New Site Booking System
Comments
-
Don't you think long stay members are being penalised by the change to booking pitch types, at least now if when you arrive the pitch type of your choice is not available you know within a couple of days it will be as a short stayer will move on so no problems there but the new system has very little flexabilty which is probably the reason behind the ccc system.
0 -
No, I see no difference being made by the booking of pitches by surface type. The end result will be the same.
We are all free to book as few or as many nights as we want - subject to the 21 day rule. Your proposal would penalise a different group of members and I don’t believe in penalising anyone by inflicting draconian rules as we are all equal in this club.
It's academic in any case as JK has said minimum nights bookings are not going to happen.
1 -
No, I don't think things will be much different to now. To refuse to allow anyone to move pitch would, IMO, be unreasonable and unlikely.
If you book a HS, in case of bad weather, but really prefer grass, and then find that when you arrive the grass pitches are fine, if one is free for the duration of your stay, you could ask to amend to a grass pitch.
Likewise, if the only pitch left of the type you have booked is not to your satisfaction, you could move to a different one when one becomes free.
0 -
At present a member on arrival has the choice of ANY empty pitch (allowing for reservation for disabled, staff, etc). Under the new system a member has the choice of any pitch only of the PRE-SELECTED TYPE, which is probably reducing choice to about half the pitches on site, or less if serviced pitches are considered.
Swaping to a different type of pitch may well be impossible if that type is fully booked at some point in the future (e.g. weekend).
I do not see this as improving my customer experience at all!
0 -
Just read an e-mail from the Club about deposits etc and thought I’d come on here to see if there was more detail. Spotted this thread, but seeing the length of it, couldn’t be bothered to read it all.
So, a couple of observations and a question.
The reason given by the Club for now applying deposits, is to prevent no-shows and thereby ensure more availability of pitches.
The Club are also now saying that deposits will deter people from making speculative bookings - multiple weekends that they have no intention of using.
But didn’t the Club say repeatedly over the years, that when they previously had deposits, there were a lot more no-shows? The reason, they said, was that people felt no compunction to cancel, because they’d somehow ‘paid’ for it by forfeiting a deposit.
And didn’t the Club also repeatedly say that, according to their booking statistics, members did not make multiple, speculative bookings?
Neither of these earlier assertions from the Club ever made sense to me. Indeed, I repeatedly asked for numbers of late cancellations (just outside the 72 hour cut off) but was told that the information wasn’t available. It now appears that the figures were in fact available and that they demonstrated the opposite of what the Club were saying.
Of course, a certain group on here slavishly agreed with the Club’s earlier comments, despite the lack of logic or any actual facts to support their statements.
However, that said, I’m glad that the Club are finally admitting that they were wrong and are doing something about the lack of available pitches.
Too late for me as I rarely use Club sites now. But it’s nice to have been proven right at last.
My question - what happens about existing bookings, made before deposits came in? Will all the earlier speculative bookings require a retrospective deposit to be paid and will that lead to a flood of cancellations?
5 -
Re your question Ian (which is in fact three questions). It’s all in the links in this thread, no, and finally no. 😁
1 -
But didn’t the Club say repeatedly over the years, that when they previously had deposits, there were a lot more no-shows? The reason, they said, was that people felt no compunction to cancel, because they’d somehow ‘paid’ for it by forfeiting a deposit.
And didn’t the Club also repeatedly say that, according to their booking statistics, members did not make multiple, speculative bookings?
Neither of these earlier assertions from the Club ever made sense to me. Indeed, I repeatedly asked for numbers of late cancellations (just outside the 72 hour cut off) but was told that the information wasn’t available. It now appears that the figures were in fact available and that they demonstrated the opposite of what the Club were saying.
I did point that out earlier in this post, Ian, but not responses wer forthcoming. The statement by Ro seems to me to contain much of the usual Fake News that the club puts out on a fairly regular basis.
2 -
Having just made a speculative booking for 2022 I can confirm that the T&C's state that no deposit is required and full payment can only be made at arrival at the site. Stand by for a huge increase in speculative bookings for 2022 which will be subsequently cancelled and then referenced by the Club as proof of need to change ...
0 -
Still not going to happen. Minimum stay will always be ONE night.
JK
1 -
The reason given by the Club for now applying deposits, is to prevent no-shows and thereby ensure more availability of pitchesI
No Ian - if you read the Q&A deposits it states that deposits are being introduced to reduce speculative booking not no-shows.
This has been made a few times, there is a difference between speculative bookings and no-shows. Speculative booking are booking with no (real) intention of taking them up and cancelling before the three days, often perhaps very near the cut off point. No-shows are bookings that are not cancelled at any time and hence not showing up and/or not giving anyone else the chance to take up that pitch on that night . And yes speculative bookings can lead to no shows but they are different things in my view.
