Why won't Cunard / Carnival save the QE2 ?

[Rob Lightbody]

Even without the branding or ownership, she is instantly recognisable as a Cunard ship.

If she is scrapped, which will be a drawn-out process, many current Cunard guests will be upset and there will be signifcant publicity.

Why would they allow their most ship ever, the best possible advert for Cunard, to be lost?

SS Rotterdam Cruise Hotel has proved that in the right location, done well, a former liner can be a very successful Hotel.

What have they got to lose?

So, Carnival, get her back.  

Do something lovely with her.

She'll be a superb advert for your brands, and will promote trips on the current Cunarders.

[cunardqueen]

Better to have egg on their face now and be seen to attempt to do smething, rather than the other stuff when it hits the fan, and when that happens there no knowing where it will end up !

  If she is scrapped, which will be a drawn-out process, many current Cunard guests will be upset and there will be signifcant publicity.
   

Look what hapened when she was sold, there was the initial out cry, it died down, when the fleet was reflagged, again an initial outcry and it died down, every time QE2 is mentioned in the press there is the outcry , with the usual ramblings bring her back to the Clyde or Southampton and again the fuss dies down.

What if QE2 was to be scrapped ? yes some guests might be "upset" but thats about it  !  But you know what they will still sail Cunard, In spite of it all, theres only a few people l know who havet sailed since that day in 2008, and in the grand scheme of things we are only a very small voice. Heck even the mailings have stopped. And Cunard it seems are not bothered, the Marketing department could have done something to "entice the old brigade back" I suppose a ship visit shouldnt be dismissed, but are more content to welcome the new brigade of cruiser and give them some onboard credit to keep them happy.

 For some Cunard is still the name in Cruising and a great many of their passengers havent even sailed on QE2, and are quite glad to accept if its Cunard on the side then its all singing and all dancing and wonderful inside. And who is to say if they are right or wrong ?

Dubai through it all have remained reasonably tight lipped, and wont say what they are planning, and really why on earth should they tell us, they paid handsomely for an iconic ship and its upto them (with some input from Carnival as to yea or nae) just exactly what they can or should do with QE2. 

If l was in charge at Carnival HQ  l would be very very careful about how to handle this very hot potato, like a sleeping dog, you risk wakening up something which in all probablility could very well bite your arm off, with a resulting expensive bill.

We do need to view QE2 not from an emotional subject of the heart, of which some of us are still dearly attached to, but from a logical well thought out point of view, trouble with that is the lines are a bit fuzzy.

Well thats my thoughts, as usual off topic ..
     

[June Ingram]

Hi Rob -

I totally agree with your post.  Carnival must get her back.  If Carnival got QE2 back, the good will would be immeasurable.  Good will equals money in the pocket (Carnival's pocket).

June

[Brandon Sterkel]

Just keep in mind that Carnival was never selling the ship.

[June Ingram]

Hi Brandon -

Carnival is the parent company of Cunard and many other cruise lines and shipping companies.

June 

[QE2forever]

So, Carnival, get her back. 

Do something lovely with her.

She'll be a superb advert for your brands, and will promote trips on the current Cunarders.

Honestly I'm not sure it would be a viable option for Carnival to take QE2 back. Coldly and logically speaking, out of any emotional thoughts, she's now probably too old and too expensive to refit/run as a cruise ship.

However, what I'm convinced they can do (and should do!) is to prevent her from being scrapped.

Should her current owner make this lamentable decision, they could give a boost or pull some strings in some ways so that she can be preserved, e. g. to help or participate in an existing preservation scheme such as QE2 London. This would make excellent publicity, for sure.

But what if they don't?

[Rob Lightbody]

I definitely didn't mean to imply a return to Cunard service, just that they should assist a rescue from Dubai or worse.

[QE2forever]

I totally agree with you, Rob.

By the way, do we know if Holland-America/Carnival helped the SS Rotterdam project in any way?

[Lynda Bradford]

When Cunard/Carnival announced the sale of the ship in 2007 recognition was given to QE2 as Cunard's longest serving ship and the most famous ship in the world.  The fact that the plans for QE2 in Dubai would give her a future where she would still be recognised as an international luxury icon gave us hope.

This year Cunard are celebrating their 175 year anniversary and the future is not looking good for their iconic ship.  It is time that they spoke up and ask Dubai why what is happening to QE2 is so far from what was planned when they agreed to the sale of the ship.  To say it is not longer their problem is not good enough.

Extract of letter from Cunard to Passengers onboard QM2 in 2007 regarding the sale of QE2. 

