Has Cunard *really* gone down hill in the last couple years?

[keithm]

My husband, toddler son and I were on a TA in July 2009 and thought it was absolutely fantastic. We're considering booking another for this summer, but in reading this board many say that Cunard and the TAs in particular have gone down hill the last couple of years.

 

Now, I remember people saying that when I was checking the boards back in 2009, and we still loved the crossing. A lot of the complaints seem to be the same now as they were then (mediocre food, run-down rooms/facilities, poor service), and we didn't think any of those were justified at that point. However, we didn't have a point of comparison then, now we do...are we going to be disappointed if we book another one?

 

(PS: The $10 charge on the Kings Court restaurants doesn't bother us...we didn't eat there then and we won't eat there this time, except maybe to feed our son from the one buffet section when we want to enjoy an adult dinner in Britannia)

We've done 6 voyages so far. The second one had some quality issues in the stateroom. We were given an extra $500OBC to rectify the problem. We applied that to our third trip. The last 2 trips have been in the Grills. The service there was absolutly stellar(as it should be)We're looking at the QV for either Hawaii(feb.2012) or Panama Caribbean(Jan.2012)We'd like to do the Grills, but are still waiting for prices to drop more. A PG on the Panama trip is down to about $3300/PP.

[bobby1119]

I regretfully concur with some of the posters above that the standards are dropping quite dramatically.

 

Two recent cruises in Britannia were marked by good waitstaff service but very forgetful dining. Another recent cruise in QG was even more disappointing. Very polished service simply does not make up for really poor food. I had lunch recently in QG during a NY visit. The food was very unappetizing and barely edible.

 

I am not sure what is going on, but I do sense a seachange for the worse, and this troubles me given my affinity for Cunard.

 

:(

[Artemis]

We took our first QM2 voyage in July, so I can't do a "then and now" comparison based on personal experience.

 

However, we did go through an "expectations vs. reality" check. As wonderful as she is :) (in so many ways that have absolutely nothing to do with cruise staples like food, service and accommodations), we were surprised to discover QM2's not a "luxury" travel product. At least in Britannia class...and thus far, I'm unpersuaded Grills class is competitive in the luxury travel market.

 

Based on hype and Cunard's liberal use of the word "luxury" (which doesn't end when you embark--the Cruise Director reminded us several times of the "luxury cruise" we were experiencing :(), we expected QM2 to be elegant from bow to stern and offer a premium level of hospitality goods and services in every respect. Or at a minimum, a step up from the mass market cruises we had enjoyed and something like a Four Seasons hotel with historical influences preserved.

 

Instead, our QM2 experience was akin to staying at one of those European grand dame hotels that is now past her prime and being operated as a Best Western. The rub is, QM2’s only seven years old. :eek: So she's hardly past her prime, and a dry dock refreshment isn't the cure for all that ails her.

 

I think my mind was simply tricked into thinking she's a "faded glory" because the other Cunard theme that runs alongside luxury is "legacy." The Cunard history is, indeed, fascinating and important. I loved the Maritime Quest. But focusing on the grand old days naturally sets the stage for a "then and now" contrast, which the current iteration of QM2 simply cannot win. It makes one wonder if anyone in HQ has stepped ashore (or on the competition) in years.

 

Band-Aid Solution: I think Cunard would see immediate results in guest satisfaction and positive buzz here and around the trade if they simply toned down their own hype AND stepped up their performance of basics like food and service. It's been said that they follow these boards, but what a corporate waste; they obviously fail to act on the knowledge mined. From this forum alone, we know they would instantly hit a home run with their very influential online fans and critics if they'd simply:

 

• take meaningful action to improve Britannia dining--pending a full review and implementation of indicated corrective action, they could get a jump start that would cost nothing by developing more contemporary menus and addressing flawed galley operations that produce, e.g., mushy fish; and

• spend the labor dollars necessary to correct the glaring understaffing situation in the dining room and stateroom housekeeping.

