Fair comment - but it is disingenuous to claim to be a club.
I can actually see little benefit to members. For example, the member cost of the Sandringham site is similar to that of the nearby commercial Kelling Heath site, the latter boasting greater facilities. Obviously different people, different strokes apply, but , really, what is the benefit of the “club” other than a discount on Inflated site charges?
It's always been that way, at least all the 40+ years I've been a member - back in the '80s there were (vigorously denied) rumours of the Club floating on the Stock Exchange and the accounts looked like a company trying to do just that - and nothing's changed.
If I was a principled person I wouldn't join the club - but being hard-nosed I continue my membership to use their CLs and Mayday recovery - nothing else is of value to me.
We like visiting commercial sites with a restaurant or take away facilities and normally the cost is not much different to the CAMC site down the road.
We gave up on the take away foods offered on CAMC sites as never had a decent fish and chips. Obviously there are some CAMC sites that probably do offer decent fish & chips, but we found it best to pop down the road to a local Fish & chippy for decent meal.
In my view, extra facilities like restaurants shouldn't affect the pitch fees - their cost should be born by their takings - it's only free faciities that justify an increase in pitch fees.
To be fair, we would generally avoid on site restaurants in favour of local independents. Site food tends to be expensive, but is obviously more convenient. Takeaway F&C’s, in particular, are a problem for me - by the time one gets back, the chips are generally just a clump of warm claggy potato. So would much rather “sit in”.
We tend also not to be interested in site bars either. Ale is not necessarily very good, but they are useful to visit so the driver can have a drink after being out and about.
Certainly not the cheapest but imo the policy cover is one of the widest and their attitude on claims is well respected and valued. Mayday Green flag again is excellent but cheaper may be available but not necessarily with the same level,of cover.
Does that include Mayday as their caravan cover insurance is quite pricy in comparison to many mainstream caravan insurers?
There are some possible benefits of being a member but each person will have weigh up the pros and cons to see how they fit their own particular situation or preferences.
One of the benefits and this applies to both the CAMC and the CACC is the options of accessing sites that are "club" controlled.
There is a "club" magazine which has unique articles, adn can provide some access to a club market place, and special offers.
Again both main clubs have arranged forms of caravan insurance that is specifically tailored to the needs of touring caravans. These policies seem to be well specified in ways that many commercial policies are not. But there are few other independent insurers that can offer comparative policies which can also be price competitive.
The clubs may have a legal services to help members with caravanning problems. But so do other organisations such as the Consumers Association who publish "Which?" magazine
And both main clubs are members of the NCC ( the trade organisation for the caravan industry) and can help to bring the consumers perspective to NCC decisions and lobbying of government. Though most of the NCC's work seems to be to further the companies rather than consumers.
And don't forget that the "Club" caters for a wide range of "members". Often amused by the adverts for some items that, at least to me, seem overpriced and quite unnecessary but good to own for "bragging rights".
However, each to their own.
Fortunately I have now realised that at least some members of our club are "upper class" and "wealthy" like wat I am.
From Dec. CAMC magazine:
However, each to their own.
Fortunately I have now realised that at least some members of our club are "upper class" and "wealthy" like wat I am.
From Dec. CAMC magazine:
CC/CAMC is NOT a member of the NCC to represent members interest, it's a member to represent it's own commercial interest as a site provider and insurance provider.
I’m finding now that there are some good beers and ciders at zero or low alcohol and if I’m driving then that’s what I now opt for. Gives my wife a break from driving although she rarely if ever drinks alcohol.
Since I became teetotal, on medical advice, I've had no desire to drink "fake" beer - plain tap water for me with a meal, and it's free!
It’s not “ fake beer” as the brewing process is maintained, the difference is that the alcohol is removed. I like some LA or 0 drinks as they go well with a meal, whereas coke, lemonade etc don’t do it for me when having a meal.
The point I made when I wrote
"And both main clubs are members of the NCC ( the trade organisation for the caravan industry) and can help to bring the consumers perspective to NCC decisions and lobbying of government. Though most of the NCC's work seems to be to further the companies rather than consumers."
As the clubs are only a small voice on the council, it will be rare for the consumers view to prevail when in conflict with the trades position. But because of the nature of the Clubs business model, it is a route through which some consumer perspective can be aired.
I have limited experience if 0% alcohol, it used to be crud, but have fairly recently tried 0% Guinness from a can. It was, surprisingly to me, very good - and I hated canned Guinness in the 80/90’s, only drinking it from bottles if pump delivered not available
Yep one of my favourites. Heinken Zero is not too bad either. OH likes the Kopparberg zero cider. Tried Thatchers Zero but not impressed.
Not sure why anyone would think there has been any Fred Drift? Title of thread is Dynamic Pricing and that definitely comes into play when going to different pubs. LOL! 
Facebook
Twitter