"As you are a valued guest, I wanted to write personally to tell you that Queen Elizabeth 2, the most famous ship in the world, will be leaving the Cunard fleet in autumn 2008.  QE2 has sailed the world's seas for almost forty years and has travelled over 5 and a half million miles in the process; that is further than any other ship in history.  She is the longest serving ship in Cunard's 168 year history and she has outlasted all other translantic liners.  After such an illustrious career we feel that the time will be right for her to leave the fleet next year.

However, she will not disappear.  She has been purchased by Islithmar, the investment arm of Dubai World and a wholly owned company of the Government of Dubai.  She will be delivered to Dubai in November 2008 where she will cease her role as an ocean going passenger vessel and be refurbished and adapted to become a luxury floating hotel, retail and entertainment destination at the Palm Jumeirah."

[Brandon Sterkel]

The question is, what would Cunard/Carnival do with the vessel once it has left Dubai?

[Lynda Bradford]

The question is, what would Cunard/Carnival do with the vessel once it has left Dubai?

Cunard would do nothing with the vessel.  They would just need to speak on her behalf to ensure there is a future for the ship and save her from the scrapyard. 

[Stowaway2k]

Honestly I'm not sure it would be a viable option for Carnival to take QE2 back. Coldly and logically speaking, out of any emotional thoughts, she's now probably too old and too expensive to refit/run as a cruise ship.

This is true.  What Cunard could do is what was planned for QE2 post-retirement in the first place. 
A permanently-docked hotel/dining/convention/museum venue,  CUNARD-branded and managed. 

It may seem odd, but if Cunard PR were upfront and honest it could work.

"Queen Elizabeth 2" is arguably our most well-loved ship.  She is a British national-treasure.  Though she is now too old and expensive to operate in our fleet of "The World's Most Famous Ocean Liners", there is no reason why she shouldn't continue doing what she has always done, albeit permanently-moored here in Britain.  It's time to bring her home and keep her home where she is loved and cared for."

What a master-stroke that would be. 

Carnival could now buy her back for far less than what Dubai paid for her.    Actually, CUNARD doesn't even have to purchase her outright, they could simply be the lease-holder/operator such as is the case with the Queen Mary in California. 

She could even serve as the so-called "White Star Academy", a training ship for future on-board staff and crew.

Lease her from Dubai, put CUNARD back on her superstructure, and she's back in business for decades to come.

[Brandon Sterkel]

This is true.  What Cunard could do is what was planned for QE2 post-retirement in the first place. 
A permanently-docked hotel/dining/convention/museum venue,  CUNARD-branded and managed. 

It may seem odd, but if Cunard PR were upfront and honest it could work.

"Queen Elizabeth 2" is arguably our most well-loved ship.  She is a British national-treasure.  Though she is now too old and expensive to operate in service as a cruise ship, there is no reason why she shouldn't continue doing what she has always done, albeit permanently-moored here in Britain.  It's time to bring her home and keep her home where she is loved and cared for."

What a master-stroke that would be. 

Carnival could now buy her back for far less than what Dubai paid for her.    Actually, CUNARD doesn't even have to purchase her outright, they could simply be the lease-holder/operator such as is the case with the Queen Mary in California. 

She could even serve as the so-called "White Star Academy", a training ship for future on-board staff and crew.

Lease her from Dubai, put CUNARD back on her superstructure, and she's back in business for decades to come.

I can actually see this idea working.........as long as she is brought back to Britain.

[Bob Flett]

My feeling is that if it was Cunard calling the shots, I think there would be a strong likelihood that this would happen. They were in the process of taking back The old Queen Elizabeth until CY Tung  stepped in, slightly different circumstances , I Know but at least it showed they cared about its future
However with Carnival in control, they are in the business of making money with little regard to sentiment.
I still can't help likening this situation to the Norway. After the boiler explosion it was generally acknowledged that her sailing days were over. NCL didn't want her and there were loads of  ideas of turning her into a Queen Mary like attraction, with all sorts of supposed interest in her. However at the end of the day NO ONE came forward, no one wanted her, presumably because of the huge financial outlay , with no guaranteed returns. I just hope we have not reached this stage with QE2 !

[Brandon Sterkel]

My feeling is that if it was Cunard calling the shots, I think there would be a strong likelihood that this would happen. They were in the process of taking back The old Queen Elizabeth until CY Tung  stepped in, slightly different circumstances , I Know but at least it showed they cared about its future
However with Carnival in control, they are in the business of making money with little regard to sentiment.
I still can't help likening this situation to the Norway. After the boiler explosion it was generally acknowledged that her sailing days were over. NCL didn't want her and there were loads of  ideas of turning her into a Queen Mary like attraction, with all sorts of supposed interest in her. However at the end of the day NO ONE came forward, no one wanted her, presumably because of the huge financial outlay , with no guaranteed returns. I just hope we have not reached this stage with QE2 !

