Nunnykirk club site
Comments
-
No black book required for me. Things said more than once tend to stick in the memory. 😄
0 -
Seems to work well enough here. The only problem was the other night when a MH broke down in the entry totally blocking it. Several vans trying to get in seemed to go elsewhere. Otherwise the system has worked very well. It is after all fairly basic technology. We are not talking state of the art.😀
1 -
no never needed one,
You still think ANPR is well proven technology then?
0 -
Oooh! Prickly tonight.
Thanks, David, but I have a very good life and, what’s more, I’m happy in it. 👍🏻😀
0 -
Regarding your second paragraph, my OH said the same thing, cover costs but not looking for ever increasing profits to keep members happy. Then I pointed out to him his mistake in viewing it as a Members first Club, as opposed to it being a holiday company looking to ever increase profits.🤔
Regarding staff less site, I should think quite a bit of the income from pitches at Nunnykirk comes from seasonals. Not sure you could persuade many folks to take a seasonal pitch if there was no one on site keeping an eye on things, so it might be self defeating?
0 -
Yep, I thought of that one 👍🏻
0 -
i didnt suggest using it.....you brought it up!
0 -
No they are not avoiding both. We predominantly use CL's but also have used virtually all of the non facility sites and will continue to do so, along with many other members, as long as they are open.
8 -
Runs,alright at Killin, with a,volunteer warden the non facility site.
1 -
agree with nellie, a site like this (large CL, no facs) doesnt fit the CC staff model, cost wise....less facilities to 'manage'....toilets, showers to clean, yet costs remain.
that permanent warden costs must hit hard into the overall margin, whereas without these costs the site might be quite profitable.
customers who use sites like these (similar to using a large CL) basically look after themselves...how many need the owner of a CL once they have sorted payment and any entry/exit 'conditions'?
yes, a site like NK isnt a 'car park' type aire (almost maintenance free) and needs periodic site maintenance (grass cutting etc) but it doesnt need full time wardens to manage this does it?
of course, there is no CC precedent for customers booking onto sites without someone in an office...yet, many come and go after the initial check in via their barrier fobs...is this any different to getting on site first time...if there is an alternative method of checking their booking or for a 'pitch up' customer to have their membership validated and pay?
I guess its down to whether the club is able to think a bit laterally and look at cost reduction (rather than price rises) to make this type of site viable.
im sure they are looking hard, but if every site has to be subject to the same fixed costs its going to hard for sites like NK.
2 -
That’s us Nellie as well. However, if they lose the small sites, we shall take stock of our membership, not interested in using the larger sites, at least on a regular basis.
3 -
The club has to obtain new sites as it is inevitable that some will go for various reasons. Many areas are virtually impossible to book in at short notice now, which tends to show a need in those areas.
Not sure where the club stands in general but Crystal Palace and Bristol are two sites that will probably go in the foreseeable future.
The C&CC will lose at least one site at the end of this year, as the landlord has decided not to renew the site lease although they have planning permission for a new site as well. Problem is they are 200 miles apart.
1 -
Peedee
The key word in your post is Buy! If the Club owned Nunnykirk we probably wouldn't be having this discussion. Terms of leases are, of course, confidential, so we only know what the Club have shared with us. Clearly trying to operate the site on a hand to mouth basis brings into question whether the Club should continue with the site. The occupancy is at best static so the only way it can be run economically on the current basis is to increase site fees which I accept could be counter productive. Its all very well having inventive ideas on how the site could be run with payment/barrier infrastructure but do we know whether that would A) be allowed by the lease holder,
whether the cost would be worthwhile if the lease ended in the next 1-5 years, C) is there sufficient data infrastructure locally to operate this sort of system? Many of you seem to be blaming the Club for this situation when clearly their hands seem to be somewhat tied. If they invest in the site it could prove to be a waste of money if the lease is suddenly called in. David
1 -
Assuming this one is on a lease, then the club will now how long is left and with that in mind decide if they can justify further investment or to wait and see if they can negotiate a renewal of this.
It does help if you can buy a site but you have to go with what is available when looking at new sites. Buying though requires a large initial capital outlay where a lease does mean start up charges are far lower and easier to manage so a mix of both is probably the way to go.
0 -
Agree there is nothing Club can do about a lease.
To me, if they could buy it, and then give it the Club revamp many crave (hardstandings, roads, service pitches, loo blocks, manicured little grass strips, signage everywhere. Etc...), it would actually be such a shame. The whole essence of what the place is about would be ruined, and it would be just another clone. And of course the prices to justify such spend. Losing it would be less intrusive. I’d rather it was left to the local wildlife. Might sound like heresy, but a personal view.
1 -
The problem with this site is perhaps its location? Even if the club refurbished even with HS and/or facilities would numbers staying increase? It is as quite remote, (middle of nowhere is a good description) and quite a distance to anywhere of interest?
The nearest coast is at least 40 minutes driving, Newcastle the same. The are two excellent NT properties within about 20 minutes but in opposite directions. Yes there is the Northumberland national park but again there is not a lot to do there apart from the very pretty villages?
Interestingly (or not) Mrs C worked in a school that had Seaton Sluice to Zanizbar in one line of the school song!
0 -
Walking, cycling, wildlife spotting, dark skies, Border Reiver History, Gardens to visit, industrial history, agricultural shows, castles to visit, Battlefields to visit, tiny churches full of history, watersports. All not far away Corners for those that want them or are interested. But it’s a fact that you can just sit outside your van on a nice day and hear nothing but the birdsong and soft bleat of sheep that we enjoy. It’s not for everyone, but it’s what (posh) camping means to us. That’s it’s uniqueness.
Northumberland possibly ranks as our joint favourite county, so I am a touch biased maybe😁
1 -
indeed, nothing wrong with Northumberland and pre-caravan it was out day trip visit of choice but many of those you have listed will require some journey time from the site.
There must be a reason for it's low occupancy as described?
Where would you go for water sports?
0 -
Kielder is only an hour, Coast a good bit less, River Coquet very close. Talking canoeing here....
For those that enjoy fishing, Fontburn Reservoir is about half a mile away.
We don’t mind a bit a travelling if we want to indulge in an activity, we used to drive up to Dartmoor (Lydford) from Fowey a couple of times a week to take horses out over the Moor. Campsite was special, but lacked the riding quality, and we never found a decent Site at the time to stay on the Moor. So it was an hour up to stables, ride out for a few hours, then hour back to site. A nice run as well....
The Army provides good entertainment as well if staying at Nunnykirk. Otterburn Ranges aren’t far.......😂
Edit: Low occupancy? Only guessing, but it’s a site where you have to be self sufficient, and prepared. As in able to cope with being on grass, using all your onboard equipment, cooking for yourself instead of going out to eat. Trends have changed, moved on, more folks like the ease of easy pitching, more don’t choose to use facilities onboard, like to eat out.....
0 -
I'll try and remember that
0 -
Good idea, if more people used it then it might stay open?
0 -
I’d rather it was left to the local wildlife. Might sound like heresy, but a personal view.
Just like the original Caravan Harbour site close to the present, but threatened, Crystal Palace site in London.
0