 

They should also pick out a few of the top complaints and tackle them, e.g.:

 

• ditch the laughable Pol Acker and develop a signature "welcome aboard" greeting and/or gift that makes a wildly positive, lasting first impression (to add insult to the injury of Pol Acker, we were not personally greeted until we sat down for dinner that night, a lapse I think most industry experts would find inexcusable); and

• make it someone's mission to find a way to serve a decent cup of coffee!

 

The Big Fix for Sustainability: My theory is, QM2 suffers from an identity crisis and thus lacks that savoir faire that comes with knowing who you are. Is she old? Is she new? Cunard needs to put its most talented minds to the task of answering this question:

 

What unifying elements can bridge past and present and give QM2 her own distinctive identity so she remains as relevant and desirable to discriminating 21st century travelers as she was to their parents and grandparents?

 

I’m not talking about replacing the ballroom with a skating rink or taking her down to the studs ala the Savoy. But some well-considered creative enhancements--including a few that don’t cost anything but a different conceptual or practical approach--could be transformative and insure the future of the product.

 

Take entertainment, which is one of QM2's best features. I think everyone agrees the nightly "big show" is the weakest link in the entertainment programme yet costs them the most to produce. Why would anyone in their right mind think it's okay to put on outdated song and dance revues to a sophisticated audience that likely saw the latest West End or Broadway show before boarding. :confused: And how can you juxtapose an erudite afternoon lecturer with a stand-up musician/comedian who hasn't been a Vegas "has been" in decades?

 

Or how about look and public area usage? The décor shipwide is so uninspired you could blink and imagine yourself in a nondescript lounge or dining room anywhere in the world. There are underused public spaces that could be filled with happy, revenue-producing passengers if someone would only figure out how best to retask them. (I gather one initiative already underway is to do something with those rooms most distant of the King's Court buffet.)

 

Bottom line: I don't think QM2 is reaching her potential. We grew quite fond of her in just one crossing and very much look forward to sailing with Cunard again, but only because of our fabulous fellow passengers, the terrific staff and crew, and the "anchors" of the entertainment and activities programme--guest lecturers, the abundance of high quality music and dance options, history and science activities, etc. Cunard does get credit for making that happen. But pending significant improvements in their delivery of food, service and accommodations, we won't be paying more to better our stateroom or move into Grills--there are plenty of other places we can go to get true "bang for the luxury buck." (And as a shareholder, I have to say, that does frustrate me.)

[Just2guys]

We most definitely have to agree with Artemis' comments regarding "luxury". Having traveled both in Britannia class and the Grills, Cunard in no way currently equals overall---in either class---the same experience that one encounters on the acknowledged luxury lines (Regent, Crystal, Seabourn, etc.). Grill pricing in particular is comparable to those lines...and oftentimes higher.

 

We've been voyaging with Cunard for over 15 years now...and once-upon-a-time Cunard was definitely in the same competitive league with those lines---and very often better. While a Cunard voyage is still a unique and wonderful experience in its own way, it is just no longer in the same category as those lines. The comparison now is usually to Celebrity or Princess.

[resistk]

Well, whatever standards Cunard and MSC have allowed to slip won't be an issue for you any longer since you won't be sailing with either of them again. Surely you won't keep going back for service, food and ammenities that only get worse.

 

I have two TAs and an Adriatic crusie on the QV booked for 2012 which is why I am complaining now. Maybe those dolts at Cunard will make some constructive changes though an 11 day drydock isn't going to do much. They can and should cure the food problem as well as the worn out state rooms easy enough. They are capable of turning out great lunches, but for some reason dinners and breakfast are a problem. The prices are not cheap so the food should be as good as Celebrity or Princess. I like many others depend on the TA for transportation which is why I would not like to see things deteriorate further.

[Salacia]

PARTIAL QUOTE

 

I am not sure what is going on, but I do sense a seachange for the worse, and this troubles me given my affinity for Cunard.

 

:(

 

Bobby, I share both your concern and your affinity for Cunard. -Salacia

[Norfolk Brit]

.