Its interesting to know that Cunard was actually trying to save the original Queen Elizabeth.
Hopefully they can save our beloved QE2.

[Peter Mugridge]

I agree it would be excellent PR for Cunard as well as a face-saver for Dubai; I might even feel inclined to book with Cunard again ( on the QM2 maybe ) if they helped save QE2 as a hotel in the UK...

Take note, Carnival bean counters and PR men...

[Lynda Bradford]

Cunard bringing the ship back to the UK as a hotel/conference ship would be a fantastic idea.  Their passengers pay a lot of money to hotels in Southampton for overnight stays pre and post cruises.  They could be spending this money on hotel QE2.

Southampton may not still be an option for hotel QE2 but if London was still a viable option then Cunard could bus passengers to Southampton for embarkation.  The conference facility is another money making option and the training facility for Cunard crew is an excellent idea.

 If she was based in London then there could be opera or ballet or west end show nights onboard QE2. However the current condition of the ship is a worry, and I am sure that even Cunard would be shocked to see the condition she is in, compared to when they left her in Dubai.

Come on Cunard/Carnival do something to save QE2 and make your 175th Anniversary a memorable year for the right reasons. 

[Rob Lightbody]

Even if Cunard carnival were simply facilitators, it would help. The current situation is confused, secretive and difficult for anyone who's trying to rescue her.

I was reading about the ss Rotterdam foundation this morning, but the first requirement is to have an available ship!

[Rob Lightbody]

I actually think Germany could be a home for her! They could celebrate the biggest ship re engineering project ever competed (keep the engineering intact as an amazing educational experience) and explain that the new system took her another 3.5 million miles.

They seem very keen on the Cunard ships, perhaps they'd like one of their own?

[Twynkle]

As Rob writes, - as 'facilitators'? In private - perhaps, who knows!
However Carnival, being seen in public to be 'saviours', (spending money of Shareholders...) then maybe the following is relevant too.

And yes Rob, 'Germany love QM2, QE2 (as restored) could be a good addition to their collection of famous ships!
.............................................................................
While you have been adding to this thread, the following is also an attempt to answer the question:
 
 'Why won't Cunard / Carnival save the QE2 ?'
Firstly, we can't know whether they will or not save QE2 - her are a few suggested reasons why they might not!
Would Mr Arison and the Board of Carnival (parent company which owns Cunard's 'good name') have sold QE2 in the first place if they hadn't made a definite decision to do this as part of their Long Term Business Plan?
It's impossible to imagine that keeping 'a bottle-full of coins' on the side towards 'saving QE2' was part of this plan!

Surely Big Business very rarely have 'second thoughts' that are implemented - Carnival are 'not for turning'! It's very doubtful whether  their Shareholders would agree to it either.

 - Why ever would Carnival need (or wish) to save her / buy her back, (whole or in part)?
 Wouldn't Carnival lose even more 'face' if they tried to invest more and attempt to 'save' QE2 / buy her back?! Possibly!
 If they did, it would be only when All their other commitments have been fulfilled.
(It was difficult to ignore just a few of the missing luxuries that we noted on board QM2 - the ships are asking for more across the board, as in more tasks to be fulfilled by fewer crew, and  'more for less' from passengers.
The first thing that needs to be funded is an efficient internet service across the entire fleet, at one point off the islands of Indonesia, it took 48 minutes to send an email! (Not the fault of the satellite positioning, either!). The current system (for passengers and crew)  really is in desperate need of capital expenditure.)
 
- As a matter of interest, didn't Carnival / Cunard miss a good opportunity to buy the Cunard Building in Liverpool?
Did anyone ask 'Why or why not'?!
 - Another good example from earlier days, Cunard /Trafalgar House et al didn't show any interest in re-purchasing / saving Queen Elizabeth and Queen Mary - or did they? Is there proof that this is still the case? If so, the stats would make interesting reading.
 
 - Given Carnival's current marketing philosophy - and the ever expanding and competitive cruise ship business, 
in reality, what ever would they 'save' old, unsafe/at risk, and sad-looking QE2-The Liner for?
There is 'mountains of stuff' here on The QE2 Story Forum - full of good ideas / great suggestions / fantastic hypotheses - A training ship, a hotel and all the rest of it - however, it looks as if they have deliberately 'missed this 'boat' too!

