Club re-branding
Comments
-
Monthly figures will likely be available for the board, so yes, immediate impact will have been noted.
Over the last couple of years, the NCC have made big news about sales of new leisure vehicles which have been on the rise, in particular, the sales of motorhomes.
The last financial statement for the C&CC shows a rise of overall revenue of approx £2M and the financial statement for this club, a drop of almost £1M
This club had to do something and by analysis, they sought to appeal to the growing motorhome ownership.
2 -
The growth that the C&CC have experienced despite not including the word ‘motorhome’ in their name, would not lead them to consider rebranding would it? When a business (or club/membership organisation, whatever you want to call it) are doing well and experiencing good growth, why would you spend to change the model?
The C&CC for example, did other things differently. Such as, for example, forward booking by 12 months. This Club have noted this too, and changes were made to compete.
1 -
-
Personally I think the re-brand was good in attracting new members , which it did according to the club in large numbers. If revenue is down and other providers have gone up then that is one matter, but if all providers are in the same boat?
But as noted no one seems to be complaining about the new sites which must have cost something approaching the re-brand cost? (which was 2M or what? I'm still confused) and no one is asking for a vote when new sites are bought or expensive refurbishments made?
1 -
good point
why isn't anyone complaining about not being asked/voted about that?
1 -
Historically the C&CC have been far more open to all forms of 'camping', not so the CC as it was in my opinion. In fact many in the past were somewhat derogatory in their view that the club was rather a stuffy lot of caravaners. Things change and clearly there was a need to become far more inclusive in the evolving leisure market. We now are witnessing increasing numbers of campervans, motorhomes and other RVs visiting sites which in turn are gearing themselves up to welcoming them. I'm sure the change in both site facilities and possibly 'attraction' for these new members is much down to the rebrand.
4 -
I didn’t want to quote the warden at Black Knowl, because at the time (3 weeks ago) when he told me membership had increased by 40% since the rebrand, I was a little sceptical.
Anyway, his words... a 40% membership increase for the Club since the rebrand, most of which are motorhomers.
0 -
We were told by the site manager at Sandringham ccc that they had had less staying this year than last,that was last month
I was reading an article in a magazine that they think some of the reasons that people are going for motor caravans is
1 they can be leased as cars are?
2 some who are nervous of towing
3 the availability of useing part of pension pots
4 the problems in some areas of storage for caravans
When at a local to here dealers yesterday they said that despite more sales of motor caravans,the caravan sales are still very bouyant
0 -
It would be a good question to ask at the AGM
‘Has there been a membership increase since the rebrand, if so, how many and what percentage are motorhome owners?’
0 -
I also think that towcars has something to do with it.
If you want a large caravan, you need a large towcar. A growing number don’t want to run a large car for the remainder of their motoring away from towing.
The option to own and run a small economical car for everyday life and have a decent size motorhome for 3-4000 miles a year of touring, for many, is more appealing than owning and running a large 4x4 which is necessary for pulling the big caravan on occasion.
JLR, three day week... the desire for large cars is waining
1 -
I’m less interested in the numbers joining this year than I will be in the number of retentions next year.
I’m also interested in member satisfaction statistics. In general the rebranding has made little difference to my perception of the club. The shift in emphasis in marketing material however has had quite an impact. I don’t feel I’m the sort of member the club is after and that, along with some fairly significant price hikes, has changed the way I feel about the club.
I pick sites because of the location rather than the brand but I’ll always pick a site that offers me a choice of pitch surface over one that doesn’t. I’ll also pick one that sells me a pitch rather than trying to sell me the idea that I’ve got a shared interest in the great outdoors whilst providing a pitch.
I still use club sites but my recent scores in response to email surveys have been generally much lower than previous years. A reflection on my reduced level of satisfaction overall I guess
3 -
Don't forget the original Camping Club has already been rebranded to Camping and Caravan Club so I think it unlikely they will have another go at a rebrand? I wonder if they had a lot of complaints when they did that. Fortunately for them they got in before the digital age!!!
David
0 -
My general theory JayEss is that you can't charge people the same amount for an area of mud or a manicured area of gravel. This is where the club is so idiosyncratic that it will continue to push potential site users away. Only the diehards will continue to accept this regimented approach of accepting inferior pitches for the same price.
1 -
I've been scratching my head on that one as well. My perception from touring through out most of the peak seasons was the Club was not doing as well as other sites.
Singling out the the C&CC, there are lots of things they do differently but I suspect the prime reasons they are doing better is it is the first choice Club for the majority of newbies, most not being seniors. At the other end, seniors get a nice discount off pitch fees.
peedee
1 -
And miss out on all that lovely additional income?
It matters not (to me) as said in earlier posts, what the Club is called. If anyone cares to do some basic maths 40,000 new members actually pay for the rebranding - the worrying part for me is that revenues are down £1 million. Does this mean people join and then don't use the Club and then go and spend with C&CC instead? This Club seems to be reactive rather than proactive, as noted in previous posts and by you David. I will reserve any further judgement until next years' figures are available 😀
1 -
Personally I think the re-brand was good in attracting new members , which it did according to the club in large numbers
How big is "large" CS? The C&CC attracted nearly 60,000 new members in 2017 and the number of member households is fast catching up that of the C&MC. If that rate is maintained their membership will exceed that of the C&MC at the end of this year.
peedee
1 -
Perhaps because the C&CC are more in tune with the popular concept of Glamping which appeals to a different sector of the public to that of caravans and motorhomes. I don't know if Glamping should be seen as a passing fad but I wonder if it will lead to any long term retention of members for the C&CC or conversion to caravans/motorhomes in the future? The CMC are in a different market although they are tentatively moving into that sector with pods and yurts etc?
David
0 -
Again away from home but I remember that in a club magazine it was 80,000?
0 -
60% of the new membership intake in 2017 for the C&CC were of digital membership.
With this club now breaching £50 for the annual membership fee and not offering a reduced membership to forfeit the monthly paper rag, this has to have some bearing on which way a potential member may go, if they were only considering joining one club.
0 -
I think you must have misread the magazine, the figure is more like 800.
The end of 2016 report says the membership stood at 351,170 while the latest reports in the October magazine which arrived today for the end of 2017 say 320,000. I suppose it is always possible there was a surge in 2018?
peedee
0
