QUOTE(cuse44 @ Nov 1 2006, 07:37 PM) [snapback]5402[/snapback] This may have discussed in the past but I cannot find any recent discussions on the topic. I always use this site before making a reservation at a park and sometimes find it difficult to make a judgment. One person will rate a park a 1 and the next person rates it a 9. When reading their comments, you wonder if they are rating the same park. One says everything is dirty and the other says everything is clean. I often wonder if the park owner comes in after a bad review and submits his own good one?? :unsure: I usually take the majority view when making a decision if there are different opinions. When posting my own reviews, I will try to remark on prior reviews that I consider either accurate or just plane wrong. Any others have the same problem? I agree with you on the owners posting. My cue was when I read a review that was WAY too detailed about activities and "recent improvements". How could a first time visitor to a campground be that familiar with all of those details. I doesn't take much to figure it out. Also I look for posts that are by people in a similar demographic as me (i.e. families, full timers, older, younger, couples). For us the reviews of retired couples full timing across the country would apply to me. But those same people probably wouldn't like a CG full of kids either. Also keep in mind, we are quick to complain when something goes wrong, but frequently forget to mention when something is great on a 10:1 scale. Happy camping.
I would much rather read reviews of campgrounds that the writer is usually writing from a sense of honesty - that's how they are feeling about it, right now. I try to balance the different comments and decide what the real answer might be. When I read the comments in a published campground guide, TRAILER LIFE, AAA, WOODALL'S, etc... that NEVER say a bad word about a campground, I know they exist because campgrounds pay for the privilege of being in their guide and they don't wish to upset them. I've seen campgrounds rated in the middle of the ratings but I wouldn't want to spend a minute in their rocky, uneven, parking lot of a campground and I can't always get that from the guide description. Reading other's comments gives me a fairly accurate description of the cg, especially when there are several that have written. If ALL say it is a "3", I believe it. If only one or two say that, and others all call it an "8" or "9", I can usually figure that out also. Then I look at WHY they rated them a "3" and often find it was because they didn't have the right kind of dog food in the store, or they didn't say the right thing at a particular time - all to be balanced with the way I balance out the comments. I find all the reivews very informative for one reason or another and I wouldn't visit an out of area cg without first reading all the comments I can find about it. Keep up the good work and I wish more folks would find this site. I'm happy that so many have! I'm looking forward to a NEW season of travel - COME ON SPRING!!! (for those of us that don't travel all year long)
Hi all, As a park owner, I do not read all reviews, but I do read all reviews of my park and those of parks that I am familiar with. I attempt to use these reviews as benchmarks for our park. Yes, some of the reviews are somewhat inconsistent, but for the most part they represent someone's opinion, good or bad. I carefully consider the reviews of our park and if there are any negatives, no matter how slight, I try to discern how I might correct the situation or if it is economically feasible or possible to do so. I also make sure all of our staff reads each and every review of our park, especially those that relate to how folks were treated and what they liked and disliked about their stay here. There are some things I cannot do anything about, such as the remoteness of our location or the fact that a certain cell phone service may not work here, so I do not spend any time worrying about those things. The beauty of our location is our primary attraction; if we were in town, that would take care of the remoteness thing, but then we would lose the people who come here for beauty and river activities. Most people love our trees and most who have been here before request shaded sights when they reserve, but some don't like the trees because they may block their satellite signal or a bird may leave a calling card on their rig. In these types of situations, I could decide to correct the so called problem, but I choose not to because I believe it would disappoint more people than it would please. All in all, I think this is a great site and that users of it derive a great deal of useful information from it. I commend the webmaster and anyone else who works on or moderates this site on a wonderful and obviously very time consuming job. The site is very helpful to travellers and park owners alike. I don't get my drawers in a wad just because someone says something on a review that I may not agree with - it is still someone's opinion and should be dealt with if possible. Again, tahnks for the site and for the opportunity to add my two bits worth. Doug
