Is it a rip off?

Posted on 25/04/2019 12:30 by brue

This wasn't a personal view it was a business view. The club has to compete for take up of pitches, going elsewhere is a sign that the system probably needs tweaking to attract more customers. Without the revenue the club can't improve on it's customer provision.

Posted on 25/04/2019 13:07 by JayOutdoors

Is it a rip off ?   IMHO a rip off is when something does not turn out to be as described/advertised etc when I chose to pay for it.

I tend to think as members we each choose from what the club has to offer that suits us personally/individually and that all members must have at least 1 reason for joining or continuing their membership otherwise there would be little point in paying the yearly fee. 

Particularly like being able to book 1 night only - not always allowed by some other providers.  As in all aspects of life – personal choice is there for all.

Posted on 25/04/2019 14:21 by

I suppose that you are quite correct Jay. A rip off is normally when you are  islead into making a purchase whereas club site users soon learn what to expect regarding standards and provisions

Posted on 25/04/2019 12:05 by huskydog

So ,should the Club offer a sliding scale of pitch price according to your income !!...……………………………...NO

The prices in my shop are the prices ,if people cant afford them ,then they need to shop else where 

Posted on 25/04/2019 14:36 by

Wonder if Husky does 'set asides'? You know, have a few Bonios from a box and pay for them and Husky puts box on one side so that you can call in and buy a few more when you run out.

Posted on 25/04/2019 13:43 by

But the CC Club does not tell members to go elsewhere Brue. Members choose a site that is not a CC site for many reasons. Cost is but one of them. 

Posted on 25/04/2019 15:13 by brue

No they dont but I was referring to comments on here. 

CAMC also suggest and provide alternatives in the shape of CLs and rallies and discounted prices which is good, but could they offer a bit more I wonder?

Posted on 25/04/2019 15:29 by DavidKlyne

I suppose the acid test is whether enough members use any particular site. The Club, no doubt, will have an occupancy level in mind site and adjust accordingly. If the likes of Seacroft and Bridlington were on average less than 50% occupied then they would have to address that situation probably by reducing the price or perhaps the introduction of MWD. We have seen on some sites where they have seasonal pitches that those pitches have been reduced because of a greater take up of touring pitches. So the situation is probably fairly fluid if circumstances change. However the reality of the situation is that sites, especially those with higher site fees, seem to enjoy pretty high occupancy. The fact that many members are willing to add an addition £3.90 onto a standard pitch fee to secure a serviced pitch rather proves the point that money isn't everything. It seems that the Club have more than sufficient members willing to pay the current fees.

David