quote:

---

Originally posted by Malcolm @ cruisepage:

I did NOT photoshop anything. That is HAL's reendition of ther Oosterdam, which has obviously been used for Queen Vic.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Patsy:
...The interiors are indeed nice, Joe. It's the exterior that's the problem. That and very simialr deckplans.

---

Oh, believe me I would love to see a new ship with the look of the past - thats probably why we sailed on Rotterdam V five times. Trouble is we are living in the now and it just isn't going to happen.

I find it amusing how some here - and on other forums - just cannot accept that fact and constantly criticize attempts by the cruise companies to expand their brands while remaining fiscally responsible. I remember overhearing a maritime historian onboard QE2 responding to just such a criticism by noting that passengers see very little of the exterior of the ship once they are on board.

There are plenty of modern ships that can provide an experience very similar to the past and often times a superior one. You just have to get out there and try them.

Sadly however, it seems to be much easier to sit at a keyboard and just take shots at sound marketing plans rather than make the effort of getting out there and actually experiencing the wide variety of product available. While the ships may all look very similar the reality is that the onboard experience can vary greatly and there really is a product for all tastes.

Zuiderdam Class:

LOA: 290 m
LBP: 254

Queen Victoria:

LOA: 294
LBP: 265.36

And I do not necessarily mean this from an ‘ancient’ history perspective. Only a few years ago Cunard and P&O were British and Costa were Italian. Each had completely unique ships on offer. I now understand from some reports that Costa are turning into a European version of Carnival’s ‘Fun Ships’ and actually losing their 'Italian-ness'.

I don’t doubt that ‘Queen Vic’ will be a very nice ship with a Cunard atmosphere. The fact that she is one of many ‘vista-class’ ships will not matter to many of her passengers, but it does matter to many ship-aficionados.

Next year at Southampton I will have a choice of a P&O Vista, a Cunard Vista, a P&O ‘Grand Class’ and at Dover, a ‘Princess Grand Class’. Costa and Hal may have ‘Vista’s’ visiting Dover too. Each fleet is expanding and it sounds like us Brits will get a wide choice, but that’s five cruise lines, six ships, but essentially only two designs of ship.

I’d love to try all of the brands and compare, but due to limited time and money, much speculation will unfortunately done from my keyboard rather than from a Promenade deck.

[ 10-02-2006: Message edited by: Malcolm @ cruisepage ]

We also must not forget that Cunard urgently needs new tonnage - and modifying a Vista class was probably the easiest and fastest solution.

Personally I have less a problem with seeing sister ships in different fleets. This MIGHT be more a problem for the owner - but I doubt it is right now - and as said above, the expierience is not only the ship - and even sister ships can give a very different impression only due to maybe small differences in decor.

... I was very much of the opinion that the original P&O Princess / RCCL merger was the best way forward, but now that we are a few years into being under the Carnival Umbrella, I do feel that P&O does have its own identity and in replacing the Adonia with Arcadia, that is another plus point.

I really hope that P&O will not end up just being Carnival UK with a "mish mash" of ships, and they retain Aurora and Oriana which are definately the two of the best modern day cruise ships. I think that Carnival acknowledge they own some pretty powerful names and will continue to use them.

Like Patsy, I was originally against this "cloning" of ships, but it has been proven that in this modern day consumer age of keeping shareholders happy etc, we are only going to see more of this.

Now, after sailing onboard the Caribbean Princess and Arcadia, I think each ship still has its "own personality", but a lot of the time, we sail with a particular line for its experience.

This is very true in the case of Arcadia, it has a modern twist, but looks apart, its definately a P&O ship. She is far better than the Adonia.

Regarding the looks, I think the twin funnels fore and aft on the HAL's look daft. They would look far better side to side like the "Rotterdam".

With that in mind, I think the Arcadia is definately the best looking "Vista", and the QV will look very smart.

I'm not a fan of the Ventura, but as long as they preserve the feel of P&O, it may give a wider audience the chance of having a "P&O holiday".

I know a lot of people love giving Carnival a good kicking (I confess, when the takeover of P&O was taking place I was one of them), but they have given the UK the following:-

1) A proper North Atlantic Liner - QM2
2) This, along with the QV keeps the Cunard name alive.
3) Continuing to base their UK operation in Southampton and not remotely controlling it from Miami.
4) Investing in a yet to be built flagship HQ in Southampton keeping many jobs in the UK.

So, although I'd far prefer the next Cunard or P&O vessel to be induvidually built in a year like Meyer's, this is less than likely.

Before anybody asks, no I don't work for Carnival! But, I do work for what is now an ex P&O company owned by DP World. Oh how things have changed since Lord Sterling did the awful demerging a few years ago, but that, as they say, is another story...

quote:

---

Originally posted by mec1:
As for "Cunard and P&O being British until a few years ago" - puh-leeze gimme a break. Cunard hasn't been genuinely British since about 1975 and nor has P&O.

---

Point taken! However, they are both marketed as a 'British' experience', although the Cunad one is tailored for the American market.

Cunard clearly use the 'Royal Connection' (Ship names, Queens Room, Princess Grill etc.) and their 'heritage' as their unique selling point. After all the QM2 even has a Pub and a Pillar box! P&O clearly offer an onboard experience tailored exclusively for the British market.

