It would be interesting to trace the evolution of Cunard's market positioning from the dawn of the Jet Age to the present. How seamless was Cunard's transition from "multi-class mass transit carrier with mail service" to "nostalgia-themed luxury cruise line?"

It's worth noting that Arthur Frommer's Europe on $40 A Day still considered ocean liners a legitimate alternative, albeit a poor one, for transatlantic crossing in 1970. Ticket prices were comparable between airlines and ocean lines, and in fact the SS France's ticket prices were very competitive. However, not only did the crossing itself burn up time most travelers didn't have anymore; travelers were also nickel-and-dimed with having to travel to their actual destinations by rail or rental car.

Since Frommer still had to make those arguments, apparently Cunard and the French Line still considered themselves mass transit carriers at the time, despite Cunard's awareness that they would have to reposition themselves or go out of business. All those classic posters seem to bear this out. I'd like to see some adverts from Cunard around the late '70s, though.

[ 12-11-2008: Message edited by: Lubber ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by viking109:
It's a bit of an odd statement to come out with really. Kind of like saying - we called it luxury when it suited us, but it was'nt really , but thanks anyway to all those who bought into it.
I guess it's phony Edwardian luxury from here on in then.

---

They're no more of a luxury line than HAL or Princess.

I believe his comments are not done, even when his comments about QE2 are absolutely right.
QE2 what ever people think of here positive/negative have saved Cunard to survive. Obviously this manager have no clue or better to say no interest in the importance of the QE2 fore Cunard. His only interest is making money and his bonus at the end of the year. And that is general no good thing!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tim in 'Lauderdale:
Cunard has never been a 'luxury line' in the vein of Seabourn, Silversea, Crystal, RVL, etc, and with or without the QE2, they still won't be.

---

Shanks produced sanitary ware, and my feeling about this man's pronouncements is that he was probably talking through it.

He is typical "The Office" materail -without the humour.

For more weasel words

http://wearecunard.com/tag/peter-shanks/

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ernst:
As much as ship enthusiasts appreciated QE2, not everyone shares this view and I can understand why QE2 recently 'held them back' in developing the Cunard brand.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thad:
Yes and no Doug. As they are less and transportion vehicle and purely a leisure based one, they are not compromised with any less than "suitable" accommodations, which does allow them to be a more completely luxury product, not just merely a more modern one.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by dougnewman:
In 1969, QE2's standard accommodation was far above average, whereas in 2008, QM2's and QV's are just average.

---

Her Deck 5 closets are on a par with RotterdamV, Le France, Oceanic, QAM, Olympia past 1970, and the SAL ships entry level accomodation.

Many of the old liners were converted to full time cruising in the late 1960's had most immmigrant grade cabins converted to private bath, installed carpeting, hiding of plumbing/mechanical hardware, and in the case of Olympia, 3 adjacent cabins converted to 2.

When the old liners were converted for cruising, the bottom grade cabins were not bad, just small.

my cabins
On SSNorway P105, single cabin with bunk bed above. Loved the Jetson's fittings

QE2, 4087 single cabin, cozy with the top bunk removed.

Rembrandt, 734. Was converted to private bath.
Double with 2 L shaped lower beds with beautiful fittings

PS: We all know Cunard's legendary poor service until the Princess takeover. Just like today she is more hype, and more cult worship than reality.

[ 12-13-2008: Message edited by: desirod7 ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by dougnewman:
Indeed, I would say that in 1969, QE2's standard accommodation was far above average, whereas in 2008, QM2's and QV's are just average.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Malcolm @ cruisepage:
I would not call the QM2's Duplex Suites average.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Malcolm @ cruisepage:

I would not call the QM2's Duplex Suites average.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by dougnewman:
...but QM2 and QV are not more luxurious than QE2 was; they are just more modern.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Malcolm @ cruisepage:

I think many of the cruising public DO associate 'modern' with 'luxury' and 'old' with 'inferior'. I've heard many a classic old ship described as a 'rusty old tub' by the unwise, when the ships were in fact immaculate.

---