Will Cunard change its Home Port?

[Trevor33]

Southampton is the main current home port for its ships in the UK. |Whilst bobbing down the Solent is fine there are many other ports and routes out of the UK that may be more convenient. When the cruising resumes is it likely that some of the Cunard ships will relocate to a different home port or perhaps individual ships could relocate to "Home Ports" in another country? As an example perhaps ....Newcastle could become a new home port and focus its ships and save monies by travelling to Scandinavia and perhaps the Baltic more cost effectively for Cunard to help them recoup lost revenue and perhaps make the cruise cost cheaper?

[Austcruiser84]

13 minutes ago, Trevor33 said:

Southampton is the main current home port for its ships in the UK. |Whilst bobbing down the Solent is fine there are many other ports and routes out of the UK that may be more convenient. When the cruising resumes is it likely that some of the Cunard ships will relocate to a different home port or perhaps individual ships could relocate to "Home Ports" in another country? As an example perhaps ....Newcastle could become a new home port and focus its ships and save monies by travelling to Scandinavia and perhaps the Baltic more cost effectively for Cunard to help them recoup lost revenue and perhaps make the cruise cost cheaper?

 

I doubt it. Southampton - while not quite Cunard's ancestral home port - is most convenient for sailing to the US and Europe. Plus it's closer to where I'd imagine the majority of its UK passengers live (the south is wealthier than the north and all). 

 

We know that QE is destined to home port in Melbourne, Tokyo and Vancouver on a year round basis once the new ship begins service. They've been trialling that most successfully (and highly lucrative) over the past couple of seasons (until recently). I'd say it's a matter of when (rather than if) QE resumes as an Asia-Pacific based Cunarder. 

 

QM2 will certainly remain Southampton based. And depending on economics, we may see the new ship compete for Mediterranean passengers in a resumption of the old fly in fly out cruises that QE and QV used to do, but with the return to Southampton once the high season ends.  

 

It is doubtful Cunard would try to enter the Caribbean market as its saturated with big ships. More South America cruises could be in order though. 

 

It is almost certain though that Cunard will stagger the return of its ships once the lockdowns begin to lift. It will take time for the cruising public to come back in numbers enough to warrant sending the ships out to sea. 

[BlueRiband]

According to a quick lookup it appears that there is no cruise terminal in Newcastle yet.  While the airport is about a 30min drive one site says there is "not much to explore".   It's really close to the North Sea but 165 km (103 m) from Edinburgh and approx. 446 km (277 m) from London.  It definitely would be inconvenient for operating TAs and Med cruises.

[Ray66]

9 minutes ago, BlueRiband said:

According to a quick lookup it appears that there is no cruise terminal in Newcastle yet.  While the airport is about a 30min drive one site says there is "not much to explore".   It's really close to the North Sea but 165 km (103 m) from Edinburgh and approx. 446 km (277 m) from London.  It definitely would be inconvenient for operating TAs and Med cruises.

 

Yes there is. The Port of Tyne. Marella, Fred Olsen and Cruise & Maritime start their cruises there.

 

https://www.portoftyne.co.uk/passenger-information/cruise-schedule

 

 

Edited April 19, 2020 by Ray66

[exlondoner]

Another futile speculation really. 😀

[Trevor33]

Perhaps Cunard will split up its ships like many other cruise lines and save on fuel costs by offering cruises out of different ports and do more fly cruises? It is the passenger that pays the air fare after all. It may be a way that the company lowers its costs in future.

[ace2542]

47 minutes ago, Trevor33 said:

Perhaps Cunard will split up its ships like many other cruise lines and save on fuel costs by offering cruises out of different ports and do more fly cruises? It is the passenger that pays the air fare after all. It may be a way that the company lowers its costs in future.

You mean increase their profits don't you. I doubt moving to a port will lead to a reduction in ticket price.

 

Liverpool might be a home port for the QM2. That might be a closer to new york than Southampton and also that would be tying in with Cunard history.

[Host Hattie]

Cunard have had fly cruise seasons recently, generally the air fare was included in the total price.

I'm not sure how using a different home port would reduce costs.

[Trevor33]

From the passenger point of view it could be more expensive but from Cunard's point of view it could greatly reduce the cost of fuel. Ace 2542 has a point with regards to Liverpool, Which is the old White Star port would be easier for northern ports, possibly Canada, New York maybe. Newcastle is already used as a port by Fred Olsen, C&M and would be closer to Scandinavia, Fjords etc. 

[BigMac1953]

The ships' home port is Hamilton, Bermuda, and that's not going to change anytime soon.

 

They may use ports around the world as temporary bases, but anything else is nothing but pure speculation.

[zider]

40 minutes ago, BigMac1953 said:

The ships' home port is Hamilton, Bermuda, and that's not going to change anytime soon.

 

They may use ports around the world as temporary bases, but anything else is nothing but pure speculation. Southampton is the Home Hamilton, Bermuda, is where the ships are Flagged but that could change soon  as the Q.E is making her way back to the uk as she was flagged  I Bermuder  

 

[kentchris]

1 hour ago, ace2542 said:

Liverpool might be a home port for the QM2. That might be a closer to new york than Southampton and also that would be tying in with Cunard history.

Not very attractive for US pax travelling to/from TAs though - Southampton is much better placed being comparatively close to Heathrow.

[North West Newbie]

1 hour ago, kentchris said:

Not very attractive for US pax travelling to/from TAs though - Southampton is much better placed being comparatively close to Heathrow.

