So what did the Club ever do for Motorcaravanners?
Comments
-
My long golden locks are no more!😲 I now have a small hairdryer if we are on EHU. But I have some natty gas canister hot brush/tongs for when we are not!😁
1 -
I do wonder what you hope to gain, BB, with you constant running down of club sites and promoting the ‘over there’ ways of doing things - other than to wind everyone up. We all know the cultures are different and what you want is unlikely to happen here
DSB has made some very sensible points yet still you push for things to be done your way. How about a bit of give as well as take?
7 -
Regarding the ability to book a hardstanding I am in two minds about this. Yes it would suit me nicely. However it would mean that anybody making last minute bookings are likely to find all hard standings taken. Given the fact in the last 15 years I have not been compelled to take a grass pitch other than on all (or nearly all) grass sites it does not make any real difference to me.
If I was looking to make a booking on a site where the majority of pitches were hard standing but these were all booked up I would look elsewhere.
0 -
The ones that say the most are usually the ones that mean the least(amobuts)
5 -
i actually do agree with you that the EHU/not should be easy to implement....on any pitch...
the point is that a number of other suggestions have been made which extend into different pitch provision (the whole crux of Stuart's OP) which, while pretty straight forward in principle, is made harder to implement due to the current proccess being unable to deal with 'late arrivals' onto their booked pitch rather than the LNA....resolved with an ANPR system....thus freeing up the LNA area for the type of pitch being discussed.
we then get the 'question' raised about honesty/metering etc, my point was just saying that administrative process such as meter reading and hooking up is not the issue some will suggest it is...its just part of the everyday site processes, like rubbish collections,toilet cleaning or manning reception.
it matters not whether my 'example' was from here, there or Outer Space, merely that, with the right mindset, it isn't an issue at all.
1 -
...but he didn't....
0 -
you mean with the 'right' over there mindset
you're looking at the issue from the wrong end of the telescope
how do you think some of the larger continental sites manage it..?
looks like we're back to the constraints of the 'club staffing model'.
couple that with the rigid arrival times and you have a system that is anything but flexible, with no allowance for ongoing process change...
the sites we've used this spring have all managed to get us checked in and hooked up (or unhooked) or meter read at start (or end) of stay with out any fuss...
none of this or the scores (hundreds in the case of La Manga) impacts on the running of the site or the service offered....they are just geared up differently and take this sort of thing in their stride..
As TW said, every line is a criticism of the club and how 'over there' does it so much better
It is a constant theme you keep coming back to.
1 -
Yes, David did make some good points but the whole OP was to discuss a way of getting a supply of short term, low cost pitches, possibly from the CC.
...but this is a continental idea, and it must be valid to see how those who are currently doing it, do it..
currently only a few suppliers in the uk provide this sort of thing and they have sometimes taken part of an existing service (Canterbury for example) and ring fenced it for a new specific purpose, MH (but could easily be caravans, too) limited time/facility overnighting.
obviously, the club won't be buying up new sites to satisfy this service, so ideas have been mooted to make more of existing club sites without the cost of additional land.
if this route were taken, changes in processes (and possibly technology) would be required to try and make this category of offering as automatic as possible...
theres no point in looking to increase staffing or to assign any more tasks to the current staff quota as its plain that they are already 'full'..
so, ANPR is one way that automation would help...
if the short term pitches were non-EHU there would be no meter reading etc..
my comments on how this shouldn't be an issue was in response to suggestions for metering and the predictable responses re 'who, how, when' etc...
some places (and it matters not, where) do deal with this sort of process as part and parcel of the overall arrival/departure process...
obviously (again) this simply can't be managed with typical club site staff levels, but (again) technology could help...
however, just rereading Davids post, I'm not sure that he thought much could work beyond turning off EHU
.....but IMV this was because he was trying to Imagine some 'normal' piches taken out of normal service ...
this wasn't how I saw it....rather the creation of a couple of new 'short term' pitches from other 'resources'...
if (yes, if) this was acheived, it wouldnt impact at all on the rest of the site, there are sites where these two types of provision coexist happily without impacting one another.
im sorry you seem to take my posts in such a negative way...
we all gain ideas from the experiences we enjoy....I agree, things are run differently in different places but we are talking about the provision of a continental type service of which the club has no experience...
is it wrong to cite those places where this particular service is the norm and what different process are used to make it run smoothly.
why should you take the highlighting of something done well as criticism of CC?
if the club were to take on something like this, why wouldn't you want it to aspire to do it as well as possible, by getting a good understanding of how other providers deliver?
2 -
no, it was describing how sites which offer the service we are discussing (short term pitches) deal with the inevitible issues by employing technology (ANPR etc) to keep staff involvement down.
this is a new area for the club and it has no experience of delivering such a service, yet there are places where the provision of these services are meat and drink.
if those who happen to do it well are in Germany or France or Spain etc, then so be it....
why is it such a bad thing to recognise that sometimes we don't have the know how in a particular area and we can actually learn form someone else?
