Glamping Pods
Reading through this months club magazine im disappointed to read that the club continues to use its fund to invest in an increasing number of glaming pods on sites! Gary Martin covers the level of investment on site, which at times isn't always seen. I must say having visited a number of sites this year, there are still a number requiring a little TLC here and there, therefore its disappointing that the Caravan and Motorhome club seem to be heading down this path.
Pods at troutbeck head and park coppice coniston take up much need touring space, disproportionate to regular pitches. As the sector has seen exponential growth and with sites continually full most weekends, it is frustrating to see the size of the land turned over to these pods, the picture on page 11 of the club magazine clearly demonstrates an increasing trend to prioritise the highest bidder.
Just last week I visited a site which did not adequately accommodate motorhomes, with the service point requiring significant modernisation. I value the club, the standard of facilities and consitancy if approach however the investment in pods is a worrying trend for which I do not see the value in my subscription, I urge the club to get back to basics and concentrate on its core business before it becomes another souless mobile home park!
Comments
-
Thanks for your post but it's unlikely that anybody of any relevance from the club's staff will see it on here. You might be better to put this in writing directly to the club.
0 -
Bryn
Is this mentioned in the latest edition of the magazine, if so I have not yet seen it. Personally I have no objection to the principal of alternative accommodation on Club sites as not everyone in the future will tow or have a motorhome or perhaps may decide to give up on regular touring but still like to visit their favourite campsite.
The investment question is interesting. Do we know whether the Club is directly investing or is it some sort of lease pay back scheme? I take your point about priority on investment on some sites. Moreton in Marsh is a case in point. There has been a considerable investment in static accommodation but little in the touring side of the site which to my mind needs a complete overhaul by providing not only proper sized pitches but also adding some serviced pitches?
This would have been a good question to have asked at the recent AGM but you will have to wait a year for the next one.
David
2 -
Thank you for your replies,
David the article doesn't breakdown the investment structure unfortunately, however my frustration sits as much with my perception of the expansion in this area as it does the use of funds, however they are funding it.
As you mention above in relation to Moreton in Marsh, I question the logic of prioritising the investment in pods rather than upgrading the overall touring experience. Happy to be proven wrong but id hazard a guess that the funds and time spent at all levels at Moreton in Marsh, amongst others, to introduce pods could have been used to significantly improve/overhaul the touring facilities, and in turn the overall experience for the majority of the sites visitors! I don't see pods as an introduction to touring, but more as a step away from the heritage and principles of the clubs foundations and a worrying one at that.
I echo your view that larger, better serviced pitches are required and I suspect most sites in the network would benefit from improvements in this area. I'm all for diversification where necessary but when occupancy levels are high and pitch prices are set at mid to high end of the range I just feel the use of funds and pitches could be put to better use. If family want to experience the world of touring alongside you let them sleep in the awning like my families early experience of touring, you never know they might just enjoy it!
Anyway end of ramblings, I don't usually feel compelled to comment but the direction of travel here feels its going in completely the wrong direction, reinvestment to improve facilities for the majority should be the clubs focus and if it wants to capitalise on future generations it would be best investing in its wifi infrastructure....just ask my kids 😃
3 -
Bryn
The latest magazine has just arrived in the post so I will have a look at it later.
Regarding WiFi they did mention at the AGM that 70 sites now have Fibre Broadband. However I always get the impression they throttle back individual connections so all that the Fibre Broadband would do is provide a more consistent connection which would be an improvement compared to some.
David
0 -
I glanced at the magazine photos of Cayton Village - described there as the "dream holiday venue for all" - a touch of hyperbole I thought. I don't mind the concept of extra accommodation but winced at the Nissen hut in the foreground.
I do wish the Club would employ better landscape architects as it does rather look as though the same people the Club has employed do army camps as their main line of business. It's not beautiful and wouldn't win prizes at the Chelsea flower show, but perhaps it will mellow in time.
