CL's - A survey to gather your views
Comments
-
I agree.
I’ve completed the survey as I do use CLs but rather infrequently and I’m not sure the survey captures the reasons why I don’t use them more often.
If it’s aimed at existing users then I understand but I would think the survey offers an opportunity to understand the untapped market better. Many of the questions focus on issues I don’t care about (walks from the site for example) and although it offers plenty of opportunity for comments I think you’ll end up with a collection of issues that will prove harder to analyse.
Great start though. Shame the club doesn’t do this on your behalf
(the reasons I don’t use cls more often is down to the problems I’ve had and the time I’ve wasted trying to book by the way)
0 -
Well that is one of the big questions on the survey, how would you prefer to book and could the club set up a better booking system for CLs and how might this be funded etc. I think the survey covers most bases, for all users and prospective ones too.
1 -
To be honest, with my ex marketing officers hat on, I am a bit wary of the questions. Like others, I seem to have completed this without perhaps thinking about it more, and perhaps should have asked a few questions about how the information is going to be used, and indeed by whom?
I think surveying the membership about CL usage and important factors determining what prevents or enhances a visit is very important, and indeed ought to be something the Club does on behalf of CL owners and members. So I commend the group on this. But, some of the questions, and how you can submit an answer are a bit skewed for me. For example, I can only choose with a van or a MH, not both, and I know there are other members like us out there. Then the question around length of membership, it's very skewed towards new members, upper limit being three years or over. There will be thousands of members out there with three decades of membership, who will have a good understanding of the background of CLs in terms of diversity, range of facilities, etc...... and may not need or require many of the requirement that are listed further along in the survey.
With another look at the survey, I can't help thinking that it's going to give results that will indicate that the way forward is to encourage CLs to become in the main, tiny Club Site clones, complete with high tech booking interaction, a tap, waste disposal at every pitch, carded gate entrances, toilets and showers and consequently, what the member will be paying for is the chance to pay a premium for being one of only five!
I have no doubts that quite a large percentage of the membership might be perfectly happy moving towards such clone sites. But there might also be a percentage happy with a wide range of places to stay, at true budget prices, without too many of the frills if they are going to significantly raise CL prices.
The very selling point of membership for me are the CLs. But that also comes with knowing that the CL network is and hopefully will remain diverse. There will be those out there looking upon CLs as a business, with income and expenditure targets carefully monitored, tweaked in a variety of ways to ensure maximum potential. That's great, good luck to them. But I also know that a good deal of CLs are only part of a total income, and are not overly worried if they don't achieve a target for every pitch, every month. We are good friends with quite a few CL owners, those who we have stayed with down the decades, and who, despite only offering somewhere to pitch up, empty waste and fill a water tank, are happy with their lot.
I am apprehensive we will lose more of these low tech, reasonably basic tiny sites that are happy for visitors to stay at a very good price. Which at the moment is possibly the majority of CLs, not too basic, but not too managed and marketed either.
Very much my take on things, there to be shot down in flames.
8 -
Hi Brue, I got to that question about booking and gave up.
People manage to book all the independent campsites sites down here without the Club setting up a booking system for them, they manage to book bed and breakfasts, guest houses and hotels too, as well as restaurants for dinner. If they can't work out how to book a CL then they are inept.
It isn't the booking system which made me give up on CLs - it's what I found when I got there.
2 -
TTDA - I agree with most of what you say, but is there a possibility that you might be pre-judging the results, albeit I concede that there is a bias in the questions towards what you are suggesting? I think we both appreciate just how difficult it is to construct the 'perfect' questionnaire and to do so is probably outside the scope and resources of the CL Users Group. I think that, providing the results are statistically significant, this may be the start of something to develop further in the future.
0 -
Actually, that might just indicate part of what I am trying to say. If users do nothing but look at a few photos, read a brief description, then click a booking form, they could be in for a bit of a shock! Even when booking hotels, cottages etc...... I never ever just complete a booking form. I try and think of those things that are important to me, that could make or break a visit. So I always have some other form of interaction with my host to be! It might be an email, it might be by phone, but we seldom have any nasty surprises.
I wouldn't like the Club to run the CL booking system. From experience I know I can get what I want easier by talking to Wardens on Club Sites directly..........even at those sites often showing fully booked!
Edit: apologies R&R, this reply is around posts to do with online booking!
