Are CAMC finally getting the message

[hja]

I guess this is all about perspectives, regarding electricity its clear since the energy pricing crisis it has become more in focus than the past, then you get people with opinions about what it 'Should' cost or just wanting free parking so somewhere lays the truth.

Clearly the more popular sites do get very busy and you have to book in advance, as we know when lock down happened things went bananas along with people abused the system by booking then late canceling.

I have just booked a private site, the pitches and showers are not as neat, tidy or in as a good a state as CAMC, and its £33 per night, if I want to go to Brighton next Saturday (this Saturday is Full) is from £23.30, add the wife its about £40 so about £7 more than I am paying this weekend. which has very well maintained facilities.

In the area we are staying a Pub room is £140

So here is a thought and its around Inflation, in 2019 that Brighton CAMC pitch may have been £19 with inflation in 2024 that would now be £23.66 and with the wife £33.00

So it may well be that its inflation rather than greedy CAMC that is making these pitch figures look high, yet people expect costs to remain the same or lower.

Average price of pint in 2019 was £3.70 today that same pint is £4.80

The FT weekend edition is £5.20 who on earth would pay over a fiver for a paper? yet its around the same price as a pint



View attachment 963511

It is interesting to read the reviews on the club site of its sites by members. Many are not complementary of the ite standards. Lots of comments about tired facilities in need of improvement. I rarely visit club sites so little first hand experience but I don’t get a sense that club sites are at the top of the pile in regard to excellent facilities. They probably used to be, but independent sites have overtaken them. Probably the newly refurbished blocks are good but that is only a minority.

 

[poppycamper]

It is interesting to read the reviews on the club site of its sites by members. Many are not complementary of the ite standards. Lots of comments about tired facilities in need of improvement. I rarely visit club sites so little first hand experience but I don’t get a sense that club sites are at the top of the pile in regard to excellent facilities. They probably used to be, but independent sites have overtaken them. Probably the newly refurbished blocks are good but that is only a minority.

We very rarely use club sites, but if we do we never but ever venture Into their toilet blocks... why should we.... we got or own on board toilet block!

 

[Apacheman]

My CAMC experience in past years is that unless you booked months in advance your only chance of getting on site at short notice during peak season was if there was a late cancellation. Hence the rush in previous years to book the most popular sites online up to 12 months ahead, as soon as advance booking was available online.

In 2024 there was/is a lot of pitch availability if you use the lata availability search tool, even during school holidays and bank holiday weekends. I actually got a pitch at Cirencester Park during the August Bank Holiday weekend via late availability. I was pleasantly surprised, except by the rather steep cost.

I don't know where the break-even occupancy level lies. What is now becoming obvious is that increases in the pitch fees for the 2023 season (and this year) were unnecessarily high. That is putting many Members off, especially compared to cheap pitch fees for equally good or better sites across the Channel at half the cost.

I estimated that I am paying about £5 a night for EHU on CAMC pitches, hidden in the inclusive pitch fee. My requirement is only to charge the hab batteries and keep the compressor fridge and lights running. I am being either overcharged, or I am effectively cross-subsidising high electricity consumption (especially for hot water and space heating) by other outfits, especially large caravans with awnings. What the Club should be doing with its £50+ million in the bank is rolling out metered EHU across its site portfolio ASAP. I understand the current trial of metered EHU has been successful. Bleedin' obvious anyway.

It’s interesting that there is the same charge on CAMC sites for awning and non awning pitches. I’ve come across many people who having an awning then use a 2kw heater to heat it.
I’ve always had the view that the best way CAMC could have effectively and cheaply reduced the use of electricity would be to replace 16amp breakers with either 10 or 6amp ones. These allow the basic functions eg fridge, charging, water heater etc, even a low wattage kettle or microwave, but not electric guzzling heaters etc.

 

[hja]

It’s interesting that there is the same charge on CAMC sites for awning and non awning pitches. I’ve come across many people who having an awning then use a 2kw heater to heat it.
I’ve always had the view that the best way CAMC could have effectively and cheaply reduced the use of electricity would be to replace 16amp breakers with either 10 or 6amp ones. These allow the basic functions eg fridge, charging, water heater etc, even a low wattage kettle or microwave, but not electric guzzling heaters etc.

I think the CAMC has decided that it wants to roll out meters to all sites. The trial was a success I. That it lowered consumption but I gather that the system used was not without issues. Not surprising because in my view the club tends to go for complex not simple, and when I read about the system it did seem very complex. But I’ve not used it. They were going to trial on a second site, but that seems to have gone quiet. They were also doing some trial of members being able to opt on arrival for either electric or not and the warden would lock that particular box, but this seems to have been during the autumn and maybe winter. Not the best time to do a trial with people who perhaps are not too confident in opting out of ehu. Somewhere there has been a report that they will push ahead once they have found an easy system to use. Installation costs will of course be considerable.

