"and that would be ....what?"
Well, one of the principal differences is that this is the first major new liner built for Cunard since the QE2 back in the late 1960s. This was supposed to be milestone, and 'though you may have missed it, there has been saturation level print advertising in the upscale press for the last year touting this as THE nautical event of the millennium. Quite frankly I feel suckered, having fallen for the hype. Literally millions were spent on advertising the liner and they did not bother to hire enough staff to perform even the most basic of tasks efficiently for the maiden voyage. I've never been on a liner before that offered customers the option of carrying their own luggage ashore (referred to as "self help dismebarkation") and hope never to again.
Another difference is that the majority of the passengers, by Cunard's OWN DESIGN were repeat cruisers- tickets were made available to them at least a month before they were to the general public. As such Cunard should have known that they were dealing with a clientele who 'knew the ropes.' I spent 14 days interviewing passengers and did not find A SINGLE ONE who thought QM2 represented an improvement over the QE2. I would say that if a line invests close to a billion dollars building the longest and largest liner in the world and then peoples it with their bread and butter customers, it represents a departure from the norm.
The passenger list, in addition to select customers, was filled with titled Europeans. Various Lords, Ladies, Baronesses etc. were aboard (I have the exact number written down somewhere) in addition to doctors, a handful of American Old Money socialites, and best of all reporters travelling incognito. That is not typical of the maiden voyages of the last generation or so. Since many of them forsook their own dining room to eat in the very public Todd English restaurant. It might be seen as an indication that the upper levels of service on the ship need attention, too.
Did you know a movie was shot onboard for release later this summer? GMA broadcast live from onboard. 60 Minutes covered the voyage to an extent. Can't remember the last time another liner had that happen.
So, Cunard was in a position unique amongst cruise companies. Why they sent the ship to sea short staffed, sailed it through the Bay of Biscay in mid winter which left 60 percent of the passengers retching including one of only two 'name' entertainers on board, put a price tag, generally exhorbitant, on literally everything- including the champagne at the gala sailing from Southampton, and committed blunder after blunder after blunder in front of the press, their repeat customers and to a certain extent the general public is beyond me. If I heard one more time "Well, you're on the MAIDEN VOYAGE" as if the alleged historical implications somehow made up for the shortcomings I would have throttled someone.
This was a different maiden voyage, 'though not in an entirely desirable way. Cunard blew it.