Dumbing Down & Dressing Down: The New Cunard?

[Mareblu]

On 6/30/2024 at 10:53 AM, Mareblu said:

An important note:  There is a vast difference between P&O Australia, and its UK namesake.  P&O Australia has "enjoyed" a rather terrible reputation over recent years.  There are some who are loyal to the brand, because it certainly offers affordable cruises in local waters, but it is known as "the party ships line", favoured by end-of-year football teams and generally those of a younger generation who still have the stamina (but perhaps not the common sense) to "rage" during a holiday.  There was a tragic case several years ago of a lovely middle-aged woman who was date raped by a drunken gang, which ended in the courts only after much outrage, and the most recent scandal has been the outbreak of bedbugs, initially denied by P&O.  At the very least, the name had to be changed to save the line.  Costa, IMHO, has never really recovered from the tragic running aground of Costa Concordia a few years ago.  Our Italian relatives say they would never sail on Concordia.  My point in all this is to emphasise that in both cases, public scrutiny and opinion would be the reason for rebranding. 

 

I personally don't understand why Cunard would need to be rebranded, when its loyal guests return for the same reasons:  the ambience and comfort of sailing on a vessel where standards are hopefully maintained well into the future.  I do believe that is possibly a reason for other lines to follow Cunard's lead.  We are an ageing population, and if they're lucky enough, the younger generation of cruisers will follow.  They will probably, in time, seek the ambience Cunard offers.

OOps.  correction:  no-one, of course, can sail on the Concordia.  I meant our relatives have said they would never sail on Costa, even though one couple had sailed on a Costa vessel many years ago.  They are also resolute that they would never do so again. 

[reeves35]

2 hours ago, JT1101 said:

P&O Australia is a completely different animal than Cunard. Also Cunard and P&O comprise Carnival UK - a separate unit within Carnival LLC. P&O Australia is part of the main Carnival Cruise Lines unit. Costa is in its own unit also. 

The Carnival UK business unit is not separate; it is just a reporting line.  The head of Cunard Katie McAlister reports to Carnival UK CEO Paul Ludlow who reports to Carnival Corp CEO Josh Weinstein.  It is no more autonomous than any other business unit.

 

P&O Australia was not part of the Carnival business unit.  It was actually part of the Holland America Group which includes HAL, Princess and Seabourn.  P&O Australia was a member of Princess Captains Circle rewards program.  Following the announcement of P&O Australia's "sunset", the reporting lines are changing so P&O Australia will report to Carnival USA along with the existing Australian based Carnival ships.

 

 

[Winifred 22]

5 hours ago, 2Oldpeopleinlove said:

Sorry about the lack of editing. You’d never believe I was a college English teacher most of my professional life, would you? Now it’s too late to edit.

It’s so easy to make a spelling or grammar mistake, isn’t it like sending text messages where you haven’t spotted predictive text has changed the words. I wouldn’t worry I can remember my grandmother regularly using a very old saying  “cobblers children are the worst shod” I didn’t teach in college but was a school teacher for over 30 years and still need to make edits. 

[david63]

1 hour ago, reeves35 said:

The Carnival UK business unit is not separate; it is just a reporting line

Not quite - Carnival UK is a company in its own right which is quoted on LSE.

[exlondoner]

6 minutes ago, david63 said:

Not quite - Carnival UK is a company in its own right which is quoted on LSE.

Hmm. Not sure about that or whether it is the Carnival behemoth that  is quoted on both LSE and NY.

[Victoria2]

2 minutes ago, exlondoner said:

Hmm. Not sure about that or whether it is the Carnival behemoth that  is quoted on both LSE and NY.

Correct to question. It's Carnival PLC which is quoted on both the NYSE and LSE, and it's the umbrella company for the Carnival brands,

[reeves35]

From the Carnival website...this explains the dual listing.

Effective April 17, 2003, Carnival Corporation and Carnival plc (formerly known as P&O Princess Cruises plc) completed a dual listed company transaction. On most matters that affect all shareholders of Carnival Corporation and Carnival plc, each of their shareholders will vote together as a single body. As a mechanism to effect the new voting arrangements resulting from the DLC transaction, shares of Carnival Corporation common stock were paired with trust shares of beneficial interest in the P&O Princess Special Voting Trust (the "Special Voting Trust"). These are referred to as the "trust shares" (or in some literature they are referred to as "paired shares"). The trustee of the Special Voting Trust holds a special voting share which is the means by which the vote of Carnival Corporation shareholders is given effect at the parallel meeting of the shareholders of Carnival plc. Accordingly, each holder of Carnival Corporation common stock is also deemed to be the beneficial owner of an equivalent number of trust shares. The trust shares that are paired with the Carnival Corporation common stock do not give the holder separate voting rights. Separate certificates are not issued to represent these trust shares. Instead, the trust shares are paired with, and evidenced by, certificates representing Carnival Corporation common stock. The trust shares cannot be transferred separately from the Carnival Corporation common stock and have no separate value.