 

What unifying elements can bridge past and present and give QM2 her own distinctive identity so she remains as relevant and desirable to discriminating 21st century travelers as she was to their parents and grandparents?

 

You've raised some very interesting points, but I suspect most of our collective grandparents couldn't have afforded Cunard...

 

Mary

[Cruachan]

You've raised some very interesting points, but I suspect most of our collective grandparents couldn't have afforded Cunard...

 

Mary

 

If I had told my parents that I would one day sail on a Cunard ship, not once, but eight times, they would have told me to stop getting ideas above my station and that such things were "not for the likes of us". And, incidentally, they couldn't have afforded the taxi fair from Southampton Central to the docks.

 

I love Cunard just as it is. To my tasteless, undiscriminating, working class eyes, it all looks just fine and the food is a delight. I wouldn't change one single detail. I'm only grateful that people like me are allowed on board at all.

 

J

[Whitemarsh]

I love Cunard just as it is. To my tasteless, undiscriminating, working class eyes, it all looks just fine and the food is a delight. I wouldn't change one single detail. I'm only grateful that people like me are allowed on board at all.

 

J

 

I'm with you. I found Cunard to be delightful and I thought the food and service were excellent. And I do get around; a couple of weeks prior to boarding in Southampton I had been in Paris, where I dined at Benoît, which a 1-star Michelin restaurant owned by Alain Ducasse. I thought the Princess Grill on QM2 was better.

 

In NYC I dined at Le Bernardin which is one of only five restaurants in New York awarded three Michelin stars. And again, I preferred the Princess Grill on QM2.

 

So I guess it just goes to show. Some people can dine in some of the best restaurants in Paris and New York City, and be quite happy with the food and service on Cunard. Whilst others, who perhaps don't eat at such establishments are highly critical of Cunard's offerings. :confused:

[pepperrn]

If I had told my parents that I would one day sail on a Cunard ship, not once, but eight times... J

 

My life-long love of ships and the sea started, I think, from when I was very young and taken to Southampton by my father to see "the Big Ships". Some of the early harbour tours we went on as a family, I was too young to remember in detail, but they made an impression. Later ones I do recall easily, I can still see in my mind the hulls of the Union Castle Line ships, The Queen Elizabeth, The United States, The France, P&O liners. I'm told that I saw many others as well.

 

My father said that he had wanted to travel on a transatlantic liner since he was a boy, esp a Cunard "Queen". But that it was only for the super-rich who could afford to travel for pleasure, and therefore he could only dream of making such a voyage, he had "more chance of walking on the moon".

 

So you can imagine the look on my parent's faces when they boarded Queen Mary 2 for a first cruise in 2008.

 

And, in May of this year, at almost 80, and still not wealthy, my parents made that transatlantic voyage to New York, in Britannia Grade, on Cunard's QM2. In luxury that steerage passengers, when he was a boy, couldn't have dreamed of.

[moniquet]

Artemis, excellent points. Couldn't have put it better myself:)

[The Real PM]

I absolutely can not understand how anyone can say in all honesty that Cunard has gone downhill in the past couple of years. . It really bothers me because it is just not true. The other comment that really bothers me is that standards have lowered. I always wonder what standards they are talking about. I was on the QM2 in early 2008 and again in late 2010. I saw absolutely no difference whatsoever in the ship and certainly she has neither gone downhill or lowered standards..

 

As far as I am concerned the QM2 ia as beautiful , and top notch a ship as she was two and a half years before.. Service was still excellent, food was very good, the attitude of most passengers continued to be civil and respectful, activities were just as stimulating, and the ports were just as diverse and interesting as before. But most of all the ship itself, as does the other Cunard ships, remain just as quietly and classically elegant as the prior cruise. And there is one more important thing about the QM2 and that is that there isn’t a ship out there that can handle the inclement weather of the north Atlantic better than the QM2.. She is one of the only surviving ocean liners left. Or perhaps she is the only true ocean liner out there.

