Servicing calls at CLs for Motorcaravans

Some very interesting stuff via that link PD. Had a good look at the Cumbria- Northumberland tour link, as it’s a tour we do quite frequently. Will find time to have a good look at some of the other stuff as well, lots of information to read. 👍

Either way, in your original and corrected post, you cannot deny it is a very biased sample and really cannot be taken as representing the general population of all MH.

You can think what you like CS, I have seen  official stats from surveys with a lot less samples than that and any owner who was aware of it and had access to the web had the opportunity to vote.

peedee

Apart from the point that you didn't answer my question about it being a very biased survey and my only 'thoughts' were about giving a a balanced viewpoint which your post or survey didn't (did it?), it is not about what I think on a number of levels is it PD? 

It is about using good sampling processes to show that a survey represents the general MH population who might use such a facility. Yours did not. 

It is about what CL owners think, so far owners on this thread have said they are not going to go down the OP's route for various reasons. They are the ones you will have to convince.

I have seen official stats from surveys with a lot less samples than that and any owner who was aware of it and had access to the web had the opportunity to vote.

Again please share your official statistics and sources and a definition of what official actually means? What official organisation are you referring to?

Also surveys with a lot less samples ? What does that mean? If you have a smaller sample it will be more less likely to represent the general population? Why would a lot less samples make your case stronger to owners?

any owner who was aware of it and had access to the web had the opportunity to vote.

I'm not sure what that means it is sort of self evident?

I'm really not against this idea though those that run CLs appear that way. So as been said upthread somewhere else and by NTH and TDA before, make a business case to them or get/support a group of people together to put up so money to make it happen?

A survey last year in which 9000 owners responded indicated 96 percent of owners were willing to pay £10 per night just to park overnight and would pay more if there were motorhome services available as well. I think there are very very few who expect to pay nothing and of the 4 percent who wouldn't pay £10, considering it to be too expensive, they would probably be willing to pay something.

I didn't comment before on all what went through my mind at the time of our post. It says 96% of responders were willing to pay £10 to park overnight without  fill and dump. It does not indicate what they might be willing to pay for fill and dump - only that if those facilities were provided that they would pay more. 

Not totally relevant. 

When talking of "official?"surveys and PD advises of smaller surveys it sounds just like those seen on adverts , where 96% of 56 people were pleased with the results

Thanks for the links to the motorhome group Peedee, obviously a good sized membership and keen to make a difference.

 ps , when marketing any product or service ,the way a question is formatted to the target recipients ,will as those asking the question  get a positive or negative reply depending what they are as hoping for with the survey?

keen to make a difference.

Most self-interest groups are. No idea what they are doing to achieve their  aims. I supposed that they wee striving to promote the provision of Aires. But it seems that overnight parking without facilities is also desired.

I think the idea of more aire type stopovers will come, but they will have little to do with the Club, it’s Club Sites, or CLs, simply because they are a different model.
Personally, I have no problem with this, we have happily paid our Membership fee, toured and stayed on both Club Sites and CLs for the last 30+ years, enjoying what has been provided for us by both Club and CLs throughout that time. That’s using a camper, caravans and now a small MH. Ok, we use less Club Sites now, mainly because of the prices and how busy they are, but the CLs are great, and provide just what we want from a tour. So personally no, I don’t see a need for CL owners to have to consider changing the balance of what they provide. 
That doesn’t mean we don’t want to see more limited stopover options provided by others. Even with a caravan, we always required a transit stay if going a long way, and lots of such options are simply not there now, or not as safe. My hope is that some of the big land and property owners, NT, EH, CADW, National Parks, Forestry Commission will get on board and look at possible rural stopovers, with LA’s providing more urban, semi rural provision. 
A big test of course will be what happens when the World re opens for travel, and just how much usage places get when those that are biding their time can head off overseas again. Hopefully therewill be a viable need, the growth in MH ownership is still happening.

I agree with your point about stopovers and many laybys are now occupied by HGVs on their legal driving breaks which i agree is a good bit of legislation , the problem is when towing and advised by driving organisations and illuminated road signs to take a break after two hours driving and i find as i have got older i can qute agree ,it is diffcult in the UK to find any where for a stopover ,even service stations have HGVs filling caravan parking areas 

How about petitioning the Clubs (both) for members to have a  driving break using the LNA on sites when towing,