QM 2 seats breaking

Mark (SF) wrote:

>
> No matter how beautiful they look in the showroom, some pieces can't stand
> up to heavy usage in a public room.
>
> ...and it IS rude of Cunard.

Workmanship vs. functional durability. They didn't get the basics right.
It is unacceptably rude of Cunard and the French yard workers to make
those public comments and an apology to the ship's customers is in
order. Nothing less is acceptable.

Ben S.

>
> Mark
>
>
>

The message <0ACtd.8754$Va5.1770@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink. net>
from Benjamin Smith <benjs@ix.netcom.com> contains these words:

> Mark (SF) wrote:

> >
> > No matter how beautiful they look in the showroom, some pieces can't
> > stand
> > up to heavy usage in a public room.
> >
> > ...and it IS rude of Cunard.

> Workmanship vs. functional durability. They didn't get the basics right.
> It is unacceptably rude of Cunard and the French yard workers to make
> those public comments and an apology to the ship's customers is in
> order. Nothing less is acceptable.

It's laughable everyone is so upset.. in fact hilarious. I fail to see
why any apology is due anywhere. America has quite openly referred to
itself as "The Fattest Nation in the World" for several years. Lighten
up and play along, Americans do not seem to take so easily what they
dish out to others frequently.

The newspapers report... and how many people believe the whole truth of
a newspaper report? they shouldn't if they do.

"Alstom Chantiers, the French company that provided the liner with all
its fixtures and fittings, claimed many of the chairs had buckled under
the weight of larger passengers.
"There are some things that need to be changed or replaced," said a
spokesman. "For instance, there are some problems with the chairs
because some of our passengers are heavier than we imagined.
"It's not an English problem, it's probably more American."
An unnamed former member of the ship's crew said: "We do have many large
passengers on the QM2. Most of the passengers are American."

Nowhere does it say Americans are fat, nowhere is Cunard involved, and
in any event Alstom did not choose, design or manufacture the chairs.
The fixtures and fittings came from many sources around the globe. Maybe
those very chairs came from the US.

--
Pam

Capt Mary Kidd wrote:
> The message <0ACtd.8754$Va5.1770@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink. net>
> from Benjamin Smith <benjs@ix.netcom.com> contains these words:
>
> > Mark (SF) wrote:
>
> > >
> > > No matter how beautiful they look in the showroom, some pieces
can't
> > > stand
> > > up to heavy usage in a public room.
> > >
> > > ...and it IS rude of Cunard.
>
> > Workmanship vs. functional durability. They didn't get the basics
right.
> > It is unacceptably rude of Cunard and the French yard workers to
make
> > those public comments and an apology to the ship's customers is in
> > order. Nothing less is acceptable.
>
> It's laughable everyone is so upset.. in fact hilarious. I fail to
see
> why any apology is due anywhere. America has quite openly referred
to
> itself as "The Fattest Nation in the World" for several years.
Lighten
> up and play along, Americans do not seem to take so easily what they
> dish out to others frequently.
>

Don't lump me in we those folks. I take jokes about overweight people
seriously because it screws people up psychologically for their lives.
Fun and games at the expense of other's appearances is insensitive and
just not cool. It's unprofessional and ugly on either side, Americans
(USA citizens) towards another culture or another culture towards
America. See my post where I knock French bashing.

> The newspapers report... and how many people believe the whole truth
of
> a newspaper report? they shouldn't if they do.
>
True. But these are quotes, albeit, out of context.

> "Alstom Chantiers, the French company that provided the liner with
all
> its fixtures and fittings, claimed many of the chairs had buckled
under
> the weight of larger passengers.
> "There are some things that need to be changed or replaced," said a
> spokesman. "For instance, there are some problems with the chairs
> because some of our passengers are heavier than we imagined.
> "It's not an English problem, it's probably more American."
> An unnamed former member of the ship's crew said: "We do have many
large
> passengers on the QM2. Most of the passengers are American."
>
> Nowhere does it say Americans are fat, nowhere is Cunard involved,
and
> in any event Alstom did not choose, design or manufacture the chairs.
> The fixtures and fittings came from many sources around the globe.
Maybe
> those very chairs came from the US.
>

I doubt it, though you are accurate that Alstom didn't design and build
the furnishings. Most of the furnishings for ships come from European
companies.


Ben S.
> --
> Pam

We also will not sail QM2,not because of seats breaking,but because they
are so class oriented. When on a cruise we like to be able to eat in any
dining room,and have complete run of the ship.
surfer e-2468

Chrissy Cruiser wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Dec 2004 17:14:49 -0500, Surfer E2468 wrote:
>
>
>>We also will not sail QM2,not because of seats breaking,but because they
>>are so class oriented. When on a cruise we like to be able to eat in any
>>dining room,and have complete run of the ship.
>>surfer e-2468
>
>
> I have a problem with this "class" thing myself.

What is wrong about giving different service to people that pay
different prices? It's not about what class of person you are, it is
about how much you have paid. Do you not fly on airlines that have
different classes?

>Exactly!
>Any furniture manufactured for a cruise ship needs to be built to industrial
>standards. Yes American's are becoming fat, but I haven't read about any
>Royal Caribbean, Carnival, or Princess ships being sent back to the shipyard
>for new furniture. This is just an excuse for either poor quality and
>workmanship or a poor choice of furniture designs. Once again I would have
>to point the finger at whomever approved the furniture purchases (the
>designers?). Everything should have been well tested prior to placing any
>orders.
>It's interesting that QM2 might be going through some fairly drastic changes
>so soon ... after only a year or so of service. This is really not that
>common since just about everything can be tested on previous newbuilds to
>ensure functionality. Wasn't the same true of QE2 years ago? I believe she
>was also substantially altered very soon after entering service.
>
>Frankly Cunard should be appalled by the comments of the French shipyard.
>Whether true or not they are in poor taste. These "fat Americans" are the
>very people cruising Cunard and paying their inflated rates!
>
>Ernie
>
>
>
Totally agree....well said Ernie.
Sean

>
>Workmanship vs. functional durability. They didn't get the basics right.
>It is unacceptably rude of Cunard and the French yard workers to make
>those public comments and an apology to the ship's customers is in
>order. Nothing less is acceptable.
>
>Ben S.

Agree.
Sean

Chrissy Cruiser wrote:
> On Thu, 09 Dec 2004 08:00:33 GMT, Merry Christmas wrote:
>
>
>>>I have a problem with this "class" thing myself.
>>
>>What is wrong about giving different service to people that pay
>>different prices? It's not about what class of person you are, it is
>>about how much you have paid. Do you not fly on airlines that have
>>different classes?
>
>
> Have you ever been on the QE2 or QM2 or known anyone who has?

Yes, why do you ask?
It's not like Titanic, there are lifeboats for all.