WiFi waste of money?

No I did not imply, note the rather.

It is interesting that when other non club organisations review any site, the phrase, up to caravan club standard is often cited, saw sush a phrase only recently, so maybe they believe the myth too?

Actually I don't know about many other sites, and never perpetrated any such myth, you are being disingenuous and all I know is that club sites are always clean and spotless, and they do have that reputation, read some reviews.  

But if there are other sites as good, you would expect them to be in demand, but for whatever reason the simple fact is they are not. More people want to come to club sites, even with the poor (as defined by you) booking and wifi. It has been that way for years, since I joined in 1999 and has continued so. You can develop spurious counter arguments that you think explains the club's popularity but you cannot deny the popularity of the club. 

But I bet the wifi is not "the most desirable attribute" there is it, David? 

What part of the UK is the Kuna used?

"…you clearly implied it with your statement "rather than excellent sites with very good clean facilities.." WiFi and toilet facilities are not associated so why perpetuate the myth that non club sites are not as clean."

I saw no implication, Phish, nor did I see any perpetuation of a previously unheard of myth. I think you’re reading far too much into the words.

The user and all related content has been Deleted User

The user and all related content has been Deleted User

I do not deny the popularity of the club, I am a member and use some of the excellent services they offer. 

I did not use spurious counter arguments, there are many commercials and CLs that offer better for less cost than the club sites. Why you state the commercials are not as popular is totally unfounded, as I previously asked - what are the club occupancy levels?

The only reason the club sites are "popular" is that the membership demand out strips the number of prime sites available. This is not a sign of popularity or quality but an indication of the success the club has at retaining the membership and offering a product that offers value.

Having good WiFi with sufficient bandwidth is a total necessity to many people. Teenagers fall ill and fail to function normally if they don't have WiFi, may people have work commitments when on site, people like to plan, walking, cycling etc. with downloads to things the stick on their arms to track them and show the world were they have been. When these people become the majority of the club membership (5 years?) then what?

 

 

as I previously asked - what are the club occupancy levels?

I think we once showed 75% occupancy rate across the network at peak times in a previous discussion based on LA, some sites running not only at 100% most of the time but at over 100%, 110% + I recall (yes that is correct - strange isn't it further details on request but it come from a warden).

The only reason the club sites are "popular" is that the membership demand out strips the number of prime sites available. This is not a sign of popularity or quality but an indication of the success the club has at retaining the membership and offering a product that offers value

Right 

I think your last paragraph is perhaps tongue in cheek.

 

Prompted by the advert in the recent C&MC magazine I purchased a portable WiFi unit, not from the club but from Currys where they had an offer. Proposing to convert it to PAYG after first month. Works splendidly at home, connects more items than i've got, not tried it on site but have high hopes.

I have paid for CC WiFi for the last 2 years. The biggest problem which is self evident at Clumber Park is that the WiFi coverage is OK but the speed available to the sites location is woefully slow.

We have a mobile EE router on board and mostly we get a signal so don't need the CC for telly viewing. On sites like Clumber where the phone signal is all but non-existent a good WiFi service (include speed here) is very important. I pay extra for CC WiFi but find it patchy at best service wise.

Why not only have WiFi provided on site where phone data signal is difficult and then do it properly by using a dish to pull in data at a fast and useable speed for distribution hi a the site WiFi aerials? Using a copper phone wire many miles long seems to be a real issue on most remote sites. A radio delivered connection at the site for redistribution males good sense I think. I do not think charging anything to non users is fair at all. In the same way - I object to not getting a cheaper rate for not using the showers, pot washing or children's playpark.