So it is possible that no-shows went down when deposits were removed no shows went down due to either the 'honour system' or the three strikes and lose all bookings.
Anyway good to know you're still a member of the club even though you rarely use club sites.
0 -
The way the club works at the present is the most easy and flexible way of touring going I believe it works most of the time for all types of user on the odd occasion we get a disappointment in booking what we want but always have the option of an alternative all done yourself on line no phone calls easy, if you think the new system will improve your pitch availability I think you're in for a disappointment..
1 -
The time to make your voice heard is long gone, Arch. It’s now a done deal and it's time for us to accept it and move on. Otherwise, head/brick wall.
2 -
Unfortunately I like many others did not get the opportunity to make my voice heard, I do accept its a done deal but like all of us on this post l still have an opinion and whatever everyone's is for or against make your views known because as we know HO is aware of this post
1 -
Tandem and Arch, the move to deposits has been hinted at since at least the 2020 AGM. You could have made your views known to the club way back then and again at the 2021 AGM. There was plenty of opportunity.
You didn’t need to be asked but could at any time have voiced your opinions here, on FB, or by contacting the club. I’m afraid you have missed the boat but any dissatisfaction could now be addressed directly to the club via the Contact Us link.
Also, it is pointless to keep asking for specific numbers as neither I nor other posters know the answers.
7 -
I suspect for those for whom the current system worked and tended not to get involved with online discussions the news of the Club moving to a deposit system may have come as a bit of a shock. However many will be aware that the discussion on the fairness of the current system has been ongoing for several years and has centred around the ability to book sites through lack of availability. This was compounded, in my view, when the Club moved to the rolling year on year booking system. All this has been fed back to the Club by members over the years. Many suggestions have been put forward on how this might be remedied including some suggesting deposits should be taken on booking. I don't think any amount of tweaking of the current system would substantially improve the situation. So what options are the Club left with? They have obviously concluded that they only way to prevent speculative bookings and the resultant cancellation levels was to introduce deposits. That is where we are now and I doubt there is any going back on that.
David
2 -
Agree.. ...I've 'cancelled bookings' and booked an alternative site on the network for the same dates. It's really a 'changed booking' but it comes up as cancelled followed by a new booking.
I've also changed/cancelled bookings in the process of planning an extended touring period..... e.g. adding or taking away nights from one site when the next site doesn't have the exact dates available.
I hope I'm right (but may not be), but it is my understanding that, eventually, it will be possible to plan going to a series of sites on the network adjusting the bookings in the planning stage, then to book all the sites in the chain at one go, so that a 'continuous plan' will work . Not sure how exactly this will work, but it could very well be a problem for someone booking a selection of Club sites and non-Club sites. In the past, when I have done this, I have been able to use Club sites to adjust lengths of stay to fill any gaps. Not sure how all this will work with deposits in the mix... No doubt time will tell....
David
0 -
I'm sorry I must be mistaken in thinking this discussion was opened for comments on the new system, apologies it must be for positive comments only, I had emailed the customer services before joining this discussion so I am well aware that nothing will be changed. I will take your advice and move on.
1 -
I agree with what you post and the deed is now done ,as i was told just yesterday evening, much tweeking is still to be done.?
But it seems that the simple method of just extending the cancellation period of the current system did not fit with what was put on the table by some
1 -
......another thought....
In the longer term, when we are all driving electric cars (!!!😉😉), will we all be looking for shorter journeys between sites (because of the need to recharge)? Therefore there may be a large turnover each day, and perhaps a greater need to book a series of sites... Club members will need to be able to adjust bookings to make the series work - there will need to be a system to 'make this work with deposits'.
David
2 -
100 percent agree David and I suspect the situation would only have got worse as more and more members abandoned their consciences and joined in the fray.
Judging by some other comments seen on another forum, at best many welcome deposits, at worst opinion is equally divided.
peedee
0 -
A further thought on the subject of "no shows" rather than late cancellations.
I understand that such a booking is held for 24 hours so cancellation by the Club occurs at, presumably, 8pm the day after the expected arrival. That being the case, there are two nights income that are lost as the pitch could not be re-let at "a minute to midnight". Perhaps the deposit level needs to be reconsidered.
0 -
It's no secret that I think that booking a pitch with surface type is long overdue - many will know my opinion about that. However, I do think 'deposits' is a double edged sword - possibly a problem when booking a series of sites - but it all depends on how this works in practice.
David
1 -
Why do you say for positive comments only? I'm not pro deposits and neither are many others. However, we recognise the club has chosen another route and see no sense in beating ourselves up about it so we accept the situation and go with the flow.
I think the idea of comments about the new booking system was to discuss the workings of it rather than an attempt to turn back the clock.
2