 

Manchester Airport serves the US very well and it is closer to Liverpool than Southampton is to Heathrow.

[Chelsea1]

Carnival put significant financial investment, together with British Ports, into refurbishing facilities and expanding the capacity of Southampton, so I doubt if Cunard will move to a different home port for the UK based ships. Assume Cunard have favourable berthing rights at Southampton.

 

Port Tyne (Newcastle) facility has 2 berths and can handle liners with LOA length up to 300 M (985 ft) and maximum passenger capacity is 2000, so this would exclude the QM2 (LOA 345M, max 2,695 passengers) and would just about accommodate the QE and QV.

 

Liverpool has much better capacity, but not the global transport links, and is also further from Hamburg and the very popular weekend / transatlantic extensions. However it would be nice if Cunard did more Liverpool calls.

 

[exlondoner]

11 hours ago, kentchris said:

Not very attractive for US pax travelling to/from TAs though - Southampton is much better placed being comparatively close to Heathrow.

 

And much easier to reach from Hamburg where so many Atlantic crossings begin or end.

[ovccruiser]

The Queen christened both QM2 and Queen Elizabeth in Southampton and Camilla the Queen Victoria also in Southampton, I doubt very much they would change their home port. I do hope my memory is correct lol

Edited April 20, 2020 by ovccruiser

[navybankerteacher]

On 4/19/2020 at 4:34 PM, North West Newbie said:

 

Manchester Airport serves the US very well and it is closer to Liverpool than Southampton is to Heathrow.

But many more US types would prefer to bookend a cruise with a stay in London than in the Midlands.  Hard to say getting around Ireland would be better than directly into the Channel for going  to New York — and certainly Med, most other European destinations and southern climes generally argue for Southampton.  

[North West Newbie]

14 minutes ago, navybankerteacher said:

But many more US types would prefer to bookend a cruise with a stay in London than in the Midlands.  Hard to say getting around Ireland would be better than directly into the Channel for going  to New York — and certainly Med, most other European destinations and southern climes generally argue for Southampton.  

 

Liverpool is not in the Midlands and there are plenty of other options for the "US types" to visit in or from our locality. Plus London is only 2 hours away by train if they don't fancy a change. Samuel Cunard had no problem navigating his way from Liverpool to Halifax in 1840.

[Austcruiser84]

4 hours ago, North West Newbie said:

 

Liverpool is not in the Midlands and there are plenty of other options for the "US types" to visit in or from our locality. Plus London is only 2 hours away by train if they don't fancy a change. Samuel Cunard had no problem navigating his way from Liverpool to Halifax in 1840.

 

Except in the early days of Samuel Cunard, transporting mail was the priority. The new railways meant easy national transportation and Liverpool was ideally situated. It wasn't about passengers, who certainly were not holidaying in the 1840s.  

 

Southampton today remains the logical, economical choice for the holidaying purpose these ships serve. 

[navybankerteacher]

7 hours ago, North West Newbie said:

 

Liverpool is not in the Midlands and there are plenty of other options for the "US types" to visit in or from our locality. Plus London is only 2 hours away by train if they don't fancy a change. Samuel Cunard had no problem navigating his way from Liverpool to Halifax in 1840.

I was referring to Manchester, not Liverpool - figuring that more people would want to visit London rather than the area near Manchester for a pre- or post-cruise visit.

[IB2]

On 4/19/2020 at 5:09 PM, Ray66 said:

 

Yes there is. The Port of Tyne. Marella, Fred Olsen and Cruise & Maritime start their cruises there.

 

https://www.portoftyne.co.uk/passenger-information/cruise-schedule

 

 

It cant have much room for ships, since most of the Marella fleet is sailing up and down the sea outside my window.

[North West Newbie]

5 hours ago, navybankerteacher said:

I was referring to Manchester, not Liverpool - figuring that more people would want to visit London rather than the area near Manchester for a pre- or post-cruise visit.

 

Manchester is also not in the Midlands.

[North West Newbie]

8 hours ago, Austcruiser84 said:

 

Except in the early days of Samuel Cunard, transporting mail was the priority. The new railways meant easy national transportation and Liverpool was ideally situated. It wasn't about passengers, who certainly were not holidaying in the 1840s.  

 

Southampton today remains the logical, economical choice for the holidaying purpose these ships serve. 

 

The context of my comment was in response to navybankteacher who said “Hard to say getting around Ireland.....” The ability to navigate from Liverpool [and get around Ireland] is unaffected by the ship’s passenger/cargo load.

 

As you rightly say “The new railways meant easy national transportation and Liverpool was ideally situated”. That is truer today as rail links across the UK have vastly improved since the 19^th century. Therefore, Liverpool remains ideally situated for anyone holidaying who wishes to visit anywhere in the UK.

 

Edited April 22, 2020 by North West Newbie

[autumn lass]

7 hours ago, navybankerteacher said:

I was referring to Manchester, not Liverpool - figuring that more people would want to visit London rather than the area near Manchester for a pre- or post-cruise visit.

Manchester is not the Midlands either it is a NW England city

[SEFlyer]

On 4/19/2020 at 4:34 PM, North West Newbie said:

 

Manchester Airport serves the US very well and it is closer to Liverpool than Southampton is to Heathrow.

 

Manchester's service to North America pales in comparison to Heathrow.  It's not even close in terms of diversity of cities served and frequency of North American air service.