 

[Dolmen]

We very rarely use club sites, but if we do we never but ever venture Into their toilet blocks... why should we.... we got or own on board toilet block!

I agree with you there, always nicer in your own van, however, I do use the site facilities if I want a long shower and don't fancy moving the van to top up with water, I have used showers at the gym and at the swimming baths so I'm not completely against their use, just prefer my own.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Apacheman]

I think the CAMC has decided that it wants to roll out meters to all sites. The trial was a success I. That it lowered consumption but I gather that the system used was not without issues. Not surprising because in my view the club tends to go for complex not simple, and when I read about the system it did seem very complex. But I’ve not used it. They were going to trial on a second site, but that seems to have gone quiet. They were also doing some trial of members being able to opt on arrival for either electric or not and the warden would lock that particular box, but this seems to have been during the autumn and maybe winter. Not the best time to do a trial with people who perhaps are not too confident in opting out of ehu. Somewhere there has been a report that they will push ahead once they have found an easy system to use. Installation costs will of course be considerable.

I think your last sentence says it all. Installation costs… which will of course be passed onto site fees making CAMC sites even more expensive. A simple change of breakers to lower consumption would have been a relatively cheap and quick option.

 

[bladerunner]

I prefer private sites to "franchise" in the same way I prefer family run hotels to chains.
Always better when the person you deal with has skin in the game.


My main objection to CAMC is the amorphous, rather soulless, corporate branded similarity of them all - that and the odd warden who interprets "warden" differently to me!.

 

[CAB96]

It is interesting to read the reviews on the club site of its sites by members. Many are not complementary of the ite standards. Lots of comments about tired facilities in need of improvement. I rarely visit club sites so little first hand experience but I don’t get a sense that club sites are at the top of the pile in regard to excellent facilities. They probably used to be, but independent sites have overtaken them. Probably the newly refurbished blocks are good but that is only a minority.

I've only been to a dozen or so. Yes, some of them are older, but none were unpleasant or unwelcoming. All were a step up from CACC standard (which are perfectly fine themselves).

They have a rolling programme of upgrades and refurbishment. But I guess some are put off if they don't have the security of a long lease.

 

[Coolcats]

It is interesting to read the reviews on the club site of its sites by members. Many are not complementary of the ite standards. Lots of comments about tired facilities in need of improvement. I rarely visit club sites so little first hand experience but I don’t get a sense that club sites are at the top of the pile in regard to excellent facilities. They probably used to be, but independent sites have overtaken them. Probably the newly refurbished blocks are good but that is only a minority.

if you rarely visit sites how do you know only a minority are in good condition ? I would say they are pretty standardised clean and in working order. You say reviews are not complementary the guy who responded to a warden who said ‘good morning Sir’ the guy responded by snapping ‘do not call me Sir’ I suspect he would have left a negative review.

 

[Gellyneck]

if you rarely visit sites how do you know only a minority are in good condition ? I would say they are pretty standardised clean and in working order. You say reviews are not complementary the guy who responded to a warden who said ‘good morning Sir’ the guy responded by snapping ‘do not call me Sir’ I suspect he would have left a negative review.

We've stayed on many C&MC sites and, by and large, they are all much of a muchness. Clean and very functional. You know what you're getting when you book.

Only ever made one complaint and that was a few years ago when they spent a lot of money upgrading Hawes toilet block which, to our minds, was one of the higher spec facilities! Money could have been better spent elsewhere on the network on some of the older facilities.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[hja]

if you rarely visit sites how do you know only a minority are in good condition ? I would say they are pretty standardised clean and in working order. You say reviews are not complementary the guy who responded to a warden who said ‘good morning Sir’ the guy responded by snapping ‘do not call me Sir’ I suspect he would have left a negative review.

Only a minority have been refurbished, is what I was saying.

 

[Gellyneck]

Only a minority have been refurbished, is what I was saying.

I think you'll find there is quite a few that have had work done on them over the last couple or so years. We can think of, probably, a dozen or so that we've been on.

 

[SpeedyDux]

I think your last sentence says it all. Installation costs… which will of course be passed onto site fees making CAMC sites even more expensive. A simple change of breakers to lower consumption would have been a relatively cheap and quick option.

The CAMC had closing cash of £53.8m up 12% from the previous year. The Club has always been sitting on its massive cash reserves.

