Jump to content


BFE Staff
  • Content Count

  • Joined

1 Follower

About Gareth

  • Rank
    BFE Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. There are no new forum rules. The rules regarding treating others with respect have always applied.
  2. Quite possibly expectation management. I suspect they’ve given a date based on worst-possible conceivable outcome so that any improvement is a welcome bonus rather than having to announce further delays.
  3. That’s the enlightend enthusiasts version. Won’t cause any excitement among the average member of the public. (I’m only addressing the query as to why there hasn’t been a big fanfare announcement about this, and advocating a theory that this maybe because, however interesting we may find it, it is not big PR material).
  4. Let’s be frank, recalling a 12 year-old previously-discarded freighter and adding a bit of passenger accommodation to it, in order to replace an iconic legend (to its loyal customer base) is not exactly fanfare material. Of great interest to those of us in the know about the history etc, sure. But difficult to turn into a PR goldmine.
  5. I believe comment was passed on here at the time about the folly of building such a facility designed only to fit one ship.
  6. That’s true, and I agree. On the other hand, (a) they won’t be identical, and (b) the principle of unique ships has already been abandoned with the plethora of Vissentinis in the fleet and the pending arrival of triplets from China!
  7. Why’s that a downside? Sounds a perfect way of raising the standards on Poole-Cherbourg. Armorique’s stint at Poole on refit cover duty almost led to the Barfleur fan club jumping ship! 🤣
  8. It needs to be clarified that this is not “news”, it is speculation. Accordingly, as you have done with the sections about Etretat and Normandie, there should be a question mark after your thoughts on Barfleur. (No announcement has been made that she is moving to Le Havre, so this should not be being reported as a fact in the “news” section).
  9. Don’t hold your breath - I’ve been going on about the visibility of the timetables since we were invited by BF to comment on the beta site a while back. BF is fully aware of the request but have made a deliberate decision to reject it.
  10. There already is one actually - we bought one on board for our (then) 5-6 year old a couple of years ago. He's not built it yet (and, come to think of it, I'm not quite sure where it is). I think it's meant to be of Normandie (probably pre-scrubbbers and certainly pre-livery change), but it's quite hard to tell!
  11. So that's what a scrubber looks like...!
  12. Is this an announcement or an expression of a wish? I can’t see where in the article it says that this is happening “soon”. (And it’s clearly nothing to do with BF even if it is talking about something concrete).
  13. I was thinking that too - it’s an obvious explanation. And, presumably, also a one-off, as the circumstances this year that required the delay are unlikely to be replicated next year.
  14. To a greater or lesser extent, all ships in the BF fleet (with the exception of Bretagne and Pont Aven) can be considered ropaxes. Some of them, like MSM, carry off that role very effectively and with a luxury that makes them feel like a cruise ferry. I’m sure the e-flexers will be the same.
  15. I’m starting to wonder whether BF might be adopting an approach in which ship space is being sold a bit at a time, with other bits of space kept in reserve for later bookings? Then the impression is created early on of ship filling up (encouraging people to get their bookings made) whilst still keeping space available for later bookings? Also, it is possible that some space is being reserved for guaranteed space for HMG for the post-EU departure contracts.
  • Create New...