2 -
It's less to do with "how to do it" as I'm sure most find their way round this but more perhaps with getting a response quickly from a site owner (the difference between being available at a hotel reception desk or easy on line bookings etc or being perhaps out working on a farm, doing a day job, forgetting to check e mails etc.) I can see the point of a central contact, however as CLs vary so much there are a lot of other considerations.
A good description and a couple of clear photos would be more of a priority for me. Maybe the club could do a rating system according to what's on offer?
There's no way I'm going to criticise this survey, I hope it helps us all.
1 -
Takethedoglong - Thank you for your thoughtful comments. As you, like me, have a marketing background I completely understand your points.
As you will appreciate, it is extremely difficult to construct a survey with nil bias. Nielsens et al have made Billions out of the survey market, sadly the CL Owners Group has more limited resources!
However, I'm pleased to report that the survey now has 450+ responses, so is nearing 0.3% of the 154,000 members who stay on a CL once per year or 2% of the 21,000 Members who join the Club 'Mainly' for the CL network.
Perhaps the Club, which has a full-time Market Research Manager (with a significant budget), will conduct a survey with greater rigour than our attempt. However, as a first 'stab', I think our survey will at least provide some food for thought.
I hope the questions are not too 'skewed' and never envisaged that someone might own both a Caravan AND a Motorhome, but you live and learn!
As stated in the OP, we will be posting the highlight of the research here and we will also share it with the Club management.
With regard to your points about keeping 'basic' sites and not wanting them to become 'mini club sites', I can understand where you are coming from, and some basic sites meet members needs and do a great job and provide cover their costs. The topic has been debated here on CT a number of times.
However, I know of a good many that find operating a CL that doesn't cater for the larger marketplace of those who want EHU or Toilets etc. a struggle to remain viable. With the 5 van restriction, they simply don't generate enough revenue to cover the costs of keeping the grass mown, rubbish, water, waste, marketing and insurance at the prices members expect to pay for a piece of tranquility.
As you were in marketing you'll realise that you have to stay in touch with market dynamics. The facts are evident. Motorhomes are on the increase, motorhomes need different facilities to caravans, stay shorter times and prefer sites with public transport. Caravan sales are flat or declining. Caravans are increasingly sophisticated and the average Caravanner is looking for ever-easier booking & pitching.
Despite the best efforts of the Club, the number of CL's continues to decline year-on-year. Is this because running a CL is not economically viable unless you offer a site that caters for the majority? Or is it because landowners can get a much higher Return on Investment by following the Glamping trend, which is 'in vogue' and strongly promoted to the Landowner community? See 'The Glamping Show' taking place this month where I'll be speaking about the benefits of running a CL alongside a representative from the 'other' club.
The Club derives a very healthy % of it's membership income from members like yourself who join mainly for CL's. By my calculation between £1M and £3M annually. My question to them, which I have raised a number of times at AGM's and Club Coucil, is whether this income is in any way reflected by the amount the Club spends to support and improve the CL Network? To date, I have had no evidence that it does.
If you'd like to chat about the findings of this survey by phone, or even come to Cholsey Grange to mull over them with me together, I'd value your marketing experience. You know where to find me!
0 -
As someone who had one foot in marketing and the other in customer service, I think the survey is a good attempt at seeking to understand the needs of CL users. You can spend a lot of time on the negatives of CLs but for now, focusing on getting the offering balanced for those who are pro CLs is the right way. Once you are satisfied that your pro CL users are happy, then you can start pursuing non users.
Many years ago DAF Trucks in Leyland highlighted you can waste far more time on cynics than the time you invest in developing your optimists. Optimists can help you convert the sceptics; you will never convert the sceptics.
The hard task is ahead. You need to convert the data you get into information - not easy without the tools, then into knowledge - your experience will help here, and then into wisdom for the other CL owners - that will be a test of your communication skills!
Good luck.
PS get your CL members to do the survey, answering what they think their customers want, and compare results.
1 -
CG, thanks for your reply. I'm sorry if I seemed a tad negative about the survey, it just that we get surveyed to death here at home by our Council, and it's not always made clear what the survey's ultimate goal is about, nor how they will interpret the findings they achieve.
I am still part of a community group that was so incensed about the latest proposal thrown at the local population that enough of us from all backgrounds got together, and were able to dissect the survey and it's questions, got a Freedom of Information granted and found out that as usual, the survey was nothing to do with what most folks thought it was, but another big stick to extract cash from vulnerable folks! So as you can see, I am a tad wary, a case of be careful what you wish for!