I don't see why rolling out metered EHU to the majority of Club sites should mean increased site fees to pass on the cost to Members. Plenty of cash available for such a programme. While they are at it they could install more EV charge points.

 

[hja]

The CAMC had closing cash of £53.8m up 12% from the previous year. The Club has always been sitting on its massive cash reserves.

I don't see why rolling out metered EHU to the majority of Club sites should mean increased site fees to pass on the cost to Members. Plenty of cash available for such a programme. While they are at it they could install more EV charge points.

They also have to get their heads around more electric motorhomes like the VW Buzz and others that will need charging on the pitch.

 

[Dolmen]

They also have to get their heads around more electric motorhomes like the VW Buzz and others that will need charging on the pitch.

It would be nice, and if there is an electricity to the pitch, why not, however, not a necessity. The clubs do not currently provide facilities for you to refuel with diesel. Electric motorhomes will just have to charge up before they get there or when they leave just like we do now

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Apacheman]

The CAMC had closing cash of £53.8m up 12% from the previous year. The Club has always been sitting on its massive cash reserves.

I don't see why rolling out metered EHU to the majority of Club sites should mean increased site fees to pass on the cost to Members. Plenty of cash available for such a programme. While they are at it they could install more EV charge points.

It would be interesting to know what % of a site fee is apportioned to EHU use. It would also be interesting to know if generally that is exceeded or underused by the majority? Metering could result in a drop in annual income whilst electricity costs on the whole stay high. Facilities blocks, offices, shops etc will still burn it. As you say sitting on massive cash reserves. Up again this year but didn’t stop fees increasing across the board. A not for profit members organisation that sits on £millions yet increases prices. What makes you think they’ll use reserves and not pass the costs on?

 

[SpeedyDux]

It would be interesting to know what % of a site fee is apportioned to EHU use. It would also be interesting to know if generally that is exceeded or underused by the majority? Metering could result in a drop in annual income whilst electricity costs on the whole stay high. Facilities blocks, offices, shops etc will still burn it. As you say sitting on massive cash reserves. Up again this year but didn’t stop fees increasing across the board. A not for profit members organisation that sits on £millions yet increases prices. What makes you think they’ll use reserves and not pass the costs on?

Recently I booked a CAMC site that has one or two cheapo basic grass pitches without EHU, probably for tenters.

The pitch fee for a grass pitch with EHU was exactly £5 more. That's where I got my £5 per night cost of EHU from.

Such an overkill cash pile makes me think that the Executive Committee is extremely risk-averse and/or lacks imagination.

I find it difficult to think what kind of emergency scenario would justify this size of reserve. I understand that some of that cash is earmarked for the odd acquisition, although the tendency is to buy former affiliated private sites, so in reality the number of pitch nights available to Members through the Club's booking system stays roughly the same. Meanwhile, the Club loses important leased city sites such as Baltic Wharf and Crystal Palace, that can't be replaced.

The other excuse for holding cash seems to be that the Planning system delays their site improvements programme.

 

[Coolcats]

Only a minority have been refurbished, is what I was saying.

My goodness, yet the standard of cleanliness is in our experience good as a CAMC member haven’t had cause to grumble or complain yet.

 

[Coolcats]

Such an overkill cash pile makes me think that the Executive Committee is extremely risk-averse and/or lacks imagination.

I find it difficult to think what kind of emergency scenario would justify this size of reserve. I understand that some of that cash is earmarked for the odd acquisition, although the tendency is to buy former affiliated private sites, so in reality the number of pitch nights available to Members through the Club's booking system stays roughly the same. Meanwhile, the Club loses important leased city sites such as Baltic Wharf and Crystal Palace, that can't be replaced.

The other excuse for holding cash seems to be that the Planning system delays their site improvements programme.

Cash is king any business should look after their cash reserves, remember Marconi that great british firm, they had a cash pile, management went on a splurg of ‘investments’. Then there was the dot com crash and Marconi is no more our radar is now owned by the Italians, e2v that make specialist cameras that are on board space craft are now owned by the Americans. All because of the notion of not having a cash pile….

 

[SpeedyDux]

Cash is king any business should look after their cash reserves, remember Marconi that great british firm, they had a cash pile, management went on a splurg of ‘investments’. Then there was the dot com crash and Marconi is no more our radar is now owned by the Italians, e2v that make specialist cameras that are on board space craft are now owned by the Americans. All because of the notion of not having a cash pile….

Marconi etc were examples of spectacular mismanagement. It happens.

The CAMC isn't Marconi. It's a Club that operates a portfolio of campsites. It could put a chunk of its cash pile to better use without any risk of going bankrupt.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Coolcats]

Marconi etc were examples of spectacular mismanagement. It happens.

