Less time to hostel this year

So much for wanting to spend a few days hostelling in March this year.
I was planning to stay at hostels in North Wales, but with one or two
exceptions, none appears to be open before Easter :-(

And with Easter being late April this year, most hostels are open for
only six and a half months between Easter and October, with the caveat
that the hostel may be closed at certain times during this period!

By contrast, I've been checking out hostels in Denmark for a holiday
later this year. Most are open all year, and interestingly the vast
majority are privately owned businesses who are affiliated with the
Danish hostels association. Maybe it's high time our hostels went down
the same route and were run as independent owned businesses with an
incentive to succeed rather than by bureaucrats more interested in
chasing government grants.

This was tried in the USA when their association started, but when the
wardens retired, the hostel usually vanished.

There have been privately-run hostels in the YHA, like Tebay, that
didn't provide a members' kitchen, in order to boost meal revenue.

Seriously, there are privately run hostels in Britain and Ireland.
They're called independent hostels, but they don't restrict their
income by only being open to YHA members. They vary from well-run to
terrible.

oliver_twomey@hotmail.com wrote:
> This was tried in the USA when their association started, but when the
> wardens retired, the hostel usually vanished.

LOL. Ours are vanishing anyway ;-)

> Seriously, there are privately run hostels in Britain and Ireland.
> They're called independent hostels, but they don't restrict their
> income by only being open to YHA members. They vary from well-run to
> terrible.

There are many independent hostels, both good and bad, but those
weren't the ones I was referring to.

The Danish model I did refer to seems to operate along the lines of
each hostel being privately owned, and then run under the banner and
rules of the Association as an affiliate hostel. One has to be an HI
member to stay there, and if one isn't, guest stamps must be bought
towards membership, just as our hostels used to do before membership
became pointless.

The same model of private ownership/affiliate is also followed
successfully throughout Australia, and from personal experience, I can
say there was absolutely no difference to the user experience, and
quality was entirely consistent with expectations of YHA hostels.

This model seems to have a good degree of merit, not least that any
debts incurred from poor business practice would be incurred by each
individual business owner and not by the Association as a whole. Each
business owner therefore has more incentive to open the hostel, to be
flexible, and not close for the seemingly compulsory RAH for six months
of the year.

And that was the point of my original post - I can't go hostelling
until at least Easter because YHA seems to have taken a step backwards
to much shorter opening periods, unlike the last few years when it
seemed they were moving positively in the direction of longer opening
periods and more flexibility.

On 21 Feb 2006 02:06:39 -0800, "Jacki" <jacki@pr-photo.net> wrote:

>
>The Danish model I did refer to seems to operate along the lines of
>each hostel being privately owned, and then run under the banner and
>rules of the Association as an affiliate hostel. One has to be an HI
>member to stay there, and if one isn't, guest stamps must be bought
>towards membership, just as our hostels used to do before membership
>became pointless.
>
Same effect - if you aren't a full member when you arrive you pay a
supplement to stay. The only difference is that the English model
doesn't grant any membership priviledges at any time.

>The same model of private ownership/affiliate is also followed
>successfully throughout Australia, and from personal experience, I can
>say there was absolutely no difference to the user experience, and
>quality was entirely consistent with expectations of YHA hostels.
>
IYHF Assured Standards, theoretically what you should get at any IYHF
affiliated hostel http://www.hihostels.com/openStandards.do gives you
the minimum. Not very specific but you get the gist.

>This model seems to have a good degree of merit, not least that any
>debts incurred from poor business practice would be incurred by each
>individual business owner and not by the Association as a whole. Each
>business owner therefore has more incentive to open the hostel, to be
>flexible,

you still have the problem that the owner can walk away from the
association at any time. The main function of the association then
becomes to market the hostels well enough that this doesn't become an
issue.

That aside I agree that there are a lot of benefits to this type of
system

The potential downsides, to some readers here, are

a) it's no longer a membership organisation
b) the hostels tend to be larger and in (sub)urban areas
c) they offer facilites some may see as undesirible e.g. tv
d) a lot are family orientated

On my very unscientific investigation of the Danish hostel website I
haven't found few (2 out about the 50 I looked at) hostels under 50
beds or any in what would be considered a remote location.

I haven't got a copy to hand but I think this model was considered in
the strategy paper but it looks like it wasn't proceeded with. If it
were I think we would now be looking at a lot longer list of closures.

Nigel
replace SPAMHATER with n and t*sc*li with totalise

Hi Nigel, hoped you'd jump in ;-)

> Same effect - if you aren't a full member when you arrive you pay a
> supplement to stay. The only difference is that the English model
> doesn't grant any membership priviledges at any time.

True you pay a supplement, but my point was you no longer HAVE to be a
member to stay at our hostels, they just make you pay £3 extra,
whereas the Scandinavian hostels DO require you to be a member, and the
supplement goes towards membership. Correct me if ours still do too,
but I got the impression you just paid up your £3 with no requirement
to acquiring membership.

> IYHF Assured Standards, theoretically what you should get at any IYHF
> affiliated hostel http://www.hihostels.com/openStandards.do gives you
> the minimum. Not very specific but you get the gist.

