On the Yahoo CunardShipQM2 group someone posted the fact that Conde Nast Travel had rated Cunard only 9th of the top 10 best rated cruise lines. This caused somewhat of a discussion about why Cunard did so poor - with some blaming it on the teething problems on QM2.
There was a nice summary from Richard P that summed up the QE2. He wrote:
"Although, I love the QE2 and think she's the ultimate liner, I think that she will drag down Cunard's ranking in comparison to a Celebrity for instance. She's 35 years old and built at a time of transition for the passenger shipping business. No matter how much I love QE2's quaint accommodation and all those wonderful rabbit-warrens down on 4 and 5 Decks, it's difficult to argue that those cabins can compare favourably to those on modern vessels. I may be speaking sacrilege but, most passengers who are not into the whole "ship thing," like we are, prefer modern accommodations with modern amenities -- like balconies. But, of course, the QE2 has something that most ships do not and that is ambiance. That cannot be rated in a politically motivated top ten list."