Did P&O Order the Wrong Ships?

[Snow Hill]

34 minutes ago, Cruisemeister2002 said:

I suppose Azura and Ventura will take over the Atlantic cruises. Neither of which I prefer to Aurora or Oriana. Oriana has obviously departed and Aurora must be close to going as is 22 years old and obviously ships of that age and capacity are more expensive to run than one running on LNG such as Iona and Arvia. I must admit the itineraries of both these ships don't fill me with excitement. One seems to go mainly to the Fiords and the other has the Med with the same itinerary month after month. Whether this is due to the availability of LNG or the size of these ships I don't know. It has been said that certain ports of call are out of bounds to this size of ship. Which again leads me to question the necessity for vessels of this size especially when comments have been made with regards to the facilities afforded by P&O on these ships stating that they don't for their size have what Royal Caribbean have. It does seem to an extent they are caught between a rock and a hard place as to whether to cater for old fogies such as myself or the younger generation. They are clearly putting off some of the older clientele with larger ships whilst not appealing to the younger generation by not having all the bells and whistles on the new ships.

I was reading an article in the FT this morning, which highlights the issues cruise ships ina number of ports in Europe, the likes of Marseilles, Barcelona, Palma, Venice, Bergen and Dubrovnik have already or are I the process of placing restrictions on numbers of cruise passengers and sizes of ships allowed to dock. Others will no doubt follow in the coming years. 

 

With the EU requirements that cruise ships use port side power from 2030 the pressure is on cruise companies to adapt. Often said that LNG is the answer to pollution from cruise ships and container ships, but currently there are only 26 out of 272 cruise ships that use LNG.

 

 

[BrianI]

20 minutes ago, Snow Hill said:

 

With the EU requirements that cruise ships use port side power from 2030 the pressure is on cruise companies to adapt.

 

Princess have been doing this for the last 20 years where port facilities permit.

https://www.princess.com/news/news_releases/2021/07/princess-cruises-celebrates-20th-anniversary-of-shore-power-in-juneau.html

Brian

[terrierjohn]

2 hours ago, Cruisemeister2002 said:

I suppose Azura and Ventura will take over the Atlantic cruises. Neither of which I prefer to Aurora or Oriana. Oriana has obviously departed and Aurora must be close to going as is 22 years old and obviously ships of that age and capacity are more expensive to run than one running on LNG such as Iona and Arvia. I must admit the itineraries of both these ships don't fill me with excitement. One seems to go mainly to the Fiords and the other has the Med with the same itinerary month after month. Whether this is due to the availability of LNG or the size of these ships I don't know. It has been said that certain ports of call are out of bounds to this size of ship. Which again leads me to question the necessity for vessels of this size especially when comments have been made with regards to the facilities afforded by P&O on these ships stating that they don't for their size have what Royal Caribbean have. It does seem to an extent they are caught between a rock and a hard place as to whether to cater for old fogies such as myself or the younger generation. They are clearly putting off some of the older clientele with larger ships whilst not appealing to the younger generation by not having all the bells and whistles on the new ships.

I tend to agree that P&O have been slow to add family friendly features onto their new ships. However on Arvia thay are adding  mini golf, altitude Skywalk and splash valley a kids water feature, so let's hope this augurs well for the future.

As an old fogie myself I have to say I much prefer the larger ships which , despite lacking RCIs fancy features, do have far more entertainment venues and bars than the smaller ones, and for us they are far less boring, which is probably why we have only done 1 cruise on each of Arcadia and Aurora, out of our total of 14 cruises with P&O.

[FamilyCruiserUK]

18 minutes ago, terrierjohn said:

I tend to agree that P&O have been slow to add family friendly features onto their new ships. However on Arvia thay are adding  mini golf, altitude Skywalk and splash valley a kids water feature, so let's hope this augurs well for the future.

As an old fogie myself I have to say I much prefer the larger ships which , despite lacking RCIs fancy features, do have far more entertainment venues and bars than the smaller ones, and for us they are far less boring, which is probably why we have only done 1 cruise on each of Arcadia and Aurora, out of our total of 14 cruises with P&O.

Totally agree with this, todays cruise demographic i believe want more then sitting and watching the world go by. We are a culture who want to be entertained as we have so much at our fingertips. There is of course still a market for those that want to sit and watch, which is fine, but i believe the cruise companies are looking to enticing a younger generation of cruisers. 

