Glamping Pods

Thanks for your post but it's unlikely that anybody of any relevance from the club's staff will see it on here.  You might be better to put this in writing directly to the club.

Bryn

Is this mentioned in the latest edition of the magazine, if so I have not yet seen it. Personally I have no objection to the principal of alternative accommodation on Club sites as not everyone in the future will tow or have a motorhome or perhaps may decide to give up on regular touring but still like to visit their favourite campsite. 

The investment question is interesting. Do we know whether the Club is directly investing or is it some sort of lease pay back scheme? I take your point about priority on investment on some sites. Moreton in Marsh is a case in point. There has been a considerable investment in static accommodation but little in the touring side of the site which to my mind needs a complete overhaul by providing not only proper sized pitches but also adding some serviced pitches?

This would have been a good question to have asked at the recent AGM but you will have to wait a year for the next one.

David

Thank you for your replies,

David the article doesn't breakdown the investment structure unfortunately, however my frustration sits as much with my perception of the expansion in this area as it does the use of funds, however they are funding it. 

As you mention above in relation to Moreton in Marsh, I question the logic of prioritising  the investment in pods rather than upgrading the overall  touring experience.   Happy to be proven wrong but id hazard a guess that the funds and time spent at all levels at Moreton in Marsh, amongst others, to introduce pods could have been used to significantly improve/overhaul the touring facilities, and in turn the overall experience for the majority of the sites visitors!   I don't see pods as an introduction to touring, but more as a step away from the heritage and principles of the clubs foundations and a worrying one at that.

I echo your view that larger, better serviced pitches are required and I suspect most sites in the network would benefit from improvements in this area.  I'm all for diversification where necessary but when occupancy levels are high and pitch prices are set at mid to high end of the range I just feel the use of funds and pitches could be put to better use.  If family want to experience the world of touring alongside you let them sleep in the awning like my families early experience of touring, you never know they might just enjoy it!

Anyway end of ramblings, I don't usually feel compelled to comment but the direction of travel here feels its going in completely the wrong direction, reinvestment to improve facilities for the majority should be the clubs focus and if it wants to capitalise on future generations it would be best investing in its wifi infrastructure....just ask my kids 😃 

Bryn

The latest magazine has just arrived in the post so I will have a look at it later.

Regarding WiFi they did mention at the AGM that 70 sites now have Fibre Broadband. However I always get the impression they throttle back individual connections so all that the Fibre Broadband would do is provide a more consistent connection which would be an improvement compared to some. 

David

I glanced at the magazine photos of Cayton Village - described there as the "dream holiday venue for all" - a touch of hyperbole I thought. I don't mind the concept of extra accommodation but winced at the Nissen hut in the foreground.   

I do wish the Club would employ better landscape architects as it does rather look as though the same people the Club has employed do army camps as their main line of business. It's not beautiful and wouldn't win prizes at the Chelsea  flower show, but perhaps it will mellow in time.

Are the Pods and other than LV types of non touring accommodation coming out of funds from the same pot,  or as seems it is called "Experiance Freedom" ,which it seems.  like many companies is another arm of the Caravan Club Ltd (companies house registration)that is part of ,but not part of, "our club" but a stand alone organisation?

Then it should not be funded to the detriment of the touring area of sites , that when reading reviews and site staff comments it seems is being neglected by finance cuts

The reviews of other "refurbished?" sites also mention that ,  ,I remember when the "centenary site"was first opened on the outskirts of the New Forest on an old WW2 airfield the same comments were made , on our last visit you would not think so it has very much matured,

It is very obvious or seems by the pictures that te glamping pitches are much more generous than the tourer side of the site

With the current increase in the number of people staying in Britain for their holidays and the significant proportion of which have taken to the road with a caravan, motorhome or campervan there is more than ever a need for more touring pitches. At the end of this pandemic, whenever that is, there will be some who decide that the touring life is not for them but I guess many will stick with it so more pitches will definitely be required. I know not all or even many sites are fully booked 7 days per week all through the main season but weekend availability of a pitch is still a problem for many. And this will be just the same for glamping pods except it will be the club who have unused financial assets in the form of pods standing there unused for a good proportion of the time. Additional expenditure will also undoubtedly be required for maintenance. I would hope that the cost of hiring a pod will be sufficient to cover both the initial investment and the maintenance and that we 'tourers' will not be subsidising the venture.

I think I am probably correct in believing that the cost of the construction of a hardstanding pitch is significantly less than the cost of a pod and maintenance costs must be extremely low so I know where I would invest my money. Put it where there is a recognised need and not invest it in a new venture that may or may not succeed.

We 'tourers' have our own financial asset in the form of our caravan, motorhome or campervan but at least we can always try to find an alternative site, possibly and, indeed probably, a commercial site. If 'the club' can't provide us with what most of us joined the club for then I think many will vote with their feet, or perhaps that should say, wheels and not bother with their membership. 

Over the years when I was working I came across several companies that tried diversifying only to eventually fold because the new venture didn't take off.

And just to finish, remember the old adage, "Jack of all trades, master of none". Improve what you already have, ie caravan and motorhome pitches and make them first class before you go down uncharted routes that will be to the advantage of no-one.

As I have long thought the 'Caravan Club' ( as I still think of it) ceased to be a club many years ago and is essentially a business. Leave alternative accommodation to other providers and concentrate on tourers.

As soon as I saw the picture in this months magazine , I thought POW camp