2 -
Are the Pods and other than LV types of non touring accommodation coming out of funds from the same pot, or as seems it is called "Experiance Freedom" ,which it seems. like many companies is another arm of the Caravan Club Ltd (companies house registration)that is part of ,but not part of, "our club" but a stand alone organisation?
Then it should not be funded to the detriment of the touring area of sites , that when reading reviews and site staff comments it seems is being neglected by finance cuts
0 -
The reviews of other "refurbished?" sites also mention that , ,I remember when the "centenary site"was first opened on the outskirts of the New Forest on an old WW2 airfield the same comments were made , on our last visit you would not think so it has very much matured,
It is very obvious or seems by the pictures that te glamping pitches are much more generous than the tourer side of the site
0 -
With the current increase in the number of people staying in Britain for their holidays and the significant proportion of which have taken to the road with a caravan, motorhome or campervan there is more than ever a need for more touring pitches. At the end of this pandemic, whenever that is, there will be some who decide that the touring life is not for them but I guess many will stick with it so more pitches will definitely be required. I know not all or even many sites are fully booked 7 days per week all through the main season but weekend availability of a pitch is still a problem for many. And this will be just the same for glamping pods except it will be the club who have unused financial assets in the form of pods standing there unused for a good proportion of the time. Additional expenditure will also undoubtedly be required for maintenance. I would hope that the cost of hiring a pod will be sufficient to cover both the initial investment and the maintenance and that we 'tourers' will not be subsidising the venture.
I think I am probably correct in believing that the cost of the construction of a hardstanding pitch is significantly less than the cost of a pod and maintenance costs must be extremely low so I know where I would invest my money. Put it where there is a recognised need and not invest it in a new venture that may or may not succeed.
We 'tourers' have our own financial asset in the form of our caravan, motorhome or campervan but at least we can always try to find an alternative site, possibly and, indeed probably, a commercial site. If 'the club' can't provide us with what most of us joined the club for then I think many will vote with their feet, or perhaps that should say, wheels and not bother with their membership.
Over the years when I was working I came across several companies that tried diversifying only to eventually fold because the new venture didn't take off.
And just to finish, remember the old adage, "Jack of all trades, master of none". Improve what you already have, ie caravan and motorhome pitches and make them first class before you go down uncharted routes that will be to the advantage of no-one.
6 -
As I have long thought the 'Caravan Club' ( as I still think of it) ceased to be a club many years ago and is essentially a business. Leave alternative accommodation to other providers and concentrate on tourers.
3 -
None of us could foresee the surge in staycations and leap in LV ownership that's happened this year but if we wind the clock back 12 months to the time when adequate towcars were becoming rarer and diesel and petrol engines were being regarded as the spawn of the devil, I think it's perfectly understandable that the club started to diversify into fixed accommodation. Indeed, I recall praising their foresight into providing alternatives when this topic was debated previously. Then along came covid......
0 -
ET
All refurbished sites look like that initially and it often takes years for them to mature. Back in 1984 we visited Rookesbury Park, at the time it was a pretty new site. The road on the approach to the site is down hill and at the time you could see all the pitches, then mainly caravans spread out before you with hardly a tree or bush in sight! We went back a couple of years ago and from the road there was no sign of the campsite until you arrived at the barrier. So things do change in time. Aerial views are often not flattering to the campsite landscape. It's a bit like my head of hair, it looks reasonably OK looking from the front, but from above it would show the sparseness!!!
Also important that location often dictates the type of landscaping. Unlike the French we don't have those massive pine forests that stretch down to the coast.
I am keen to go back to Cayton Visit as we enjoyed the location during our visit but it was clear there needed to be lots of improvements which now seem to have taken place. I can understand why the Club have installed static accommodation on Cayton Bay as it's such a massive site, although I am a bit surprised it's been put so close to the front of the site but the Club were starting with an almost clear canvas.