 

I believe that some of the mega ships have become a new standard for ships. Most of these huge arks are as much like a ship as your local mall . And in fact many are very much like malls. They offer few views of the ocean, have activities that are diverse, but silly and non-stimulating and those are aplenty. They have all kinds of shops and gardens and things that look like parks. These ships are made to feel as if they are anything but ships. Passengers become shocked when there is any sort of movement that resembles a movement by a ship. So it could be that some of those people who are complaining that Cunard has gone downhill have accepted the new non-ship as the standard they are looking for. If so, then there are an abundance of that type ship to go around for every one.

 

And I truly believe that many who complain and find fault, say they are disappointed, or feel that standards have slipped would find fault and complain about most anything they do. Perhaps it is a first cruise or perhaps they have never been aboard a Cunard ship or perhaps they are frequent Cunard passengers and are just plain disagreeable people and complaining is a way of life. We all have seen those types. Or just maybe they are people who frequent other cruise lines and just want to pull the name of the Cunard line down for reasons only known to them.

Whatever their reasons, I maintain that Cunard, in my opinion, remains a wonderful cruise line, classic, elegant, enjoyable, very civil and yes, luxurious. But most importantly Cunard continues to maintain all the things that make sailing vessels what they always were and what they should be and that is for them to remain as true ships.

[Cruachan]

...So I guess it just goes to show. Some people can dine in some of the best restaurants in Paris and New York City, and be quite happy with the food and service on Cunard. Whilst others, who perhaps don't eat at such establishments are highly critical of Cunard's offerings. :confused:

 

Well, the topmost rung of my on shore dining experience is limited to the Asda cafeteria. Maybe that's why I enjoy Cunard so much. :D:D:D

 

J

[Artemis]

You've raised some very interesting points, but I suspect most of our collective grandparents couldn't have afforded Cunard....

 

Hmmm. It is interesting to inject fare structure into the discussion. I actually think fares are too low. :eek:

 

I wholeheartedly agree it is desirable that the Cunard experience be accessible to more people than it was in our grandparents' day. But that necessarily means we cannot compare the standards of Cunard present to those of Cunard past! It also forces us to become dispassionate when evaluating the implications of consumer-friendly pricing, including product quality, operational efficiencies, market competitiveness, sustainability, etc.

 

I'm truly thrilled so many of you are wholly satisfied with your Brittania experiences.

[resistk]

If Cunard cannot provide above average experiences in Britannia, the Grill is irrelevant. Food should be above average across the board. Right now, it is worse than other Carnival lines.,

[vjmatty]

We most definitely have to agree with Artemis' comments regarding "luxury". Having traveled both in Britannia class and the Grills, Cunard in no way currently equals overall---in either class---the same experience that one encounters on the acknowledged luxury lines (Regent, Crystal, Seabourn, etc.). Grill pricing in particular is comparable to those lines...and oftentimes higher.

 

We've been voyaging with Cunard for over 15 years now...and once-upon-a-time Cunard was definitely in the same competitive league with those lines---and very often better. While a Cunard voyage is still a unique and wonderful experience in its own way, it is just no longer in the same category as those lines. The comparison now is usually to Celebrity or Princess.

 

I am finding "luxury" to be an elusive term when it comes to cruising.... some will say it has to do with the size of the ship, yet Crystal's large ships seem to qualify, and the two Princess small ships do not. Also, Regent et al might be labeled luxury but don't seem to be very elegant in that they are less formal than Cunard. I really do not see any clear definition of "luxury" other than being high-priced, which seems a rather empty quality. So until the cruise industry clearly defines what that means, Cunard isn't really out of line in claiming to be a luxury type experience.

[Louise D]

I regretfully concur with some of the posters above that the standards are dropping quite dramatically.

 

Two recent cruises in Britannia were marked by good waitstaff service but very forgetful dining. Another recent cruise in QG was even more disappointing. Very polished service simply does not make up for really poor food. I had lunch recently in QG during a NY visit. The food was very unappetizing and barely edible.

 

I am not sure what is going on, but I do sense a seachange for the worse, and this troubles me given my affinity for Cunard.