QUOTE(Parkview @ Mar 12 2009, 03:03 PM) [snapback]15465[/snapback] Hi all, As a park owner, I do not read all reviews, but I do read all reviews of my park and those of parks that I am familiar with. I attempt to use these reviews as benchmarks for our park. Yes, some of the reviews are somewhat inconsistent, but for the most part they represent someone's opinion, good or bad. I carefully consider the reviews of our park and if there are any negatives, no matter how slight, I try to discern how I might correct the situation or if it is economically feasible or possible to do so. I also make sure all of our staff reads each and every review of our park, especially those that relate to how folks were treated and what they liked and disliked about their stay here. There are some things I cannot do anything about, such as the remoteness of our location or the fact that a certain cell phone service may not work here, so I do not spend any time worrying about those things. The beauty of our location is our primary attraction; if we were in town, that would take care of the remoteness thing, but then we would lose the people who come here for beauty and river activities. Most people love our trees and most who have been here before request shaded sights when they reserve, but some don't like the trees because they may block their satellite signal or a bird may leave a calling card on their rig. In these types of situations, I could decide to correct the so called problem, but I choose not to because I believe it would disappoint more people than it would please. All in all, I think this is a great site and that users of it derive a great deal of useful information from it. I commend the webmaster and anyone else who works on or moderates this site on a wonderful and obviously very time consuming job. The site is very helpful to travellers and park owners alike. I don't get my drawers in a wad just because someone says something on a review that I may not agree with - it is still someone's opinion and should be dealt with if possible. Again, tahnks for the site and for the opportunity to add my two bits worth. Doug I agree with you 100%. Unfortunately, some of us frequently fail to avail ourselves of the good common sense we were born with. Besides, you cheat! You have a great place in a very popular area. It's a lot easier for an owner of a really nice place to react to the complaints of his customers when they have less to complain about. If only all owners were like you.
Parkview, as a park owner, you are NOT responsible for BIRD POOP! Now DOG POOP is another matter...... But that's an issue of dog owners not picking up the poop. "A bird pooped on my RV, I'm giving this park a ONE." JJ
QUOTE(pilgrim @ Mar 12 2009, 12:51 PM) [snapback]15462[/snapback] I would much rather read reviews of campgrounds that the writer is usually writing from a sense of honesty - that's how they are feeling about it, right now. I try to balance the different comments and decide what the real answer might be. When I read the comments in a published campground guide, TRAILER LIFE, AAA, WOODALL'S, etc... that NEVER say a bad word about a campground, I know they exist because campgrounds pay for the privilege of being in their guide and they don't wish to upset them. I've seen campgrounds rated in the middle of the ratings but I wouldn't want to spend a minute in their rocky, uneven, parking lot of a campground and I can't always get that from the guide description. Reading other's comments gives me a fairly accurate description of the cg, especially when there are several that have written. If ALL say it is a "3", I believe it. If only one or two say that, and others all call it an "8" or "9", I can usually figure that out also. Then I look at WHY they rated them a "3" and often find it was because they didn't have the right kind of dog food in the store, or they didn't say the right thing at a particular time - all to be balanced with the way I balance out the comments. I find all the reivews very informative for one reason or another and I wouldn't visit an out of area cg without first reading all the comments I can find about it. Keep up the good work and I wish more folks would find this site. I'm happy that so many have! I'm looking forward to a NEW season of travel - COME ON SPRING!!! (for those of us that don't travel all year long) Just a note regarding Trailer Life and Woodall's being in the campground owners pocket. Nothing could be further from the truth. I have a running feud going with Trailer Life and have reduced my advertising with them to the absolute lowest level to maintain my park as a Good Sam Park. Over the past few years, I have had a