Hello! I'm pretty new to RVParkReviews but already value it highly. Those who see my reviews probably note that we tend to stay in low cost spots - especially when traveling. However, we still want an attractive, clean place but not all the extra stuff that we seldom use. My problem in doing reviews is I don't know how to rate a low cost campground relative to a top of the line park. When we are on our way somewhere we usually stay at each location for just a single night. In that situation all we really need is 30 amp electrical hook up, big rig access and an attractive, clean, quiet place. a campground that meets these qualifications and charges only $15 is a 6 in my mind. If it also provides water and a dump station and charges the same $15 it is a 7 to me. These campgrounds really meet our needs and I recommend them to other folks in our situation. A family staying for two weeks might disagree with my rating because they want a campground to meet totally different needs. So maybe we should define what type use we believe the park satisfies. For example, how about defining parks into categories such as the following: (A) high amenity (destination) park for seniors, (B) high amenity (destination) park for families, © destination park for hunters/fishermen, (D) Low amenity destination park and (E) overnight stay parks? Does anyone think this might help make our reviews more meaningful?
I would disagree with your scores. If a park meets all the criteria you are expecting, it should get a high rating. Giving a score of 6 to a park that you feel gave you value, I think is way too low. I think ratings should reflect expectations. If a park exceeds them, they deserve a 9 or 10. Meet expectations an 8. Only if a park is terrible should it get a 2 or a 1. And by terrible I mean, terrible, not just an Internet connection that doesn't stream your movies as fast as at home or you got a site at the last minute that didn't have the best views in the park. It is like grading school papers, a paper you would give an "A" to in the 3rd grade, wouldn't pass muster as a doctorial thesis. Same with RV parks, a $15.00 overnight park with simple water, sewer and electrical connections but nothing else could get a 10 if it is nice and clean, but would score around a 3 if it was advertised and positioned as a resort and priced at $90.00 a night.
QUOTE(RoySchoepf @ Aug 31 2010, 07:33 PM) [snapback]23868[/snapback] Hello! I'm pretty new to RVParkReviews but already value it highly. Those who see my reviews probably note that we tend to stay in low cost spots - especially when traveling. However, we still want an attractive, clean place but not all the extra stuff that we seldom use. My problem in doing reviews is I don't know how to rate a low cost campground relative to a top of the line park. When we are on our way somewhere we usually stay at each location for just a single night. In that situation all we really need is 30 amp electrical hook up, big rig access and an attractive, clean, quiet place. a campground that meets these qualifications and charges only $15 is a 6 in my mind. If it also provides water and a dump station and charges the same $15 it is a 7 to me. These campgrounds really meet our needs and I recommend them to other folks in our situation. A family staying for two weeks might disagree with my rating because they want a campground to meet totally different needs. So maybe we should define what type use we believe the park satisfies. For example, how about defining parks into categories such as the following: (A) high amenity (destination) park for seniors, (B) high amenity (destination) park for families, © destination park for hunters/fishermen, (D) Low amenity destination park and (E) overnight stay parks? Does anyone think this might help make our reviews more meaningful? That is an interesting suggestion and you make a good point. Some people are only interested in just the very basic amenities - full hookups and clean restrooms - and don't want to pay more for services that they won't use. Others are looking for more destination-type resorts with Wi-Fi, swimming pools, etc. and don't mind paying a premium for that. Even within that category you have young families that want more stuff for their kids to do, while others are more interested in a quieter, age 55+ type of setting. Not sure the best way to display all that but it would be helpful to all users on here.
QUOTE(MinnysodaRVer @ Sep 1 2010, 09:43 AM) [snapback]23875[/snapback] That is an interesting suggestion and you make a good point. Some people are only interested in just the very basic amenities - full hookups and clean restrooms - and don't want to pay more for services that they won't use. Others are looking for more destination-type resorts with Wi-Fi, swimming pools, etc. and don't mind paying a premium for that. Even within that category you have young families that want more stuff for their kids to do, while others are more interested in a quieter, age 55+ type of setting. Not sure the best way to display all that but it would be helpful to all users on here. I agree. Many people do state, "great park for overnight stop". Maybe 2 questions: OK for one night. Yes, No OK for one week or more. Yes, No I can think of 2 parks that I would rate Ok for a week or more but not for a 1 night stop.