 

:(

 

I agree with you Bobby. I do not have any "affinity" for Cunard anymore. I think it is wrong to try to liken the present version of Cunard to the one we remember from ten years ago. It is totally different in my opinion and Cunard is not for me anymore.

[Griller]

I am finding "luxury" to be an elusive term when it comes to cruising.... some will say it has to do with the size of the ship, yet Crystal's large ships seem to qualify, and the two Princess small ships do not. Also, Regent et al might be labeled luxury but don't seem to be very elegant in that they are less formal than Cunard. I really do not see any clear definition of "luxury" other than being high-priced, which seems a rather empty quality. So until the cruise industry clearly defines what that means, Cunard isn't really out of line in claiming to be a luxury type experience.

 

I'm a big fan of Ocean Princess, maybe it isn't sold as luxury class but its very comfortable, intimate, and the friendly efficient crew are really dedicated to giving passengers the best experience they are able to, they tell you that and its a fact.The crew have chosen to work on a smaller ship as its what they like, they are enthusiastic about traditional cruise values and work hard to maintain them. Some crew have moved from Cunard as they were no longer happy working on the big ships of Cunard.

Ocean P generally costs more per day than the larger Princess ships but is worth it, and the dining IMHO has much better choice and quality than Cunard offer in Britannia these days.

I have given up on the Grills on Cunard for the last several years so have no valid current opinion on them but have many fond memories of QE2 Grills.

Yes I still sail Cunard but won't pay much for it, most recent was $60 per day, and therefore I don't expect much luxury so I'm not complaining.

[Salacia]

PARTIAL QUOTE

Yes I still sail Cunard but won't pay much for it, most recent was $60 per day, and therefore I don't expect much luxury so I'm not complaining.

 

 

60USD per person? On a Cunard ship? After 9 voyages since 2008, our average cost per person, including fuel surcharge and H&D charge, was 250USD per person, double occupancy, Britannia Category balcony. On board charges, tours additional. Insurance and transport to and from the port also additional, as are tips for hard working staff, plus a few new clothes I buy just to feel spiffy. So the cost per day does vary, as does expections.

[Whitemarsh]

I had lunch recently in QG during a NY visit. The food was very unappetizing and barely edible.

 

How do you score a lunch in the QG if you're not a paying passenger? I thought they didn't allow family and friends onboard?

[vjmatty]

I'm a big fan of Ocean Princess, maybe it isn't sold as luxury class but its very comfortable, intimate, and the friendly efficient crew are really dedicated to giving passengers the best experience they are able to, they tell you that and its a fact.The crew have chosen to work on a smaller ship as its what they like, they are enthusiastic about traditional cruise values and work hard to maintain them. Some crew have moved from Cunard as they were no longer happy working on the big ships of Cunard.

Ocean P generally costs more per day than the larger Princess ships but is worth it, and the dining IMHO has much better choice and quality than Cunard offer in Britannia these days.

 

I was very happy with the Pacific Princess as well. In fact, for the Black Sea next year I've chosen her over the QE, though more for the itinerary than for the cruise line, in spite of the cost being almost $1000 more pp for a 12 day sailing. I agree with your assessment of the small Princess ships being more comfortable and intimate, and the crew was more efficient, at least in the MDR. We were not very lucky with our cabin steward who was a bit aloof but there were some rough sea days so many were probably not at their best. Most were top notch however....some going that extra mile, like while shopping in a Ponta Delgada grocery for wine, the maitre d who was from Portugal not only translated but helped us with some recommendations. After that he ended up helping other passengers before heading back to the ship.

 

Still, I find Cunard to be enjoyable as well, though my most recent sailings have been on QV. My problems with QM2 are less about the food quality, service or wear and tear on the ship.... I just find her to be too crowded. I can never get a seat at Sir Samuels, afternoon tea is a mad house and getting tender tickets reminds me of the stock exchange.

