Excessive site fees
Comments
-
BB when are you going to accept that we are all different? Some like CL type sites with no, or limited facilities, others don't and prefer a full toielet block and 16 amps. Yes I know some CL's now offer these facilities, but these are generally more expensive,
just as a larger facility site will be. Just be grateful that we all don't want to visit your favourite CL's, or they might have to invoke a frenzy booking day as wellvery true why can't people accept that?
0 -
But in fairness, why can't BB have a point of view?
Try to find fault with his argument by all means (I personally don't chose sites without toilets and showers) but please don't berate someone simply for having their own views......even if they differ from yours.
0 -
BB when are you going to accept that we are all different? Some like CL type sites with no, or limited facilities, others don't and prefer a full toielet block and 16 amps. Yes I know some CL's now offer these facilities, but these are generally more expensive,
just as a larger facility site will be. Just be grateful that we all don't want to visit your favourite CL's, or they might have to invoke a frenzy booking day as wellsteve, my point was that JVB was suggesting that cc sites offer much more in terms of facilities and security.....they dont.
if a public loo and a shower is the the key facility attraction of a 'full fat' cc site, then great.....but does this justify twice the price?
a cl with an ehu, a water tap and a waste disposal point isnt a no facilities site.....it has everything a cc site has execpt a shared loo/shower. if customers want to pay an extra £10 a night for sharing this with scores of others, lovely...
some cls also have these added 'attractions' but i suspect those who use cc sites wouldt go there as they dont provide 'cc' levels of toilet paper or whatever....
0 -
BB when are you going to accept that we are all different? Some like CL type sites with no, or limited facilities, others don't and prefer a full toielet block and 16 amps. Yes I know some CL's now offer these facilities, but these are generally more expensive,
just as a larger facility site will be. Just be grateful that we all don't want to visit your favourite CL's, or they might have to invoke a frenzy booking day as wellvery true why can't people accept that?
why can people read which post was being responded to before wading in on their chargers....?
i didnt say that it was right or wrong to choose a cc site over a cl, merely challenging JVBs point which suggested that cc sites had more facilities and security than a cl .....i disagreed.
0 -
But in fairness, why can't BB have a point of view?
Try to find fault with his argument by all means (I personally don't chose sites without toilets and showers) but please don't berate someone simply for having their own views......even if they differ from yours.
Ian read the post. I never said someone could not have another point of view.
0 -
I don't mind anyone having a point of view but BB's constant need to try and indoctriate folk into his way of thinking is a bit wearing.
and you dont think youre constant defence of all things cc isnt any more wearing?.......
to quote the off trotted line of cc stalwarts....
if you dont like this forum, go and try another one.....
0 -
BB when are you going to accept that we are all different? Some like CL type sites with no, or limited facilities, others don't and prefer a full toielet block and 16 amps. Yes I know some CL's now offer these facilities, but these are generally more expensive,
just as a larger facility site will be. Just be grateful that we all don't want to visit your favourite CL's, or they might have to invoke a frenzy booking day as wellvery true why can't people accept that?
why can people read which post was being responded to before wading in on their chargers....?
i didnt say that it was right or wrong to choose a cc site over a cl, merely challenging JVBs point which suggested that cc sites had more facilities and security than a cl .....i disagreed.
I am afraid that it does not come across that way BB and I do not think I am alone in this interpretation.
0 -
DD, bikes are the 'swag' of choice at Clumber, i believe.....
0 -
BB when are you going to accept that we are all different? Some like CL type sites with no, or limited facilities, others don't and prefer a full toielet block and 16 amps. Yes I know some CL's now offer these facilities, but these are generally more expensive,
just as a larger facility site will be. Just be grateful that we all don't want to visit your favourite CL's, or they might have to invoke a frenzy booking day as wellvery true why can't people accept that?
why can people read which post was being responded to before wading in on their chargers....?
i didnt say that it was right or wrong to choose a cc site over a cl, merely challenging JVBs point which suggested that cc sites had more facilities and security than a cl .....i disagreed.
I am afraid that it does not come across that way BB and I do not think I am alone in this interpretation.
well, i wouldnt expect you or 'someone else' to have any other opinion....
how would ypu have worded a rssponse to JVB, then?
surely, a like for like comparison on each element of 'facilities' and 'security' might do it......? it seems not.
