Snobby RV park

[336muffin]

Prevosts are not 50ft, they are 45ft.

[mwwade]

The world we live in!

[Deny]

there are plenty of nice places to stay in Fla

Move on, count yourself lucky

[thedjjack]

Whatever.... I personally find RV "rules" give rv'ers a bad image in my mine... 10 years old, class A only, all just makes the RV look snobby to me...

I my mind RV should just allow people to travel and see the world... Just a tool...

Personally it makes me sad that the RV is more important than ones family... "no way I would ever let my children borrow my RV"

They are just vehicles... most worth more money than one should spend... I see way too many RVs afraid to drive on poor roads ect as it might damage the "RIG"

Personally I love my 33 year old RV... class who knows what it is (Wide body B+ or C without bunks?? I do not care)... It happily drives down dirt roads to the best West Coast Beaches, the kids soak the floor coming in from the ocean, the 120lbs dog sleeps on the bed with the 8 year old, the cat sleeps with the 11 year old, the shower stores hockey gear or surf boards depending on the season....

We walk around without shoes if we want, sand in our hair, and optional shirts... That is Freedom... sort think the locked gate is keeping me safe from the class A?

[Brian W]

Originally Posted by 336muffin

Prevosts are not 50ft, they are 45ft.

Meet the Prevost H5-60

[wowlites]

Nice welcome by a quite a few members to a first time poster
I'll bet he will rush right back for more insight (read "abuse") from forum members. Yup, I guess it really is all about "class"


Cheers Rick T.

[HoneyBadger]

Interesting that no one seems willing to admit that there is no rational reason for the park to restrict their clientèle to Class A's. Its not as though the hook-ups won't fit a Class C or a 5ver, or the concrete pads will be too hard.

Its clear the park wants to restrict itself to new, expensive rigs with owners that have a lot of disposable income, either because they believe they'll get a higher "class" of people or because its their way of justifying overcharging for a 20x60 foot chunk of pavement.

Of course its snobbery, economic if not social. And of course the owners are perfectly entitled do whatever they wish with their property. I just find it interesting that no one is willing to admit the bias. Because they buy into the snobbery too?

[Mr_D]

Don't need a "rational" reason! Their property, their rules.

If people here are so worried about it then call and ask what their rational is rather than speculating about it. Probably they don't even care about what you think about it.

[wowlites]

Originally Posted by HoneyBadger

Interesting that no one seems willing to admit that there is no rational reason for the park to restrict their clientèle to Class A's. Its not as though the hook-ups won't fit a Class C or a 5ver, or the concrete pads will be too hard.

Its clear the park wants to restrict itself to new, expensive rigs with owners that have a lot of disposable income, either because they believe they'll get a higher "class" of people or because its their way of justifying overcharging for a 20x60 foot chunk of pavement.

Of course its snobbery, economic if not social. And of course the owners are perfectly entitled do whatever they wish with their property. I just find it interesting that no one is willing to admit the bias. Because they buy into the snobbery too?

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ WELL SAID

Cheers Rick T

[HoneyBadger]

Originally Posted by Mr_D

Don't need a "rational" reason! Their property, their rules.

If people here are so worried about it then call and ask what their rational is rather than speculating about it. Probably they don't even care about what you think about it.

Touchy, aren't you?

Sure they are welcome to do as they please with their property, as I said. But I'm pretty sure they do it for the reason I said, too.

But people are ashamed to admit it.

[MRUSA14]

They own the facility. If they want say only blue RV's are allowed, that's their privilege. Get over it. It's a big world and someone else will be happy to take your money.

[twogypsies]

Back when we had a small travel trailer we wanted to stay in a particular national park campground. We got there and the sign said "tents only". We would have fit perfectly in the spaces but golly gee....tents only? Now what is that all about?


What about 'membership' parks where they actually require you to be a member?


What about 55+ parks that exclude youngsters?


There used to be a Airstream park for that specific manufacturer - not sure if there still is.


How about the Elks parks? What? You have to be an Elk?


Parks can be for many specialized reasons. What's the big deal? Always something to gripe about.. . enjoy life.

[thedjjack]

"Men are required to wear shirts at all times."

Swimming sucks big wearing a shirt just saying....

Starting to wonder what the A stands for in Class A?

RVs should just be a tool to enjoyment...

[USMCRET]

Originally Posted by HoneyBadger

Interesting that no one seems willing to admit that there is no rational reason for the park to restrict their clientèle to Class A's. Its not as though the hook-ups won't fit a Class C or a 5ver, or the concrete pads will be too hard.

Its clear the park wants to restrict itself to new, expensive rigs with owners that have a lot of disposable income, either because they believe they'll get a higher "class" of people or because its their way of justifying overcharging for a 20x60 foot chunk of pavement.

Of course its snobbery, economic if not social. And of course the owners are perfectly entitled do whatever they wish with their property. I just find it interesting that no one is willing to admit the bias. Because they buy into the snobbery too?

Are you affiliated with any social, religious, or professional group that exists because its membership is like-minded?