Price increase at our KOA

[Super_Dave]

Every year at the end of our season we make our reservations for the following year. In that reservation is a listed price. Well, this off season the KOA was sold to new owners and I was notified that the price would go up 25%. Does that seem reasonable that the new owner can not honor a standing reservation? And to add insult to injury, they want to move us to a less desirable site.

[jdc1]

Super_Dave wrote:
Every year at the end of our season we make our reservations for the following year. In that reservation is a listed price. Well, this off season the KOA was sold to new owners and I was notified that the price would go up 25%. Does that seem reasonable that the new owner can not honor a standing reservation? And to add insult to injury, they want to move us to a less desirable site.

That would not be allowed in California. You buy the place, you buy all warranties, liabilities, ect.

[Lantley]

In the end the new owner is entitled to run his new place however he wants including raising rates.
I agree it would be a preferred to accommodate existing reservations at there original price.
However if the new owners has found the original rates to be too low he does not have to lose money by honoring the rates.
The new owner certainly understands raising the rates is controversial, however they may see it as a necessary evil to be profitable

[valhalla360]

BB_TX wrote:
It is not a KOA issue. KOAs are franchises, or essentially individually owned businesses. So there is likely no contractural requirement of the new business owner to honor promises of the previous owner. No different than John Doe selling his XYZ RV Resort to Jim Smith. Would be a nice gesture but not an obligation.

This is where the OP needs to tell us what the contract states.

If it guaranteed the price & site, that obligation stays with the business, even with a new owner. This would be similar to someone selling a rental house...the new owner has to let the current lease run out before they can get rid of the renters.

So the question is: Is there a clause that lets the owner change the price or site?

But again, unless you are willing to take them to court, not much you can do about it.

PS: One side thought, did you reserve with your credit card? You could dispute the charge since they changed the terms. Worst case it's a hassle for the owner to fight it. Keep in mind there are usually time limits for putting the claim in.

[time2roll]

Everybody loves the old owner with no mortgage and a big smile that has no need to press the prices and make sad faces. New owner has to pay market price, finance the purchase and probably catch up on some deferred maintenance so the price increases. I still think he could have honored the original reservation to retain some goodwill. I would pass at least one year and think about the value.

[pconroy328]

rlw999 wrote:

It seems like a bad business practice

That's exactly my first reaction.

But it may be a good business practice for the new owners. The new owners most certainly did the math and either decided they needed to raise the rent or they could.

It could be the old owners were losing money.
Or it could be Business 101 - Supply and Demand.

In either case, I too would give them a call, ask nicely for an explanation. And then -


... take my money someplace else!

[Sjm9911]

I think they should have honored the allready in place contract. Other then that, i really have no issues with KOAs , if you dont like them dont book them . Its pretty simple. I use them , along with other spots. Some are better then others. They have there place, thats why there still in buisness. You know what your getting when you book them.

[BB_TX]

agesilaus wrote:

Like all other CG's rates are based on location. A KOA in a rural area will be more expensive than a KOA in a resort area. In general KOA's maybe more expensive as a result of the franchise fee but there is uniformity, familiarity and minimum standards associated with the fee.

I believe you got that backwards: KOA in Bozeman outside YNP--%83/30 amp site. KOA outside Devils Tower: $69/night. KOA way outside the Black Hills $35

More accurate to say a KOA (or any other RV park) near a prime destination will be more expensive than one located in a lesser area.

KOA actually has 3 levels of parks; Journey (lower priced and fewer amenities located for travelers overnight or short stays during travel), Holiday (higher priced with more amenities located in more touristy areas), and Resort (typically highest priced with most amenities).

[agesilaus]

Like all other CG's rates are based on location. A KOA in a rural area will be more expensive than a KOA in a resort area. In general KOA's maybe more expensive as a result of the franchise fee but there is uniformity, familiarity and minimum standards associated with the fee.

I believe you got that backwards: KOA in Bozeman outside YNP--%83/30 amp site. KOA outside Devils Tower: $69/night. KOA way outside the Black Hills $35

[Lantley]

I think there are so many negative KOA threads because there is an expectation that KOA's be totally the same like McDonald's or other franchises we know.
We think they should be all priced the same like a Big Mac as well.
The truth is KOA's are all different with different price structures. Yes there are franchise fee's and a network affiliation that sets a minimum franchise standard.
However the properties are all different.
Like all other CG's rates are based on location. A KOA in a rural area will be more expensive than a KOA in a resort area. In general KOA's maybe more expensive as a result of the franchise fee but there is uniformity, familiarity and minimum standards associated with the fee.
When deciding on a CG KOA is in the mix with all the others. If they meet my needs and are in my prime location I have no issues staying there.
If I'm in an unfamiliar area that KOA branding becomes important/meaningful if I'm comparing KOA to an unknown competitor.
Very seldom to I make a CG decision on price alone.
Price is often very low on my list of criteria. Convenience and location are at the top of my list.

[Super_Dave]

agesilaus wrote:
So tell the owner you are going to publicly name them and there is the next town over.

No where near going nuclear yet. Discussions with them have just started.

[Super_Dave]

agesilaus wrote:
There must be some corporate standards, possibly not about contracts and customer relations, but I see a number of ex-KOAs around the country and they got the boot for something. Customer complaints may start their slide on the way out.

If they are still a campground, what might be happening is after a few years the owner is tired of KOA corporate dipping into their pocket and dictating how things are run. They can use the KOA advertising and eventually separate themselves from the corporate chain.

[agesilaus]

So tell the owner you are going to publicly name them and there is the next town over.

[agesilaus]

There must be some corporate standards, possibly not about contracts and customer relations, but I see a number of ex-KOAs around the country and they got the boot for something. Customer complaints may start their slide on the way out.

[Super_Dave]

In my case, it is further complicated by them being the only game in town and they apparently know it.

I've talked with the new owner today and some negotiations are starting.

[BB_TX]

It is not a KOA issue. KOAs are franchises, or essentially individually owned businesses. So there is likely no contractural requirement of the new business owner to honor promises of the previous owner. No different than John Doe selling his XYZ RV Resort to Jim Smith. Would be a nice gesture but not an obligation.

I stay at whatever RV park fits my needs, including KOA. And have never had any issue with a KOA, including the price of the ones I stayed at. The prices at those were entirely reasonable for what they offered.