0 -
Unless of course they liked spending time in Public Lavatories. Not everybody's idea of fun.
If the CS was on a farm it would be very secure.
K
K. Whist I would not claim that CC sites are immune from thefts, particularly ones like Clumber. You only have to google rural crime or thefts from farms, to see that your statement is very far from the truth.
I have yet to read of herds of CC Ltd members, flocks of Aqua Role’s or even Waste master’s being rustled from CL’s but perhaps I have missed something. Now I realise that a CC Ltd member aged for six or seven decades then slow roasted for several weeks may been seen as a delicacy in some quarters but I would have thought the market was quite small. As for the trade in second hand equipment again I would think that anyone wanting to go thieving would do so on a large site where the pickings are better and more numerous; something like a large CC Ltd site; however I am willing to be enlightened, and can someone tell me what happened at Clumber because I have missed that as well.
I wasn't thinking about the small things such as Aqua Rolls or caps. Given the scale of thefts, everything from large tractors downwards. I personally would be happier leaving my van on a CC site and going out for an evening meal, than possibly the only van in a field. Just my opinion you understand, others are free to make their own choice.
edit we pay for gold security at our pound. 24 hour guard, CCTV, razor wire etc. So a lone van in a field for me would be a non starter.
0 -
I don't mind anyone having a point of view but BB's constant need to try and indoctriate folk into his way of thinking is a bit wearing.
yes very true again, perhaps he doesn't mean to come across that way?
0 -
BB when are you going to accept that we are all different? Some like CL type sites with no, or limited facilities, others don't and prefer a full toielet block and 16 amps. Yes I know some CL's now offer these facilities, but these are generally more expensive, just as a larger facility site will be. Just be grateful that we all don't want to visit your favourite CL's, or they might have to invoke a frenzy booking day as well
very true why can't people accept that?
why can people read which post was being responded to before wading in on their chargers....?
i didnt say that it was right or wrong to choose a cc site over a cl, merely challenging JVBs point which suggested that cc sites had more facilities and security than a cl .....i disagreed.
Write your comments here...Good post ----- As has often been mentioned on this forum, there are a few, possibly not more than five , who do not like others having a different opinion to themselves.
0 -
I don't mind anyone having a point of view but BB's constant need to try and indoctriate folk into his way of thinking is a bit wearing.
yes very true again, perhaps he doesn't mean to come across that way?
plese dont discuss me with someone else in the third person.
if you want to ask me something, please go ahead.
this type of posting (indirect criticism) is one of the features of several posters on CT, and i could name them...
so, if you have something to say (about me), please go ahead (to me)
btw, ill tell you now that your type of posting is a bit wearing but perhaps you dont mean to come across that way?
0 -
I don't mind anyone having a point of view but BB's constant need to try and indoctriate folk into his way of thinking is a bit wearing.
yes very true again, perhaps he doesn't mean to come across that way?
That's a very rude way to talk about someone, in the third party when clearly they can read the comment.
Rude and an attempt at bullying, I would say......
0 -
Will someone wake me up when this thread gets back to discussing site fees please? I'll spend some quality time having a nap until it does!
0 -
I don't mind anyone having a point of view but BB's constant need to try and indoctriate folk into his way of thinking is a bit wearing.
yes very true again, perhaps he doesn't mean to come across that way?
plese dont discuss me with someone else in the third person.
if you want to ask me something, please go ahead.
this type of posting (indirect criticism) is one of the features of several posters on CT, and i could name them...
so, if you have something to say (about me), please go ahead (to me)
btw, ill tell you now that your type of posting is a bit wearing but perhaps you dont mean to come across that way?
ruffled your feathers a bit BB? I keep forgeting that was you job (as you once proudly stated)
I fully apologise if you are in any way offended and upset by my post. It should not have been made.
0 -
corners, of course i accept your apology.
im always happy to debate, directly, any aspect of the forum discussion contents...back to excessive site fees, shall we?
0 -
Another very rude post.
Why? It's the truth.
0 -
No, not today, Ian.
0