Its good that someone is surveying members around CLs, shame that it isn't the Club itself, although I know you are on Council and can feed back to Club Management team. And at least the CL group has your marketing expertise and knowledge. I had no idea you offered help to other potential CL providers, but your website was very interesting, and all the links. Hope the talk at the NEC goes well, I love all the diverse Glamping opportunities springing up now, actually saw one incorporating an old helicopter! Very different.
I like Aspenshaws suggestion. But I would try it on some none CL group members as well.
1 -
This is a very interesting and if I can say so a very thoughtful discussion.Perhaps I have to nail my colours to the mast and say that CL's don't figure highly on my radar. Having been in the Club for 38 years I am more than aware of them and have used a few in that time but they can almost be counted on one hand. I have no interest in sitting on a remote CL with grass pitches on our own, that is just not our thing. As an side I had a conversation with a neighbour who caravans and I uses a few CL's but even he said he didn't like remote and lonely CL's so not just me but then we are all different. As has been pointed out the growing numbers of motorhomes could be a name changer of CL's in both directions. Motorhomers are unlikely to want to visit CL's without hardstandings although I appreciate that won't apply to all. Beyond providing EHU and water and waste disposal I am puzzled by the need for toilet/showers?
As to the future financial security of CL's I do really think that some thought has to be given to increasing the numbers of outfits that can use them, possibly raising that number from five to eight or ten providing there is room to accommodate such numbers. I know this is not in the gift of the Club but if a case could be put forward supported by both Clubs and perhaps the NFU it might not be such a struggle to get the Government to at least think about it. For those that don't like that idea I think you have the think of the greater good in that not only might it stop the number of CL's closing it might actually encourage more to open?
I am sure the Club is committed to the CL network but I expect there are limits in terms of finance that they are willing to invest. If the figures given above are anywhere near right CL's account for less that 10% of the membership fee. To invest more in other than purely cosmetic changes the Club would have to be sure any extra investment would bring in more members and I reckon that is a big ask? What perhaps the more enlightened CL's owners could do is to organise a system of centralise booking and perhaps the Club could help finance the initial stages of this. The fly in the ointment is that not 100% of CL's would be in the system which might mean those CL's in the system prosper but the ones without wither on the vine.
Apologies for the long ramble!!!
David
0 -
We have stayed on some nice CLs that might suit you David, good transport links not far from towns and cities. In Summer we don't find parking on grass such an issue, although I appreciate our MH is small compared with others. Your last paragraph about CLs that don't participate in online booking rings a bell with my thoughts, and is one of my concerns. Having said that, we did two weeks in Northumberland and it was busy busy on some basic sites, lots of MHs as well!
1 -
I know what you’re both saying here. We could end up with a smallish group of CLs using a centralised booking system while others will carry on as before. It could result in the internet savvy owners striking out almost as a separate group while others lag behind.
I’m not sure that’s conducive to ease of booking overall or to encouraging would be CL owners to come onboard. In my opinion, we don’t want something approaching a two tier CL set up, or anything too organised which may detract from CL's individuality. All or nothing, in my book.
2 -
TW
I think there is already signs of this on Facebook. There is a Caravan and Motorhome Club Members Group on Facebook with nearly 4500 members and it is quite clear there are a lot of internet savvy CL owners posting on there, pictures, last minute availability and all. Some of them also post on here but no where near as many as those that post on Facebook. I know there are a lot of the older generation that do use Facebook but I imagine it has predominately younger age profile. The problem might not end with advance booking? For those that use Facebook it also provides an easy communication route direct to the owner of the CL which could bypass the Club handbook and CL page on the CMC website.
David
0 -
Sometimes I wonder about this parallel universe of Facebook and the rest of us. Two tier, indeed.
I would have thought CL owners would want to maximise their business chances by posting here as well. Oh well, not my problem.
1 -
Wow. Some fabulous points put forward here. I'm in agreement with almost all of them. Many thanks for the thoughtful contributions.
I do agree that any form of centralised booking for CL's would probably only attract 10% of owners (if that) in the first year, but it has to be the long-term answer.
Many owners who struggle with no-shows and late cancellations would love a way to monitor this situation (which heavily impacts their profitability) and I would have thought an online system, linked to the Club records, would enable some monitoring of this. It would also help when a Member can't recall where they booked (you'd be surprised how often that happens).