[JT1101]

Business units by definition are separated because they have their own internal operations. Carnival Corporation (sorry LLC is my error) is comprised of several such units. One is Carnival Cruise Lines (which causes confusion sometimes). Another is Carnival UK. Costa is another again. Cunard and P&O as Brands jointly compose Carnival UK. P&O Australia despite the name was part of Carnival Cruise Lines. 

[bluemarble]

On 6/27/2024 at 1:54 PM, bluemarble said:

... As more of the 2025 dress code and theme schedules become available, I will most definitely be looking for trends indicating whether Cunard are indeed lowering the number of Gala Evenings overall during 2025.

 

I have most of the Cunard dress code and theme schedules for early 2025. Here the percentages of the dress code and theme schedules I have for specific date ranges in early 2025 for each ship.

 

QM2: 100% of the schedules for 1-Jan through 28-Mar (I'll assume there are going to be two gala evenings on the 8-Mar crossing which I don't have yet).

QV: 92% of the schedules for 1-Jan through 27-Mar.

QE: 66% of the schedules for 1-Jan through 15-Apr (excluding the gap in her itineraries from 25-Feb through 13-Mar).

QA: 98% of the schedules for 1-Jan through 26-Apr.

 

Here are the trends in the number of Gala Evenings per week comparing those same specific date ranges in previous years for each ship.

 

QM2

2022: 1.69 galas/week

2023: 1.45 galas/week

2024: 1.59 galas/week

2025: 1.29 galas/week

 

QV

2023: 1.71 galas/week

2024: 1.63 galas/week

2025: 1.42 galas/week

 

QE

2022: 1.67 galas/week

2023: 1.75 galas/week

2024: 1.85 galas/week

2025: 1.90 galas/week

 

QA

A direct comparison is not possible since QA didn't start sailing until May 2024. But I'll go ahead and compare the 2024 schedules for QA to the early 2025 schedules for QA.

3 May-31 Dec 2024: 1.73 galas/week

1 Jan-26 Apr 2025: 1.49 galas/week

 

QE is an outlier showing increases in the number of gala evenings over the years. For the other three ships though, the schedules I have so far do tend to point to a decrease in the number of gala evenings being scheduled during early 2025.

[WantedOnVoyage]

So... nine pages later, I submit the above as evidence. 

 

And rest my case.

 

You may dress as you wish. Cunard care not. And apparently, carry your beer in lifts and from pillar to post, too. As they say, "it's all good."

 

The "Hey Guys Era" of Cunard is.... real. Makes one pine for "Ships Have Been Boring Long Enough" c. 1969.  Well, makes me pine. 

 

And thank you, Bluemarble... you are the Metrics Man par excellence. 

Edited Monday at 07:45 PM by WantedOnVoyage

[Brummel]

On 6/30/2024 at 11:42 AM, rj1227 said:

Second, it seems that some who have sailed Cunard for years view any hint of change or any change in the dressing code, however slight, as a dangerous assault on the essence of the Cunard experience.

I promise to stop beating this dead horse, but please allow me a final comment.

 

On my first QM2 crossing, gents had to wear a jacket and tie. Then the tie was dropped. Now you just need a collared shirt (no doubt soon to go) and non-denim trousers.

 

These are not slight  and IMHO they are dangerous. Because you don't have to wear a jacket and tie, fewer and fewer men bother. Jackets and suits do take up space in your luggage and then there is the trouble to maintain them during the voyage.

 

But the ambience has changed. Look around during dinner and aside from the still brilliant decor you may as well be on another line. And if you don't think people, your fellow passengers, crew and staff are not affected by your dress, experience and a review of film shot on Market Street in San Francisco in 1950 and video shot in the last ten years should settle the matter.

 

What you wear sends messages whether you like it or not. There are even dress codes in nudest colonies.

 

Thanks to WantedOnVoyage. This thread has decided me. I will be doing some lectures in the ConneXions rooms during my upcoming QM2. On dress codes, of course. But methinks a Life of Brummel would be fun, perhaps some sartorial trivia. Learn why thery're called a "pair" of pants!