I'm not sure, but I think it would take too much programming to add that option. Plus, it may be subjective depending on the reviewer. When I do reviews, I usually say, "just the basics" or I say "it's got lots of stuff!" I think you get a good idea from reading the reviews. JJ
QUOTE(kcmoedoe @ Sep 1 2010, 10:44 AM) [snapback]23872[/snapback] I would disagree with your scores. If a park meets all the criteria you are expecting, it should get a high rating. Giving a score of 6 to a park that you feel gave you value, I think is way too low. I think ratings should reflect expectations. If a park exceeds them, they deserve a 9 or 10. Meet expectations an 8. Only if a park is terrible should it get a 2 or a 1. And by terrible I mean, terrible, not just an Internet connection that doesn't stream your movies as fast as at home or you got a site at the last minute that didn't have the best views in the park. It is like grading school papers, a paper you would give an "A" to in the 3rd grade, wouldn't pass muster as a doctorial thesis. Same with RV parks, a $15.00 overnight park with simple water, sewer and electrical connections but nothing else could get a 10 if it is nice and clean, but would score around a 3 if it was advertised and positioned as a resort and priced at $90.00 a night. Appreciate your thoughts - If I understand you correctly, you use price in order to define the type of park - A $15 or $20 per night park is regarded as a basic park (overnight or short stay) and a more expensive park is considered to be a longer stay (or destination) park. The marks we give a park should be based on price - an attractive, clean and quiet park with basic features should be given a 9 or 10 if it is priced according to what it offers. The same park should be marked lower if it charges more since it does not deliver value in line with its price. Seams logical to me though that may be a bit cryptic for those who do not know the marking system. I will try to insert my estimation of the type of park I believe it to be in my descriptions but will adopt your making strategy. Thanks again.
Many reviewers state that a certain park is ok for a 1 night stop. That tell's me to look at other reviews to see if anyone stayed a week if i am interested in using it for more than a one night stop. Everyone rates parks differently. Even though I have a MH and may never use the restrooms, I take the time to check them out so I can answer the "restroom / shower" question. I would hate to see someone rate a park a 10 for a one night stop if that same person would only give it a 6 if they were to stay there a week.
Basically I do not use price at all in rating a park. Clean is clean and it doesn't matter to me whether it is fancy or plain. I list the various features of the park...paved or unpaved roads. Level or sloped RV sites. Electric and water are adequate. All of these things would be the same, no matter what you are paying. I will state that the park is fine for an overnight stay if that is what we used it for. That does not mean that for someone else it may work fine for a week stay. I figure each RV owner will have to decide if the area warrants a stay longer than one night. I also mention if it had WIFI or cable that works, but again, those items would be the same, no matter what the cost. I will mention if the park staff is rude, if the buildings and overall park is rundown and in need of maintenance. I will also mention traffic noise or some other item that may distract from your enjoyment. Again, these are things that really have no bearing on whether or not the park is a high end or low end. I have found that on the vast majority of RV reviews, there is a link to the park's own website. This website will mention the virtues of their amenities and other things that are nice about the park. I will only review the things that I used and will not write about a pool that I drove by. I feel that any perspective user will read the reviews and then also check out the park's website to see if this park meets their own personal needs. I try to keep my reviews aimed at how the park suited or did not suit my needs.