- If you like the decor on board QV et al, Bell Boys etc and other 'nods' to the past, Cunard do a brilliant job in maintaining an 'Olde   Worlde' approach where it's appropriate, however it doesn't seem to be what they might try out 'in real life'!
Heaven forfend, QE2 could look unrecognisable, should the shareholders vote 'Yes'!
 
Then out of consideration to her present owners, would they really want to return her for a refund - (and, dare it be mentioned - as 'soiled goods'?)

As previously mentioned here on the forum, there is an understanding throughout the maritime world that in Great Britain absolutely  no-one can park a ship alongside (or anchored off) these shores until there is legal proof that there are, and will continue to be, sufficient funds for the ship's hull to be removed and scrapped should it become a failed enterprise.
Almost certainly, Carnival (and shareholders) wouldn't want to be involved financially in such activity.
(This was  quoted directly following my conversation with the gentleman i/c of Historic Ships at Greenwich Maritime Museum - I wish I could find the link - currently, I'm v sorry as I have little time at present!)

Maybe the following is more realistic- and this is really cynical, too!
Perhaps Carnival and their Sharholders are waiting (and possibly her owners are too,) until it becomes certain that QE2 cannot be restored inside to any condition that would be 'permissable' and insurable, specifically in relation to public use.
Then - as an alternative to scrapping, mightn't there be reason for a new topic - 'Carnival shareholders vote to 'save' QE2', suggesting something perhaps relating to the restoration of hulls of SS Gt Britain, HMS Victory, and the Mary-Rose (she took much hard work and very many years to become 'an 'allowed' old hull) and other extremely worthy and famous ships!
However the thought of QE2 as 'an old hull' seems almost too dreadful to contemplate at the moment - wishful thinking is easy, isn't it?!
In an ideal world QE2 should now be entertaining the world, parked alongside - tenders as taxis and she'd have done a great deal worse if she's been bought and managed along the same lines as HMS Belfast, HMRY Britannia and Rotterdam V.

As Rob writes - If Carnival can see a way to helping QE2 out of the plight in which she finds herself - then maybe they could do a lot worse than to celebrate the anniversary of the laying of QE2's keel; with a generous amount of help towards the restoration and upkeep of QE2.

(Please excuse repetition, and anything else that looks as if it's been affected by ongoing jet-lag!)

[Peter Mugridge]

Southampton may not still be an option for hotel QE2 but if London was still a viable option then Cunard could bus passengers to Southampton for embarkation.

Come on Cunard/Carnival do something to save QE2 and make your 175th Anniversary a memorable year for the right reasons. 

Bus?!    Would not hiring the Orient Express be more appropriate?  After all, it's been used as the Cunard boat train quite a few times... 

[Lynda Bradford]

Bus?!    Would not hiring the Orient Express be more appropriate?  After all, it's been used as the Cunard boat train quite a few times... 

Choice of train or bus would be an option but the main thing would be to speak out to save QE2 in the first instance. 

[June Ingram]

Unlike years ago, saving historic "things" is rather in now, even though it is extremely difficult to get the money to do so.  It is the concept that is in.  Therefore, I do believe that if Carnival made an effort to intervene and get our beloved QE2 back to the UK or to Germany, they would make up in PR and in business what they expended in so doing.  And as mentioned, once QE2 is on a "safe" footing,  there would be a little more time to put together a plan that would work for her.

[cameroa]

We all realise it would be good PR for Carnicorp/Cunardival and surely as the conglomerate of companies are run by 'successful' business persons, they would know this too. So I ask, apart from finance, what is stopping them approaching Dubai?? Carnicorp/Cunardival offloaded QE2 rather quickly, why would they want her back in the company portfolio?? Would they not have thought about this kind of project before they sold her??

[June Ingram]

Even if Carnival would not want QE2 in their portfolio, they could intervene to get her back for use elsewhere.

In contrast to what I wrote in a previous message, the next issue to address is that if Carnival got her back and QE2 went to someone else, Carnival would get some pats on the back, but whoever got QE2 and made something out of her would no doubt be the ones benefiting from QE2's fame.

So it appears to be a double-edged sword.

[Stowaway2k]

 

Wouldn't Carnival lose even more 'face' if they tried to invest more and attempt to 'save' QE2 / buy her back?! Possibly!

I seriously don't think Carnival is or ever has been worried about 'face'.   

[June Ingram]

Even if Cunard carnival were simply facilitators, it would help. The current situation is confused, secretive and difficult for anyone who's trying to rescue her.

Rob, do we know any more about what is happening ?

