New Forum software
i hadn't visited a forum I use for somethime and had a pleasant supprise today, its all new with the comment:
It’s been a long time coming. Let’s face it. Sometimes older forum technology lags behind other parts of the internet. Although seeing the same format for a long time is comforting, the member experience shouldn’t include dealing with outdated, unsafe, slow software.
I was pleased to note the other day from a horses mouth that a process is also in place to revamp CT and that the handbook is to go digital. (paper copy still to be available for those who want it) No time scale for the former but the handbook will be digital this year, I think August was mentioned. Good to know something is at least happening about the poor functionality of CT but whether it will improve the content is another matter.
peedee
Moderator Comment - I have moved this out of Chat and into Member Services as it seems a better place to discuss Club matters?
Comments
-
Peedee
I imagine that "from the horses mouth" means a person employed by the Club? Sounds a good idea to make the Handbook (Site Directory) digital although some will see that as the thin end of the wedge? As for a new forum haven't we been talking about that for the last 10 years?
David
0 -
I don’t know who agreed to the website changes, but as a very long tern member over 30years the site is the worst I have ever encountered. I only use club sites on the rare occasion so CLs is my go to, spending about 12 weeks away each year. The club site is so bad I now go onto Google to get back to the cl I want to look at.
change it back so the CLs are easy to get to
1 -
There is a discussion somewhere about CL searches and Rowena explained there is a problem which they’re 'working on' but that’s the website rather than the forum.
Didnt we have new forum software a few years ago? Look how that turned out☹️
1 -
Hopefully it is the thin end of the wedge. A fully digital membership would make much more sense, at a reduced price of course.😀 Although I would load a digital version of the site directory onto my pad, I don’t suppose it would get any more use than the current paper one, which is almost zero. I always use the web site or App at home and It is only rarely we have changed anything after leaving. In those cases a 4G or other internet connection has always been possible and connectivity is constantly improving.
0 -
I raised this issue at the recent 'Home Counties' Q&A held at Missenden Abbey. I made the point that both Club Together and the Reviews aspect of this website were well past their sell-by-date. Club Together is archaic and losing the majority of users to Facebook and other Social Media platforms.
The Reviews aspect of this site is a nightmare for CL owners, who are unable to effectively reply to a review, and indeed many users find it almost impossible to leave a review. In short the club is losing its audience because it has not invested in the website. The whole website is slow, overly complex and way out of date.
However, the club's IT history has been a catalogue of errors and it appears that the 'new' booking system (already 3 months overdue) is soaking up all resources.
This at a time when I understand from the Q&A that the club needs to save £750,000 of costs (as per Alison Woodhams - Exec committee) probably means that those planned investments will be shelved for some time to come. So don't hold your breath with regards to a new CT, or an easier way to find and book CL sites.
1 -
I don’t have any faith either Ted, we find it easier to use searchforsites nowadays, usually look at reviews on there as well. Aspect of searching for a CL on website that really annoys me is that you put your chosen County in, but then still have to scroll through all the towns to get to the one nearest.
There are so many ways of searching, and going into a CL search, but none of them are less than long winded. And…… if the Club is going to advertise the owners CL on the website, then take them down unless the owners provide a more up to date price. So misleading.
1 -
Ted
Did they say why they need to save £750,000? Given that most sites I have been on this year have been pretty full and they have added an energy surcharge to all bookings that seems a large amount of money to have to save. Haven't they already downsized HQ?
With regards to CT and reviews. There is a body of regular posters here who can generally work their way round the obstacles that poor design has thrown at us. However one can well imagine any new or infrequent user finds it easy to vote with their feet. There is probably a difference between CL reviews and Club sites. Just an example, when I sometimes get an email request to do a site survey there is also a link to do a review. If I press the link it takes me to main page for that site not directly to writing a review. There is an icon that says read reviews but nothing to ask you to write a review. It would just be a simple change so that it read Read and Write Reviews!!! On your point about CL Owners not being able to respond to a review there is an option to leave a reply but of course the CL owner needs to be signed up as a member of CT to do so. Something that irks me about reading reviews is that you get a long list of reviews from the last 24 hours which is fine. However if you click on a review and then want to go back to your list you have to start again!
David
0 -
I've noted that some CL owners always reply to reviews, good or bad but they are in a minority.
Agree the CL search is poor, it doesn't retain the search input and requires a lot of effort!
The forum is unique, makes a change from many of the standard impersonal offerings.
But the website as a whole malfunctions much too often which is unfortunate for such a large organisation.
Interesting to hear about savings to be made.
0 -
DK wrote:
"Did they say why they need to save £750,000? Given that most sites I have been on this year have been pretty full and they have added an energy surcharge to all bookings that seems a large amount of money to have to save. Haven't they already downsized HQ?"
I am not sure whether I am missing something here, but £750,00 strikes me as a very small amount. It represents less than 1% of the total expenses in the 2020 financial statements and only 0.66% of the total expenses in the more representative year of 2019.
Perhaps they meant that they have to save £750k just on software and website costs. That would make more sense. Other wise £750,000 is utterly marginal in the context of the clubs turnover and total expenses, and not very material at all in the context of the loss of £15m in 2020 (after a deficit on the pension scheme - the trading loss was almost £10m) and profit of roughly £4m in 2019.
Of course, before some wise cracker tells me that £750,000 is a big number to them, I agree, it is to me too. But, when cost saving, it is not going to get a business very far if it represents less than 1% of costs.
I agree though that it would be nice to know why they need to save costs if turnover is returning to normal or, probably, exceeding recent non-Covid affected years. There is a decent balance of reserves still.
On the question of the web site, I agree that it is slow and out of date, but is it really that bad? I very rarely search for CLs so I can't really comment on that.
0 -
I agree that in the scheme of things that amount of money is quite small. However I wonder if they are trying to reduced fixed costs which could have a different type of impact on both members and staff?
David
0 -
There must be something wrong with me as I can find my way round the search processes offered for CLs quite easily using both the online and paper versions of map and list. I think it would be totally amiss for the club to ditch the printed version of the site directory.
With regards to reviews, although I've not written any for a little while, I have never had a problem leaving one since they extended the time limit on postings. Perhaps having written well over 100 I am well practiced at the process.😁
2 -
Nellie
I suspect the move towards a digital Site Directory is probably based on the number of "clicks" CL's and Club sites get online as a measure. I am not sure whether I will request a paper version as my site directory sits in the door of the motorhome, unopened from trip to trip. I can understand why you would want a paper version. Its probably safe for a few years to come, after all its only published every two years.
I just see parallels with my old staff magazine and now the pensioners magazine. The former was always a weekly printed magazine that, even when I retired, I was able to pick from my local branch. Now it is online and it is the only way you can view it. Its been designed in such a way that you can't even print it off! The pensioner magazine is going the same way and new pensioners can only access it online. Perhaps when they officially announce the change they will tell us what the cost implications are. Obviously printing is expensive but even a digital site directory is not without cost.
David
0 -
Like Nellie we are well practiced at finding CLs and leaving reviews but they are a lot easier to do on something like UKCampsite website.
Whilst internet connectivity is improving at a rapid rate not everyone has unlimited data usage and with economies being forced upon the population at large I don't see that getting rid of the paper directory will be popular with a portion of the membership. Fine if they are going to provide one if requested but in my experience this just means postponing the date for getting rid of it to sometime in the near future.
I still like perusing the map for a quick check, in the same way that I still like looking at maps and yes I do know I can check them online, and then look at the directory to find the name of the site and then check it out on the website. Like Ttda said further up thread the club do not make it as easy as it should be to navigate ones way around the search.
0