different reviewer each year and each one comes with the personality of a rock and they each treat their review criteria incredibly differently. One year, the reviewer requested a site for the night. I was sold out, he literally told me he would be glad to park his rig in my personal driveway for the night, since he was a long way from a park with availability. Against my better judgement, I agreed and then the next day he presented my ratings with a deduction for the quality and consistency of the sites. I questioned why, and he told me since I used my driveway as a site, he must include it in the sites being rated. He said the site was unlevel and the utility hookups were inadequate for most RVs. He also took a point off my laundry room since all the machines were not new. (5 of the washers were bought that year and the rest were less than 3 years old, 6 of the dryers were 1 year old and the other 4 were older triple load machines that I had just recently replaced the coin acceptors to digital displays and had replaced the drums inside the machine.) He told me to get a good score they needed to be new, not used. So I guess unless the machines are still boxed up from delivery, no campground could get a 10 on facilities from this jerk. The next year, I lost a point on my bathrooms because my walls have real wood wainscotting. Plastic wainscotting, tile, or cheap plastic laminate would get a 1, but real wood, stained and sealed gets only 1/2 point according to him. Last year, I lost a 1/2 point due to road noise. My park has had perfect noise scores for the past 6 years I have owned the park, and nothing has changed. When I questioned the rating, they told me there was a lot of noise form the RVs that were arriving. No Kidding!!!. I guess I could keep out guests and get a better score. Noise should be planes, trains, industrial parks and road noise, not the noise from a diesel motorhome checking in. I have traveled in my rv for many years, and nothing is more inconsistent that Trailer Life ratings from state to state. Believe me, they have no interest in pleasing the advertisers, which is why I suspect they will be having fewer advertisements in the future as us park owners move to web based advertising and away from these books.
Lordy! Now, I know I'd rather do reviews "anonymously" than get paid to do them! If you are "paid," you can't do it your way. JJ
Thanks Westernpark owner for another great insight into the trials and tribulations of a park owner. It never occurred to me how much trouble you can have with reviewers from the campground directories. Sounds like their reviewers, as well as ours, get picky every now and then. You mentioned a different reviewer came each year. Is that the usual interval for an inspection? Does a reviewer come each year? Is it the same for all the directories? I'm just curious.
QUOTE(Texasrvers @ Mar 14 2009, 01:15 PM) [snapback]15488[/snapback] Thanks Westernpark owner for another great insight into the trials and tribulations of a park owner. It never occurred to me how much trouble you can have with reviewers from the campground directories. Sounds like their reviewers, as well as ours, get picky every now and then. You mentioned a different reviewer came each year. Is that the usual interval for an inspection? Does a reviewer come each year? Is it the same for all the directories? I'm just curious. Our woodalls rep has been the same for the past 6 years. The trailer life rep has changed each year. Trailer life used to have the same rep year after year but they are now going through this constant change. I realize they have to balance a fair review with ad sales for the book, so it is a hard job. That being said, I prefer the woodall's rating system to the trailer life system. Too much in our lives are on a one to ten scale, so we get used to a score of 5 or 6 being pretty bad. The numeric scoring that Trailer life uses can result in a fine park getting a 5 or a six. For example, if a park does not have a pool it automatically loses two points. Also, I can be located next door to disneyland and get 0 credit for it, yet if I put up a swingset and a basketball goal, I would get points for recreation. They only give the point if the park actually owns the attraction, not if it is convenient to it. If a park lacks a pool and doesn't have a playground it already is a 7 without even having a single facility reviewed. In my area, concrete drives and concrete pads are almost an impossibility due to the need for extremely thick pads to prevent cracking in extreme cold. Therefore, I loose another point for not being paved. Now I am down to a six. To me this looks like a failing score, so I tell my rep I will not advertise against my rating. What good would it do to pay for an ad that says my park is great and then see a rating of 6 on the trailer life rating system. I just think it is a bad system that doesn't reflect the true rating of a park.
