I just put in a review of a campground and the cost was 0.00 not the one dollar I put in. IT is a factory campground for Blue Ox and is one of the nicest small campgrounds I have stayed in. I wonder if there should be an option for 0.00 instead of saying it is not allowed. I have stayed at other factory campgrounds and have not reviewed them but they are also free.
In general, I think our policy would be to discourage reviews of factory CG's that exist solely for the convenience of customers awaiting service. Those are not "RV parks" open to anyone who is passing through. We know that our database does include some factory CG's, the largest of which is probably the one Tiffin has in Redbay AL. However, the fact that such entries exist doesn't mean that we actively support the inclusion of others. As for allowing zero to be an allowed response for cost, the key issue is to ensure that a zero doesn't represent a "entry by default" if someone forgets to put a number in the box. However, that could be resolved by replacing the box with a dropdown that requires an entry. We will review this issue again.
While we're discussing cost, has there been any thought to having this amount be the daily rate? If a user gets a monthly rate, that could be noted in the review, but dividing a monthly rate by 30, or the weekly rate by 7, and using that as the cost is rather misleading. I feel the same way about Passport America--put the regular rate in the box, but include the fact that PA was 50% off in the review itself. Also, with monthly rates there's the issue of electricity, since it's almost always paid by the customer, and is highly variable from person to person. I don't think Good Sam discounts matter that much, since they're only 10%, and the price that actually gets paid might be more in some cases because of tax or whatever. A 10% swing isn't that big of a deal, but It just seems to me it would be clearer and simpler to have the cost be the daily rate, and if people want to elaborate on what THEY actually paid because of some sort of opportunity they took advantage of, they can. But for perusing reviews, a consistent standard would make it much more useful.
With all due respect, it's difficult enough to get people to accurately put the rate they paid into the box, let alone trying to get them to post a daily rate that they didn't actually pay. Many people don't pay any attention to the daily rate if that's not what they paid; expecting them to ask and accurately post it is not something I wouldn't rely on.
Well, not for the first time, it looks like I'm different from most people. Even when I pay a weekly or monthly rate, I know what the daily rate is, if nothing else to see if I'm getting a decent deal. And if I were doing a review, I'd look at the website to see what it is if that's what I was being asked. But I get what you're saying--people are either idiots or lazy. Or both.
Well, I consider myself neither an idiot nor lazy and certainly not both, but I do list what I paid for the site. If it's a monthly rate, I mention that in the review. Sometimes we get a Good Sam's, senior citizen or some other kind of discount. I'm not going to go back to the park's website and try to figure out what I would have paid had I not been eligible for the discount. And then there are taxes and sometimes other fees if the park is in a historical area that figure into the rate. I figure that most people aren't idiots or lazy and that they're quite capable of going to the park's website and looking up the rates. Most people could figure out that the $20 a night in the review for a nice park would probably translate into a monthly or seasonal rate.
Well, the company site had 6 units that were not for service there. They were just staying there as it is a nice campground. I do not review the Foretravel Park as that is the factory but this is a bit different.