Exactly my point :-) They may be all be individually owned,independent
businesses , but they all adhere to the assured standards offered by
IYHF, whereas true "independents" don't. Some indies are extremely
good, some are ghastly, the point being you never know what you're
going to get, whereas with IYHF ones, you do.

> ... The main function of the association then becomes to market the hostels well enough that this doesn't become an issue.

That's the crux of the whole issue! The hostels are well marketed so
no-one wants to leave the safety of the association's umbrella.

> The potential downsides, to some readers here, are
>
> a) it's no longer a membership organisation - Not true, membership IS required by the ones I refer to, and SHOULD be required by the others.

> b) the hostels tend to be larger and in (sub)urban areas - Granted, but ours seem to be going that way too. Not that many of the 50 closures are tiddlers or one-star, most seem to be medium sized 3-star hostels in err... rural areas.

> c) they offer facilites some may see as undesirible e.g. tv - unfortunately everyone has one - or at least that's what TV licencing keep telling me when I tell them I haven't got one ;-)

> d) a lot are family orientated - that's no bad thing. I'd rather see full hostels, families enjoying themselves and kids having fun than see our hostels go down the "boozy 18-25 backpacker" route with the accompanying all night noise, vomit, etc.

> On my very unscientific investigation of the Danish hostel website I
> haven't found few (2 out about the 50 I looked at) hostels under 50
> beds or any in what would be considered a remote location.

I'll let you know!

> I haven't got a copy to hand but I think this model was considered in
> the strategy paper but it looks like it wasn't proceeded with. If it
> were I think we would now be looking at a lot longer list of closures.

It ain't over yet :-(

On 21 Feb 2006 14:57:52 -0800, "Jacki" <jacki@pr-photo.net> wrote:

>True you pay a supplement, but my point was you no longer HAVE to be a
>member to stay at our hostels, they just make you pay £3 extra,
>whereas the Scandinavian hostels DO require you to be a member, and the
>supplement goes towards membership.

Don't think that's totally true. Again reading the Danish website you
can either pay 35 Kr extra per night OR purchase international
membership for 160 Kr

>Correct me if ours still do too,
>but I got the impression you just paid up your £3 with no requirement
>to acquiring membership.

correct. The point is that either way if you are not a member you pay
extra to stay but you don't have to be a member to stay at a hostel.
Here the supplemental fee doesn't go towards acquring membership. I
think that, in part, scrapping the membership requirement was a) a
marketing tool, b) to satsify the Charities Commission that YHA wasn't
acting as a members club but claiming charitable status

>> The potential downsides, to some readers here, are
>>
>> a) it's no longer a membership organisation - Not true, membership IS required by the ones I refer to, and SHOULD be required by the others.

See above, membership ISN'T required to stay at any hostel, but their
are benefits that accrue if you are a member e.g. you don't pay a
supplement and if you are of limited means you can get a further
discount on the overnight fees.

You can arrive here from abroad and purchase an international
membership (£10 last year) but you can't do it by installments (the
guest stamps) any more. This made it cheaper than the old guest stamp
scheme which was £12 and reduces the admin overhead.

It's interesting that as a policy in E&W it seems to have worked and
membership actually increased in 2005 contrary to what a lot of
people, me included, expected to happen. Making membership voluntary
and pointing out the financial benefits seems to have made more people
willing to pay rather than resent having to become a member.

>
>> b) the hostels tend to be larger and in (sub)urban areas - Granted, but ours seem to be going that way too. Not that many of the 50 closures are tiddlers or one-star, most seem to be medium sized 3-star hostels in err... rural areas.

That's my point. If E&W went down this line then IMO there would be
even fewer rural hostels than there are now because potential
owner/operators would look at them and decide that the potential
profit margin isn't large enough to justify their investment.

>
>> c) they offer facilites some may see as undesirible e.g. tv - unfortunately everyone has one - or at least that's what TV licencing keep telling me when I tell them I haven't got one ;-)
Another story :-)
>
>> d) a lot are family orientated - that's no bad thing. I'd rather see full hostels, families enjoying themselves and kids having fun than see our hostels go down the "boozy 18-25 backpacker" route with the accompanying all night noise, vomit, etc.
I don't have problem with that approach, you don't have problem with
that approach but some who post here appear to have a problem with
that.

Denmark makes it clear in it's pricing structure that families get
beds at cheaper rate than indiviudals thus you will get more family
booked rooms and potentially less interaction between all guests i.e.
'not real hostelling' :-)

Nigel

replace SPAMHATER with n and t*sc*li with totalise

Denmark makes it clear in it's pricing structure that families get
beds at cheaper rate than indiviudals thus you will get more family
booked rooms and potentially less interaction between all guests i.e.
'not real hostelling' :-)

Their site says the maximum paid by an individual at any hostel is
€20.15, or about £14.00, with family rooms costing slightly less per
bed. So isn't that the same policy as YHA, where a 4-bed family room
might cost £45.00, with a discount for single-parent families, but if
it's 4 adults wanting their own room, it'll cost £56.00?
(Hypothetical figures!)

