SS Norway gone, now there are only three of the worlds largest oceanliners of the 20th century in existance. Just as there are only 4 of the worlds most powerful battleships in existance:The Iowa Class Battleships.
And I get critized for expressing my opinions? These are alternate topics that I've brought up for discussion. Of the 8-10 ships that I've talked about, I would be lucky to see at least four of those ships becoming hotels. So far, the QE2 and the Kungsholm has some hope towards that goal. Now my concentration is on the other vessels.
A ship is ment to sail, I'll agree. But if cities can preserve warships, why not oceanliners? There are so few of them left to begin with, regarding those of the 1950's and 1960's. This is my area of interest; and it doesn't go beyond 1969. I'll let the others worry about the classic cruise ships from 1970 to the present.
Now, let's get back to the alternate history of the French Line.
[ 03-16-2008: Message edited by: Redlinekid2 ]
quote:Originally posted by Cambodge:Linerich: Have you looked at the papers recently?
Yes, I know--my posting was meant to be ironic. It's deja vu all over again!
quote:Originally posted by Linerrich:It was a risky and brave gamble when Kloster bought her and gave her a new and longer life as NORWAY. And she served her new purpose well, developing the 7-day Caribbean cruise market. I don't think she would have done well on world cruises. She only made two such voyages as FRANCE, and they were not commercial successes.Rich
I still remember doing a tour of QE2 with then Purser Ian Burrell and we were talking about the "impending arrival of S/S NORWAY" - at the time he said it would a "huge White Elephant".
And your right it was a time when QE2 was thought to be the last ocean liner we would see and even then it was thought her days her numbered...
What a pleasure it has been to be witness to the renaissance of passenger ship travel - and it has survived thanks to the evolution (like it or not) of the passenger ship experience.
quote:Originally posted by Redlinekid2:The QE was a failure because it was placed in the WRONG location: Port Everglades of 1968. The QE should have been placed in NYC.A ship is ment to sail, I'll agree. But if cities can preserve warships, why not oceanliners? Now, let's get back to the alternate history of the French Line.[ 03-16-2008: Message edited by: Redlinekid2 ][ 03-16-2008: Message edited by: Redlinekid2 ]
A ship is ment to sail, I'll agree. But if cities can preserve warships, why not oceanliners?
As for QE in NYC IMO it would have been a failure as well. It was a very different era and the idea of preserving a beautiful liner (w/a not so beautiful interior) was not in most people's minds.
As for military ships that is completely different. There are legions of people who follow 'all things' military and not just sailors and soldiers. Just look at the endless cable programs devoted to every aspect of the military. I cannot recall the last documentary I saw devoted to ocean liners-other than to the ones that sank!
As for ss France she could have eventually been transferred to a flag of convenience to keep labor costs down. It is nearly impossible to run a large passenger ship w/a very well paid union crew. The NCLA ship's union crew are paid about the same as non-union workers on land which is much less than say ssUSs staff was paid. ss France may have been able to continue in service but a refit would have been needed in order for her to compete. The refit may have not been as drastic as Norway's-but close. She would have needed a new expanded lido deck aft plus a several verandah cabins (like QE2s) to bring in additional revenue. Who knows, she may have been based in NYC or Florida for 1/2 of the year w/a World cruise in the winter. Her schedule most likely could have mirrored QE2s minus the Transats as 2-big liners on the Atlantic in the 1970s was a losing proposition.
do you have ANY idea what the west side of NYC was like 10, 20, 30 and God forbid, 40 years ago? It was a WASTELAND. Dirty, dingy, seedy and somehwat dangerous. The only reason one would go to the west side was either to go to the piers or pick up a $25 hooker.
There's no way neither the QE, France, or US would have been a successful hotel ship in NYC. A rather detailed proposal was put forth to place the US on the west side about a decade ago. She would have been adjacent to the Javits convention center with the vast spaces such as the engine room, dining rooms and holds converted into convention space and presentation theaters.
However, the dire financial projections from HAVING to deal with NYC unions, along with the squeals and sqawks from various enviromental groups put the kabosh on the project.
Moreover, where do you propose that any one of the Queens should be or have been placed in their "homeland"? The internationally renowned tourist mecca of Southampton? Liverpool?
One only need look at the small number of signifigant military ships that were ever successfully saved or preserved. And no one can argue that military ships have a much broader appeal. The NJ and Missouri, arguably two of the most famous ships in the world, are constantly seeking additional funding to keep them financially afloat.
The best way to preserve old passenger ships is in your memory. Start collecting brochures, it's much easier and more fulfilling.