Now Carnival are not going to throw these unique selling points (brand identities) away, after all that’s why they purchased the brands in the first place. The QM2 is a living testament to this; a new ‘Ocean Liner’. In fact I think Carnival have been more effective at using Cunards ‘Heritage’ as a selling tool, than Cunard did. Never the less, I still think providing both lines with near identical ships (Vista) does erode the uniqueness of each brand. Providing P&O with a ‘Grand Class’ is also a mistake, in my opinion. To my mind it puts them in competition with Princess, HAL and Costa who have similar ships, mind you it’s all Carnival.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Magic Pipe:
A few observations from Fincantieri's web page:

Zuiderdam Class:

LOA: 290 m
LBP: 254

Queen Victoria:

LOA: 294
LBP: 265.36

When QV was re-ordered, it was said she would be 11m longer than the standard Zuiderdam ships. The information from Fincantieri confirms that the QV is 11 meters longer than Zuiderdam, though that is length between perpindiculars, not overall length, which she will be only 4 meters longer. This leads one to believe that QV will have a considerably shorter (7.36m) bow overhang, which means that her stem will probably have a very different shape than that of the Zuiderdam class.

---

Never mind the figures on Fincantieri's website and in their shipyard publicity material.

I've been on Oosterdam, Westerdam and Arcadia, and in their Pilot Cards (technical data sheets), which can be found on the bridge, it says that they are in fact 285.24 metres in length, not 289.8 metres as is widely stated by Fincantieri.

The "289.8-metre" error occured a long time ago and, unfortunately, has been allowed to live on without being corrected.

quote:

---

Originally posted by shipsnorway:
... the "new" QV will be 11 metres longer than the Vistas correct...

---

I'm now going to swap sides of the fence :

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Patsy:
Carnival brands are rapidly losing theirs (identity) and if people in the UK don't go on the newer ships because they've 'already been on one of them' they'll lose business.

Most cruise passengers that I've met enjoy repeating ships and lines. It not unusual to meet people that have cruise on the QE2 10 times or with RCI 20 times etc. They positively like the familiarity.

Most Costa passengers probably do not have a clue what a 'Vista class' is and that Cunard and P&O, who are a thousand miles away, will have similar ships. Would they even care? I wonder how many P&O regulars know much about Costa.

Queen Victoria already isn't attracting the interest of the general public or in the media QM2 did because Carnival are keeping everything close to their chest, unlike Mary where every little thing was known stage by stage.

The QM2 is an impossible act to follow, and by comparison the QV is not so 'special'. I think Carnival have picked-up on some of the criticism, so have become tight lipped. In fact I wonder if the 'Vista' that was intended to be QV and became 'Arcadia' was considered ‘not special enough’ to be a Cunarder. I recall reading that bigger suites would be included and better kitchens for the Grills etc – all Cunard signatures missing from the original design.

Anyway, I bet the QV will be a great success. You wait, when the people of Southampton see that dark hull and Cunard funnel sailing into port, emotions will be running high. Already maiden cruises are sold out.

[ 10-03-2006: Message edited by: Malcolm @ cruisepage ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Malcolm @ cruisepage:
[b][..]I think Carnival have picked-up on some of the criticism, so have become tight lipped. In fact I wonder if the 'Vista' that was intended to be QV and became 'Arcadia' was considered ‘not special enough’ to be a Cunarder. [..]

---

I think there were even statements of Cunard which said that the surprising success of QM2 lead to the decison to come up with a refined QV - of course other things might also have played a role. (e.g. lack of capacity for P&O)

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ernst:

I think Cunard needs a ship of the size of QV - but if QM2 is really that sucessful the logical thing to do would be a 'sister' for QM2. Right now this is what the brand stands for.

---

What build two expensive Ocean Liners and only use each for 50% of their Trans capability?

..why not extending this 'consecration' to other ships? This is what Cunard stands for.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Malcolm @ cruisepage:
Patsy, Ship-nuts are very fickle people. Many people were gutted when Canberra was lost. Oriana and Aurora (the new kids on the block) were viewed with much suspicion and were ‘not worthy’ in many peoples eyes. As time has moved on, these two ships are now looking like ‘classics’.

I think Queen Victoria will take on a ‘classic status’ when the QE2 is gone. Remember the original Queen Many was considered ‘too modern’ in comparison to what had gone before.

---

Well said. If people could get past the common exterior and shared deck layout of the ships I think they would find out that the onboard experience is very different between Cunard, HAL, Carnival and Costa. Yes, it is no longer as nationalistic as some would like but that is the reality of todays market.

If you follow Carnival Corp's history you will see that they have been successful by adapting their products over time and also allowing the various brands to offer a different product. There are even significant differences between different ships within the brands.

If you don't like any of the Carnival offerings there are other lines - big and small - that are likely to have a product that meets and inividual's needs.

When HAL got rid of Rotterdam V many feared that her loyal followers would go elsewhere. Many of them did - to the new Rotterdam.

Yes, it is no longer as nationalistic as some would like but that is the reality of todays market.

Joe, it is really is not fair bringing 'reality' into the arguement!

Today Cunard stand for the liner cliche and I think this is the major selling point of QM2. I guess this also plays a role for selling 'conventional' cruises - even for cruises where some of QM2's features are actually a disadvantage.

Also, QM2 is already doing quite a lot convetional cruises, and I think QV is actually an extension of QM2 - the 'liner cliche' is still the major selling point - and QV allows Cunard to offer a wider selection of itineraries.