[June Ingram]

Come on Cunard/Carnival do something to save QE2 and make your 175th Anniversary a memorable year for the right reasons. 

After all is said and discussed, I wholeheartedly second Lynda's sentiment !

[Brandon Sterkel]

Do we know of any Cunard executives who have seen her current condition?

[Rob Lightbody]

Would they not have thought about this kind of project before they sold her??

I honestly don't think they got that far, although they certainly knew a problem was on the horizon.  The ship still had a few years ahead of her, but $100m waved at them, plus the simplicity of it for them (business as usual right up until she arrived at her ultimate destination) meant there was no point in thinking about anything else!

[cunardqueen]

  Come on Cunard/Carnival do something to save QE2 and make your 175th Anniversary a memorable year for the right reasons.     

Might not anything they think or say or do re QE2 at this time, put the rest of the celebrations in the shade... It might just all blow up in their face.

[Rod]

Just a few random thoughts here...I may be completely wrong...I may not.
I do not think Carnival wants anything to do with QE2 apart from being still able to "pass the buck" as far as ownership goes.
Several posts I have seen on this site talk about opening her up as a resort and conference center, shopping mall, museum etc. AND, that's fine.
What I do not think MOST people on here realize the costs involved in such a venture.

 Buying the ship: scrap value has been estimated at between $20m and $100m say, for arguments sake $50m. Then you have to get it to wherever...for argument sake..say London..... towing costs maybe $3m?
 Then you must buy/lease the land and harborage for its final destination.Say near the "Eye"...... $5m/year???  paid for up front just like renting a house.
You would also probably have to pay some cost towards building an electricity substation, and sewage connection.
My understanding is, that if the ship is permanently moored, then it becomes classified as a building and must conform to all the relevant building regulations in force at the time, depending on the usage of that building. That will require considerable electrical work alone...eg some of the elevators will require to be powered by emergency generators... OH yes they will probably require a complete strip down and overhaul too.

Pictures I have seen of the interior and exterior of the ship show that in the interior, mold may have set in....BIG problem there!!!! If it is showing on the bulkheads that are covered in Formica, then it is in the carpets, drapes etc. Survey would have to be done to outline the amount of mold remediation required.
Would the local authorities accept the "Marinite" bulkheads and ceilings? or too much asbestos?

Safety of Life issues: are there enough emergency lights, do they need to put the green lights on the deck as required on aircraft? Fire doors, fire dampers, fire hoses, fire extinguishers?

THEN!!!! The icing on the cake!!! The plumbing....
I left Christmas 88. The hot water piping, copper, I would say at that time some 30% needed to be replaced. Cold water piping, galvanized iron, while I was there, the Sports deck area had to be descaled once.
My understanding is that water is not being circulated around the ship. When the copper cools and contracts, the scale that is sealing the holes will fall off...and "Niagara, Niagara, Niagara"! Cold piping...scale/rust will fall off and cause blockages.

Air conditioning.....after all these years of not being used?? That one could be interesting.

Ball park figure to get it into London, up and running, $100m and 2 years.
Say 1000 rooms are Available at finish of renovation.
At an average room rate of $300/night, that's an average between the Merchant Navy Hotel and the Ritz, assuming 70% occupancy and 20% profit/room/night
Six and a half years payback...mind you that is just on room nights. Does not include rental of shop space, advertizing, ballroom rental etc.
Lot of money isn't it?

[Bob Flett]

Exactly the point I was making before !

[QE2forever]

Several posts I have seen on this site talk about opening her up as a resort and conference center, shopping mall, museum etc. AND, that's fine.
What I do not think MOST people on here realize the costs involved in such a venture.

Agreed. It's not going to be an easy task, and it will cost a lot of money.

But the SS Rotterdam Hotel proves that it's not impossible.

After all, the same difficulties you're describing about QE2 have been met and fixed by The Rotterdam Foundation.

Another reason for the Rotterdam success is the passion and dedication of those involved. Something Dubai has never shown.

[Lynda Bradford]

Interesting comments from Rod that remind us about the reality of what it would take for QE2 to have a future and the costs involved.  QE2 would need to be economically viable for investors to risk their money.  OMG the plumbing scenario sounds horrendous!