David
0 -
Staycations have been on the increase for several years ,and lack of pitches for those who have taken up our leisure pursuit have been highlighted on this and other forums for several years,
This year has brought it into more focus i agree with posters who question the "reductions?"it seems in touring capacity in the race for the latest fad,and just hope the company running the pods ,are self contained and do not expect to fall back on the already stretched at peak times as some post (compared to over there staffing levels) the site managers (nee wardens) and assitants take up the "slack" as seems to happen on sites that already employ contract cleaners when they do not appear
0 -
Some commercials have given up on touring pitches in favour of clamping/statics, Sandy Balls at Fordingbridge being a prime example.
0 -
When in an LV it lived up to its name ,
touring pitches there have been contracting for years ,as they could make more money for less work from static holiday homes ,at peak price for families ,
The big comercial site we normally stay on in Norfolk is putting in more statics, as that (according to their touring site staff) is where the families money is
0 -
The way I always think of it, is that the CAMC is a Club running a business. Profits are reinvested in the sites for the benefit of members.
With regard to Pods and other 'alternative' accommodation, the Club are aware of changes that are taking place and, I think are justified in experimenting with suitable alternatives to see if these types of accommodation are attractive to members. With the emphasis on 'greener'/'electric' vehicles, it could be that we will be forced to look at doing things in a different way in the future. It very well could be that leisure vehicle will be smaller in the future in order to be towed by greener cars. Should that happen, there very well could be folk who might prefer 'alternative' accommodation.
Another issue, I can best explain by something that has started to happen with our friends. Very occasionally, we tend to go away occasionally with a group of friends. As folk get older, they still like to come, but are more reluctant to tow - some may have given up their caravans, but still wish to take part. In such instances, alternative accommodation on sites are ideal for this situation.
The other thing is that 'alternative' accommodationvon sites give folk the opportunity to experience a Club site before purchasing their own kit/equipment. Again, I know of folk who have stayed in one of the Club's pods/ airstream caravans etc., who have gone on to purchase their own equipment for touring.
Personally, I see no problem with a bit of experimentation/ lateral thinking. In some cases it could help the Club gain sites, especially if the local authority/ regulations feel that this is a good reason to allow the Club to open sites. After all, in the grand scheme of things, the number of pitches used for alternative accommodation are just a very small percentage. In my mind, to xperiment and assess it's success isn't necessarily a bad thing.
Just my opinion, of course.
David
0 -
I don't mind the Club offering alternative accommodation. I just wish they could do it well and show some style. A week in a shed at Cayton Bay is not Glamping.
Here's a photo of what the private sector can offer. Yes, it's the interior of a tent .
2 -
I think some may have lost sight of the reasons behind why the original changes started to take place place, Covid has overtaken everything, as you point out.
The provision of alternative accommodation will only be available on certain sites, planning and AOBs etc make expansion of the idea unlikely on a huge scale.
I agee with DSB too, comments about the needs of the vanning community changing, family groups needing alternative accommodation. The club will have to diversify and attract income from different sources.
0 -
I've generally seen the safari tents being used quite well on C&CC sites but they're not suitable for year round use so have a limited value income-wise on sites which stay open all year. They also don't have washroom facilities so the appeal is lessened for some users.
0 -
Whilst I don't disagree that the club would not have been able to forecast the increase / resurgence in staycations on the back of a global pandemic, I do still feel the diversification feels more in keeping with the less for more approach which others have mentioned has seen a number of commercial sites marginalise touring pitches at the expense of fixed accommodation.
I don't believe the capacity of pitches during summer months and/or weekends supports the argument for the need for further diversification. I fully understand the principle if these new pods were at maximum capacity all year round however I suspect their utilisation will be below that of a standard pitch? I'd be interested to see the occupancy figures. Similarly the space taken up per pitch to help give a direct comparison would also be interesting.
