At the start of the great recession, a subcontractor of mine decided to end his multi-year search for a small, existing campground to purchase. He had 1.4 million to invest, and wanted to be in the eastern third of the US. Over a couple of years, he spent over $10k in plane tickets and accountant reviews of the books of several potential purchases.
His overall take on the situation was that most existing campgrounds he looked at were built 30-50 years ago and were built on land that was either free (the family farm) or dirt cheap. They were built before zoning and intense code enforcement, and extremely expensive utility and infrastructure requirements. He hit two deal breakers in most cases. First, the land that was almost free, back in the day, was now correctly priced by the seller at it's current market rate, which was priced based on it's highest and best use. This was often a figure that a developer would eventually pay, then level the CG and build a housing development or condo project. This often meant that there was no chance of generating enough profit to justify the purchase, much less guarantee a reasonable ROI and a fair paycheck for the new owner's efforts. The other issue was that a lot of older to elderly CG owners were spending their season working long hours and really not making anything at all. They were in the farmer mentality of, "next year will be better" and "this is what I've always done, so I keep doing it, even if it doesn't make sense on paper". Their kids didn't want to take the place over, and bust their butts for less than minimum wage, and nobody was willing to buy the place since their books looked horrible.
The DW and I hold a small stake in a private CG in Florida. It is about 70 sites, fifty years old, and really a nice property. It is extremely well run, and fully booked in the peak season. The profitability of the enterprise will always be in question, as the operation is oddly co-mingled with a larger resort that we have a matching interest in. Bottom line is, the place charges market rates, and the occupancy rate is as high as possible given the climate and location. On paper the management can show a modest profit, while discounting the benefits of being attached to the larger operation, and using their utilities and amenities. Being very familiar with the cost of the daily operations, I seriously doubt that it would be attractive to any serious investor, if it was listed for sale.