 

All are invited

[D&N]

4 minutes ago, Brummel said:

Jackets and suits do take up space in your luggage

But what else would you fill the space with?

Why would you want to take empty cases and bags? 🤣

[Tattycoram]

6 minutes ago, Brummel said:

Life of Brummel

A gentle reminder that if you mean the historical figure George "Beau" Brummell, he spells his name slightly differently from yours.

 

[Brummel]

Tattycoram, he used both, I believe. His friends certainly did.

 

D&A, booze, cargo shorts, sweatpants, emotional support animals?

[rj1227]

Brummel, I appreciate your response to my post. I don't think there is an objectively correct answer. As I said, if I sail with Cunard, I will follow the rules, and if I find the rules are too troublesome, I won't sail with Cunard. My upcoming with Cunard is a special-event TA crossing (the literary festival). For a sailing other than a TA crossing, I frankly would consider other cruise lines.

  

I agree that how we dress sets a tone. I have not visited San Francisco in decades and certainly did not walk down Market Street in the 1950s, but I suspect you are highlighting the difference between how people visiting the downtown area in major cities dressed three generations ago compared to how many dress today. I understand and largely agree with the point I think you are making, but I do not agree that your analogy is an appropriate one. On my one Cunard crossing, I found that my fellow passengers were well dressed--not how people look on major downtown thoroughfares in big American cities--and do not believe that a stricter dress code on the nonformal nights would have made for a more enjoyable experience. And your concern that dress-code changes will lead to more dramatic changes in the future seems questionable. 

 

I also can appreciate your desire for a cruise that seems especially special and reminds one of a past era because of its formality. But as the owners of any fine men's clothing store can attest, people are not dressing up as they once did, and they have had to change to some extent what they sell to keep in business. I suspect that for good marketing reasons, Cunard is doing the same.  

 

Also, both on the Cunard TA crossing I took and the one I will be taking, I will be boarding the ship after several weeks of independent travel in Europe. There is a cost to have a suitcase shipped to the QM2 with clothes just for the crossing, and the size of suitcase affects cost. 

 

Further, for decades, I had to wear a tie for work. I prefer not to wear one, though I have no problem wearing a sports coat. I suspect I am not alone. But again we are talking about personal preferences

[alc13]

3 hours ago, bluemarble said:

 

I have most of the Cunard dress code and theme schedules for early 2025. Here the percentages of the dress code and theme schedules I have for specific date ranges in early 2025 for each ship.

 

QM2: 100% of the schedules for 1-Jan through 28-Mar (I'll assume there are going to be two gala evenings on the 8-Mar crossing which I don't have yet).

QV: 92% of the schedules for 1-Jan through 27-Mar.

QE: 66% of the schedules for 1-Jan through 15-Apr (excluding the gap in her itineraries from 25-Feb through 13-Mar).

QA: 98% of the schedules for 1-Jan through 26-Apr.

 

Here are the trends in the number of Gala Evenings per week comparing those same specific date ranges in previous years for each ship.

 

QM2

2022: 1.69 galas/week

2023: 1.45 galas/week

2024: 1.59 galas/week

2025: 1.29 galas/week

 

QV

2023: 1.71 galas/week

2024: 1.63 galas/week

2025: 1.42 galas/week

 

QE

2022: 1.67 galas/week

2023: 1.75 galas/week

2024: 1.85 galas/week

2025: 1.90 galas/week

 

QA

A direct comparison is not possible since QA didn't start sailing until May 2024. But I'll go ahead and compare the 2024 schedules for QA to the early 2025 schedules for QA.

3 May-31 Dec 2024: 1.73 galas/week

1 Jan-26 Apr 2025: 1.49 galas/week

 

QE is an outlier showing increases in the number of gala evenings over the years. For the other three ships though, the schedules I have so far do tend to point to a decrease in the number of gala evenings being scheduled during early 2025.

Data!  The "like"button is not enough.  Love it.

[Brummel]

20 minutes ago, rj1227 said:

And your concern that dress-code changes will lead to more dramatic changes in the future seems questionable.

Because your comments were so gentlemanly, I will break my promise to not beating this deceased mare more.

 

I'm sure you're aware of the statistical rule commonly known as the "Reversion to the Mean."  In the context of our discussion I think it applicable: Over time, without enforcement of a code, those who adhere to the code become fewer and fewer and eventually most everyone is dressing to a mean; in our example, a lesser standard.

