What would you like to see changed in the Club

+1

This could turn into a minimalist/maximalist sort of discussion? As pointed out above we know that the full facility sites with service pitches (and now in a few cases Premium Pitches) seem to be very popular. In the past it was thought that motorhomers booked service pitches because it guaranteed a hardstanding. It seems that since you have been able to book a hardstanding pitch, serviced pitches are still a favourite with motorhomers. We have lost a lot of sites in the last year but they have tended to be the low/no facility sites which don't enjoy a high occupancy rate. Obviously we have to accept the some sites were lost through no fault of the Club by lease owners taken them back. The Club, currently, is in the business of providing "proper" campsites and that seems to be proving quite successful. Given the experience of the past year it doesn't seem that the Club see much future in basic campsites? For those motorhomers who just want a place to rest overnight there are plenty of options and I think the issue for the Club is that it would be difficult to compete with such places. The nearest the Club has to an Aire is the new Steamer Quay site but if the expectation is that such a site could be provided for £10/15 a night seems unrealistic? 

David

The Club has identified its core market, and is duly providing Club Sites that suit. Affluent, not keen on much physical labour whilst on site, happy to pay whatever Club decides it can charge, neat easy to pitch up site designs to suit all outfits. Beyond that, it’s future proofing keeping Members via Experience Freedom options. Fingers crossed it all works out🤞

In my experience, it’s the MH’s who use all the services on the so called “all singing all dancing sites” more regularly than caravanners. They’ll be the ones who empty a small bowl of water at a SP, rather than into their tanks and make numerous trips to the TB’s throughout the day, so not to carry containers. So in this modern age, most of us have self sufficient outfits, some use them more fully than others, but such facilities are needed by both, else there are other more basic sites available.

I’m also against metering of electric. I like to turn up, plug in and chill out. I don’t want to be watching what I’m using or if it needs topping up. I’m on holiday!

We are generally happy with the club. We prefer hard standings but are not bothered about serviced pitches but think the current mix needs to be retained. members needs and therefore a mix of pitches should  be retained. The new development of Steamer Key is all serviced hard standings taking away choice which to me is wrong.  It is a smaller site though which might have affected the decision.

Personally I believe the club is for those touring and should stick to this as far as possible. I would avoid statice lodges and the rest where possible. If they are there when a site is taken over then retaining them does make sense and possibly adding them in spaces not suitable for tourers can be done, but it is not the purpose of the club. Tourers must come a clear first.

We seem to have a number of sites with tent spaces but from what I have seen these are normally near empty. If we are going to have them, we need to get them used. The clubs title possibly means any potential campers simply never look at the club, so possibly they should look at getting the message out and getting a decent revenue from them possibly even have a camping title for these which might be better understood.

I’d like to see clarity and a commonly held understanding as to what is possible and permitted as far as occupancy in tents (pup or otherwise) and awnings on club site pitches. I’ve long been of the opinion that if no firebreak issues are infringed then all is well and should be allowed. Definitely not two caravans, motorised or otherwise should be allowed mind but I did see a pitch this year with six adults occupying a motorhome and an attached awning. The group in question were quiet and rule obeying throughout their stay. Also I’ve witnessed a couple with four pets, the latter caged in an awning over night. 

Could it be that the Club is not looking at the full picture?

If it has identified as its core market, those not keen on much physical labour whilst on site, happy to pay whatever Club decides it can charge by providing them with full facility pitches, then it could have misinterpreted the booking figures.

Are these type of pitches referred to taking the lions share of bookings, as members who desire something simpler and cheaper have decided to use the CL network more, or the smaller independent sites. 

If this is the case then the number of this second group cannot really be estimated, and the club could be loosing a lot of bookings, more so than they make on the fully serviced pitches.

Colin

I was only thinking about what the Club is providing now on Club Sites.

I am sure that there are a good few Members who tour primarily via the CL network (we certainly did) because they are happy with more basic provision (although the variety of CLs means some are basic, but others offer a great deal more, with some surpassing what you might find on a Club Site).

CLs have become the default choice for many, as there are few basic Club Sites left. There will be CLs that suit almost every Member, if they have location and value for money as their most important factors for choice.

I think it's fairly clear in the club rules Micky.

The MH you talk about was it a six berth? Even if not if they all paid the per person fee then it is allowed. Sleeping in the awning has been going on for as long as I've been a member and would be impossible to police if it isn't. We've done it on one very warm night and sleeping in pup tents is in the rules.

There is no limit on the number of dogs and again I've often seen pets sleep in the awning.

Providing they (adults and animals) make no noise or affect others then for me it's up to them?

I've noticed two this sites year with tent spaces and they were fairly well used, certainly at weekends in summer.

These two were in parts of the sites that would not be suitable for touring outfits anyway even if converted. 

The area at Seacroft was busy all summer a few year ago when we were there for three weeks.

I've often wondered how people get to know about them although the one in Melrose is often used by by largish group of youngish walkers on some established walking route. And usually cyclists as well, and interestingly enough also many foreign cars use them too.