Tim
quote:Originally posted by lasuvidaboy:As for ss France she could have eventually been transferred to a flag of convenience to keep labor costs down. It is nearly impossible to run a large passenger ship w/a very well paid union crew. The NCLA ship's union crew are paid about the same as non-union workers on land which is much less than say ssUSs staff was paid. ss France may have been able to continue in service but a refit would have been needed in order for her to compete. The refit may have not been as drastic as Norway's-but close. She would have needed a new expanded lido deck aft plus a several verandah cabins (like QE2s) to bring in additional revenue. Who knows, she may have been based in NYC or Florida for 1/2 of the year w/a World cruise in the winter. Her schedule most likely could have mirrored QE2s minus the Transats as 2-big liners on the Atlantic in the 1970s was a losing proposition.
Hi lasuvidaboy,I agree with your comments on the SS France. Had the French Line had made a few changes, the SS France would have rivaled the QE2 throughout the years. While the SS Norway wasn't as famous the world over as the QE2, the SS France would have been the most talked about ship til this day if it were sailing. However, I believed that the French Line would have replaced the ships' boilers for disels engines, as it was done to the QE2. In addition, I believe that the ship might have become more like the SS Rotterdam in a way because it might have been able to retain much of its original build. I still believe that the SS France would have conducted transatlantic crossings in the summer seasons.
As far as persevation is concerned, the SS France would have been a top contender over the SS Norway. It would have been interesting to have seen how the competition between the SS France and the QE2 could been. It might have brought out the best out of each of them, as it was with the SS Normandie and the RMS Queen Mary.
[ 03-17-2008: Message edited by: Redlinekid2 ]
Nothing posted is personal but the facts of the matter are I think clear. Liners/older cruise ships simply are not suited for conversion to a "shoreside" use.
The average man in street and certainly your business person is not going to pay out a premium rate to stay in a hotel room that is undersized, would certainly not be impressed to have to stare out of a small porthole (50% of which face the dock) and put up with a tiny bathroom. These floating hotels have to complete with likes of Hilton etc - they can't compete price wise all they have going for them is the fact they are ships and only the likes of us (and there are very few of us) would be excited by the idea of staying on them.
The conversion of Rotterdam cost wise has spiraled, I am sure the new owners would have thought more than twice had they known what the overall cost was going to be. How she will now pay back that cost has got to be an issue.
As for Kungsholm the proposed new owner has stated he has the money to buy her. He has not as yet as far as I can see said he has the money for the shoreside infrastucture or the cost of conversion etc that he will need to make it happen, never mind the extra capital needed to market and pay for her until the marketing starts to pay off. The local government have said they like the idea but are not prepared to put up any cash at all. Even if they do manage to get all the money (and the purchase price is the smallest amount) who is going to stay on her, how many ship enthusiasts are going to be visiting Sweden in a year ? How many business people will choose to stay on board given that Hilton etc are more convenient and better set up to meet their needs ? Don't get me wrong if there is one ship I would like to see saved it is Sea Princess, but realistically I don't see it as being viable. It would be cheaper to re-engine her, make her Solas compliant, restore her to original condition and sail her on cruises as an original liner marketing her as a one off experience - that is not going to happen either. Is she really a Swedish ship though, built in the UK and spent most of her life in the UK and US markets registered in London. How many Swedes will actually remember her as the Kungsholm or travelled on baord as such, very very few and they will be quite old.
Someone recently called for the Topaz to be saved - why ? What is significant about her ? Someone else commented the original Hamburg should be saved, again why ? What are they to used for ? Who wants to use them ? Who wants to stay on them ?
I would love to see the Big U sail again, well that is not going to happen, I would hate to see her rust away at a pier in NY because she does not work as a hotel.
QM was as popular in the US as she was in UK, indeed many Americans considered her to be as American as British. So the reasoning of a ship "going home" is not really a good one.
QE2 is perhaps the only one that might be saved and work long term, only because her new owners have unlimited deep pockets, she will be part of something much bigger than just her, 1 attraction amongst many, she therefore does stand a much better chance of surviving with dignity.
Its all very well to save these ships, but do we then want them slowly rotting away at the end of a pier somewhere. QM recently stated that they cannot even afford the maintainance bill, they cannot afford to repaint her without refinancing - to me that is much sader than see a ship go to scrap.
I would much rather parts of these important ships saved, why not a France funnel mounted in the middle of a roundabout in Paris, a propeller in a park etc ? I would love part of say Windsor Castle mounted at the end of the North Pier here in Durban, but I would not want her rusting away on the embankment downtown.
quote:Originally posted by mike sa:Hi Redlinekid2QM was as popular in the US as she was in UK, indeed many Americans considered her to be as American as British. So the reasoning of a ship "going home" is not really a good one.Its all very well to save these ships, but do we then want them slowly rotting away at the end of a pier somewhere. QM recently stated that they cannot even afford the maintainance bill, they cannot afford to repaint her without refinancing - to me that is much sader than see a ship go to scrap.