 

Think of it this way.  If your clean-cut, drug-free, honor student son begins to hang out with kids unlike him, it is more likely he will become more like them than them like he.

 

I saw this on my last Cunard voyage, a 42-day cruise from Alaska to Barcelona. This was the first one I took where a jacket was not required at dinner. The first few nights, it was Cunard as usual, with most guys wearing jackets and a lot with ties. Within a week - a week! - the jacket-wearers were in the minority. Hell, even I gave up a few days later. And yes, IMO people did act less refined and dignified. Not a special occasion so no special demeanor 

 

People tend to take the easy way and effort to dress well is, well, an effort. 

 

And with that, I'm done. Hope to see some of you during my lectures!

[rj1227]

I am aware of reversion of the mean. The chances of my being on a sailing when you are giving a lecture are very small. But if I am, I will certainly attend, and introduce myself after, your presentation.

[reeves35]

2 hours ago, Brummel said:

These are not slight  and IMHO they are dangerous.

Dangerous sounds a bit strong.  It is not as if the removal of jackets on casual nights is going to lead to outright debauchery or violence.  It is just changing to what surveys are obviously telling Cunard management want customers want.  As always, if you want to dress up every night, that is fine.  Have a great time particularly if it makes you feel a bit special and make you happy. 

 

Some people seem to be spending too much time worrying about what other people are doing rather than enjoying their holiday.  As I said way upthread, LIVE AND LET LIVE!

 

[reeves35]

5 hours ago, JT1101 said:

Business units by definition are separated because they have their own internal operations. Carnival Corporation (sorry LLC is my error) is comprised of several such units. One is Carnival Cruise Lines (which causes confusion sometimes). Another is Carnival UK. Costa is another again. Cunard and P&O as Brands jointly compose Carnival UK. P&O Australia despite the name was part of Carnival Cruise Lines. 

Until June 2023, the structure of Carnival Corp was split into 4 divisions, Carnival Cruises, Carnival UK (P&O UK and Cunard), Europe (Aida and Costa), Holland America (HAL, Princess, Seabourn and P&O Australia),

 

In June 2023 this was revised to 6 divisions.  Carnival, Carnival UK, Aida, Costa, Princess, and HAL.   As part of this restructure Princess CEO became a direct report to the Group CEO and P&O Australia moved under Carnival in what can now be seen as a precursor to the brands "sunsetting." 

 

As you say, despite both operating as P&O and operating under the same company flag, P&O Australia and P&O UK have been very separate operations since the early 1980s.  P&O Australia has always been a leisure based 3 star operation whilst P&O UK has developed into the multi-layer product it is today.

[WantedOnVoyage]

28 minutes ago, reeves35 said:

 

Some people seem to be spending too much time worrying about what other people are doing rather than enjoying their holiday.  As I said way upthread, LIVE AND LET LIVE!

 

Or maybe those whose aspire to 19th hole evening attire might choose to "live" instead aboard the 96.6 percent of cruise ships and lines that think that's "smart evening attire" and leave the one line that aspires, with its core customers, to something other than chinos and "polos".  

Edited Monday at 11:19 PM by WantedOnVoyage

[DukeBeetle24]

19 minutes ago, WantedOnVoyage said:

Or maybe those whose aspire to 19th hole evening attire might choose to "live" instead aboard the 96.6 percent of cruise ships and lines that think that's "smart evening attire" and leave the one line that aspires, with its core customers, to something other than chinos and "polos".  

Why should they? They have every right to choose to sail on a Cunard ship as much as you do.

 

The dress code is clear, those items fall within it, take your issue up with Cunard rather than belittle those who don't confirm to your desire for it to return to something it no longer is. 

[Jedi_Laz]

If they dumb it down more I may consider going, 

I don't want to dress like an estate agent.

Is this a boomers thing?

They may be changing with the times.

[S1971]

4 hours ago, DukeBeetle24 said:

The dress code is clear, those items fall within it, take your issue up with Cunard rather than belittle those who don't confirm to your desire for it to return to something it no longer is. 

 

Hit the nail on the head.

 

Cunard enforces the dress code not the customer, if people don't like the changes the simple answer is to switch cruiseline, albeit they'd be hard pressed to find another as formal nowadays, that in itself tells a story, most people don't want it anymore.

[S1971]

8 hours ago, WantedOnVoyage said:

You may dress as you wish. Cunard care not.

 

On the other hand, perhaps they've listened to customer feedback and have relaxed the dress code based on that.

 

All other mainstream cruiselines are smart casual attire, I think you'll struggle to continue cruising if you're not accepting of that.