Country Coach Owners Forum

Country Coach Restoration, Repair & Parts Forums => Country Coach Archive => Topic started by: Widgielk on October 16, 2006, 02:14:51 pm

Title: WiFi Charges
Post by: Widgielk on October 16, 2006, 02:14:51 pm
Yahoo Message Number: 25983 (http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/Country-Coach-Owners/conversations/messages/25983)
We recently stayed at the Wine Country RV Park in Prosser, WA. Its a very nice park that is convient to excellent wineries and golf courses. However they wanted $5 a day to hook up to WiFi which was excessive considering the daily rate of $25. We also stayed at the Suntree RV Park in Post Falls, ID. It was a "mature" Good Sam park with a lot of junkers (school bus on concrete blocks, etc.) but it had free WiFi. Its daily rate was $27.
Title: Re: WiFi Charges
Post by: Russ And Jean on October 16, 2006, 02:39:26 pm
Yahoo Message Number: 25985 (http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/Country-Coach-Owners/conversations/messages/25985)
With the daily park fee of "only" $25, the $5 per day wifi fee doesn't sound too bad. Personally I don't see how any park can even come close to paying overhead at only $25 per day. With vacancies, utilities, insurance, property tax, payroll etc. IMHO..Park owners must really squeeeez to make ends meet.

Russ

05 Intrigue
11883

[quote author=widgielk" polaski@\.\.\.\>] >

We recently stayed at the Wine Country RV Park in Prosser, WA.[/quote]
Its a

Quote
very nice park that is convient to excellent wineries and golf > courses. However they wanted $5 a day to hook up to WiFi which

was

Quote
excessive considering the daily rate of $25. We also stayed at

the

Quote
Suntree RV Park in Post Falls, ID. It was a "mature" Good Sam

park

Quote
with a lot of junkers (school bus on concrete blocks, etc.) but it

had
Title: Re: WiFi Charges
Post by: Tom Fisher on October 16, 2006, 02:57:16 pm
Yahoo Message Number: 25987 (http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/Country-Coach-Owners/conversations/messages/25987)
Quote
With the daily park fee of "only" $25, the $5 per day wifi fee > doesn't sound too bad. Personally I don't see how any park can even > come close to paying overhead at only $25 per day. With vacancies, > utilities, insurance, property tax, payroll etc. IMHO..Park owners > must really squeeeez to make ends meet.
If this is true, how can the 'budget" motel/hotel chains make a profit on rates $30 - $40/night ? Seems to me they have a much higher overhead than an RV park.

Tom Fisher
Dallas, TX
Title: Re: WiFi Charges
Post by: Russ And Jean on October 16, 2006, 05:09:17 pm
Yahoo Message Number: 25992 (http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/Country-Coach-Owners/conversations/messages/25992)
Hi Tom,

I arrange financing for a profession and am privy to the bottom line (s) of all types of businesses.

Many of these 30-40/nite budget motels "are just barely making it".
Most don't even know it but they are going broke slowly, unless they own their property outright and maintain the rooms themselves. The vacancy patterns are such that they never know what the next month will bring.

A 25/nite RV park needs to be large enough and "full" enough with the property "paid for" before revenues will support the daily/monthly expenses and produce a profit. It might appear the numbers work on the surface, but all of the planets must align before real revenues will make it to the bottom line.

The 25/night park should probably raise their fee to $28/night and not charge for the WiFi. BUT.. they may have bought into a wireless service agreement that cost them per connection.

Russ

05 Intrigue
11883

Quote from: Tom Fisher
> With the daily park fee of "only" $25, the $5 per day wifi fee > > doesn't sound too bad. Personally I don't see how any park can

even

Quote
come close to paying overhead at only $25 per day. With vacancies, > > utilities, insurance, property tax, payroll etc. IMHO..Park owners > > must really squeeeez to make ends meet.
>

If this is true, how can the 'budget" motel/hotel chains make a

profit

Quote
on rates $30 - $40/night ? Seems to me they have a much higher

overhead