mockturtle wrote: Frankly, I think it's a matter of semantics. If, instead of 'add-ons', they used 'deductions', would that be better? Let's say you don't have any kids, don't plan to use the A/C and have a small MH, they could take ten dollars off the price. If they start with a higher base and then deduct from there, would it be easier to take? Just curious.
Personally, I prefer not to pay for what I don't use.
That concept isn't in any of the business practices models I've ever seen!!! The lo-ball come on and do "value added" later is an old established method and I suspect that if it were tried the deduction plan you outlined was a failure........but it would appeal to me!!
Ron
One of the reasons why I use "rvparkreviews.com" is to see what others have to say about their stay at a RV park. I have avoided parks that nickle and dime you to death, based on what others have written about them. I also have stayed at some 'ale carte RV parks IF I did not mind paying their charges for what I was getting.
I guess what bothers me the most is when certain "extras" are forced on you and you don't want them, or need them. In other words, I stopped at one park that advertised that they had pull-thru sites available. No problem, I'll pay extra for a pull thru, sometimes. Turns out that all pull thrus also have 50 AMP, another $5 extra, they also have cable, another $2 extra. I didn't need 50 amps and I didn't want the cable, but if I wanted the pull-thru, I would have to pay those extra fees, on top of the initial premium for the pull-thru, whether I needed them or not. I declined and went on down the road a few miles.
I don't mind "extra" charges, but don't hide them, or attempt to force them on consumers that don't have any need for those "extras." Thankfully in most areas there are other park choices availible.
I have no problem with add on charges as long as I receive quality for my fee. With limited land area in prime locations I completely understand guest parking fees. In San Diego, if the campground did not charge guest parking the campground would be filled with day visitors. Additional guests in a campground use additional water and increase the electrical load for the campground. If every dog owner cleaned up after every dog, all would be good and wonderful, but they don't. Therefore, every dog increases the burden on campground employees. Blame the uncaring pet owners, not the campgrounds.
Just my opinion.
Over chargeing has become the norm. Large companies have no idea that half price camp grounds, full of happy camper is all about, compared to have full price half full camp!!!! We are in the bussiness (small camp ground small town and Mobile home lot rental in bussiness 36 years and still going) We also RV ourselfs 4 Months plus each year. Just returned from a 30 day 4,400 mile trip. I love RV net fourm.
mockturtle wrote: Frankly, I think it's a matter of semantics. If, instead of 'add-ons', they used 'deductions', would that be better? Let's say you don't have any kids, don't plan to use the A/C and have a small MH, they could take ten dollars off the price. If they start with a higher base and then deduct from there, would it be easier to take? Just curious.
Personally, I prefer not to pay for what I don't use.
That concept isn't in any of the business practices models I've ever seen!!! The lo-ball come on and do "value added" later is an old established method and I suspect that if it were tried the deduction plan you outlined was a failure........but it would appeal to me!!
Ron
I agree it wouldn't be a viable business practice. I was trying to show that, if the concept were reversed, the end result would be the same but maybe more palatable.
2000 Born Free 24RB Class C
2002 Honda CR-V toad
Roadmaster Sterling A/T towbar
VIP braking system
Eddyline Merlin kayak
So called "a la carte" nickel and dime charges leave a bitter taste in my mouth. When traveling, I call two or three CGs and have them "bottom line" the price for me based on my requirements and will go with the best price based on comparable accommodations. I can accept paying a "premium" for a site if the premium site offers something of intrinsic value, such as ocean view, assuming most sites don't have the same view.
I have never been at a CG where I was asked to pay a red cent for having the privilege of having company visit me. If that day ever comes, I will tell the CG operator C_YA before he/she has a chance to blink an eye.
I do not mind paying a la carte if I am informed before hand but do not like to be suprised with this type of pricing. We do call ahead and get the pricing and ask for any ad-ons for our needs. We do use one park that does have a visitor fee of $2 which I gladly pay as it keeps down the traffic in the park. We stayed there before they started the fee and decal that comes with it and there was a lot of traffic through the park that is now gone. I buy the decal ahead for our daughter's car so that she does not have to stop at the office.
I do understand this business model and its advantages to many travelers. Those with no pets (that's us), no kids (us again), a small coach (not us), or only needing 30 amp (not us either), it can be a money saver over flat rate pricing. But I do think that it should be advertised up front.
Badeye
"No one can guarantee success, only effort."
Bob & Fran
2005 Coachmen Sportscoach Elite 40 ft DP
2002 Dodge Durango
Ready Brute Tow Bar
Ready Brake Tow Brake
FMCA F324606
Your idea would be to have EVERYONE at the gas station fill up their tank and pay the same amount regardless of the size of the tank? How about charging everyone the same who went into the movies whether they ate pop corn or not? Maybe go to a swimming pool and NOT pay extra for having a half dozen kids with you? RV Parking Lots didn't invent the "pay for what you use" system.
2004 F-250 SCREW Long Bed (new)
OR 2004 F-150 HD (85,000 towing miles) Rockwood 8314SS 34' travel trailer
We have enough YOUTH...how about a fountain of SMART
Offline