[majortom10]

5 hours ago, Cruisemeister2002 said:

I suppose Azura and Ventura will take over the Atlantic cruises. Neither of which I prefer to Aurora or Oriana. Oriana has obviously departed and Aurora must be close to going as is 22 years old and obviously ships of that age and capacity are more expensive to run than one running on LNG such as Iona and Arvia. I must admit the itineraries of both these ships don't fill me with excitement. One seems to go mainly to the Fiords and the other has the Med with the same itinerary month after month. Whether this is due to the availability of LNG or the size of these ships I don't know. It has been said that certain ports of call are out of bounds to this size of ship. Which again leads me to question the necessity for vessels of this size especially when comments have been made with regards to the facilities afforded by P&O on these ships stating that they don't for their size have what Royal Caribbean have. It does seem to an extent they are caught between a rock and a hard place as to whether to cater for old fogies such as myself or the younger generation. They are clearly putting off some of the older clientele with larger ships whilst not appealing to the younger generation by not having all the bells and whistles on the new ships.

Times are a changing due to demand of majority of cruisers or potential new cruisers. Unfortunately P&O or any other cruise line cannot base future cruising on an older clientele who are sadly diminishing, harsh but true. More ports will come online with the more ships that are built with LNG it is just unfortunately Iona with it being one of the few that run on LNG it limits where they can go. Also a major factor the younger cruisers with families see the ship as the destination and not as concerned as older generation of ports of call. Whether we like it or not companies have to look forward and not back and like you say the likes of Aurora/Arcadia will be more costly to run so mean higher prices which puts many off and the more environmentally friendly ports will become the chances are they will not want older ships docking there.

[AnnieC]

12 minutes ago, majortom10 said:

Times are a changing due to demand of majority of cruisers or potential new cruisers. Unfortunately P&O or any other cruise line cannot base future cruising on an older clientele who are sadly diminishing, harsh but true. More ports will come online with the more ships that are built with LNG it is just unfortunately Iona with it being one of the few that run on LNG it limits where they can go. Also a major factor the younger cruisers with families see the ship as the destination and not as concerned as older generation of ports of call. Whether we like it or not companies have to look forward and not back and like you say the likes of Aurora/Arcadia will be more costly to run so mean higher prices which puts many off and the more environmentally friendly ports will become the chances are they will not want older ships docking there.

I'm not trying to be alarmist, but where on earth are most families going to find any spare cash for cruises, or holidays of any sort for that matter, once the horrendous cost of living increases really start to bite? Many/most of P&O's new target market have mortgages (interest rates increasing), leased cars, dependant children, rapidly increasing supermarket and energy bills and on and on. Unless salaries rise to match these increases (as they did in the 70s), and that looks unlikely, the new target market will have nothing left over at the end of each month for frivolities like holidays.

 

 

Edited August 29, 2022 by AnnieC

[Happy afloat]

3 hours ago, terrierjohn said:

I tend to agree that P&O have been slow to add family friendly features onto their new ships. However on Arvia thay are adding  mini golf, altitude Skywalk and splash valley a kids water feature, so let's hope this augurs well for the future.

As an old fogie myself I have to say I much prefer the larger ships which , despite lacking RCIs fancy features, do have far more entertainment venues and bars than the smaller ones, and for us they are far less boring, which is probably why we have only done 1 cruise on each of Arcadia and Aurora, out of our total of 14 cruises with P&O.

Is the problem they have with providing the family attracting facilities of RCI and others the fact that, due to the limitations of school holidays in the UK, they would only be feasible to families at limited times? And therefore, possibly not cost effective in terms of investment? I'm thinking Easter and summer break, so 9 or 10 weeks a year. How many would be willing to pay a fine for taking a couple of kids out of school in term time?

BTW, I have no idea about what holidays they get, or what the rules are, in the USA, for example. 

[Windsurfboy]

I think the conclusion that the cruise market will have to depend more on those mortgage free oldies with good pensions and savings rather than on families, for the next few years was right .

 

Whether the big ship is right choice can be questioned,  but not making it a floating theme park is certainly right. Hopefully lots of entertainment that will attract the young at heart "oldies"

[AnnieC]

10 minutes ago, Windsurfboy said:

I think the conclusion that the cruise market will have to depend more on those mortgage free oldies with good pensions and savings rather than on families, for the next few years was right .

 

Whether the big ship is right choice can be questioned,  but not making it a floating theme park is certainly right. Hopefully lots of entertainment that will attract the young at heart "oldies"

But that isn't what they concluded. They built the new ships to cater for families, the families who will no longer have disposable income for holidays. Mortgage-free oldies did not feature in their future planning, and, in the main, seem to have already moved on to other cruise lines, or alternative holidays.

[Windsurfboy]

I Agree it's clearly not what they were initially aiming at that was families. 

 

That's why I said , whether the big ship is right choice can be questioned. 

 

However, they might still be onto a winner,  given P&O big ships offer much cheaper cruises  than Saga , Cunard , Fred.  Families with children and mortgages, and big heating bills may have to give up cruising. Oldies may not give up but many will be not spending quite as much and move back to P&O

[AnnieC]

1 minute ago, Windsurfboy said:

I Agree it's clearly not what they were initially aiming at that was families. 

