New club branding & logo
Comments
-
I really dislike the new logo, sorry! I don't mind the name change BUT the sign really doesn't stand out enough, it's just another white sign and logo is tiny. Also what has a strange shape that looks like a maroon and orange tulip got to do with caravanning?? We arrived at York Beechwood Grange recently and promptly missed the entrance as we couldn't see the sign!! The old bright green signs were so instantly identifiable. I can imagine a sort of Hugh Bonneville, Jessica Hynes chat to come up with this - a comedy mistake perhaps?
1 -
Got my new handbook and map today. There are tears in the map already where it has been folded and packaged. It wont last long when its used for real. Or perhaps we are only meant to look at it!! Perhaps the club should think about using a more robust paper for the map instead of wasting money on new logo's and marketing. Re branding is something you do when the original brand is unsuccessful. No one can call the Caravan Club name unsuccessful. There is an old saying
If ain't broke don't fix it!
Perhaps the DG should have organised a referendum by the club members before changing the Club's identity.
CRF
7 -
A referendum would be no good. People only call for another one if they don't like the result.
4 -
I guess it was shortly after we were not allowed to call them Campervans !!!!! does not sound very posh !!!! Sg2
0 -
I'm expecting my 40 year membership sticker any time. I suppose disappointingly it will have the new logo on, . I don't suppose they'll send me one from the old stock will they? - Even if I asked. Or does anyone live near enough E. Grinstead so that they can go round to the CC bins and get me one, as there must be literally tons of old stock being dumped!
2 -
There is obviously a lot of concern over this waste of Money.
Could we ask the club to arrange a referendum ON LINE and in the club magazine to get a genuine feel for this re branding, money spending exercise. perhaps it may lead to a partial refund of our Membership fee's?
1 -
2 -
Good one, Shuk. I just love the irony.
1 -
I am puzzled to understand what the referendum you suggest would achieve? It would be bolting the stable door after the horse has bolted. The rebranding has been essentially completed and the money already spent. Surely you are not suggesting that we retrospectively ask members whether they agree or want to go back to the old branding which would involve a double spend? Now it would be a different matter to suggest that in future when the Club are about to embark on such a change there should be a wider consultation of members. However that would be a bit of a double edged sword as it could restrict the management making decisions that would be to the benefit of the Club but that benefit could be lost if consultation delayed decision making?As for a partial refund of member fees, what would justify that? We still have the same club and facilities it's just called something different.
David
0 -
To my mind there is no need to rebrand if you return to the old logo. Just change it on anything being sent out and replace it on signs and uniforms as they need replacement. You might have to change the lettering on the pennant to CAMC but that is all that was ever needed and would have saved a lot of money that could have been spent on things that benefited the membership.
I do try to support the club whenever I can and have no objection to the name change, but I am sorry but the rebranding is about as badly done as is possible in my opinion, and almost a complete waste of money. I am afraid the general view on this forum and at least one other seems to confirm this.
7 -
I agree, the lettering on the pennant could have been changed to CAMC and I am sure it would have been quite acceptable. After all, it is the Pennant that is seen from a distance and not necessarily the lettering.
There could have also been a 'Motor Caravans Welcome' sign under the main sign.
0 -
We still have the same club and facilities it's just called something different.
And that is probably the main reason for the widespread hatred of the repranding exercise!
I am not a motor caravaner, but I can see they would be feeling far more welcome in this "club" if it had instead been announced that 25 sites had been fitted with fit for purpose motor caravan service points with more in the pipeline (as it were).
4 -
According to SIL who is with a "rebranding" company it would have cost at least one million probably a lot more, all for the sake of pandering to another "marketing idea" that the official name as per all V5s of motor caravan welcomed in the club for all caravans since 1962, sounds better if called motor home?
when by reading the site reviews a better use for our money to be spent on upgrades
0 -
"There could have also been a 'Motor Caravans Welcome' sign under the main sign."
That would be totally unnecessary as MHs were made welcome many years ago. They are all caravans of one sort or another.
Trailer tents welcome, fifth wheelers welcome..... Where would you draw the line?
2 -
Yes, I agree but it would have made a lot more sense than changing a very well established logo and name.
I find the standard of Caravan Club sites very good, excellent in fact but there are still a few without a toilet block and I am guessing that the cost of this re-branding exercise would have built a couple of toilet blocks.
0 -
Like EasyT, I don't want to see the non-facility sites upgraded. They meet a need at a very reasoable price and are often full which proves there is a call for them.
6 -
Any idea whether that is because they are all full (hurrah) or they don't exist (boo)?
0 -
There are none at the site,do not know why as it has toilets and showers ,and then a site high in the Cotswolds was being put forward for tents and the local manager could not comprehend why,it was not a good idea ,even when mentioned the site was for c/vans/m/vans with their own facilities, as there was not a toilet block
0 -
Thank goodness these people are on our side!
0 -
As you say we have the same club and facilities just a new name and logo so what was the point?? I doubt this enough in itself to get younger people to join and if they did the sites are only the start of their to use the buzz word " adventure ". As a member I would not wish to restrict the management but they are there to be held to account if things do go wrong, so I look forward to see how this all pans out
0