Hello Mike,
The QM is owned by the City of Long Beach. The problems with the QM are the result of mismanagement by the operator, who leases the ship from the City. A lot of bad decisions was made to the QM since it arrived in 1967, such as gutting the lower decks and powertrain to create a maritime marine museum that was a total failure from the start. The original plan for the QM by Long Beach was NOT to preserve the ship. That was the difference between the other projects and the QM from day one.
As for the Kungsholm and the Rotterdam, I doubt that they are going to keep the cabins that way they are. That is why the owners of the SS Rotterdam completely stripped the ship down to the bare metal so that they could replace all of the plumbing and electrical equipment. Thus, they could turn the vessel into a 5-Star Hotel by combining the cabin space to create a larger suite. The main issue with the SS Rotterdam was the improper handing of the Asbestos clean up that was conducted be the Rotterdam Dry Dock Company. The company didn't go bankrupt because of the ship. The company went backrupt because of corruption and mismanagement.
I am sure that the SS Rotterdam will pay its debt back to its owners. The ship has a very big task ahead of it. But the team that will run the ship, I assume, are the best in the hotel industry. This is something that the QM lacked. The ship had went through a lot of structual changes that was not thought through carefully. They are areas of the ship that are blocked off to the general public and hotel guests, as a result. And a lot of areas of the ship was torn out and never renovated.
A least the owners of the SS Rotterdam have no intention to tear out the ship's powertrain to create a marine life museum; nor do they plan to keep the cabins and bathrooms as they were. Only time will tell if the SS Rotterdam will be successful. I doubt that it will struggle in the same way as the Queen Mary had in the early years of operation.
You said why should they save the SS Topaz. A better question is why shouldn't they? The ship is important to the history of British maritime industry. It's the last of its kind. All of the other British vessels are gone. If they could save the Royal Yarht Britainia and SS Great Britain, then I'm sure they can save one passenger liner for the country. It would be the only ship that will serve as a museum and hotel, unlike the SS Great Britain that is only a museum.
The entire project was mismanaged from the start ending in the staggering bill of over $70 million (1960s dollars!) or approx. $700 million in today's dollars. The brand-new QE2 was less expensive to build than the re-building QM went through.
quote:Originally posted by Redlinekid2:....You said why should they save the SS Topaz. A better question is why shouldn't they...?
Seriously, how old are you? Are you a teenager who just doesn't understand how business works or are you just someone who doesn't listen to what others are saying?
Joe at TravelPage.com
quote:Originally posted by Redlinekid2:You said why should they save the SS Topaz. A better question is why shouldn't they? The ship is important to the history of British maritime industry. It's the last of its kind. All of the other British vessels are gone. If they could save the Royal Yarht Britainia and SS Great Britain, then I'm sure they can save one passenger liner for the country. [ 03-17-2008: Message edited by: Redlinekid2 ][ 03-17-2008: Message edited by: Redlinekid2 ]
You said why should they save the SS Topaz. A better question is why shouldn't they? The ship is important to the history of British maritime industry. It's the last of its kind. All of the other British vessels are gone. If they could save the Royal Yarht Britainia and SS Great Britain, then I'm sure they can save one passenger liner for the country. [ 03-17-2008: Message edited by: Redlinekid2 ]
The difference between your two examples and an ocean liner, albeit a small liner like TOPAZ, are like comparing chalk and cheese. By your own admission, you've never been aboard a ship, so I can appreciate that you simply do not understand the workings and complexities of something so large.
I don't know the financial situation surrounding either BRITANNIA or GREAT BRITAIN, but they are much smaller vessels and even then it has not been easy to support and maintain them. Keep in mind that any ship, and especially a passenger liner, needs constant maintenance and repair. With the rare exceptions of QUEEN MARY and GEORGE BUCHNER, there are very few other passenger liners which have been kept very long in a static role.
quote:Originally posted by joe at travelpage:Seriously, how old are you? Are you a teenager who just doesn't understand how business works or are you just someone who doesn't listen to what others are saying? Joe at TravelPage.com
Joe,
There are plans in works to save the SS Empress of Britain for Glasgow, Scotland. That why my quote was," Why shouldn't they save the ship?" If there wasn't any interests in Britain, then my comments wouldn't be a valid response to Mike's question. That's my statement. And yes I do listen to the comments from the people here. I never discounted any of them. That's what make this site a great source of information.
How so? Please specify, if you can, what makes this ship important to British maritime history. If you REALLY know what you're talking about, you'll admit that the answer is, I'm afraid, NOTHING. She is nothing more than a nice old ship that has done it's bit; she's served her purpose well and that's how she'll be remembered.
-Russ
Ultimate Bulletin BoardTM 6.1.0.3
More Vacation & Cruise Specials...