Hot Rod ‘crisis’ meeting
I won’t be able to attend the forthcoming meeting between Bright tourism operators and the Northern Suburbs Hot Rod Club because I’ll be away at that time. There’s not much point anyway, as we are already fully booked for this year’s November event (as most holiday unit owners would be), so I don’t see how I can help Club President Ray McDonald achieve his objective of allowing entrants in the event preferential treatment over the “spectators”, as he stated in this week’s Bright Observer:
.
Hot rod talks
Street rod club, local businesses to discuss options to save event into future
A MEETING will be held next month between Bright tourism operators and the Northern Suburbs Street Rod Club with the hope of sorting out accommodation issues that may jeopardise the future of the towns iconic rod run.
Numbers for last November’s event fell well short because entrants from previous years said they were unable to justify the ever-increasing financial expenses of attending.
They said it was exacerbated by some accommodation houses insisting on a three night or more stay for the two-day event.
Northern Suburbs president Ray McDonald, along with other members involved in the rod run – held in Bright for 21 years – are eager to compromise with local traders to ensure it continues well into the future.
Mr McDonald said the club had approached local accommodation providers to attend a meeting on Saturday, February 11, which he hoped would allow for a more reasonable deal for members to be able to attend the annual event.
While the event attracts thousands of visitors to the town, Mr McDonald said only a small portion of those numbers contribute to the small profit the club makes from the event, while business owners reaped the rewards.
“The people’s perception is that everybody who turns up to the township is part of the event, where in actual fact we have 750 entries that came from all around Australia and the rest of the people that come are actually spectators,” he said.
“What we are trying to achieve is a greater benefit for the participant in the event, so that they are aided for being part of it.”
The rod run is one of Bright’s major tourist attractions, injecting up to $5 million to the town each year, according to estimates.
While Mr McDonald said there were a large number of businesses that were reasonable, it was important that more were lenient for this year’s event.
“It’s a case of needing more from the traders, so that entrants get a greater benefit because we need to boost entrant numbers to make the event viable for the future,” he said.
“The other option is it won’t be a prime event…it won’t happen.”
Comment:
Mr McDonald wants accommodation owners to let entrants take precedence over “the spectators” who want to stay for longer than the 2 days in November when the event is held. He wants a 2-night deal for entrants. Well, in my case, that ain’t going to happen. How would I explain that to my guests, most of whom have been staying at GG for the event for quite a few years? What would I say, “Sorry, Mr & Mrs Smith, you’re going to have to make way for a participant who would rather spend thousands on his car than a few dollars extra on accommodation”? That’s about the size of it.
I don’t want to sound condescending but it strikes me there are probably many other reasons why the Rod entry numbers have fallen off and it’s not just due to a few unscrupulous accommodation owners (although I concede there are some profiteers out there – a small minority). Has Mr McDonald heard, for instance, about: the economy, job losses, cheap overseas travel, rising costs, etc? I think there are far greater pressures at work that contributed to his numbers dropping by over 100 participants last year (first time ever, apparently). Well, guess what? Tourism numbers were also down in 2011, right across the board. Everywhere. People aren’t holidaying regionally as much as they used to – maybe that’s got something to do with it?
That said, I have heard about the policies being employed at one of our major caravan parks and I agree that it’s a bit beyond the pale. There’s not much the rest of us can do about that though; municipal-owned parks are changing and the days of cheap digs in such prime positions are rapidly disappearing – everywhere.
I don’t know if the Club thinks it could find any alternative town that could offer them what Bright does but good luck with that. If the Club does decide to pull the pin on this event it won’t be the catastrophe some people seem to think it would be. In our case, with just 7 holiday units, I’m not concerned about getting replacement guests and I don’t see it having an impact on our business, quite frankly. However, it would no doubt impact on a few traders, especially the pubs and the supermarkets. Oh well.
BUT … there is a possible solution that was expressed by the owner of one of Bright’s larger motels when this issue first arose late last year:
The proprietor of (a large Bright motel) said while it was up to the discretion of individual business owners, she believed a two-night minimum was appropriate for a two-day event. “Asking longer than two days is unfair to the hot rodders,” she said.
I agree. A 2-night minimum would be acceptable for large motels, and I can understand that because, let’s face it, you wouldn’t find too many people willing to stay longer than 2 nights in what is just a bedroom with a kettle and a TV.
So .. maybe that motel owner should convince the other motel owners to keep their rooms exclusively for the 2-nighters?
