Cunards new Queen

Des, for a number of years now P&O Australia has not been going that well.
Only did one cruise with them, never again.
Problem was they gave most interest to the 18 to 35 who would spend all day in the bar.

Many who did a cruise with them said like us, never again with them.

As with Princess, Cunard, Holland America, Seabourne and Costa, Carnival is the overall 'owner' of the others.

They will now be rebadging all P&O Australia as Carnival ships from next season.
A spokes man for Carnival said this is to improve the overall service of all Carnival company ships.

Due to an increase of some 15% in docking charges Princess with no longer sail from Melbourne, a couple of other companies are of the same mind.
State gov said the money is needed to up grade the terminal, which currently must be one of the worst anywhere.
For years the ferry to Tassie sailed from there but all govs have done nothing.

Carnival ships have a good name here as great family cruise ships, and many families do like to cruise.

I think the days of proper cruising has gone, maybe that's why P&O are the way they are? Floating holiday parks are the norm now. As you say John in OZ, they just want the big drink spenders on board.
I often ask people, especially in the lifts, "Are you enjoying the cruise?" Most older people will answer "It's OK, but there's just too many people on board. We like the older, quieter ships". Most of P&Os proper cruise boats are gone now, never to return.
There's nothing better than sitting in a chair in the sun or shade, looking at the sea, or land you are passing. These days you have no choice, it's just where you can find anywhere to sit away from the noise of the all day long disco, big screen, or just the noise of rowdy holiday makers, and their elbows knocking yours.

I remember when running of Fort Lauderdale and Miami (Stena roro's) there was a so called cruise ship , think she was called the Discovery.
She was locally referred to as the Booze cruise ship. She only sailed up and down the coast for 4 or 8 hours? I believe it was free booze, the main purpose was it was also a casino ship. No doubt the free booze was get the punters drunk and then fleece them at the tables.

Think at that time gambling casinos were not legal in Florida? that was in the 1980's

#41 John increasing harbour dues will apply to all ships as assume they will include light dues as well and these are usually paid on the ships gross tonnage , they may be shooting themselves in the foot. I was on a small survey vessel working out of Sydney in 1998 and using one of the passenger berths which cost the ship $78 dollars per 24 hours , quite reasonable I thought as this included as much fresh water as you wanted as long as you loaded it yourself. JS.
I say shooting themselves in the foot as am sure the Melbournesiders like the money the tourists bring into the Council and Government coffers. JS
John like JP like your 2 diets but can’t tick the like box as the post again is like a sheet of foolscap. Tick is here . JS

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James Curry

I remember when running of Fort Lauderdale and Miami (Stena roro's) there was a so called cruise ship , think she was called the Discovery.
She was locally referred to as the Booze cruise ship. She only sailed up and down the coast for 4 or 8 hours? I believe it was free booze, the main purpose was it was also a casino ship. No doubt the free booze was get the punters drunk and then fleece them at the tables.

Think at that time gambling casinos were not legal in Florida? that was in the 1980's

---

I think that is common practice in casinos, I used to visit the casino in the Intercontinental Hotel in Curacao occasionally, free drinks when gambling but difficult to attract a waitress initially but once you started winning they were hovering all the time.

P&O Ships are sure not what they used to be , in our days they were a lot smaller and to me a lot better. Always had full Passenger loads, no matter where!
Ships like the Himalaya and the rest were to me the best , along with other Passenger Liners of the era!
Bring back the past!! LOL

John.
I think the NSW Govt where ahead of the game, they updated the terminal here a long time ago to handle the bigger ships.
Des

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Doc Vernon

P&O Ships are sure not what they used to be , in our days they were a lot smaller and to me a lot better. Always had full Passenger loads, no matter where!
Ships like the Himalaya and the rest were to me the best , along with other Passenger Liners of the era!
Bring back the past!! LOL

---

Different type of passengers too.

Having tries a few companies we find Princess caters for a mix, families at Christmas time and many retirees at other times.
A good number of younger omnes as well.
None of their ships take more than about 3800 passengers so we find there is plenty of room.
Never had a trouble finding a quiet spot to sit, away from the pool it can be very restful.

But each to their own, some love the large numbers and are not worried about where the ship goes.
Thye are not our type, and over the years we have met some very good people many of which we still keep in touch with.

Off on our next one in July.

Further to the story of P&P going from Oz.

Not the only ones to leave.
One problem put forward by Carnival is the limited numbers in Asia Pacific region.

Now Viking and Virgin are to no longer call any Oz ports home during the seasons.

But they have only themselves to blame.
Both say, 'no casino, no children'

That does not bode well for the average Aussie, we love our casinos even if we only go now and then, but families love to go in large numbers taking the kids of all ages with them.
Companies that say 'no kids' are off the list for good.

Cunard, a bit stiff upper lip for many here, thongs and shorts in the restaurant, that is a walk the plank offence.
So the Queen Elizabeth, which has sailed for a number of seasons from here, will now be permanent in the Carrieann.