Cost of sites has gone mad

I am perfectly content to pay the prices charged by the CMC, because their sites suit me absolutely. I've never moaned about the prices in this place, but, when booking sites, I have said to myself - goodness that seems a lot - and I might mention to others that sites are getting pricey. Am I not entitled to do that? It seems that some here think so. 

I cannot agree with the opinion of several in recent posts above promoting the view that it is meaningless or pointless, or somehow invalid, to compare increases with inflation or with competitors and to complain if those comparisons show the CMC to be out of line. It is surely perfectly pertinent and understandable that people will do that and is the kind of thing that both consumers and market commentators do all the time - and rightly so. How many times have you heard on the news that rail fares have, "once again", increased beyond the rate of inflation. (I use that purely as an example and not to attack the rail franchises). It is what people do and it is a valid exercise whether they choose to pay the increased prices or not. In no way is it meaningless. Indeed, on the contrary, it says a great deal about the market and how each supplier in that market is positioning themselves. It is perfectly valid to compare changes in prices at Waitrose and Aldi. That they are in different places in the market is wholly irrelevant.   

I am also intrigued as to how it can be that inflation has nothing to do with holidays and, as implied, inflation is only relevant to essentials like food and energy. That is simply factually incorrect. The CPI includes the full spectrum of goods and services, in 12 categories,  variously weighted and including, just to quote one or two examples (abbreviated), food 9.6%, clothing 4.8%, housing and household services 30.3%, transport 11.1% recreation and culture 11.2% and restaurants and hotels 11.2%. So essentials certainly, and weighted that way, but also holidays, leisure, eating out, etc. The prices of all these things are included when working out the rate of inflation.            

There are many valid points in this thread regarding the level of price increases and I understand it is a valid discussion. I also feel the CAMC is pushing its luck. However those who seem to suggest sounding off on here will have the club reducing their prices is about as likely as seeing a flying pig. It is competition and good old capitalist response to supply and market demand that will drive down prices. And market demand is best demonstrated by taking custom elsewhere. No one is forced to use any site irrespective of ownership. 

I agree with most of your first paragraph, GDJ, although I see no one saying that people are not allowed to have a moan.

However, your example of rail fares increasing is not in the same league as you cite "rail fares" in general. I think you would see such a comment lacked validity if folk were comparing prices on LNER with GWR, Scotrail etc which are different operators with differing circumstances. To use your analogy, the complaint here would need to be that caravan site prices are increasing in general but that is not the basis of this thread which is about CAMC’s prices only.

+1, there’s the rub-VFM👍🏻. We each have our own limit that makes us step back & say no more. That for me is the rub VFM. 

Agreed. VFM can’t be quantified as we all have different perceptions of what represents VFM for us individuallly. That's why some pay CAMC prices and some don’t.

I am also intrigued as to how it can be that inflation has nothing to do with holidays and, as implied, inflation is only relevant to essentials like food and energy. That is simply factually incorrect...

I don't think anyone has said that, I certainly didn't. What I said was that the inflation rate has nothing to do with booking and paying for a holiday. Yes holidays may (I have no idea) drive up inflation but that was not what I said or implied. People post about how the club is setting it's prices above inflation which would be a valid point if club site holidays were a necessity like food heating and there were not any cheaper alternatives. In this case there are plenty we're told.

Also rail fares are a necessity for some to get to work and hence the headlines. Club sites holidays are not so in my view not the same at all

I'll repost again to make it clear:

The ones comparing increases with inflation even more so. We're not talking about some basic need here, like food or energy costs, that are above the inflation rate, we're talking about a holiday. So what has the inflation got to do with it? There are plenty of cheaper sites out there (we are told - and far more expensive ones too) so just choose the one you want for the the price you want.

And again so what if the club sets its prices above inflation? To buy or not to buy that is the question.  

Well said, Graydjames.  You've summed up my thoughts perfectly. 

Some seem to have forgotten the purpose of a forum is to express and discuss one's (hopefully reasonably fair and factual) opinions, and are rather too ready to dismiss contributions as whingeing and whining.  

I can afford CAMC site fees as well as the next man, but I won’t just stump up any old figure they pluck out of the blue.  VFM has to come into the equation, so it's surely worth feeding back to the Club when some members feel the pips are squeaking?  

The comparison with M&S is a good one.  Some of their prices are wince-inducing too. 

Those supporting CAMC pitching themselves as the M&S of the campsite world would do well to bear in mind what happened to M&S's bottom line.  Their customers deserted and cannot be enticed back, profits on a long downward slope, stores closing...  

MnB, if you mean my earlier reference to doing the weekly shop in M&S, that in no way equates to aligning CAMC with M&S. For one thing, M&S have superb customer service at all levels of their business.

I'm glad you recognise the purpose of a discussion forum because that’s exactly what we’ve been doing here - discussing and debating in good spirit. I don’t think people have been dismissive but have put forward counter arguments and opinions with the result that we agree the perception of VFM is important. 👍🏻

and are rather too ready to dismiss contributions as whingeing and whining.

Would you care to reference those posts, as blindly labelling members contributions as such is hardly conducive to a healthy debate.