And maybe Mr McDonald should be meeting with them instead of tarring the small and honest accommodation owners with the same brush?
I’m just about over this ongoing and tedious saga.
Promoting 'Beautiful Bright'.
Click 
If it is true that the event injects $5 million into the Bright economy over the event period, how will Bright recover this amount if the Rodders move elsewhere? Is Bright travelling that well it won’t be affected? As you point out, tourism numbers are down brought on by economic factors.
You glibly state: “In our case, with just 7 holiday units, I’m not concerned about getting replacement guests and I don’t see it having an impact on our business, quite frankly. However, it would no doubt impact on a few traders, especially the pubs and the supermarkets. Oh well.”.
Sounds a bit like “I’m alright Jack and bugger the rest of you!”
If Ray McDonald can’t reach a compromise, I guess Bright will get all it deserves!
Noel, I doubt it’s $5 million. A lot less than half, I’d suggest. Anyway I’m not saying it won’t be a loss to the town, just not as big a loss as the Rodders seem to think. And I don’t think Bright has brought this on itself – it’s a joint issue caused equally by the Rodders’ eagerness to keep growing the event. They might be a victim of their own success.
“And I don’t think Bright has brought this on itself – it’s a joint issue caused equally by the Rodders’ eagerness to keep growing the event. They might be a victim of their own success.”
Strewth Ray, victims? Here’s an organisation keen to get ahead, grow their event, generate revenue for both Bright and themselves, and you reckon that’s a negative?
The point that has been overlooked is that they are the customers. Customers call the shots. Customers bankroll you and every business. And despite what you might think, the customer is ALWAYS right – they vote with both their pocket and their feet!
I hope for your town’s sake that Ray McDonald can convince the good burghers who attend the meeting on February 11 to agree to and abide by a compromise.
The Rod Club are the ones claiming to be “victims”, Noel. They’ve made an issue out of this (based on the disgruntled complaints of a few people, it seems) and have made it into “a negative”, not me. I’m just giving my opinion and calling it as I see it – is that okay by you?
Now Noel, instead of criticising, how about offering us your opinion on what should be done? What’s the answer here?
Ray, you can have all the opinions in the world – it’s your blog! But accept that people are entitled to respond, otherwise why bother airing your thoughts.
As to what is my opinion on this issue, the short answer is as I suggested above – negotiate an outcome.
I certainly accept that, Noel but, to be frank, you all too often focus on me and not the issue. Your suggestion is meaningless – “negotiate an outcome”. Hmmm, very easy to say that when you’re not part of it. Thanks.
Ray, I focus on the tenure of your remarks which are sometimes overblown. That’s my right.
I cannot speak for Ray McDonald nor can I speak for the accommodation providers he plans to meet. They need to thrash out a deal which satisfies both sides. The basic issues as they appear to me are:
1. Can a two night minimum at fair market prices be reached which only applies to entrants in the event?
2. What steps need to be taken to manage such bookings?
From what I gather from your remarks and the comments made by Ray McDonald it gets down to arriving at a mutually satifactory arrangement for the members. Others who come along as spectators are free to accept or decline whatever deal is put to them.
I think you meant “tenor”, not “tenure”, Noel:
Yes, you focus on that and try to find something to have a go at me about, instead of the issue.
Anyway, as for the issue:
1) Not with smaller & self-contained accommodation places that are booked well in advance and are more suited to longer stays. As I said in the post above, 2-nights suits large motels. You must have been focusing on my “tenor” too much and missed my key point.
2) That’s a real difficulty. To start with, entries for this year’s event are not even open yet so at this stage NO ONE IS AN ENTRANT! I guess it means the motels (if they accept the deal) will just have to not take any bookings until people can prove they are an entrant. Logistical nightmare.
Thanks for correcting my error.
As to point two, it is my understanding that once a rodder signs up and pays to be part of the event he/she is given an entry number which is on their receipt. This number could be quoted to the accommodation provider who would then accept the two night booking if so requested and if rooms are still available.
As I said earlier, a deal has to satisfy both sides. There’s probably no magic bullet to cover all contingencies but a recognisable procedure such as the one described above would at least give the accommodation provider some degree of certainty and the customer gets what they want.
Noel, your idea is too simplistic and open to exploitation. To start with, as I said earlier, entries haven’t opened for the 2012 event yet many accommodation places would already be booked, so by the time the entrant has signed up there may be nothing available. And what would merely quoting a “receipt number” mean to the accommodation provider? They’d need to provide more ‘proof of entry’ than just quoting a number.
