Brent Holt
Member
The CWS merger agreement was very complex, but CWS was a subsidiary of Cunard. They probably just added WS to the name since it seemed appropriate at the time and WS had 38% of the shares.
I still cannot see the reason for retiring 70% of the WS fleet after the takeover. The data I have seen shows that Olympic was probably the most efficient vessel of her class. And wouldn't it have made good business sense to keep one WS ship in the express service until the arrival of the QE? (WS was usually a strong second to Cunard.)
I seem to remember reading once that Cunard defended their WS retirements by saying they were old and in poor condition. Sounds defensive to me.
This debate could go on forever.....
I still cannot see the reason for retiring 70% of the WS fleet after the takeover. The data I have seen shows that Olympic was probably the most efficient vessel of her class. And wouldn't it have made good business sense to keep one WS ship in the express service until the arrival of the QE? (WS was usually a strong second to Cunard.)
I seem to remember reading once that Cunard defended their WS retirements by saying they were old and in poor condition. Sounds defensive to me.
This debate could go on forever.....