And yes, we are also doing a similar survey of CL owners. Some of the questions will be the same as the Member survey so that comparisons can be made. Again, we will share highlights with the club management.
Although I was a 'nominated member' for 3 years, which enabled me to inform the Club Council about the concerns of CL's and CL visitors, I have now been 'deselected' to enable other members to join the Club Council. That means my 'tenure' ends at the next AGM in October.
I'm hoping that the selection committee has replaced me with another member who is equally passionate about the survival of the CL Network and understands how CLs work and what pressures the owners face, but we will wait to see.
I will continue to help to administrate the CL Owners Group alongside other similarly helpful CL owners, offer help to prospective CL Owners and, if requested, offer guidance to club management. Again, thanks for your thoughtful input and support of CLs.
0 -
I do agree that any form of centralised booking for CL's would probably only attract 10% of owners (if that) in the first year, but it has to be the long-term answer.
A form of this has already been tried, as you well know, CG, and was abandoned rather quickly, what now makes you think that it would work any better in a different format?
With regards to this survey, how do we know that the results are a fair reflection of the thoughts of those that completed it, and can we be sure that the numbers quoted are of individual members and not composed of multiple "entries" by interested parties to boost the total?
1 -
Perhaps the answer to online booking might not be to do it centrally. I understand that some CL's already have a system on online booking or perhaps of availability, I remember Gale Cruisers did an age ago. If a common software package could be decided on perhaps those CL's that wanted to could participate. It would help members as each CL page they visited would have a common way to do things?
David
0 -
Nellie - Good to hear from you. I'm not aware of any form of 'centralised booking system'. Perhaps you were referring to a letter from HQ sent to a few CL's about 2 years ago asking if they'd like to participate in trialling an online booking system. Although a number of CLs responded positively (I wasn't sent the letter, but I saw a copy sent to me by another CL), the Club didn't take it any further. Perhaps other priorities emerged?
Or, perhaps you were referring to the 'Matchmaker' service the CL owners group piloted last year? This was a 'toe-in-the-water' experiment. The emergence of a strong, growing and supportive Facebook Group of C&MC members which many CL owners have joined is probably the better forum for this type of request. Not least because of GDPR rules.
David - Yes, I believe a central system that is based on one of the existing (and thoroughly tried & tested) packages available, but has access to Member Data (ie, you as a member don't have to add your personal data for each booking) and is available to all CL owners is the way forwards. On past form, the thought of the Club IT department building a platform for this, would, in my opinion, not be met with much confidence by CL owners.
A case in point is this CT platform, which has now been superseded by specialist groups on Facebook, in my opinion. Love it or loathe it, Facebook is much, much easier to use, upload photos (on CT it's nearly impossible), and has many more functions (or functions that are more elegantly implement), better engagement, better searching, the ability to tag & save posts etc. etc. For a few years, CT was my 'go to' source of information on the Club and Member views. It's now a long-way-behind second choice.
1 -
Nellie - ref your question: Can we be sure that the numbers quoted are of individual members and not composed of multiple "entries" by interested parties to boost the total?
The survey does allow multiple entries. I wanted to make it easy for people to complete without having to 'sign in' to anything.
However, as the survey takes quite a few minutes to complete and we have over 600 responses to date, I doubt whether the odd 'double-entry' (if someone was sad enough to do this) would make much odds to the outcome.
0 -
Your post at 06.22 -
Hardly the most tactful post to put on CT, Ted, especially when you want CT members to complete the survey. I’m surprised you bother with us at all really.
A central booking system that gives CL owners access to our personal details? I’m glad you explained that bit but I think not, thank you!
If you can identify my response to the survey, please disregard it in its entirety.
3 -
I can't see the Club allowing access to the member database unless they were in charge of it which would effectively become a centralised booking system. What I was suggesting was that if there was a program the is currently being used by a few CL's it could be promoted for use to a wider circle of CL's In effect they would each control their own booking as they would administer the program for their CL, there would be no interconnectivity.
David
0 -
Isn't this survey just aimed at CL users? Users who generally must like CLs, so it is just aimed at a captive audience and will continue using them? I have never used a CL but have read glowing reports from users on here, surely a better way is to increase people going there to keep them alive? A question as to why people don't use them could have been included to start this?
0
