Booking Fairness... Time for a Rethink??
Comments
-
-
I disagree with many of your points.
members will leave due to this issue, Ie whats the point of paying a membership fee if for what ever reason ,they then can not get bookings.
I never had a real issue in previous years, lets see what happens next year
However the O/P was about fairness, and the system as it is. is far more favorable to those not in work, then families and those in work
A total misunderstanding. There are ample opportunities to book a site, harder this present year perhaps for all. Old and young..
0 -
I don’t think the current system favours anyone or is biased other than to those that are prepared to book way in advance. The message to members is to book now, even if they are not sure. This encourages members to reserve a pitch, especially at hot spot sites, even when they are still in the ‘looking’ or ‘dreaming’ stages of days away and they can take advantage of the Clubs’ no penalty cancellation policies later. It is a known fact in the leisure industry, long lead bookings have higher cancellation rates than others and I was surprised the Club did not introduce deposits when the rolling system was introduced.
If there are high cancellation rates. it can lead to distorted demand, is this something we are seeing?
In the hotel industry it has been shown that 7 percent of bookings are cancelled if no deposits are taken. This falls to 4 percent with deposits. I have no reason to believe it is any different for other types of industry including camping.
The complaints of difficulties of obtaining bookings at the Club’s holiday type sites are not going to go away from this and other forums as long as bookings are so easy to make and penalties for abuse are seen as being so feeble
peedee
0 -
you really believe wiki more than the club?
0 -
In the hotel industry it has been shown that 7 percent of bookings are cancelled if no deposits are taken. This falls to 4 percent with deposits.
Could you post where you got these figures from PD? It would be interesting. I cannot find that figure anywhere, in fact I see higher percentages?
...no reason to believe it is any different for other types of industry including camping.
What? applying a set of data from probably more expensive hotels and applying that to other industries is extrapolation taken to another level. As I said hotels are generally more expensive than campsites and there is usually a cancellation insurance, that probably could give an idea why the rate falls (if it does) which of course is not needed with the club.
No reason to believe, even when the club has stated the opposite when it removed deposits?
1 -
The complaints of difficulties of obtaining bookings at the Club’s holiday type sites are not going to go away from this and other forums as long as bookings are so easy to make and penalties for abuse are seen as being so feeble
Many people were sat on untaken leave when sites were reopened. It is not surprising that sites were busy through August, they normally are busy and the present circumstances have exacerbated it. I have found various areas to be busy in September and I suspect more so this year.
There are also sites not opening or not opening toilet blocks that deters some from using those sites.
There will always be complaints by some who cannot get what they want for whatever reason.
0 -
No reason to believe, even when the club has stated the opposite when it removed deposits?
But is that any more believable than the figures that peedee put forward? As the saying goes " They would say that anyway"!
0 -
I don’t think the club would say that anyway, Nellie.
If dropping deposits resulted in worse no shows or cancellations, they'd hastily backtrack and reintroduce them saying the trial was a failure due to members being confused.
It wouldn't be in the club's interests to continue the no deposit policy if it was causing them grief.👍🏻
1 -
Peedee said:- In the hotel industry it has been shown that 7 percent of bookings are cancelled if no deposits are taken. This falls to 4 percent with deposits. I have no reason to believe it is any different for other types of industry including camping.
Quite honestly if that was the cancellation rate, a difference of 3%, it hardly makes a very strong argument for the reintroduction of deposits because the actual benefit gained seems very small given the cost of implementing a deposit system. All those years ago when the online system went live I was told by a warden, whilst booking in, they were having real problems with deposits being taken via HQ as the point of sale system then used on sites weren't compatible. It seemed strange that a short while afterwards deposits were abolished. We were told at the time that deposits didn't work and people just forewent the money and didn't bother letting the site know they weren't turning up. Now had it not been a software problem what was to stop the Club doubling the deposit to £20 which would have made people take a bit more notice? In between then and now the suggestion has been put forward that taking deposits would mean two transaction charges but recent rule changes means these transaction charges are low enough not to be an issue.
David
0 -
As a member of both club,s believe, a deposit that is not refundable if not cancelled with in a month of the site arrival date , practicality eradicates the booking hogging issue that the CMC has
0 -
Percentages on their own me little
Ie 3% of 100 is 3
3% of 1 million is 30000The club markets 200 sites
assuming a average figure of 100 pitches per site
Thais 20000 pitch
Assuming a overall capacity fill of 80%
3% difference = 600 extra cancellation a week
Assuming an average of £180 per weeks booking £180000 a week
Not an insignificant number and a good argument for reintroducing a deposit scheme0 -
and would result in less income due more empty pitches not being taken up.
So a person has gone past the deadline and has to cancel, what is the incentive to let the club know?
What is booking hogging anyway?
0 -
Except the club said they didn't work?
Those no shows and cancellations are taken up and hence no loss of income.
0 -
Your last two posts are make the argument why the present system is unfair
0 -
But your assumptions don't allow for cancelled pitches being rebooked, even at short notice so I suspect your £180000 a week figure is very wide of the mark. No organisation in the tourist industry is likely to completely run at 100% occupancy but I reckon, certainly in the busy times of year, the Club run pretty close. What cancelled pitches allow, even late cancelled ones, is for other members to take advantage as we often do.
1 -
The O/P is about fairness in respect of the booking system
Relying on other members to fill the cancelled slots, is not an argument for the present system, it is an argument against the present booking system as it shows that speculative bookings is a problem %
I have not worked it out as at 100% but an average of 80%0 -
Your assuming 100% of take up by other members of the cancelled booking and that is not going to happen
0 -
It also does not take into account of pitches that seem to suddenly appear on late availability that as often happens on sites where pitches have been rested for numerous reasons , and are now available or the site manager has chanced that some pitches can be used for just the weekend and taken out of use again on the Sunday night?
1 -
What hotel do you know that does not take a deposit for a pre booked room ?
0 -
Your clutching at straws with that one
The club will have taken into account resting of pitches0 -
But i know that only site staff know what pitches they have available at any one time!! not EGH ,and there are now to many other types of accommodation on sites to make an estimate of what is available for tourers over the whole network ,and 200 sites is not a correct figure as it seems you are counting other than club owned sites to get to your figures
0 -
-
As far as I'm concerned the system for booking works very well, it's very rare that I can't get the site I want. I tend to plan well ahead and don't normally cancel. I think we should stay with what we have at the moment i'm sure it suits the great majority of members. No system can be expected to make everyone happy, but that's just life I'm afraid.
2 -
Easy to say that but would you care to explain why?
0 -
but a vast number are, which under your deposits idea would be just left empty. Every rebooked pitched is a win not a lost income.
0 -
can I answer? All the ones I deal with. And to quote premier Inn:
Flex: If you book a Flex rate you may choose whether to pay for your room in full at the time of booking or to pay on arrival.
And Jurys Inn:
Deposits are not required for our fully flexible rates
There are many more.
0 -
Evening
I'm a site manager with the CAMC, I'm also a member of both clubs. I know lots of site staff working for both. Interestingly the other club with their deposit system have far more no shows and last minute cancellations than we have. Fact.
JK
3 -
I am sorry but you have no basis in fact for what you say. You have no idea whether people are making speculative bookings. Also how do you define a speculative booking. As far as any of us know bookings that are cancelled could be due to perfectly genuine reasons.
0