Never ending: https://www.campgroundreviews.com/invboard/inde...?showtopic=1271] https://www.campgroundreviews.com/invboard/inde...?showtopic=1271[/url] https://www.campgroundreviews.com/invboard/inde...?showtopic=1197] https://www.campgroundreviews.com/invboard/inde...?showtopic=1197[/url] https://www.campgroundreviews.com/invboard/inde...?showtopic=1872
My theory is why rate it other than for what you found on your stay? If it suited your needs and satisfied you then rate it for yourself. You are not rating it on what someone else may or may not think when they stay at that park. If it was an 8 for you then give it an 8. Don't try to rationalize that if someone else stayed there longer they might not be as satisfied as you were. Your ratings should express what you found and how you felt and not how you think someone else might see that same park.
QUOTE(RoySchoepf @ Aug 31 2010, 06:33 PM) [snapback]23868[/snapback] Hello! I'm pretty new to RVParkReviews but already value it highly. Those who see my reviews probably note that we tend to stay in low cost spots - especially when traveling. However, we still want an attractive, clean place but not all the extra stuff that we seldom use. My problem in doing reviews is I don't know how to rate a low cost campground relative to a top of the line park. When we are on our way somewhere we usually stay at each location for just a single night. In that situation all we really need is 30 amp electrical hook up, big rig access and an attractive, clean, quiet place. a campground that meets these qualifications and charges only $15 is a 6 in my mind. If it also provides water and a dump station and charges the same $15 it is a 7 to me. These campgrounds really meet our needs and I recommend them to other folks in our situation. A family staying for two weeks might disagree with my rating because they want a campground to meet totally different needs. So maybe we should define what type use we believe the park satisfies. For example, how about defining parks into categories such as the following: (A) high amenity (destination) park for seniors, (B) high amenity (destination) park for families, © destination park for hunters/fishermen, (D) Low amenity destination park and (E) overnight stay parks? Does anyone think this might help make our reviews more meaningful? I would like to find some of those price cg's. If they meet my standards I would rate them higher. I very seldom give any of them a 10 as there is always something not as it should be.
Ok everyone, if you want CHEAP camping places and don't care about atmosphere or amenities, (I hope Webmaster will forgive me....) check this website: http://www.freecampgrounds.com/index.aspx It used to be only for "free" places, but they have since revised their criteria to $10 or less. They used to include the Wal-Marts, but I think the Wal-Marts have been removed. I found a couple good places on here, I used it when I drove to Kentucky last year. JJ
Similar to what others have posted, try to be clear in your description. I have rated an unlevel, no hookups, difficult to get to, no amenities, no dump station, no bathroom (only outhouses) campground as an "8", because it was a gorgeous state park that on its website it states clearly that it is a "rustic" campground. I made it clear in my description why I rated it as I did. Another full hookup, full amenity campground I rated as a "7", because it wasn't all that good but the amenities raised its rating for me. I try to do my best to be clear in my descriptions. I hope others do the same. It is funny as heck to read descriptions obviously by the campground owner and/or friends, when they are trying to bury bad ratings!
We always attempt to rate the campground on what it is attempting to do. If we stay at a small Mom and Pop type place, we do not give it a score against a large destination park. This is clear in our description. We have stayed in a huge variety and price campgrounds and rate the campground on strictly a subjective way. When writing up the review, I ask my wife the number and I have a number in mind myself. It is amazing how often we are the same. We are rarely off by more than one. I think most people reading the reviews realize this. The park's amenities are always listed anyway. Many of the things that some people consider essential, make little difference to us. An example of this is concrete pads. I really had rather not have one as they are sometimes have dangerous drop offs. My favorite is firm sand or gravel. They also are better for the environment and ambiance. We like being under the trees and folks with satellite dishes don't. In the West, we have stayed at different campgrounds without any trees, but you couldn't see a tree for miles. Employee friendliness and overall campground cleanliness go a long way to improving score for me. We rarely use the park for much besides sleeping. We travel to see the county and not the campgrounds. I think there are a lot of campers doing the same thing and fortunately there are different types of campgrounds for us all. Actually, Wal-Mart is exactly what I need much of the time.