4 -
He did, I was there👍🏻😊. You are quite ubiquitous BB but not totally omnipresent😊
3 -
Sorry, BB, I simply cannot plough through more of the same. Sometimes you do yourself and your cause no favours with your lengthy posts.
4 -
Of course many of us would relish the provision of short term pitches on CAMC sites but the idea is really a non starter.
We have to recognise that those sites in Germany, France and Spain being constantly held up as 'doing it well' are a totally and fundamentally different 'beast' to our club. The club is a network of sites across our country not just one site. It also caters for all forms of caravanning, motorised or otherwise and the many needs of our diverse membership. Yes, some club sites may have the capacity but I personally reckon these are very few in number and possibly in what some consider the 'wrong places' for us motorhomers. Having just one or two sites amongst this whole network providing the odd short term pitches would only confuse the situation even further.
1 -
So, basically, what you are saying, BB, is that you are not prepared to listen to opposing views and/or completely unwilling to compromise. It must be everything you're asking for or you're not satisfied (I'll call it the May method of debating!
)Where others on here, have been prepared to make concessions to move towards your point of view (regardless of the lack of club response) you want 100% of your requirements.
Is that a fair summary of the situation or has there been a single item on which you've been prepared to relent?
5 -
no for BB it has to be over there is great and over here (and remember no UK site is that different to the club) is very poor.
We (and all UK sites) should simply acknowlegde this and grant BB all of his demands?
0 -
you could well be right
2 -
At the risk of further perpetuating the, sometimes acrimonious, debate I would proffer the following illustration.
A yacht club provides pontoon berths for its membership. However, the depth of water where this is to be provided is comparatively shallow and is not readily accessible to those who have yachts that have a deeper draft. Should the club dredge the area to provide access to all or take the view that they will just have to muddle through and put up with their yacht settling at an angle as the tide falls?
This is, I suggest, a similar proposition that is being debated here.
1 -
+1, Don’t feed the trolls👍🏻
4 -
no, as here all already have access to a pitch, big or small. Who cannot stay at a club site?
Actually what some want is to make the pitches or berths smaller to only take one kind of yacht. They wish to reduce access.
0 -
Ignore who??
3 -
how do you think some of the larger continental sites manage it..? looks like we're back to the constraints of the 'club staffing model'.
Comparing apples and pears again I see when you refer to La Manga? How many pitches does it have compared to the typical club site, not to mention other rental options?
As far as flexibility goes there does seem to be limitations on booking period choices on that site. Online booking indicates you can book 4 days in the week or 2 or 3 days at weekend or a full week.
1 -
if you just stop for a moment to try and understand the reply, you'll see I was referring to tha ANPR system at La Manga.
ive also mentioned other places where they have this and have processes for reading meters and hooking up/unhooking arrivals.
if attempting to explain how sites (wherever) go about the daily processes associated with implementing the OP's suggestion is trolling then guilty as charged...
but so are those relentless naysayers who spend time posting how it can't possibly be done...
.2 -
Those Naysayers possibly do not wish to have unvetted arrivals at all hours nor have a desire for below standard safety separation which means developing pitches no smaller than at present. This talk of minimum time on pitches - well you can use a pitch for a night only now.
I see no benefit to the majority of the membership for having pitches provided which do not meet the requirements of all. Arrivals to site are vetted at present and long may that continue.
By all means have a wish list but most of the membership is careful for what it wishes for.
if you just stop for a moment to try and understand the reply, you'll see I was referring to tha ANPR system at La Manga.
I was well aware of that but I was simply pointing out that there are constraints on many sites and on some occasions more so than CC sites .... but different
1 -
Everybody will have differing views on this. But what is very apparent in your posts BB is that anyone who has a different view to yours is talked about in a negative and derogatory manner.
You have posted about those who I suppose dare to offer a different viewpoint to yours as squealing, harping on... now you talk about those who do not agree with you as relentless naysayers.
Is it possible to write a post that opposes your viewpoint without such constant negative references?
maybe Pliers is correct you are just baiting people?
5 -
With respect, CY, I think the similarity ends at your words "access to all". Surely that's the case at present - anyone can access any of the available pitches on club sites. What is being proposed is the provision of "access to some" pitches, despite the frequent claims that caravanners could use these "new" pitches every bit as easily as MHers. Far easier options have been proposed but it seems that a small number of vociferous posters are completely unwilling to consider anything other that their own personal perfect scenario. Why they think the forum is the place to keep saying this rather than taking their views to the club AGM is beyond me (unless it's the possiblity that they actually accept that their proposals only have very limited support.)
1
