Queen Elizabeth is not the replacement for QE2

[cunardqueen]

  I've come to the conclusion Cunard isn't what it was 5 or 10 years ago, and I've moved on.   

SadlyTom your not alone in your thoughts, along with 7 other friends l know from the QE2 days , as yet not one of us have booked anything on the new ships, and dont have anything in the pipeline. And for each of us that is highly unusual.
 Now the fact that most of us are Diamond members, One is platinum and we are all solo travellers, l would hate to think how much other custom is being lost...  Well actually thinking about it, They are losing no custom, we are just being replaced with the new breed of Carnval customer, so why should they care

[Chris]

Thanks Michael.

What they should do, and I'll help them with this if they want!, is to create a separate www.CunardHeritage.com site or something like that which can focus on their history a bit.  Surely THIS is the value of the brand that makes it worth something.

I started doing this in 1999 with www.chriscunard.com

I'm happy for help in adding to it if anyone is interested.

Chris.

[Rob Lightbody]

I started doing this in 1999 with www.chriscunard.com

Who knew!  

What you should do is licence your material for them to use on their own website... its exactly what they should have.  Right on their front page - "click here to read about our 170 years of historic ships"

[Chris]

Who knew!  

What you should do is licence your material for them to use on their own website... its exactly what they should have.  Right on their front page - "click here to read about our 170 years of historic ships"

I love that idea, of the link.

Also strengthening ties with the Cunard Steamship Society would be good as there's a huge wealth of historical information there.

I guess the problem is that as a company Cunard need to have control over what is said about them. That's understandable, fair etc and for this reason they can't really link off to third party discussions on their heritage...

On Queen Victoria (I've been told) they still play my lectures on the TV. The history is so often what the passengers find so interesting about sailing with Cunard (rather than HAL or P&O), which makes my job easier as a maritime lecturer aboard... people want to hear what I have to say!

HAL and P&O have a different approach. They seem to be able to fill their ships regardless of their heritage. I think the same is true for Cunard, but fortunately Cunard maintain their historical links.

[Tom]

QV is a lovely ship, but now that the staff from the "Pre-Carnival" days are quickly retiring/resigning, there is little incentive for me to cruise onboard her again.  There's nothing wrong with the service the ex-Princess or P&O staff have to offer, it's just not on the same level of quality and care that Cunard used to provide.  Why should we pay a premium to cruise on a Cunard ship over a cheaper P&O cruise if they run nearly identical itineraries, were built by the same shipbuilder, staffed by the same company, and designed by the same design team?  QE2 used to justify the expense because she was more than just another Vista.

Cunard's "passion" for its history will lead to its fall.  You can't move forwards if you are perpetually looking backwards and praising all the things you've done before.  It's one thing to know your roots and to appreciate where you come from, however, it's another thing altogether to be so totally engrossed in the past that you are essentially smothering yourself with it.  This "passion" has turned Cunard from mainstream household name for luxury into some niche brand catering to those who get a warm fuzzy feeling when they hear the word "history".  Those here who can actually appreciate Cunard's history can easily see through Carnival's marketing and recognize how very little of that spirit and innovation remains.

Cunard has become a company of contradictions.  They praise their history whilst taking many opportunities to rid themselves of it, and they pride themselves on their upscale brand while there is little to distinguish them from other Carnival UK companies.  I simply cannot respect a company that cannot even pretend to stay true to their core ideals.  I need integrity, not hypocrisy, and that's why I've looked to other companies these days for when I book cruises.

[Stowaway2k]

On Cunard's Facebook page for a while they were doing "Today in Cunard History".

It's mostly "this day in 1870 _______ was launched"
I realized that they were skipping over many other interesting and important dates in Cunard history, so I started posting on their wall my own Cunard history research. 

There is so much more than just launchings and maiden voyages, many interesting events that were not mentioned, such as the date that the Cunard and White Star merger was finalized, Cunard buying up every available lifeboat in NYC upon Mauretania's arrival in April 1912, the day Queen Mary left the Clyde beginning one of the most storied of Cunard histories, etc.

But, nobody cared, there was virtually no interest shown so I quit doing it.   

The historic events of Cunard were meaningless to those Cunard Facebook fans who would then go mental for the silly puff-pieces about Ascot Balls and such.

c'est la vie.   

[Rob Lightbody]

This is a brilliant piece, and I agree with almost every word they say!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/local/hampshire/hi/people_and_places/newsid_9076000/9076513.stm

[Mauretania1907]

I agree with you, Rob, it's a brilliant piece, but there is one comment which I suspect you picked up on also - will this Vista Lizzie ever be as famous as QE2? She might be, or might not, time will tell.

[Chris]

 
In this case, Cunard have got it right, even though us purists aren't going along with it.    People are going to notice and pay attention when the new Queen Elizabeth pulls into port... which likely does not happen much for any of the other Vistas save for Queen Victoria.

I touched on this back in 2008 in this blog from aboard QE2:
https://www.theqe2story.com/forum/index.php/topic,513.msg11132.html#msg11132

[Chris]

Others may quibble with Shanks's insistence that Queen Elizabeth is a liner, not a cruise ship, but I'm not going to get involved in that argument.

From: http://blogs.mirror.co.uk/captain-greybeard/2010/10/queen-elizabeth-cunards-newest.html

[andyh]

I agree with you, Rob, it's a brilliant piece, but there is one comment which I suspect you picked up on also - will this Vista Lizzie ever be as famous as QE2? She might be, or might not, time will tell.

I would like to think so, she has only been in service less than three weeks, so give her a few years and see how people talk about her then, I would bet she will be talked about more than other cruise ships similar to her, but she will have to hit the 40 year mark to be compared with the QE2

[RMS Queen Elizabeth 2]

They think the new QE3 has replaced the QE2.

http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2011-01-13/business/fl-queen-ship-arrival-20110113_1_largest-cruise-ships-cunard-line-port-everglades

[Adam Hodson]

How do they think that a 23.7 knot cruise ship can replace a 34 knot ocean liner? Something else that sad is that MS Queen Elizabeth (2010) is the one that comes up on google instead of RMS Queen Elizabeth (1938).

[June Ingram]

There is no ship that can be really compared to our beloved QE2.  She was totally innovative in her time and thoroughly modern.  She is unique for many reasons, one of the most apparent is the effect she has had and still has on people. 

[Adam Hodson]

Very true June.