Booking a specific pitch
Comments
-
David,
No, I haven't got it the wrong way around.
What I'm trying to explain is - in your scenario 1, under the current system, if P4 were allowed to make a booking and P1, P2 and P3 arrived before him and took up pitches as you have shown, then when P4 arrived there would be no-where for them to pitch.
So to avoid that, the booking system would simply tell P4 that there is no availability.Under a pre-booking system, I agree that there is also the possibility that P1, P2 and P3 would book pitches as you have shown in scenario 1 and again P4 wouldn't be able to book. But by avoiding the 'random' method of just chosing when you arrive, and using
a computer booking system that can dovetail everyone together, there is more of a possibility of P4 getting a pitch and being safe in the knowledge that he won't have to move.So a pre-booking system will provide availability to members and maximisation of bookings at least as good as the current system.....and would most likely better it.
Could be the answer to the problems of lack of availability on popular sites and at weekends.
0 -
Another point to ponder......if these computer booking systems are so bad, why do you think that so many commercial sites use them?
Do they use them because they think it will give them more empty pitches and the ability to take less bookings?
0 -
Ian, I'd be more convinced by your argument if you'd answer the question I asked you. Would you be more likely to use CC sites if they brought in this change? If it could be shown that folk would make more use of CC sites that would be a factor in favour of it. But the argument that because commercial sites do it so should the CC remains unconvincing (IMHO of course!)
0 -
What the demand is none of us know. Those of us who appear on here are a tiny minority of members and may not be a valid cross section of members.
Why not? I accept that CT posters are a fraction of the overall membership but I see no reason to assume that they are not reflective of the membership as a whole. The only slant that may be deduced is that CT posters are perhaps more "IT geeky" than the
membership as a whole otherwise our personal foibles are an equally random selection.0 -
David,
No, I haven't got it the wrong way around.
What I'm trying to explain is - in your scenario 1, under the current system, if P4 were allowed to make a booking and P1, P2 and P3 arrived before him and took up pitches as you have shown, then when P4 arrived there would be no-where for them to pitch. So to avoid that, the booking system would simply tell P4 that there is no availability.
Under a pre-booking system, I agree that there is also the possibility that P1, P2 and P3 would book pitches as you have shown in scenario 1 and again P4 wouldn't be able to book. But by avoiding the 'random' method of just chosing when you arrive, and using a computer booking system that can dovetail everyone together, there is more of a possibility of P4 getting a pitch and being safe in the knowledge that he won't have to move.
So a pre-booking system will provide availability to members and maximisation of bookings at least as good as the current system.....and would most likely better it.
Could be the answer to the problems of lack of availability on popular sites and at weekends.
No Ian. The first scenario is the booking specific pitches scenario. 'Senario 1' couldn't happen under the current system. Scenario I is the pre-booking specific pitch model. Under the current system P4 would arrive on the same day as P1 and therefore P2 and P3 would have to fit around t hem. If we choose pitches when we arrive on site, the first scenario could not occur.
Then in your second paragraph you partly agree with me. A computer will only allow people to book in the order they book. If P1 P2 and P3 book a specific pitch P4 tries to book after, he can't. I pitches are chosen as people arrive, P4 will arrive at the same day as P1 and therefore P2 and P3 will be able to take the pitches that are left. Are you suggesting that a computerised system wouldn't allow P3 to book pitch 3 but would only allow him to book pitch 1, on the off chance that a longer stay booking might come along? If that is the case, it wouldn't be a true choice of available pitches.
So a pre-booking system will provide availability to members and maximisation of bookings at least as good as the current system.....and would most likely better it.
If by 'pre-booking system' you mean booking specific pitches, then I think this statement is absolutely incorrect - there is no evidence for it.
I think we are probably both having difficulty in getting out point across here. I wonder if anyone else understands any of the points either of us are trying to get across?
Best wishes
David
0 -
Another point to ponder......if these computer booking systems are so bad, why do you think that so many commercial sites use them?
Do they use them because they think it will give them more empty pitches and the ability to take less bookings?
I'd be interested to see a website that allows me to book a specific pitch. I wonder if you could point me to one, so I can see how it works.
David
0 -
Perhaps it would help to think in terms of site nights.
On a 3 pitch site as per David's example, there are 21 site nights in a week. If persons 1, 2 and 3 have booked between them say 12 nights on different overlapping nights as shown, then 9 site nights remain, therefor person 4 can easily be acommodated for 7 nights under the current system. Plus a person 5 could get a stay of 2 nights. The order of booking being different to the order of arrival is what makes it work. If persons 1, 2 and 3 have all booked to arrive on the same day, then for the first 4 nights the site would show as fully booked so person 4 could not start their 7 night holiday until day 5. And 2 other persons could also book a 3 or more night stay on the other 2 pitches. You need to remember that weeks do not stand in isolation, so a 7 night stay can go over 2 actual weeks if that suits you. Where no pre booking of pitches is permitted it is always possible to fill every pitch for every night without any pitch moving. However,under both systems not everyone will be able to book their ideal length of stay if they are among the later bookers. The current complaint of many that only Saturdays are fully booked would still exist.0 -
Where no pre booking of pitches is permitted it is always possible to fill every pitch for every night without any pitch moving.Agree entirely KjellNN. I chose a small number of pitches and a limited length for ease of explanation. Thank you for you post.
David
0 -
Another point to ponder......if these computer booking systems are so bad, why do you think that so many commercial sites use them?
Do they use them because they think it will give them more empty pitches and the ability to take less bookings?
I'd be interested to see a website that allows me to book a specific pitch. I wonder if you could point me to one, so I can see how it works.