[moniquet]

I thought the food was fine on QM2. Not exceptional and have had better on other cruiselines. Service was awful at our table of six. The wine waiter:confused: knew less about wine than we did...when we could actually catch him to order:D

 

One of the things I did notice, the bed cushions were really poor quality. seemed like the ones they sell in UK markets for £3 each

[deck chair]

Hello

 

As one who just returned from back to back crossings on Queen Mary 2 and a long time Cunard passenger, (B2 category) I can with great energy tell the original poster to IGNORE all this talk about the ship going downhill almost as if she is sinking into the waves.

 

I will post my impressions in the next few days most of them very positive. To give you a hint, I can report the service continues to shine but more and more of those soft spots that others have reported are appearing in the carpeting and could pose a safety hazard.....More to come!

 

Deck Chair

[Jimsgirl]

Yes Deckchair, there are moe and more soft spots, cannot think what could be causing them, but they are proliferating. TA Aug /Sept 2011

 

There was a mention in the daily new sheets, that some of staff had not completed their training at Cunard's School wherever that may be. That they were on board to learn the job!

Obviously if you get one of these untrained people as your cabin steward or server , you are not going to get "White Star service" and will be disappointed with your experience .

 

So let us not be too quick to judge those who have this misfortune, and we should be sure that when we comment on how absurd we feel their comments are, and that these people are "whiners" we are judging Britannia with Britannia and Grills with Grills.

Two staterooms on the same deck, same grade,are not going to get the same steward, they could be the length of the ship apart. and two tables in the dining room can be at differeint times and have completely different servers, wine stewards etc

 

.

[Just2guys]

I am finding "luxury" to be an elusive term when it comes to cruising.... some will say it has to do with the size of the ship, yet Crystal's large ships seem to qualify, and the two Princess small ships do not. Also, Regent et al might be labeled luxury but don't seem to be very elegant in that they are less formal than Cunard. I really do not see any clear definition of "luxury" other than being high-priced, which seems a rather empty quality. So until the cruise industry clearly defines what that means, Cunard isn't really out of line in claiming to be a luxury type experience.

 

Agreed; everyone has a different definition of "luxury"...and perhaps that is why there is such disagreement on this board at to where Cunard fits into the larger scheme of things these days. For us, it really isn't the size of the ship---we had a very memorable experience on the QM2 a couple of years ago. Nor is it simply about dressing up---we had another memorable experience on the very informal Paul Gaugin when it was still owned by Regent. Rather, for us, "luxury" is being on a ship where the crew and staff are always there to assist and to help make the voyage special. Once upon a time Cunard excelled at this.

 

As we've seen from reading these posts, food and entertainment are most often very subjective---whether onboard or in Paris or New York. That's not our purpose in criticising any cruise, although there is a basic presumption that at a certain price-point the quality of the shipboard experience (including food and entertaintment) should be very much above average. But, more importantly, on any ship---whether serving 200 or 2,000 passengers---things are going to go wrong. From our point of view, a luxury ship is one where the crew and staff work together to resolve these issues before anyone is compelled to make comment upon them. Or, if things do reach a point where the situation has to be brought to someone's attention, an apology is usually forthcoming on-the-spot, and things are immediately made right. Again, all helping to keep the experience "special".

 

In explanation toward others' comments about some of the folks responding to this thread---we are not demanding people. Having worked in customer-facing businesses, we are all too aware of how many things can go wrong with both a process and with communication---especially in cross-cultural environments. In fact, some people have said that we are probably too placid in letting things go by that others would comment on, simply because we understand how precarious a complex operation can be. Additionally, we have traveled all over the world---with both first-class and "tourist" experiences in the major (and often minor) cities of the world. With that being said then, our idea of luxury is to feel confident when we board a ship that when/if things go wrong they will be righted without having to keep fighting and fighting and fighting someone to make it right...and to have a crew and staff that really seems to want us to have a "special" experience.

 

That is where we feel Cunard is falling down of late. The ships are still (usually) beautiful, the experience onboard (usually) uniquely Cunard. As several posters have mentioned, we too used to feel like we had "come home" when we boarded a Cunard vessel---that were being transported to a world unto itself where only good things happened. That hasn't been the case recently for us...nor, it appears, for many others.