Can no longer afford

We have a digital membership with the C&CC at a reduced rate. The CAMC May very well have an indication of the numbers. I assume the other club don’t continue to offer it to loose money, therefore I have to assume it is financially beneficial, or at least they don’t loose from it. Clearly if the CAMC can introduce it without offering a discount that would be even better in their eyes. Personally I would be surprised if there are more than 50% of the membership that ever open it. I am not exactly young and I have a load of directories that just sit on the bookshelf until the next addition arrives. English Heritage, National Trust, CAMC to name but a few. The ACSI book did travel to France with us but never left the cupboard it was in. Apps are more up to date, easier to use and work off line using the last update if you don’t have internet, which is getting less an less difficult to access in any event.

Everyone is different and holidaying changes with age. We couldn’t afford a basic caravan or tow car when the kids were little, at their teenage years we could afford a very basic van, that’s when we started. A very basic field at first, then, as the kids were grown, we could afford to join the CC. Then a better caravan and so on. We had many happy holidays with our grandkids at the CC Hillhead and Longleat sites, doing things that we couldn’t afford to have done with our own children.

We preferred to use the site facilities so mainly stuck to Club sites. Though on retirement we started to question how much we were paying for, membership, pitch, storage, petrol etc. We rarely take holidays abroad and have strong feelings about not using holiday cottages, in our opinion, houses should be available for locals to buy not people making money out of holiday lets. So weighing it all up we decided on buying the static van, there were also some health reasons involved. Yes it does cost us more But, we use it more, our grown up kids use it, and the teenage grandkids love it, throughout the summer it is hardly ever empty.  We don’t have to book, we don’t have to tow or set up and we can arrive whenever we want. Looking at the Club prices now it does seem an awful lot for a place to put a caravan overnight with just  electric and loo and shower facilities. Think even if we hadn’t bought the static we would have bowed out by now.

We won’t be able to afford it forever as the ground rent is bound to rise year on year. Then we will have to have another rethink. At the end of the day it’s all about the individuals position, what is affordable and what is worth the money to them. However, as with everything, if prices rise too steeply people will vote with their feet, there is only so much people will pay for a pitch to park their van.

Interesting when people say they will vote with their wheels yet when people actually do vote with their wheels and use sites extensively and it's not what these same people want or rather at the prices they want they then want to know what research was done?

For the two weeks of the season I noticed that there were more outfits in service pitches than on standard pitches on a site that had 48 SP v 140 standard. The same site a few weeks ago and the SP were full while there were quite a few other pitches left. What 'research' does the club need when looking at that?

There's a wide variety of site, prices,, pitches, providers out there. Why not just pick the one you like rather than going on about how you won't want to use club sites ever again or want them cheaper?

A couple of years ago I suggested that the club should make all pitches serviced (when upgrading a site) and charge a flat fee....very similar to the European model.  I accept that there are some solo campers who would be disadvantaged ... but suspect the numbers are very low vs membership (Solo campers do go 'over there' and are subject to the set pitch fee).

This would also negate the provision of motorhome drive over areas (I have noticed an increase of motorhome users selecting serviced pitches...presumably to avoid using these). There would also be no requirement for the 'service points'....CDP being sited by TB's or on the pitch itself as per 'super pitch type...

I've always regarded the sites directory as a handbook not just a site finding book. In fact when we first joined I probably read quite a bit of it to understand what it was all about and what was on offer. I found it was hidebound with rules too which I didn't find particularly encouraging. I've always felt the club is more membership centre directed and these are the people who take part in meetings etc and probably have the most influence on decisions? Whether this affects what the club decides regarding costs and improvements would be interesting to know but I think there is now a big split between basic vanning and the now more expensive provisions which cost a lot to provide and which are not going to offer the majority a reasonably priced holiday after the initial outlay. So is it going to be more wheels on pitches or fewer more expensive wheels? It will be interesting to see how this develops. 

For ourselves we've recouped our initial outlay, hung on to our good older van but we're probably getting to the end of our present lifestyle and I wonder who will be replacing us in the present climate?

For those that are using Club sites it may be that folk ARE voting with their wheels and moving over to serviced pitches for whatever reason (age, convenience whatever) but it is certainly apparent on this forum that many members are voting in the other direction and leaving sites behind in lieu of CLs etc. The main reason cited in these anecdotal postings is (virtually) unanimously rising price levels, and the price of a serviced pitch, not to mention the new Premium Pitches, will certainly not be inviting for those who need to watch their touring spend.

I have never quite understood why, when starting with a blank canvas, you don't make all pitches serviced? Not sure they would need individual taps/waste as they could be shared between 2/4 pitches as is quite common in Europe. I suppose the problem is that of pricing because the Club, I would imagine, would want to charge a higher rate for what becomes a standard pitch?

David

David, I'm sure that is it in a nutshell. The club seems to have no way or inclination to do anything other than push site prices into the stratosphere.

the introduction of Premium pitches now places some pitches at £52 or more a night. Even if we had guaranteed weather, a fabulous pool, a wonderful restaurant and bar we wouldn't be paying those sort of prices.

 as it happens, we DO get all the above when we camp away but would only be paying €22 (£18.20) a night. We tour for sufficient length of time for the ferry cost to be easily recouped during the stay with such a huge site saving.

Club are now catering primarily for those with big, heavy on inside utilities, with owners who don’t want to, or for one reason or another cannot do many of the chores associated with touring. Hence all the services, premium pitches, etc…. And of course the price tag that goes with providing all of this.
For anyone like us who still enjoy some of the physical aspects of DIY holidaying, and are happy to make do with a lot less in terms of facilities and services, there are still a few of the smaller Sites. But their season isn’t long, so it’s the CL network mainly for folks like us. 

Agree Brue. I once found myself totally engrossed in all the information in the handbook, aside from the site info, one rainy evening. If folks did use it for reference, it would pre empt some of the “how do I do this” questions that sometimes crop up.

Agree about the basic v expensive outlay as well. That’s what prompted my going back to roots comment. 

As for going forwards……I always think the Club is a little like the LA I used to work for. It had elected representatives/committees, and it had professionally qualified salaried experts in given specialist spheres of required services. Reports were written, suggestions and feasibility studies put together, and then presented to Committees to nod through.