 

That's why I said , whether the big ship is right choice can be questioned. 

 

However, they might still be onto a winner,  given P&O big ships offer much cheaper cruises  than Saga , Cunard , Fred.  Families with children and mortgages, and big heating bills may have to give up cruising. Oldies may not give up but many will be not spending quite as much and move back to P&O

OK. We'll see. There's a massive capacity to fill...

[terrierjohn]

2 hours ago, AnnieC said:

I'm not trying to be alarmist, but where on earth are most families going to find any spare cash for cruises, or holidays of any sort for that matter, once the horrendous cost of living increases really start to bite? Many/most of P&O's new target market have mortgages (interest rates increasing), leased cars, dependant children, rapidly increasing supermarket and energy bills and on and on. Unless salaries rise to match these increases (as they did in the 70s), and that looks unlikely, the new target market will have nothing left over at the end of each month for frivolities like holidays.

 

 

Your view certainly seems to be supported by the media, but over the years of experiencing similar doom and gloom predictions,  I have rarely found that the pessimism the media predicts is ever accurate, and indeed is most often terribly wrong.

[terrierjohn]

2 hours ago, Happy afloat said:

Is the problem they have with providing the family attracting facilities of RCI and others the fact that, due to the limitations of school holidays in the UK, they would only be feasible to families at limited times? And therefore, possibly not cost effective in terms of investment? I'm thinking Easter and summer break, so 9 or 10 weeks a year. How many would be willing to pay a fine for taking a couple of kids out of school in term time?

BTW, I have no idea about what holidays they get, or what the rules are, in the USA, for example. 

 In the UK the current fines for taking your child on holiday during term time are far outweighed by the massive extra cost of keeping to the school holidays. So it is any wonder that many chose to ignore the rules.

[Yorkypete]

3 hours ago, Happy afloat said:

Is the problem they have with providing the family attracting facilities of RCI and others the fact that, due to the limitations of school holidays in the UK, they would only be feasible to families at limited times? And therefore, possibly not cost effective in terms of investment? I'm thinking Easter and summer break, so 9 or 10 weeks a year. How many would be willing to pay a fine for taking a couple of kids out of school in term time?

BTW, I have no idea about what holidays they get, or what the rules are, in the USA, for example. 

The summer break at USA schools is usually about late May to late August The other school holidays are only a few days at a time.

 

 

[jimbo1683]

3 hours ago, Happy afloat said:

Is the problem they have with providing the family attracting facilities of RCI and others the fact that, due to the limitations of school holidays in the UK, they would only be feasible to families at limited times? And therefore, possibly not cost effective in terms of investment? I'm thinking Easter and summer break, so 9 or 10 weeks a year. How many would be willing to pay a fine for taking a couple of kids out of school in term time?

BTW, I have no idea about what holidays they get, or what the rules are, in the USA, for example. 

There's a half term roughly every two and a half weeks isn't there?

[jimbo1683]

1 hour ago, AnnieC said:

But that isn't what they concluded. They built the new ships to cater for families, the families who will no longer have disposable income for holidays. Mortgage-free oldies did not feature in their future planning, and, in the main, seem to have already moved on to other cruise lines, or alternative holidays.

Whilst I agree with this perspective for the short term - a few years - aren't cruise ships intended to be in service for 30 years or so? In which case surely cruiselines have factored in the economic cycle of several recessions and good times over that period.

 

Those mortgage free oldies are going to pass their multi-million pound suburban semi's down at some point, and it'll probably be cheaper to go on a cruise than to sit at home in the dark and cold.

[Yorkypete]

3 hours ago, AnnieC said:

But that isn't what they concluded. They built the new ships to cater for families, the families who will no longer have disposable income for holidays. Mortgage-free oldies did not feature in their future planning, and, in the main, seem to have already moved on to other cruise lines, or alternative holidays.

I have to say that my observation on the 'regular' cruisers on CC are either very rich (in pensions or jobs) or possibly have not been on as many cruises as they say. It would seem that the lucky ones spend many thousands a year on their cruises but surely the cost of living crisis will hit us all.

[wowzz]

22 minutes ago, Yorkypete said:

I have to say that my observation on the 'regular' cruisers on CC are either very rich (in pensions or jobs) or possibly have not been on as many cruises as they say. It would seem that the lucky ones spend many thousands a year on their cruises but surely the cost of living crisis will hit us all.

The contributors on here seem to come from all walks of life,  and are both working and retired. 

Speaking as someone who stopped working in my early 50s, we have cut our cloth to meet changing circumstances in the past, and certainly until my various pensions kicked in a few years ago, we limited our holidays to once per year,  to escape the Spanish winter.

Whilst the current level of inflation, heating costs etc, will obviously have some impact, we are fortunate to have a cash buffer, and see no reason to cut down on our discretionary expenditure. Being pessimistic, we may only have 7 or 8 more years when holidays are possible,  so we are going to  make the best use of those years !