We have previously had discussions that are of interest you may want to revisit such as:

Will QE2 leave Dubai under her own power.... where towing was discussed.
https://www.theqe2story.com/forum/index.php/topic,5505.msg56479.html#msg56479

QE2 without power for extended period - the implications where the deterioration of a ship without power was discussed
https://www.theqe2story.com/forum/index.php/topic,5181.0.html

Putting QE2 into layup - Fictional scenario (for now) This was posted in 2009 when such an option did seem fictional
https://www.theqe2story.com/forum/index.php?topic=1232.msg13253#msg13253

These pdf on Guidelines for layup of ships are interesting:
http://www.ukpandi.com/fileadmin/uploads/uk-pi/LP%20Documents/LP_Reports/LPNews_Layup.pdf

http://www.ukpandi.com/fileadmin/uploads/uk-pi/Documents/Lay-up%20returns%20of%20call.pdf

[June Ingram]

All of the difficulties Rod has written about are true.

But, sometimes there is an instance where despite mammoth stumbling blocks, every effort must be made to achieve the desired result, no matter how impossible it may seem.  It is a matter of conscience and love.

The desired result may or may not happen.  If it does, that is indeed wonderful.  If it does not, in the end, one can say I tried my utmost best.  I can live with myself for having given my all to achieve the desired result.

Every effort must be made to save our beloved QE2. 

[QE2forever]

But, sometimes there is an instance where despite mammoth stumbling blocks, every effort must be made to achieve the desired result, no matter how impossible it may seem.  It is a matter of conscience and love.

“They did not know it was impossible so they did it”

Mark Twain

 

[PaulInuk]

Some colleges would like to do repairs /work on for training skills

[james h]

I thought there was a ten year non scrapping / selling / commercial sailing clause.

[Brandon Sterkel]

I thought there was a ten year non scrapping / selling / commercial sailing clause.

Hi James,
Yes, There is a 10 year no onward sale agreement that the new owners made with Cunard when they bought the ship.
Hope this answers your question.

[Twynkle]

Hi James,
Yes, There is a 10 year no onward sale agreement that the new owners made with Cunard when they bought the ship.
Hope this answers your question.

Hi Brandon
This information is very interesting!
It would be really helpful if you are able to give us the reference as to where we can find this information, please.
I believe that usually and according to law in the UK, contracts of sale and the information contained therein are regarded as  strictly confidential.
If the contract of sale was carried out under law of the United States, do you know whether the terms and conditions would include the same clauses of confidentiality?
Many thanks.

[Rob Lightbody]

Rosie,

Brandon is correct, and we've discussed it many times here in the past.
Cunard have shown themselves willing to co-operate (e.g. they Permitted the south Africa trip in 2009) and I'm sure they would be again if they were happy with the plan proposed, so the contract is not a show stopper.

[Twynkle]

Rosie,

Brandon is correct, and we've discussed it many times here in the past.
Cunard have shown themselves willing to co-operate (e.g. they Permitted the south Africa trip in 2009) and I'm sure they would be again if they were happy with the plan proposed, so the contract is not a show stopper.

Thanks so much for this, Rob.
From what you write, it seems as if there may be more information available.
If so, it would be interesting to know what other permissions and restrictions were included in the contract.
For example, have Cunard and QE2's present owners agreed the degree of upkeep and maintenance that is acceptable to both parties?
Have Cunard shown themselves willing to help with this too?
And the use of QE2's name, has this been put under restriction (as in 'for QE2's-use' only)?
It seems so important to think (here in this topic) in terms of what it is - that's in QE2's best interest, doesn't it?!

Looking at matters relating to the 175 Anniversary, Cunard are using the hashtag - #forevercunard
Somehow this makes QE2's silence in cold layup seem all the more poignant.
25 years ago, QE2 was Cunard.



 

[June Ingram]

Hi Rosie -

You are correct, and in many people's minds, especially those who have not been on QM2, QE or QV, QE2 still is Cunard and Cunard is QE2.  Our beloved QE2 has made such an impact on those whom she has touched, such an impact as an innovative liner, and such an impact on Cunard due to her longevity and how well she is loved, she is forever a part of history as Cunard.

June

[Twynkle]

I flew into Dubai 3 days ago and she was by herself on the dock, maybe a drydock inspection looming?
I bet the degaussing has been turned off for two years so who knows what corrosion has occurred .

Hi, ship pro!
Hoping you won't mind us getting a bit 'creative' as well as curious here!
Is continual degaussing turned 'on' a requirement for insurance purposes?
If QE2 looks as if she's beyond repair as a habitable 'going concern', then can there be any mileage in exploring what other purposes there are as a viable proposition that she could serve?
Also  - if her hull is heavily corroded - and presuming then that many other systems will also be out of order, then apart from 'razor blades', is there anything / and more that can be done with regards to salvage...?
Any answers will be very gratefully received.
Thanks so much.
Rosie

[cunardqueen]

  Hi Brandon
This information is very interesting!
It would be really helpful if you are able to give us the reference as to where we can find this information, please.
I believe that usually and according to law in the UK, contracts of sale and the information contained therein are regarded as  strictly confidential.

