What is going on?
78 replies
dave the rave replied on 08/07/2023 12:54
Posted on 07/07/2023 23:26 by CornersteadyRe-reading the OP when it said both sites I assumed it meant both pitching areas on the club's but I see there is another non club site there?
dave the rave replied on 08/07/2023 12:57
Posted on 07/07/2023 22:46 by InaDIt surely can't be price as its only about £35 a night in peak season.
That's a very interesting observation DK. I must admit that, whilst I realise site fees have gone up, I wouldn't call £35 a night "only". Obviously it's relative to what one can, and is willing to, pay; but I do wonder whether everyone shares that view.
We are fortunate enough to be able to afford to pay that, but there is no way that we would. We have stayed at Garlieston twice a lot of years ago. A few years ago we were in that area and spent about a week on a community-run site in Port William; a superb site, right by the sea; very clean toiletblock and even a washing machine which, at the time, was free to use. Overall a site we preferred to Garlieston.
young thomas replied on 08/07/2023 13:04
Posted on 08/07/2023 11:55 by JollyKernowYou've said "I'm sure" twice. Are you sure?
JK
InaD replied on 08/07/2023 13:27
Posted on 08/07/2023 10:01 by DavidKlyneIna
In the context that people seem to be complaining that peak site fees costing between £40 and £50 a night, £35 a night seems good value to me. We were there last year in May and it cost £27.30 a night, a little below our average nightly spend for last year. I don't know what the peak fees were last year but clearly they have not gone up much. Garlieston is a nice place with an interesting history and we were only there for three nights. Port William does look a nice place and perhaps chalk that up for a future visit but I don't think the decision will be based on site costs.
David
Posted on 08/07/2023 13:27
David
I agree that compared to £40-£50 a night, £35 is indeed cheaper; whether £35 a night represents good value is another matter and based on personal evaluation. On our 2 visits we found Garlieston interesting too and enjoyed our stays.
Decisions on sites aren't purely based on cost alone, but neither will we book any site regardless of cost; if we want to be somewhere specific, then we'll pay more, but if it's an area we're looking at, then we'll look for what we consider to be vfm. We have been away quite a few times this year, but not used any CAMC sites, finding that CLs and CSs represent better vfm and give a more choice. All IMHO of course 
At the end of the day it's just as well we're not all the same, or we'd never manage to get a pitch anywhere 
5 people like this
brue replied on 08/07/2023 14:33
Posted on 08/07/2023 14:33
A member of staff has quoted this on Trust Pilot after the umpteenth complaint about site costs this year and VFM. (5/7/23)
"In future years the club's ambition is to set lower annual price increases "
There may have been some errors of judgement over the rush to purchase vans after lock down which gave the brief false impression that camp sites would be overflowing with new keen campers? But it seems many have now changed their minds and the vans are awaiting resale.
Let's hope for a more balanced approach over next year. 
1 person likes this
eurortraveller replied on 08/07/2023 15:03
replied on 08/07/2023 15:28
Goldie146 replied on 08/07/2023 16:32
Posted on 08/07/2023 16:32
We drove past the site a couple of days ago, and though we didn’t stop it doesn’t look enticing (especially when the tide’s out). I much prefer New England Bay where we are. More spread out with different types of pitching areas. Both sites are rather off the beaten track (though Garlieston is near a pub if that’s your sort of thing). We drove 160 miles to get here, but as it’s our main (6 days) holiday don’t mind the cost of fuel.
Longtimecaravanner replied on 08/07/2023 17:43
Posted on 08/07/2023 16:32 by Goldie146We drove past the site a couple of days ago, and though we didn’t stop it doesn’t look enticing (especially when the tide’s out). I much prefer New England Bay where we are. More spread out with different types of pitching areas. Both sites are rather off the beaten track (though Garlieston is near a pub if that’s your sort of thing). We drove 160 miles to get here, but as it’s our main (6 days) holiday don’t mind the cost of fuel.
Posted on 08/07/2023 17:43
Only the second site in 40 years where we booked for a week and left after one night as we hated it.We were crammed in between the front row overlooking the harbour of motorhomes and the row behind us of caravans. I have to say the warden was wonderful in refunding our fees. We went on to New England Bay and loved it.
DavidKlyne replied on 08/07/2023 22:50
Posted on 08/07/2023 17:43 by LongtimecaravannerOnly the second site in 40 years where we booked for a week and left after one night as we hated it.We were crammed in between the front row overlooking the harbour of motorhomes and the row behind us of caravans. I have to say the warden was wonderful in refunding our fees. We went on to New England Bay and loved it.
Posted on 08/07/2023 22:50
Jenny
You would have probably been happier of the other section of the site across the road as the pitches are a bit more generous and no rush to get a harbour side pitch? Perhaps now as we have a motorhome we tend to spend less time on anyone site also Garlieston was handy for our onward route to Ravenglass.
David
Gallery
This topic has been locked, no new replies can be added.
dave the rave