 

[zap99]

6 minutes ago, wowzz said:

The contributors on here seem to come from all walks of life,  and are both working and retired. 

Speaking as someone who stopped working in my early 50s, we have cut our cloth to meet changing circumstances in the past, and certainly until my various pensions kicked in a few years ago, we limited our holidays to once per year,  to escape the Spanish winter.

Whilst the current level of inflation, heating costs etc, will obviously have some impact, we are fortunate to have a cash buffer, and see no reason to cut down on our discretionary expenditure. Being pessimistic, we may only have 7 or 8 more years when holidays are possible,  so we are going to  make the best use of those years !

 

Absolutely agree. We will dip into savings if we need to. We only have 1 flight to Majorca booked for next year and will hold fire on booking anything else as some price reductions may appear Christmas time. No plans to cut back on important things like holidays. We won't be able to travel forever, so will whilst we are able.

[wowzz]

7 hours ago, zap99 said:

Absolutely agree. We will dip into savings if we need to. We only have 1 flight to Majorca booked for next year and will hold fire on booking anything else as some price reductions may appear Christmas time. No plans to cut back on important things like holidays. We won't be able to travel forever, so will whilst we are able.

We have three cruises booked for next year (2xP&O, 1xPrincess), and currently availability on all three looks limited, with prices greater than what we paid.

Whilst it is entirely possible that prices may fall, cruise lines face the same inflationary pressures as everyone else,  so I am not anticipating major price cuts in 2023. Plus, for us the choice of cabin type and  location is far more important than saving a few hundred pounds by going for a last minute bargain.

Going forward into 2024,  the impact of raging inflation is bound to have an impact on all discretionary spend, and cruise lines,  with such significant costs, both fixed and variable, cannot reduce fares significantly are therefore going to struggle to get "bums on seats" , certainly from their core  middle class demographic.

[FamilyCruiserUK]

8 hours ago, Yorkypete said:

I have to say that my observation on the 'regular' cruisers on CC are either very rich (in pensions or jobs) or possibly have not been on as many cruises as they say. It would seem that the lucky ones spend many thousands a year on their cruises but surely the cost of living crisis will hit us all.

I think the vast majority of

 regular cruiser's are those in say Florida who class a three day cruise as a cruise. The prices for these royal carribean cruises esp during the off season are very cheap. 

 

Whilst our dau is primary school aged we will take her out of school at the end or beginning of a school term as its cheaper to pay the fine rather then the school holiday prices. Also generally the last week of term they do little learning. 

 

As for cost of living, its getting nuts. People just need to prioritize what they spend their money on. I know some wont have that luxury and i really do feel for them and hopefully some help will be coming. Also dont forget most people book cruises years in advance. So hopefully have budgeted monthly like we do.

[terrierjohn]

8 hours ago, zap99 said:

Absolutely agree. We will dip into savings if we need to. We only have 1 flight to Majorca booked for next year and will hold fire on booking anything else as some price reductions may appear Christmas time. No plans to cut back on important things like holidays. We won't be able to travel forever, so will whilst we are able.

+1

[AnnieC]

13 hours ago, terrierjohn said:

Your view certainly seems to be supported by the media, but over the years of experiencing similar doom and gloom predictions,  I have rarely found that the pessimism the media predicts is ever accurate, and indeed is most often terribly wrong.

On this occasion, the press are reporting on what is actually happening right now, not on wildly over-pessimistic predictions of doom in the future.

 

Isn't that the job of a free press?

[Windsurfboy]

Getting back to cruises and holdays, were not stopping that's what we saved for. Spending less than we earned was just part of our upbringing.  So "luckily" still continue as we did before. Have decided we prefer Saga to Cunard who seem to be ripping off grills customers. 

 

We are going on Arvia,  for suite 40%  price of Cunard  QG cruise, as long as speciality restaurants are open sure we will like it. Loved Aurora but only Sindhu apart from main restaurants so it's bigger ships with P&O or smaller shipswith others. The one draw back of big ships in future will be repetitive intinerarys . 

 

So our go to lines are Saga and P&O big ships (not Fred or Cunard) , unless more lines sail out of Southampton. 

 

I think with holidays, airfares and cruises , early booking savings will be best option. Providers will cut back on capacity rather than drop prices.

 

 

Edited August 30, 2022 by Windsurfboy

[Josy1953]

20 minutes ago, AnnieC said:

However, assuming you worked in the public sector, for most of your working life you'd have been paid less that you would have been in the private sector; that was the trade off, so your index linked pension has been earned.

I worked in the private sector for a company whose pension scheme was excellent, unfortunately for those still working there, shortly after I retired they changed to a money purchase scheme.  Had I worked to my official retirement age I would have paid in more for very little extra benefit.