Motorhome manufactures are already targeting the 3500 weight limit market and improved engines to meet emissions targets. These innovations and technologies will ripple into the van world, reinvestment into core business where supply overtakes demand will ensure sustainability. Id hate to look back in 5 years and due to a further expansion in this area theres an impact where more tourers are unable to do what they enjoy now due to a lack of availability.
For me if I wanted to stay in fixed accommodation I'd find a hotel, it would certainly be cheaper than my current level of investment. However, thats my opinion and i guess its a matter of personal choice.
0 -
Bryn, sadly many of the 3500kg MHs being produced now are barely fit for purpose having woefully inadequate payloads and making them totally unsuitable for families.
Add to that the lessening availability of decent tow cars and, as I said before, it’s quite understandable that the club and other operators decided to diversify into fixed accommodation applying the old adage of evolve or die.
This year took everyone by surprise. Next year and beyond, who knows? I'm glad I'm not the one who has to decide which direction is the right one.
0 -
Tin, I totally understand your thoughts on the restrictions of weight and the challenges ahead with greener vehicles, I guess my worry is, as you say, other operators and now the club have begun removing pitches at the expense of traditional touring.
Im not sure we're yet at a point yet which necessitates this, withstanding the diversification argument. I guess in the absence of facts, tr: occupancy, space, income and expenditure and a long term strategy to give a more informed view it will remain a point of healthy discussion.
0 -
Unfortunately I believe that the next 20 yrs will see the demise of caravaning and motorhoming as we know it now. Smaller, lighter alternative fuelled cars will require a very different type of caravan/trailer. More and more pods, chalets, permanently pitched tents etc. will become the norm. Both of the major clubs and many commercial operators will need to adapt in order to survive. Over the past 25 yrs we have witnessed the growing number of the above units taking over sites in France (probably for different reasons, but growing none-the-less). It will come here, however our touring days will probably be over by then.
1 -
I completely understand why the club went down this route, Bryn, and I’m pleased to see the evolution for future generations as I suspect, like Scoutman, vanning as we know it will become a thing of the past. That's not to say I like the change on a personal level but I can see the need to embrace new ways.
I'd hazard a guess that covid may set back plans for all manner of projects in many areas by some years so I don’t think we need to worry too much quite yet.
1 -
Even before the covid scare, we had no liking for the idea of living in accomodation where there was way of knowing how well, or even if, things had been cleaned after the previous occupants, who may well have had dogs, cats, curry, tobacco products, unwashed body parts, etc with them.
2 -
I think you are right and some manufacturers are already going down the route of smaller lighter LVs, looking at keeping the"freedom" of going when and where one likes,but with much more environmental sensitive tow vehicles and M/vans will need to follow
0 -
We still prefer caravanning, but the user payloads are really poor on most UK produced 'vans'. We get round it by a large tow car and putting most stuff in the car. I understand why manufacturers feel the necessity to keep leisure vehicles light, but I don't think anyone is really sure of the direction....
It could very well be the end of caravanning as we know it. Bailey have already experimented with a much smaller unit and a larger 'wrap-around' awning. Sites in the UK and on the continent are 'installing' more small permanent units (pods, yurts etc), including our own Club.
However, I think manufacturers are also thinking about adding some sort of 'motorisation' to caravans, and who knows what progress could be made in producing green vehicles capable of pulling larger units?
I do think that the Club needs to keep all options open. 'The Great Outdoors' tends to be a buzz-phrase, not only with our Club but with other similar sites/ organisations. That's possibly what will make the Club and other Sites different from a large hotel.... Who knows what the future holds, but maybe the ethos and 'feel' of a 'campsite' will distinguish it from a hotel.
David
0 -
They could equally have spent the money on providing overnight parking for motorhomes/camper vans. That would have probably been a better investment Motorhomes and camper vans are not going to dispappear any time soon in fact sales growth is more likely to continue and I don't think it will be too far off before electric ones will be available.
peedee
2