OK, along these same lines, I know I have a very difficult review coming up in a couple of weeks. I know about it since I've spent time at this same place before and we will be staying there mid-September. The place is primarily a "cabins" park and 98% of their business is camping cabins, but they have added two (yes two) RV sites. The sites are not level and only have water and electric, BUT they only charge $10.00/night for these sites. The owners are very freindly and accomidating which helps. The only amenities are a small, very dated playground for the kids. The "park" is useful if you need electric or if other people in your party are staying in the cabins, but otherwise I'd reccomend staying somewhere else. I really don't know how to rate this place. I feel the price is right for what you get, but I don't want people thinking this is a "regular" RV park with all the usual stuff you would expect (dump station, bathrooms, etc.) Also, since I've stayed in the cabins before, should I include that information in my review, or leave it out and only include the RV info?
QUOTE(Fitzjohnfan @ Sep 5 2010, 11:34 PM) [snapback]23951[/snapback] OK, along these same lines, I know I have a very difficult review coming up in a couple of weeks. I know about it since I've spent time at this same place before and we will be staying there mid-September. The place is primarily a "cabins" park and 98% of their business is camping cabins, but they have added two (yes two) RV sites. The sites are not level and only have water and electric, BUT they only charge $10.00/night for these sites. The owners are very freindly and accomidating which helps. The only amenities are a small, very dated playground for the kids. The "park" is useful if you need electric or if other people in your party are staying in the cabins, but otherwise I'd reccomend staying somewhere else. I really don't know how to rate this place. I feel the price is right for what you get, but I don't want people thinking this is a "regular" RV park with all the usual stuff you would expect (dump station, bathrooms, etc.) Also, since I've stayed in the cabins before, should I include that information in my review, or leave it out and only include the RV info? First of all, what you have said above is an excellent review. Just put all that in your real review, and it will be fine. Rate it whatever you want to. If you feel it gives you a good value and meets your needs, rate it on the higher side. If you feel it should be rated lower because it lacks amenities and sites are not level, that is ok, too. The important thing is your comments, and you have described the situation very well. As for mentioning the cabins. It is certainly OK to mention that they have them. Again what you have said about them above is great, but you should really stay in one this time in order to review them. Hope this helps.
Rate it for what it is and how well it accomplishes that purpose. Include the pros and cons concisely in your written review. This sounds like a place that we would like, but I realize that many campers would not. They want lighted shuffleboard and the rest. Have an excellant trip.
QUOTE(Fitzjohnfan @ Sep 5 2010, 09:34 PM) [snapback]23951[/snapback] ...The place is primarily a "cabins" park and 98% of their business is camping cabins, but they have added two (yes two) RV sites. The sites are not level and only have water and electric, BUT they only charge $10.00/night for these sites. The owners are very freindly... Wow, this is something we might be interested in. How long do you stay? Please DO write a review as RVers don't always need the whole enchilada every time. We full time. Had kids and grandkids come stay with us for a week this summer. I chose a park (used everyone's reviews on this site) which had the sparkling pool, great shower/restrooms, grass and paved 'bicycle worthy' interior streets, and close proximity to the beach. Was a great treat for them, AND for us. Paid more and got a kick out of their enjoyment of all that extra stuff. We've since moved on to parks w/o all that infrastructure. Much less fussy as we enjoy our elbow room, wildllife viewing, star gazing etc. The folks next to us can have a fire without smoking us out, and we can cook up a storm without bothering them. (All bets are off on a major holiday...but that's part of the lifestyle.) Now that the summer crush has died down, we'll get the bit in our teeth and travel a bit before winter closes down a huge chunk of the nation. This park you noted would be a worthy stop, as long as we all don't converge at once. :lol:
QUOTE(FosterImposters @ Sep 6 2010, 10:55 AM) [snapback]23962[/snapback] Wow, this is something we might be interested in. How long do you stay? Please DO write a review.... Watch for the review after next weekend in Colorado/Twin Lakes area. We usually stay here evey year with other family members who stay in the cabins. It's kind of a tradition. Here's their website: http://www.winmarcabins.com/cabins.htm