Actually, it was suggested by someone commenting on my earlier post (possibly a club member) on this topic that the system would work thus:
So the idea is to deceive the accommodation owner? And that, I suggest, is the only way it could work.
Anyway, Audax entrants have arrived this week (most of ours stay for longer than the 4-night minimum we have for the entire Summer school holiday period) and we’re not hearing any squealing from the 2,000 or so entrants about wanting preferential treatment over the “spectators” and other holiday makers. No calls for a 2-day minimum coming from them, and it’s actually harder to get in!
Ray wait till the people that generally stay in Bright Holiday Park find out that the Rod week end is now a premimum week end. Like l have told you before there are people in Bright that run busineeses and do not try to price gouge, but there are a few “Bright Holiday Park” being one of the chief offenders.
I think the Alpine Shire should of done some major research before given out a 25 year contract to APTM.
The stuff we have found out is amazing.
I can’t help but agree with you on that one, Rod, as you know. $200+ per night for a cabin in a bloody caravan park is way over the top in my opinion. It’s much more than what the better places charge. And I hear what you’re saying about permanents and camp sites, etc. As I said in the post, there’s not much the other traders or the Chamber can do about that. The council bears responsibility in my opinion.
Ray we are aware there is not much you can do, hopefully our voice will be heard at the council meeting on Feb 7th, there be close to 1500+ people that stay in the Bright Caravan Park on a busy week end. They’re all feeling it.
Just means less money to put into the local community
May l ask what you charge for a night during the Hot Rod weekend
We charge our ‘off peak’ rate for the Hot Rod event, currently $130 per night for a couple +$20 per night for extra people. Max of 4 per unit means two couples sharing 1 x 2 bedroom unit = $170 per night. Less than the park and, I dare say, about twice as good.
Twice as good i think your selling yourself short, maybe should look at putting in Cabins and charge them like the Bright Holiday Park, have them paid off in full in no time at all.
Open up a kiosk, stop the baker and Mr Whippy to, make millions that way
Good luck at the council meeting, Rod. Give ‘em hell, they deserve it. If they’ve given a 25 year lease on that prime piece of real estate (owned by the ratepayers) then they’ve sold us all down the river.
Ray could go down as one of the worse decisions council has ever done, given out a 25 year contract to a big Queensland based company that has shown it has little or no respect for the township of Bright and the people that live there and visit there.
My big questions is why don’t the council run the park like the do with there Myrtleford park.
They have 2 people live there on site, hire a couple of cleaners (could be contracted out) and reap the benifits themselves, they dont need to run at a massive profit, cause if the Park is full means the local businesses are thriving which would help all of Bright
I don’t know the details of the lease (it wasn’t made public) but I believe the council put it out to national tender and that (possibly) the successful bidder had to pay the council a large ingoing fee, as it’s a prime site in a busy tourist town. I don’t think you could run it like the much quieter Myrtleford one but something doesn’t seem right about giving such a long term lease – that’s tantamount to giving freehold title.
Chamber should have some interest Ray , price hikes at the caravan park means less money for local business , more money to Queensland and ATPM
The aggressive management style of this company can only send people away as well , we’re slightly off track but still very relevant to your local business , this company has managed to put quite a lot of people off side in such a short time
It seem so, Norm. Not good for Bright, I agree. The council needs to be taken to task over this matter – I think they’ve crapped in their own nest by not consulting the wider industry before entering into this agreement. I would have thought that the leasing out for 25 years of a crucial piece of infrastructure like the council-owned park should be put out for community consultation before any such deal was done. It’s not unlike our council to do things behind closed doors and not act in the interest of its ratepayers and tourist operators. They did a similar thing with the Visitors Centre – in reverse. At great expense and loss.
Well said Ray , we got Bright at heart mate
Interesting point to Ray is we have sent a few letters of to the Bright Chambers of Commerce telling them of our plight, have got read returned receipts but no formal reply. You think they would be right onto this.
During the week end a retired couple who had been in the park for 50+ years decided to sell up, they were scared of how far the fees would go up and if they could afford them, and they were intimidated by the manager sand ATPM
this is couple that spend there pension cheques up there as they stay for longer then the school holiday
I wouldn’t count on any public support from the Chamber. They might say something behind the scenes but they can’t be seen to be criticising an independent business. That’s not their role. It sounds like you only sent them emails (‘read receipts’) so I would suggest a formal letter might get a reply. As I said, don’t count on much help there – I’ve had my own issues with our Chamber too, although that was under a previous executive.