I always thought it was just assumed there was the 10 year rule and that Carnival had never confirmend anything at all.
If this is the case then what have they confirmend.?
 

[Keith Walters]

Even without the branding or ownership, she is instantly recognisable as a Cunard ship.

If she is scrapped, which will be a drawn-out process, many current Cunard guests will be upset and there will be signifcant publicity.

Why would they allow their most ship ever, the best possible advert for Cunard, to be lost?

SS Rotterdam Cruise Hotel has proved that in the right location, done well, a former liner can be a very successful Hotel.

What have they got to lose?

So, Carnival, get her back. 

Do something lovely with her.

She'll be a superb advert for your brands, and will promote trips on the current Cunarders.

It really seems to be a 'no-brainer' to somehow have Cunard/Carnival be involved with taking QE2 back to Britain and using her as a hotel.  This would certainly restore some faith in the company, that the best-known and most-loved passenger ship EVER, is respected enough and treasured enough, to keep her as more than just a 'memory'.  It is a mistake for any business, to under-estimate the feelings of people generally.  It surely would be a 'win-win' for the company and everybody else.
Cheers,
Keith.   

[cameroa]

Regarding the original Contract of Sale, who saw the '10 year rule' or clause? Did that person see or read the Contract of Sale end to end? Did they read any of the small print.
Is it possible that some, not all, is pure speculation, supposition and wishful thinking by those who love her dearly? (I include myself in that too!)

[Twynkle]

Regarding the original Contract of Sale, who saw the '10 year rule' or clause? Did that person see or read the Contract of Sale end to end? Did they read any of the small print.
Is it possible that some, not all, is pure speculation, supposition and wishful thinking by those who love her dearly? (I include myself in that too!)

Hi cameroa
Exactly!  Having also been inarticulately 'banging on' about this for some time, and like you, trying to make  sense of 'networks of guesswork', conjecture, call it 'what-you-will' stuff - it feels a bit like, 'Well, it's been a good run for our money'! And until the truth is known, I guess we can't really 'know' anything...It's always frustrating, isn't it - 'not knowing'!! 
I'm also wondering whether the Contract of Sale will have been prepared with a strict 10 year (if it is that) confidentiality clause associated with it, itself - and not just its contents?
(For example - 'QE2 must retain a red funnel' (as in 'contents');
whereas - the overall document may be legally protected for 10 yrs as well)
Rosie

[cunardqueen]

Is it possible that some, not all, is pure speculation, supposition and wishful thinking by those who love her dearly? (I include myself in that too!)
 

Hasnt it always been speculation that it was 10 years before Dubai could do anything, and that she could never carry fare paying passengers, But also wasnt it generally assumed that she was sold on the basis that the original plan was the only plan in the pipeline.

[cameroa]

It would be interesting to find out if possible, when and by whom the speculation was started ......Dubai ........Carnival Cunard .........Media or a former crew member with contacts?
We will probably never know but it does make you think!!

[Joseph Navin]

In reply to James's post, what if the cause of the QE2 being in Dubai in it's bad condition is that they are ready to scrap her once 2018 rolls around . It all adds up!

[cameroa]

What affect is the constant 40-50c Dubai heat having on the alluminium superstructure? Could there be several negative reasons (apart from the enormous cost)as to why she hasn't been towed to Asia? Her hull would be totally sound but what about her superstructure and her internals within that superstructure? Would it survive a rough tow passage to Asia or back to Britain? I am not a ship expert but I presume, with no engine power, She will have no control over her movements on rough seas other than what was provided by the tow ship. How would she be moved? One ship starboard, one portside and one astern?

[Peter Mugridge]

She should be sound enough to be moved; I can't answer the tow question but I'd have thought at least two ocean going tugs would be required, one ahead of her and one astern as a drag to keep her straight?

[June Ingram]

I would agree with Peter.  With Queen Elizabeth (Lizzy), two tugs had a hard job keeping control of her especially when it was rough.

[Rob Lightbody]

What did SS Rotterdam and SS Norway get?  I'm sure someone told me it would only need one proper full-on ocean going tug.

The hull is 100% (but she'll need dry-docked first) and the superstructure is old, brittle and cracked, and will leak if it rains, but it doesn't really matter...  being unsuitable for constant cruising is different to be being unsuitable for a single tow.,..

I believe I was told that because the superstructure is white, it won't be suffering too badly.  I remember touching it when I was there (40C) and I don't remember it being burning hot.  The main thing I remember is the incredible glare when standing in front of it in the midday Dubai sun, it was completely unbearable.