David
I have seen a CL that operates such a system, cannot remember the name though. On their website you can see a calendar for the pitches and nights available, so you can see how there may be 3 nights available on one pitch and 4 on another, but not 7 nights
on any one pitch, just as per your example.So you either fit in, move pitches, or go elsewhere.
There is also a CL I have seen that allows pre booking of pitches, but reserves the right to allocate you a different pitch so they can fill all the pitches as far as possible.
0 -
I think I might have seen a CL with a system like this, but can't remember where. I guess, when you've only got 5 pitches, it's a lot easier to update manually and to go back to one customer and ask him if he would mind moving if it helps fit in another
booking..David
0 -
Still thinking about this..... the only way I could see this happening is if the Club allocated pitches through a computerised system, so we would know what pitch we would have on arrival - but the members would have no choice. This would probably work, but it would take all choice of pitches away from members (other than perhaps the type of pitch). I can't see the members wanting this sort of 'allocation'. Is this the sort of pre-booking of pitches Ian is getting at?
David
0 -
Still thinking about this..... the only way I could see this happening is if the Club allocated pitches through a computerised system, so we would know what pitch we would have on arrival - but the members would have no choice. This would probably work,
but it would take all choice of pitches away from members (other than perhaps the type of pitch). I can't see the members wanting this sort of 'allocation'. Is this the sort of pre-booking of pitches Ian is getting at?David
Mmmm, I'm guessing not, David!
0 -
Specific pitch booking might work for a CL where they have a maximum of five clients but may have six or seven pitches to allow for pitch rotation but it wouldn't work otherwise.
0 -
BP (other oil companies are available)
0 -
Assuming they aren't being picketed by CGT.
0 -
The majority of sites pull the grass out of use at the end of September and don't start using it again until Easter, at the earliest. So for a considerable portion of the year are hard standing only, so you have the choice of all available, awning/non awning
pitches.0 -
David......just three examples from recent experience.......Pentewan Sands, Sandy Balls, Woolacombe Sands........there are of course hundreds / thousands of other commercial sites that use an on-line pitch booking system.
These are not small sites, as you suggest. They are very big sites. They are run by commercial organisations that are in business to make a profit. They don't have a 'membership fee' giving them an income of millions of pounds to shelter them from commercial
reality.They are looking to maximise pitch occupancy and to accept as many bookings as they possibly can. They need to please their customers, so that they come back.
They are attuned to what customers want and give it to them. They don't decide what their customers want in some ivory tower, by someone who barely knows what a caravan is. No way would they spend two years (and counting) on trialling a choice of grass or
hardstanding.That's why they are flourishing, while CC sites stand nearly empty mid week.
That's why they use pitch booking systems.
I've tried to explain how this would benefit people trying to book by accepting rather than rejecting their bookings, in several different ways now. Either you are being deliberately obtuse (in your role as a moderator and an obvious 'fan' of the CC) or.......you
just cannot seem to understand. I don't mean to be rude, but as I've said, it must be obvious that all these commercial organisations use on-line pitch booking for good reasons?0 -
So your only reasoning is that commercials do it so therefore the CC must as well, Ian?
It's a pity that having started a thread where you appeared to he open minded and genuinely interested in other's views, you have now reached the position where you ridicule or are (not very subtly) rude about anyone with an opinion that doesn't fit your own.
To me, there are other priorities, such as I've already mentioned - both sides of the debate are equally valid surely and should be treated with respect.
BTW, I'm still interested to know if you, personally, would be more likely to use CC sites if the club took up your proposal but did nothing else about pricing or pitch selection. You seem strangely unwilling to commit yourself!
0 -
I'm trying not to make it personal, Moulesy (as you seem to keep trying to do) and want a proper debate on the facts.
I find it intriguing that you think that hundreds of commercial organisations using a pitch booking system is not in any way relevant and that a single (not at all commercial) organisation could be the one to have 'got it right'.
Perhaps you could explain your logic for thiS, given that you already concede that the CC have got it wrong in so many other ways.
0 -
Oh Ian, why so serious? I'm not making it personal at all. You gave 3 examples, all sites in popular holiday hotspots incidentally. If that suits you, great, but I repeat, there are two sides to the debate - please allow those whose views differ from yours to express them without being ridiculed.
If it could be shown that your proposal would result in a greatly increased take up of CC pitches there would be some merit in the idea, but even you, as strongly as you feel on the subject, won't commit yourself, so why should we think there is any great demand for it?
We clearly have different priorities. Shall we leave it there?
0 -
Oh Moulesy, please stop saying 'why so serious'.
I do agree that it's best that you drop out of the debate though......you clearly don't like to see any view opposite from your own if you keep having to resort to calling it 'ridiculing'.
Anyway, bye bye.........leave it to the big boys now eh?
0 -
Oh Moulesy, please stop saying 'why so serious'.
I do agree that it's best that you drop out of the debate though......you clearly don't like to see any view opposite from your own if you keep having to resort to calling it 'ridiculing'.
Anyway, bye bye.........leave it to the big boys now eh?
So now you're just resorting to more ridicule are you, Ian? I'd thought better of you than that! If you take the time and trouble to read through my posts you will see that I've gone out of my way to accept that folk have different opinions on the subject. Now contrast your entirely reasonable posts at the start of this thread with all this latest nonsensel
I bet even your old ally K is blanching at what you've written, having exhorted us all to have friendly discussions!
0 -
To my mind commercial sites using a pitch booking system probably add a bit to the charges to cover the inevitable losses. There is simply no way you can guarantee a full site with specific pitch booking.
Possibly booking a pitch from a block of pitches might work.
0
