CAMC CL Signage
Comments
-
0
-
Another one toeing the company line!!!
Come on David you know darn well that the CC has treated CL owners shabbily. Go on be a man and admit it!!
5 -
I think members need to calm down a little. It doesn't matter what leaflets or signs CL owners have they can only be booked through the club site or handbook. Either way members know what they are booking a recognised Cl. Some of these posts on this site are bordering on hysteria.
1 -
Whilst we may have frustrations regarding signage, loyalty runs deep with me. We like having CAMC members as guests - you are nice people and I would not wish to lose the clientele we have.
Both Clubs insist that CLs / CSs only accept members of their Clubs and we do abide by rules regarding member-only and up to 5 vans.
Ian Kelly
01691 622951
Caravan@BirchHill.co.uk
www.BirchHill.co.uk
Birch Hill Farm – a multi-award winning caravan site in the beautiful lake-lands of Shropshire - exclusively for members of the Caravan and Motorhome ClubRead the reviews - look at the photos.
Number 1321 in the 2017/18 Sites Directory
Number 1398 in the 2015/16 Sites Directory1 -
I see no hysteria as such David. No idea about other posters but, I suspect that like myself, they are perfectly calm and are simply expressing their views regarding what they observe. No doubt you do the same David. I don't see a great deal of unpleasantness either David - rather people calmly expressing those opinions in a relatively civilised manner.
3 -
Ian, will there be a
motorhome@birchhill.co.uk
address that I can use?
;-)
1 -
Good point! Maybe also:
- FoldingCaravan@BirchHill.co.uk and
- TrailerTent@BirchHill.co.uk
- FifthWheel@BirchHill.co.uk
- DemountableCamperVan@BirchHill.co.uk
We welcome you all
Ian
0 -
The relationship between the Club and CL owners is a matter for the two parties concerned, nobody else. It is entirely up to the Club when and how they communicate information. Clearly the Club wanted to keep the rebranding secret, the more people that know beforehand the greater the risk as I have mentioned before. I fail to see what adverse effect it would have on and CL's as far as their customers are concerned.
David
1 -
Whilst this
Hang on David, what about all the many staff at the magazine printers' the handbook printers', the sticker printers', the sign makers', the letterhead printers', the garment makers', the garment embroiderers' etc etc. These are obviously several different companies with numerous staff. Were they all sworn to secrecy with the threat of no further business if anything leaked out? Are CL owners to be less trusted than these companies?
Whilst this whole debacle was obviously cooked up over someone's kitchen table the production of all the necessary materials could not possibly have taken place there.
10 -
JohnM20 - Over a kitchen table? No doubt gallons of tea had been drunk. Many overpaid head honchos consulted, probably a new department opened. Make it last to justify our jobs. Cost- whats that to us to worry about. its only members monies.
4 -
I am not sure why there was the requirement to keep it so secret and announce it on a specific day. Except as some sort of Ego Trip for the club hierarchy. Particularly when this has resulted in at least one CL owner going to unnecessary expense. Given the number of CL's they are unlikely to be the only one.
It is not as though the CC was like a new mobile phone with someone poaching all your new add ons. Or announce their new phone the day before to steal your thunder. Apart from all the fancy jargon and signs, it is purely a rebranding, nothing else has changed. So why the need for such secrecy, which to date has delayed the site book and cost CL owners unnecessarily.
5 -
Whilst you might not agree with it the Club clearly decided they wanted to keep it under wraps until it was announced at the NEC. In order to achieve that it would have been sensible to keep it on a need to know basis which clearly did not include CL owners. I think perhaps what you might have to think about is what would have happened had it been more widely known, a months or even days in advance, and rumours started to appear here and there. You can just imagine what the result would have been on Club Together!!! There would have been uproar about members being kept in the dark?
David
0 -
They could still have had there big reveal at the show. Even if they had announced months before that they were going to rebrand the club. They could even have run a completion for the new logo and name, with a motorhome as the prize. This would have probably worked out cheaper than the consultants they employed. It would also have been clear why the site books were delayed, and CL owners could have run down there stock of old advertising literature.
8 -
They could have even just told people not to order new stuff without saying why.
Even just 600 CLs at £500 a time is £3,000.000 that is not being spent on improving the CL part of the network.
4 -
So! The "edit" does not work. £300,000 only.
1 -
I think many of us CL owners would like to think we were in a partnership with the Club, and would like to see the club grow and give benefit to members. It would have been very easy for the Club to have said to us in one of our newsletters 12 months ago that we are reviewing our signage of CL's and would be grateful if you could hold back on any expense you were thinking of in advertising until we have made some decisions on this. Quite clearly Mr Klyne you are following instructions you as a Moderator have been given, but spare a thought to CL's who have lost money and are worried about the proposed signage to their sites, I am fortunate our site can be see from the roadside but some are hidden away and can take some finding.
David www.perthshirecl.co.uk
7 -
How sensible would that have been? I said something very similar one thread lord knows which one 😃. I think that would have respectful to CL's. In fact you are probably the ones who could have been given a blanket nod, along the lines you've suggested, printers and others would have had some sort of gagging clause I presume.
1 -
You may very well think that but I couldn't possible comment.
3 -
they can only be booked through the club site or handbook
Not true, as a number of CL's are also listed on other web sites such as 5Van & UKcampsites, and so can be booked through them.
0 -
So you don't think that the CC has treated CLs shabbily then? You must have read all the complaints on this forum regarding the issues, surely.
All the problems with reviews, inaccurate data on the web site, a new logo that is unrecognisable when most members are use to the familiar green sign and wording, no indication on the sign that they are only allowed 5 members which is bound to cause confusion.
1 -
All the problems with reviews, inaccurate data on the web site, a new logo that is unrecognisable when most members are use to the familiar green sign and wording, no indication on the sign that they are only allowed 5 members which is bound to cause confusion.
So apart from that there is no problem and doubtless the CC will sort out any remaining problems ............................ soon .............as is there current indication of timescale for such matters
0 -
10 weeks so far since launch of the new web site and we're hardly any nearer a proper solution, by the looks of it. And of course no real indication of when all will be fixed or any sort of apology for the c*ck-ups.
1 -
NTH - I understood that a release is planned for the 28th which should resolve the hardstanding filter issue and the searching by CL name where duplicates exist error plus others. Not included is the missing reviews or the inability to add a review to a CL with no reviews. There are apparently a number of options to fix this issue and more time is required to work out which is the best.
Alan
now with online booking
0
