Good Sam campground guide
We just took our first trip using the new Good Sam campground guide instead of our old Woodall's. What a disappointment! Only the Good Sam campgrounds are rated and they are not necessarily any bett...
Forum Discussion
The two park owners make some interesting points. But the thing that is missing is the SUBJECTIVE; How shady is it? Does it have mature trees or is it one flat concrete or gravel pad that resembles the Space Shuttle landing strip? Is it in a scenic location or is it in the middle of Phoenix? Is the pool more akin to a blow up one in size or a decent swimming pool?
Are the spaces packed in like sardines or can you actually open your slides?
These are the SUBJECTIVE things that I think many people would like to see. And before you all jump, yes you can be OBJECTIVE in rating the SUBJECTIVE.
As for the size of the book. I would cut it in half and do a western and eastern version. Yes it's two to buy but my guess is many many people stick to one area of the country primarily. And two would not take up as much space as the one if so much of the needless fluff was discarded.
The public parks issue is kind of a Red Herring argument here. While it would be nice to have those included (rated or not) There are much better publications out there describing these campgrounds than the GS Guide. I think what people want is complete ratings on NON Good Sam Parks as well as the GS ones. If I am planning to stay in a Nat'l Park or a State Park or BLM land the GS guide would be the LAST source I would go to. People that are using the GS guide in my opinion are overwhelmingly looking for Commercial Parks/Campgrounds.
But again for the two park owners. There is obviously a significant amount of dissatisfaction with the GS Guide and it would seem obvious to me that resisting what your customer base is saying isnt smart business. The old saying is TRUE. For every customer that does complain 20, 50 or a 100 walk out your door with the same issue and never say anything.
What is my interest you may ask? I just hate to see something with so much potential go downhill and squander it's customers good will. Maybe I've been in business to long.
Are the spaces packed in like sardines or can you actually open your slides?
These are the SUBJECTIVE things that I think many people would like to see. And before you all jump, yes you can be OBJECTIVE in rating the SUBJECTIVE.
As for the size of the book. I would cut it in half and do a western and eastern version. Yes it's two to buy but my guess is many many people stick to one area of the country primarily. And two would not take up as much space as the one if so much of the needless fluff was discarded.
The public parks issue is kind of a Red Herring argument here. While it would be nice to have those included (rated or not) There are much better publications out there describing these campgrounds than the GS Guide. I think what people want is complete ratings on NON Good Sam Parks as well as the GS ones. If I am planning to stay in a Nat'l Park or a State Park or BLM land the GS guide would be the LAST source I would go to. People that are using the GS guide in my opinion are overwhelmingly looking for Commercial Parks/Campgrounds.
But again for the two park owners. There is obviously a significant amount of dissatisfaction with the GS Guide and it would seem obvious to me that resisting what your customer base is saying isnt smart business. The old saying is TRUE. For every customer that does complain 20, 50 or a 100 walk out your door with the same issue and never say anything.
What is my interest you may ask? I just hate to see something with so much potential go downhill and squander it's customers good will. Maybe I've been in business to long.
