Marazion
Comments
-
yes but it was Steve's choice and you should respect that no matter what you personally may think, he knew the prices beforehand and decided it was worth paying and was happy.
2 -
... They have lower maintenance costs and lower initial capital outlay and if my experience is anything to go by excellent return on the clubs investment.
Last year when the Wels gov said that shower blocks should be closed, we were originally booked in at Chirk. When I question the club that they were not reducing the price per night, the reply I got back was that there was little difference in running cost between a full fat facilities site & a none facilities site ..... 🤔🤔 Quite how that works is beyond me
And I too would prefer a none facilities site to a club site
1 -
Your choice, his choice, Both are equally valid, but my point is that you should respect Steve's, which you didn't on page 5.
As to the joke I have no idea?
0 -
Who doesn't have google these days PD? I don't think not knowing what's available is valid in my opinion. We have many non members stay on site that like what the club offers compared to others and are also happy to pay the supplement.
JK
1 -
I think I'm correct in saying that those who hire MH's via the club's link up with Swift get temp membership of the club so they wouldn't pay the supplement.🤷♂️
1 -
@BoleroBoy ... if you include the (sorry but) awful Inclborough Fields which we stayed as short a time as possible) and
Just wondered why you thought that 😕 We stayed there a few years back & liked the site especially as it wasn't all gravel
0 -
Just to be clear I would have no objection to the Club opening more no facility sites. However from a commercial point of view I think the Club would seriously consider the likely financial outcome between a no facility site and a full facility site. Imagine the Club purchase a plot of land large enough for 100 pitches. Even a no facility site would involve considerable investment. Electrics would be no different on either site nor would the provision of water and waste. Given what they have done at Hebden Bridge I imagine they would want to include the provision for say a couple of dozen service pitches. So the only real additional cost is the facility block £250,000 plus depending on size. Comparing the non facility site Hebden Bridge with the full facility site at Hawes the difference in pitch price per night is between £10 and £15 a night, so potentially £1000/1500 a night extra revenue. Clearly a facility block would probably have a minimum life of 25 years and even allowing for extra staffing costs the Club would stand to substantially add to its finances over the longer term. My argument is therefore the full facility site would provide the better return on investment in the long run. If thinking about the future, will caravans and motorhomes be as well equipped as they are now given the uncertainty of electric propulsion. Could it be that in future LV's will be more basic and rely more on site provided facilities. The truth is we don't know!
David
1 -
Some where we are at Bearsted ,say it is expensive? ,until they are made aware of what it costs these days to run sites that use employed staff,, where the majority of other than basic maintenance has to be out sourced to specialist companies ,where their staff are all "qualified" to carry out such work,,
On family run sites the risk is theirs
0 -
We would choose Incleborough over Seacroft funnily enough. Just like the location much better. We stayed in a gorgeous cottage in West Runton last year, and I walked the footpath alongside Incleborough. It’s very handy for the rail links as well, more so than Seacroft. Did you get around any of the lovely gardens around there BB, Felbrigg or Blickling? I suspect they would be lovely at the moment.
0 -
North Norfolk has some really lovely CLs and CS sites, some of the best in the country, so it’s rare we use Club Sites there. Only been to Incleborough once, a couple of nights one Autumn, only half of Site open very quite. Never been to Sandringham or Seacroft, but we have always enjoyed Fakenham Racecourse. Not sure if it’s still a Club Site nowadays.
I think part of our Cornish trip in September might be to seek out an alternative to Marazion if it comes to pass that Club have lost it. We prefer not to be too far down either Lands End or the Lizard, as it can be a tad more cut off at either, that’s why we loved this location. Choice of coasts, equidistant to either LE or Lizard, and easy to get elsewhere such as Falmouth, St Agnes Etc....
0 -
We have not been back to Incleboro Fields since we discovered Seacroft where we go quite frequently. Reluctant to go to a site without hardstandings. Apparently the National Trust don't like gravel pitches and they seem to have some influence? Seacroft is not perfect but certainly it suits us better than Incleboro Fields. At least members have a choice in the same area so it should suit all?
David
0 -
I’m sure there are. Each one on its own terrace.
0 -
Is this a Marazion thread? Where are we now?
1