The CAMC isn't Marconi. It's a Club that operates a portfolio of campsites. It could put a chunk of its cash pile to better use without any risk of going bankrupt.

It’s a business like any other, and whilst it is a club any club should be run as a business no matter how small, here is a question what percentage of the ‘Cash pile’ is compared to the overall assets of the club. And without a financial assessment it’s doubtful that ” It could put a chunk of its cash pile to better use without any risk of going bankrupt.” maybe your right maybe your wrong.

 

[SpeedyDux]

It’s a business like any other, and whilst it is a club any club should be run as a business no matter how small, here is a question what percentage of the ‘Cash pile’ is compared to the overall assets of the club. And without a financial assessment it’s doubtful that ” It could put a chunk of its cash pile to better use without any risk of going bankrupt.” maybe your right maybe your wrong.

The Club survived the Covid lockdowns in good financial shape. The cash pile wasn't drained even by this worst-case scenario.

 

[Coolcats]

The Club survived the Covid lockdowns in good financial shape. The cash pile wasn't drained even by this worst-case scenario.

Prudent financial management I would suggest and the club passed on the VAT savings.

Along with prudent financial management there was a huge intake of bookings from people who may not normally have used the sites. This was not uncommon across many leisure industries Cycle shops and manufactures couldn’t sell or get hold of enough bikes.

The club sites are well maintained, staff as far as I can tell are pleasant ( treat people nicely and they are nice back). The web site does leave something to be desired but they are not the only organisation with a frustrating web pages. And so it goes. Life isn’t perfect neither is the CAMC CCC or private sites or me or you.

 

[SpeedyDux]

Prudent financial management I would suggest and the club passed on the VAT savings.

Along with prudent financial management there was a huge intake of bookings from people who may not normally have used the sites. This was not uncommon across many leisure industries Cycle shops and manufactures couldn’t sell or get hold of enough bikes.

The club sites are well maintained, staff as far as I can tell are pleasant ( treat people nicely and they are nice back). The web site does leave something to be desired but they are not the only organisation with a frustrating web pages. And so it goes. Life isn’t perfect neither is the CAMC CCC or private sites or me or you.

If maintaining a growing cash pile is the highest priority, do you believe £53 million is enough? Would £100 million not be better?

The current trickle of Club investment in upgrading its existing sites* together with a very timid rate of expansion by acquisition (or development of brand new sites e.g. to replace Baltic Wharf) could result in the cash pile getting even bigger year on year. Since I rejoined it has grown from @£30 million to £53 million. We will have to wait until October 2025 for the 2024 Annual Report and Accounts summary, to see the cash figure held this year. Place your bets ... £55 million? £60 million? Higher?

The more spare cash the Club holds, and the more unmortgaged freehold land the Club owns, the higher the chances that it will eventually de-mutualise (probably turning the Executives into millionaires, yippee!) also raising the risk of sell-off of sites for residential development. That's where I think the bigger risk to Members' interests comes from, medium to long term, than a depleted cash reserve.

*Investing in glamping Yurts and Pods can be seen by many Members as heading in the opposite direction to their requirement for more all-weather touring pitches, especially on those sites that are most popular at peak times, hence more difficult to book. How about a faster roll-out of metered EHU on top of a basic pitch fee? Giving more Members with self-sufficient motorhomes the choice not to pay to have EHU they either don't want or don't need? The Club is still stuck with a Caravanning mentality even though they are now the minority.

You shouldn't try to make excuses for the Club's offputting booking software. It simply isn't nearly as user-friendly as the bespoke software it replaced. Just because other organisations have frustrating web pages doesn't make it OK.

I agree that the Club is essentially a leisure business. Hence the trend towards fashionable "glamping" investment, that most Members might disagree with. Fashions can change and disappear quite suddenly, so is that "prudent" investment anyway?

The Club is a business that is relatively low risk and asset-rich, yet apparently managed in an over cautious and risk-averse manner. You described this as prudent but I detect a sclerotic mindset at the top.

A business whose executives are very difficult to hold to account, and try to avoid admitting they were wrong or made mistakes. The magazine is full of PR and spin. I don't often take a look, but the Club Together forum seems quite likely being heavily censored moderated to remove posts by annoyed or disappointed Members, to give the impression that everything about the Club is positively marvellous, and we are all happy bunnies. In that regard, the Club does mimic many big organisations and their top executives.

Feel free to dispute the above!

 

[68c]

If maintaining a growing cash pile is the highest priority, do you believe £53 million is enough? Would £100 million not be better?

