I just encountered something new to me.

We were looking for an rv park to stay at for the next month in the Albuquerque area. We stopped at one rather nice looking park to check prices and availability. The very first question the lady at the counter asked was the age of our coach. I told her and then she very respectfully informed me that our coach had to be a 2001 or newer to stay at their park and she was sorry that she couldn't help us. Huh?

Now keep in mind that we were in our car at the time. She wasn't questioning the appearance of our coach, which isn't as pristine as some but totally acceptable in my opinion. It was just policy I guess.

We found a place next door that I'm sure will meet our needs better anyhow, but I'm curious as to whether this is common practice.

This would probably come as a slap to the face to some of you that have put so much time and energy into the restoration of your coaches.

Classism?

I've never personally run into one, but the "10 year rule" is discussed somewhat regularly at my other RV forum home. Its intentions may be acceptable (keeping out old, beat up rigs and related owners that may detract from the overall atmosphere of the campground) but as you said, such a rule gives no appreciation to well-maintained older rigs or quality classic restored units like Barths.

My overall feeling is that if the campground wants to be so petty that I have to be able to afford an RV that cost more than my house, then I don't want to give them my business anyway. Truth is that they probably get the last laugh, since the rule means they must have enough customers regardless and don't NEED my business anyway. Oh well, move on to the next spot and be happy.

Boy, that could put a dent in the Barth get togathers.

quote:

Originally posted by Brady and Hilary:
Classism?

Another form of racism?

I think I need to get the American Civil Liberties Union involved. All I need to do is tell them I'm part Cherokee Indian and then sit back and watch the show... Popcorn anyone?

I still subscribe to the theory that a private business has a right to market their products or services as they see fit. The market forces will decide whether or not their biz model is a good one.

quote:

People who generally tend to find charges of classism against 'lower' classes to be unfounded or unreasonably harsh often characterize the perceived prejudice as expressive of classist class envy. Those who argue classism is especially pervasive or fundamental to the society that they live in often identify classism as the expression of systematic economic exploitation by the 'higher' classes, and may connect it with an explicit notion of class warfare — but it is important to note that any particular accusation of classism does not, as such, presuppose any such claim, just as people may agree on examples of overt racism, while disagreeing intensely over how widespread or deep-seated racist attitudes are in their society.

Oh boy.

It seems irritating, but the same thing is true of most homeowner associations where you can't park a trailer or boat, must leave your garage doors closed, ,must mow the lawn to within an inch of its life, must...must...must!

I think Bill you are right in saying these businesses have every right to discriminate as long as within the law. We have every right to ban them and condemn them for their petty-ness.

quote:

Originally posted by Brady and Hilary:


Classism?

Of course. Nobody wants to be around people poorer or less-educated than them. Or even less-attractive than them.

Look at CC&Rs on newer property developments. Houses must be built on-site only. Conventional construction only. I am running into that right now. There are modular homes, log homes, prefab panel homes that are often way more attractive that stick builts built by lettuce pickers or dopers. And pole barns and steel buildings are also prohibited. Again, they can be absolutely stunning!

There are also square footage minimums. One developer demands 1800 square feet as a minimum. We have worked out a modular design that is 2700+ square feet, well above the minimum, but it is a no go because it is not stick built.

The whole think is to keep poor people out, disguised under the quality and architectural beauty concern. And all this on 36 acre lots. Really, do people buy 36 acre lots to tow on a crappy trailer with old pickups up on blocks and school bus seats on the porch?

I also suspect that communities that prohibit vehicle maintenance in your own driveway are practicing classism or economic discrimination.

And RVs must be kept inside. Not on the street in front, or even in the driveway. And not in a carport, even. A complete building. But horseshxx and flies are fine. AAAAArgh!

The funny thing is, they do not have education or income requirements. But, paradoxically, I could probably meet those.

Perhaps they are just trying to keep out thrifty people rather than poor people.

OK, end of rant.

quote:

Originally posted by noble97monarch:
We have every right to ban them and condemn them for their petty-ness.

I know that if I owned a newer motorhome I wouldn't frequent them as a "Matter of Principle".

Now, if they had a members only club that only sold site spaces to their membership and part of being a member meant that you had to have a coach that was 10 years or newer, then I wouldn't have a problem with it. You knew what you were getting into when you joined the snub-club.

But, in that scenario, I'm sure they would just offer you a $1 membership at the same time you're trying to park your coach.

I guess most people don't really want cousin Eddy pulling in beside them. So I do see the reason for such policies. As with most retrictive policies I've encountered, it seems that the actions of a few have ruined it for the many.

But, having a right doesn't necessarily make it right.

You know, I was just thinking about this a little more...

It would be nice if the FMCA, or other organizations in this arena, would come out with a policy about this. I would like to see these organizations pull any accreditation that they give to these Snub Places.

It might make them think twice about doing it... or maybe not. Again, at that point, it's a market driven force. Do you want the extra biz that the accreditation is worth?

One of a few things would happen.

> The biz would rethink their policy and decide whether or not the accreditation is worth it...

> A new Organization would step in to fill the void for the older coaches...

I wonder if there is a directory that posts the location of these exclusive sites or if you only find out about them after you traveled there?

quote:

Originally posted by Brady and Hilary:
I just encountered something new to me.

We were looking for an rv park to stay at for the next month in the Albuquerque area.

What park is it? We have reservations in October and I would like to be forewarned if there is going to be trouble. This will be during the balloon festival and most everywhere is sold out.

quote:

Originally posted by MWrench:
Albuquerque etc etc...... balloon festival

Ed, please take notes while you are there. We want to do that some day.

quote:

Originally posted by Bill N.Y.:
You know, I was just thinking about this a little more...

It would be nice if the FMCA, or other organizations in this arena, would come out with a policy about this. I would like to see these organizations pull any accreditation that they give to these Snub Places.

the FMCA has inclinations to being a Snub Club of its own. People with lesser MHs, and people who have not held office in their org are definitely second-class citizens. They even have segregated parking. Younger people, too, are made to feel like outsiders.

I have not experienced discrimination for owning a series of Airedales, but little poodles, Lhasos, and Shit-Zues seem to go along with being in the in crowd. Preferably white.

Search this site for FMCA for more vitriol, some from others as well as Bill who is crabby today.

And, then, there are the parks that ban dogs above poodle size, but that's another subject.

Ed,

American Rv Park.

Nothing on their website nor in Trailer Life Campground Navigator indicates that limitation.

It's also a Good Sam park, and I bet they'd be interested in the restriction.

"Really, do people buy 36 acre lots to tow on a crappy trailer with old pickups up on blocks and school bus seats on the porch?"
Yeah, they do; and they're usually at the entrance or immediately to your left.

"Now keep in mind that we were in our car at the time. She wasn't questioning the appearance of our coach, which isn't as pristine as some but totally acceptable in my opinion. It was just policy I guess."
I learned this (with my '86) about year 1995. When that question is asked - even if you're parked at the check-in office- respond with a straight face "It's a 2001" (or '02 or '03). No questions, immediate registration. Remember, they don't know what a Barth is; if it was a See'ya or Winnebago they'd know. Also: they're looking for an excuse to rent the site and you've just enabled them. Be cool! play the game and win.
PS: I miss my coach every single day.