[Peter Mugridge]

Rob, assuming she is saved and comes home how complex is it to re-skin the superstructure?  Is it basically just a much bigger version of re-skinning a preserved diesel locomotive on a railway?

[Rob Lightbody]

At risk of saying something I shouldn't, I believe a special treatment has been identified which will coat the superstructure so that it will be suitable for a static role for a very long time indeed.

[Keith Walters]

At risk of saying something I shouldn't, I believe a special treatment has been identified which will coat the superstructure so that it will be suitable for a static role for a very long time indeed.

From small (well, not so small, really) beginnings!  Hopefully!!

[cunardqueen]

At risk of saying something I shouldn't, I believe a special treatment has been identified which will coat the superstructure so that it will be suitable for a static role for a very long time indeed. 

So can we deduce that a deal has been done and QE2 is safe for ever more, and shes heading down to Rio..

[Rob Lightbody]

So can we deduce that a deal has been done and QE2 is safe for ever more, and shes heading down to Rio..

you can deduce that if you like! [emoji2]

[Bruce Nicholls]

you can deduce that if you like! [emoji2]

I deduce that we are all still guessing?

[June Ingram]

Any further deducing ?   

[Peter Mugridge]

Any further deducing ?   

I deduce that we cannot possibly deduce yet what will happen.

All we can deduce is that she won't stay where she is forever.  Elementary, my dear forumites.

[skilly56]

Why wont Cunard/Carnival save QE2?

Simple - Cunard is an American company, controlled by the bean counters and the bottom line.
Why would they want to blow money on a UK floating heritage site?

If it was still an English company, then sentimentality, the 'feel-good' factor, & public goodwill would have a strong showing,
and they make all the difference.
Just look at how many people contribute to keeping Avro Vulcan XH558 airborne every year.

Skilly

[PaulInuk]

Its alll arinsons fault

[Lynda Bradford]

It is sad that Cunard/Carnival cannot do more for QE2.  From a business point of view she is no longer their ship, but she is still a famous Cunard ship, and seeing her in an unkept condition, does reflect on Cunard. 

We have had some interesting comments on this topic and it would be good to hear more of our members' opinions
https://www.theqe2story.com/forum/index.php/topic,6693.msg70525.html#msg70525

[Hank Hargrove]

Why wont Cunard/Carnival save QE2?

Simple - Cunard is an American company, controlled by the bean counters and the bottom line.
Why would they want to blow money on a UK floating heritage site?

If it was still an English company, then sentimentality, the 'feel-good' factor, & public goodwill would have a strong showing,
and they make all the difference.
Just look at how many people contribute to keeping Avro Vulcan XH558 airborne every year.

Skilly

I agree. Sadly, most shipping lines have treated things purely as business, including Carnival Corporation, but the QE2 might still be a big enough name to influence things, whether or not Cunard is owned by Carnival. Shipping lines in general have been more in it for the money than for the preservation aspects, and many people don't have regret until after everyone realizes what has been lost. There are exceptions. NYK took back control of the Hikawa Maru about 10 years ago and Cunard has been involved in some way with three hotel ship projects. One has come to naught, one is uncertain, and one has been successful on and off in "Californian Exile" as John Maxine-Graham put it (and Cunard might have sold the Queen Mary for scrap had the Long Beach bid not come along). P&O did sell the Oriana for further use and it ultimately took a typhoon to destroy the Oriana. They did sell the Canberra for scrap (much to my regret), but I don't know if there was a serious preservation bid anyhow.

[Peter Mugridge]

Given the way Canberra's demise was announced at short notice, I doubt there would have been time for anyone to get a bid together?

[Derek Boyd]

I agree very much with Lynda Bradford's posting of 20th February 2016. She has summed up perfectly my own thoughts on this issue.
When I read my copy of 'Cunarder' about how wonderful QE2 was for Cunard, and her contribution and place in history through their 175 years, it makes me choke that here we are with their 'much loved QE2' (sarcasm) lying in a somewhat abandoned state with a very uncertain future.
It makes absolutely no sense to read this drivel. I don't believe a word of what they are saying and I would tell them that in person if I had the chance. Pitiful. 'much loved' Oh really?? Strange way of showing love.

[Hank Hargrove]

Given the way Canberra's demise was announced at short notice, I doubt there would have been time for anyone to get a bid together?

I doubt there was time, although I believe someone said that there had been talk of one (probably not serious). I wouldn't know, though. I probably saw it on the internet and I was only two when the Canberra sailed off into the sunset...