The current trickle of Club investment in upgrading its existing sites* together with a very timid rate of expansion by acquisition (or development of brand new sites e.g. to replace Baltic Wharf) could result in the cash pile getting even bigger year on year. Since I rejoined it has grown from @£30 million to £53 million. We will have to wait until October 2025 for the 2024 Annual Report and Accounts summary, to see the cash figure held this year. Place your bets ... £55 million? £60 million? Higher?

The more spare cash the Club holds, and the more unmortgaged freehold land the Club owns, the higher the chances that it will eventually de-mutualise (probably turning the Executives into millionaires, yippee!) also raising the risk of sell-off of sites for residential development. That's where I think the bigger risk to Members' interests comes from, medium to long term, than a depleted cash reserve.

*Investing in glamping Yurts and Pods can be seen by many Members as heading in the opposite direction to their requirement for more all-weather touring pitches, especially on those sites that are most popular at peak times, hence more difficult to book. How about a faster roll-out of metered EHU on top of a basic pitch fee? Giving more Members with self-sufficient motorhomes the choice not to pay to have EHU they either don't want or don't need? The Club is still stuck with a Caravanning mentality even though they are now the minority.

You shouldn't try to make excuses for the Club's offputting booking software. It simply isn't nearly as user-friendly as the bespoke software it replaced. Just because other organisations have frustrating web pages doesn't make it OK.

I agree that the Club is essentially a leisure business. Hence the trend towards fashionable "glamping" investment, that most Members might disagree with. Fashions can change and disappear quite suddenly, so is that "prudent" investment anyway?

The Club is a business that is relatively low risk and asset-rich, yet apparently managed in an over cautious and risk-averse manner. You described this as prudent but I detect a sclerotic mindset at the top.

A business whose executives are very difficult to hold to account, and try to avoid admitting they were wrong or made mistakes. The magazine is full of PR and spin. I don't often take a look, but the Club Together forum seems quite likely being heavily censored moderated to remove posts by annoyed or disappointed Members, to give the impression that everything about the Club is positively marvellous, and we are all happy bunnies. In that regard, the Club does mimic many big organisations and their top executives.

Feel free to dispute the above!

Went through it line by line. Cannot dispute your post.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[hja]

If maintaining a growing cash pile is the highest priority, do you believe £53 million is enough? Would £100 million not be better?

The current trickle of Club investment in upgrading its existing sites* together with a very timid rate of expansion by acquisition (or development of brand new sites e.g. to replace Baltic Wharf) could result in the cash pile getting even bigger year on year. Since I rejoined it has grown from @£30 million to £53 million. We will have to wait until October 2025 for the 2024 Annual Report and Accounts summary, to see the cash figure held this year. Place your bets ... £55 million? £60 million? Higher?

The more spare cash the Club holds, and the more unmortgaged freehold land the Club owns, the higher the chances that it will eventually de-mutualise (probably turning the Executives into millionaires, yippee!) also raising the risk of sell-off of sites for residential development. That's where I think the bigger risk to Members' interests comes from, medium to long term, than a depleted cash reserve.

*Investing in glamping Yurts and Pods can be seen by many Members as heading in the opposite direction to their requirement for more all-weather touring pitches, especially on those sites that are most popular at peak times, hence more difficult to book. How about a faster roll-out of metered EHU on top of a basic pitch fee? Giving more Members with self-sufficient motorhomes the choice not to pay to have EHU they either don't want or don't need? The Club is still stuck with a Caravanning mentality even though they are now the minority.

You shouldn't try to make excuses for the Club's offputting booking software. It simply isn't nearly as user-friendly as the bespoke software it replaced. Just because other organisations have frustrating web pages doesn't make it OK.

I agree that the Club is essentially a leisure business. Hence the trend towards fashionable "glamping" investment, that most Members might disagree with. Fashions can change and disappear quite suddenly, so is that "prudent" investment anyway?

The Club is a business that is relatively low risk and asset-rich, yet apparently managed in an over cautious and risk-averse manner. You described this as prudent but I detect a sclerotic mindset at the top.

A business whose executives are very difficult to hold to account, and try to avoid admitting they were wrong or made mistakes. The magazine is full of PR and spin. I don't often take a look, but the Club Together forum seems quite likely being heavily censored moderated to remove posts by annoyed or disappointed Members, to give the impression that everything about the Club is positively marvellous, and we are all happy bunnies. In that regard, the Club does mimic many big organisations and their top executives.

Feel free to dispute the above!

There have been some threads very critical of the club on Club Together, the new booking system, prices, pods, AND BINS! I am not convinced it is that heavilly censored. They do get irritated if you go off thread (goodness knows what they would think of this forum) and you are not allowed to mention dogs.