Boy, WesternRVparkowner, I would really be pi$$ed at that kind of a rating system. I don't judge on whether or not it has a pool, I just judge on.... what were my expectations and were they met? Now, if a park has a pool, I expect it to be working (unless it's winter) and clean. Then I judge on that. If a park doesn't have paved pads, I don't rank it down, but I may comment on how hard it was to get level.... Well, I recently stayed at a park that had "just the basics," it didn't even have a laundry facility. BUt it did have great landscaping. I gave it a five. Ok, that one was a bias, I guess I expect laundry facilities. I try to find good points to make a park desireable. JJ
QUOTE(westernrvparkowner @ Mar 14 2009, 02:04 PM) [snapback]15489[/snapback] I just think it is a bad system that doesn't reflect the true rating of a park. Maybe we should start a poll to see which directory is more of a joke than the other. For the CG owners/managers here who aren’t happy with the directory rating systems, I’d tell you that some of us wouldn’t believe those little numbers or Ws if life depended on it. As more and more Rvers get burned by the overly inflated ones, they too will join the list of displeased. For me, my 3 year old book is solely for finding a facility in certain areas from which I can then go to other sources to find a real review of it. Ad money would be better used on a nice website with pictures and that site advertised prominently in the books.
QUOTE(RLM @ Mar 21 2009, 11:58 AM) [snapback]15571[/snapback] Maybe we should start a poll to see which directory is more of a joke than the other. For the CG owners/managers here who aren’t happy with the directory rating systems, I’d tell you that some of us wouldn’t believe those little numbers or Ws if life depended on it. As more and more Rvers get burned by the overly inflated ones, they too will join the list of displeased. For me, my 3 year old book is solely for finding a facility in certain areas from which I can then go to other sources to find a real review of it. Ad money would be better used on a nice website with pictures and that site advertised prominently in the books. While I agree with your comments, I would also bet that the HUGE majority of people who go camping are fairly unfamiliar with any rating system. As such, the ads in RVing magazines and the like are very important to them. When the ads say that they have a high rating, my guess is that many take that as gospel. Most on this forum say they don't depend on the numerical rating so much, but rather the comments of the rater. I would also say that the members of this forum are probably more educated towards any rating than the mainstream of campers.
QUOTE(RLM @ Mar 21 2009, 09:58 AM) [snapback]15571[/snapback] Maybe we should start a poll to see which directory is more of a joke than the other. Good idea ! We too have discovered the Trailer Life ratings don't reflect reality. Haven't purchased an updated version for several years now. Like RLM, I only use it as a quick reference. Don't have to fire-up the computer should the pilot decide to make a detour from the original flight plan. Don't worry WesternRVPark, AbbyGolden, ParkView... most of us understand the ratings gimmicks from the likes of these 'camping guides'. That's why sites like this are soooo popular! Cheers! B)
QUOTE(FosterImposters @ Mar 21 2009, 01:24 PM) [snapback]15574[/snapback] Good idea ! We too have discovered the Trailer Life ratings don't reflect reality. Haven't purchased an updated version for several years now. Like RLM, I only use it as a quick reference. Don't have to fire-up the computer should the pilot decide to make a detour from the original flight plan. Don't worry WesternRVPark, AbbyGolden, ParkView... most of us understand the ratings gimmicks from the likes of these 'camping guides'. That's why sites like this are soooo popular! Cheers! B) Y'all are the type that I referred to as being "more educated toward the ratings."
QUOTE(cuse44 @ Nov 1 2006, 04:37 PM) [snapback]5402[/snapback] This may have discussed in the past but I cannot find any recent discussions on the topic. I always use this site before making a reservation at a park and sometimes find it difficult to make a judgment. One person will rate a park a 1 and the next person rates it a 9. When reading their comments, you wonder if they are rating the same park. One says everything is dirty and the other says everything is clean. I often wonder if the park owner comes in after a bad review and submits his own good one?? :unsure: I usually take the majority view when making a decision if there are different opinions. When posting my own reviews, I will try to remark on prior reviews that I consider either accurate or just plane wrong. Any others have the same problem?
