Originally Posted by Ten_Ben:
“I hope the participants were given clear instructions on how to judge making the payments. It's a bit difficult to pay £300 for somewhere when that's based on (say) six people and a three night minimum, when there's only one or two of you there for a single night.
If they're not all thinking along similar lines and using the same criteria the payments are going to be all over the place, surely?”
Interesting point! And applicable on every 4IAB! How do they calculate what they pay when the accommodation is for 6 and there are only 2 people at most?
Originally Posted by SolarSail:
“No. That's Steph Parker. I can see the similarity too, but they're totally different people.
Which is probably what the production team want to put the cat amongst the pigeons.
It'll be interesting.
It's supposed to be 'Value for Money'
Well, if you have the funds available, then I don't think £48 per night is a good spend on Park Farm's tents.
Six times it uses the word 'luxury' on the front page of their website. It also talks about 'glamping'
£48 is not a lot of money, especially when split between a family, but to me they certainly don't offer ever a hint of luxury. What they have there is the most basic provision for camping and I'd rather put the £48 towards something else.
If people knock a couple of quid off Derek's charges then the way the totals are calculated, that's going to be a bigger percentage than a fiver off the more expensive venues.
On the other hand, over a couple of hundred a night they run the risk of much bigger underpayments.”
Value for money is very subjective. For me, none of this week's places have been luxury. A tent in a field is not luxury. The lodges were nice but for that sort of money, I'd rather go to Centre Parks. The accommodation there is designed so that you never really see your neighbours.