Campgound Price

Psychology 101 - it is called 'rationalization'

From Merriam Webster: "to attribute (one's actions) to rational and creditable motives without analysis of true and especially unconscious motives <rationalized his dislike of his brother> ; broadly : to create an excuse or more attractive explanation for"

Sarge3398 wrote: larryf said: "They asked me to remove their ICE link and other comments about them being high priced from this website. "

Sounds like that D.C. Shoot the Messenger Disease has spread to Fort Belvoir. Trying to put a lid on legitimate dissent? Are they kidding or what? Do they really think that removing comments about them being high priced will cause the RV community to flock to their "paradise?" These people obviously don't have a clue about the community they profess to be serving.

The next thing I can see them doing Larry, is signing up here on the website and submitting phony "reviews" praising their campground and the value of staying there. Better keep an eye out for that one! :laugh:

I can't wait until Monkey44 sees this. I can see the steam coming out of his ears from here! :woohoo:

I'd say that's a no brainer, Sarge.

I'm standing on the outside lookin in and don't have a rig yet, but I can safely say this is one place that won't see our rig when we do hit the road.

That being said. The comments about MCGs paying the rent for the rest of the MWR programs kinda reminds me of College Football. Most folks realize that at most Unis the Football program pays the most (generally well over 50%) into the Athletics fund. This is why we we see $100+ bleacher seats at major Unis around the country. It sucks, but that's the price for success I guess.

Don't get me wrong. I'm with ya'll a hunnert percent here. Fam Camps are a benefit we worked long and hard for. We EARNED it, we bought it with our blood and they shouldn't be fussin around with our bennies like this. Ad retirees are, after all, only pullin in HALF of their base pay now. We should only have to pay HALF the regular rate.

They asked Larry to pull the links? Hehe, oh yeah, they're startin to squirm. Keep the heat on.

I've been on the road and taking care of some urgent family business, but this response seems to be almost the same one, reworded. But, if someone asked Larry to remove ICE and the info, it's definitely NOT a tickle that MCG is feeling.

I'd assume Larry responded with a NO to that request, if he bothered to respond at all.

WE need to keep at this, and continue expressing our feeling about this kind of benefit abuse - FC are NOT money makers for MWR - and we need to make them feel that pressure.

Once I get this family business finished - I'm writing a letter to my congressmen and senators, in both states where we own property and anyone else that wants to use it as a guide, or just copy it to your representatives - is welcome

the prices in FT Belvoir, and the escalating costs in California and other areas will continue to erode this benefit - we entered into a contract, and that contract seems to mean little now, as we already fulfilled our part. So, now what?

" FC are NOT money makers for MWR -"

I've been doing a little research on this Monkey, and actually Family Camps are classified by DOD as Class C NAF activities. These are defined as revenue generating facilities, and are supposed to make money for the local MWR. Included in this category, besides campgrounds, are golf courses, bowling alleys (over 16 lanes), rod and gun clubs, and service clubs (NCO, Officer, Enlisted), recreational lodging (Shades of Green, Garmisch, etc), temporary lodging during PCS facilities, restaurants, and just about everything that we have to pay for.

As a minimum, they are required to break even financially every year and receive little or no government funding.

Seems to me John, that breaking even and covering its own expenses is more what this SHOULD mean - not generating as much money as it can.

For example, if all MWR activities made more money than it cost, what would happen to the extra bucks? That would be my first question of the MWR. Does it then use that overage for MWR? And if each pays for itself, then what?

And, beyond that - if the MWR thinks it's a money-maker, when will that carry over to the other "benefits". Will our health care become a 'for profit' private contractor?

I see now in the Stimson Report that the FEDS are considering closing ALL commissaries, giving the AD a food stipend, and the retired '0' ... And it occurs to me as I read it, why spend all the millions and millions of bucks on building new commissaries over the past years, and then close them. Makes sense, right?

One thing to make clear here too, no reason we can't pay our way and cover the costs of these recreational benefits, it's the over-charging that pushes my button. What happens with over-charging and extra revenue, the people then get pats on the back and raises ... probably.

And, the distorted prices then become 'normal', and even when less campers use it because of high prices, the cost to operate is spread over less campers and then 'justifies' the high prices because only half the sites are full - and the 'stump' then becomes 'we can't stay open unless we charge this much, where as, with $30 a night, the place would be full.

monkey44 wrote: I'd assume Larry responded with a NO to that request, if he bothered to respond at all.

Of course the ICE link and information remains on the website. However, I did reply to them and I do wish to keep an open line of communication with them. I offered to discuss with them why RV'ers think $60 is too expensive for their campground. They indicated they would like to discuss this issue, but we haven't yet spoken.