Interestingly, the €20.15 or 150DKK maximum price applies even to the
5-star central Copenhagen hostel, whereas our most expensive London
equivalent currently costs £28.00 per person.

Also of interest is that for everyone's wellbeing, alcohol is strictly
forbidden at Scandinavian hostels! Yet they still seem to stay pretty
full.

So maybe YHA is sort of on the right track after all, with the idea of
heading towards catering mostly for families, with family-rooms, and
other beds taken up by individuals.

If YHA could only get its head round the concept that it shouldn't also
be trying to attract the "boozy backpacker" market as I call them, as
the two don't mix. There are plenty of "backpacker" type independent
hostels catering to their needs, where they are surrounded by other
like-minded and similarly drunken room-mates.

They'll most probably be grateful for the quieter, more family-oriented
YHA once they've grown out of binge drinking and either started their
own families or got to the age where they can't cope any more ;-)

	#1
Jacki	Less time to hostel this year So much for wanting to spend a few days hostelling in March this year. I was planning to stay at hostels in North Wales, but with one or two exceptions, none appears to be open before Easter :-( And with Easter being late April this year, most hostels are open for only six and a half months between Easter and October, with the caveat that the hostel may be closed at certain times during this period! By contrast, I've been checking out hostels in Denmark for a holiday later this year. Most are open all year, and interestingly the vast majority are privately owned businesses who are affiliated with the Danish hostels association. Maybe it's high time our hostels went down the same route and were run as independent owned businesses with an incentive to succeed rather than by bureaucrats more interested in chasing government grants.

	#2
oliver_twomey@hotmail.com	Re: Less time to hostel this year This was tried in the USA when their association started, but when the wardens retired, the hostel usually vanished. There have been privately-run hostels in the YHA, like Tebay, that didn't provide a members' kitchen, in order to boost meal revenue. Seriously, there are privately run hostels in Britain and Ireland. They're called independent hostels, but they don't restrict their income by only being open to YHA members. They vary from well-run to terrible.

	#3
Jacki	Re: Less time to hostel this year oliver_twomey@hotmail.com wrote: > This was tried in the USA when their association started, but when the > wardens retired, the hostel usually vanished. LOL. Ours are vanishing anyway ;-) > Seriously, there are privately run hostels in Britain and Ireland. > They're called independent hostels, but they don't restrict their > income by only being open to YHA members. They vary from well-run to > terrible. There are many independent hostels, both good and bad, but those weren't the ones I was referring to. The Danish model I did refer to seems to operate along the lines of each hostel being privately owned, and then run under the banner and rules of the Association as an affiliate hostel. One has to be an HI member to stay there, and if one isn't, guest stamps must be bought towards membership, just as our hostels used to do before membership became pointless. The same model of private ownership/affiliate is also followed successfully throughout Australia, and from personal experience, I can say there was absolutely no difference to the user experience, and quality was entirely consistent with expectations of YHA hostels. This model seems to have a good degree of merit, not least that any debts incurred from poor business practice would be incurred by each individual business owner and not by the Association as a whole. Each business owner therefore has more incentive to open the hostel, to be flexible, and not close for the seemingly compulsory RAH for six months of the year. And that was the point of my original post - I can't go hostelling until at least Easter because YHA seems to have taken a step backwards to much shorter opening periods, unlike the last few years when it seemed they were moving positively in the direction of longer opening periods and more flexibility.

	#4
SPAMHATERepper@tiscali.co.uk	Re: Less time to hostel this year On 21 Feb 2006 02:06:39 -0800, "Jacki" <jacki@pr-photo.net> wrote: > >The Danish model I did refer to seems to operate along the lines of >each hostel being privately owned, and then run under the banner and >rules of the Association as an affiliate hostel. One has to be an HI >member to stay there, and if one isn't, guest stamps must be bought >towards membership, just as our hostels used to do before membership >became pointless. > Same effect - if you aren't a full member when you arrive you pay a supplement to stay. The only difference is that the English model doesn't grant any membership priviledges at any time. >The same model of private ownership/affiliate is also followed >successfully throughout Australia, and from personal experience, I can >say there was absolutely no difference to the user experience, and >quality was entirely consistent with expectations of YHA hostels. > IYHF Assured Standards, theoretically what you should get at any IYHF affiliated hostel http://www.hihostels.com/openStandards.do gives you the minimum. Not very specific but you get the gist. >This model seems to have a good degree of merit, not least that any >debts incurred from poor business practice would be incurred by each >individual business owner and not by the Association as a whole. Each >business owner therefore has more incentive to open the hostel, to be >flexible, you still have the problem that the owner can walk away from the association at any time. The main function of the association then becomes to market the hostels well enough that this doesn't become an issue. That aside I agree that there are a lot of benefits to this type of system The potential downsides, to some readers here, are a) it's no longer a membership organisation b) the hostels tend to be larger and in (sub)urban areas c) they offer facilites some may see as undesirible e.g. tv d) a lot are family orientated On my very unscientific investigation of the Danish hostel website I haven't found few (2 out about the 50 I looked at) hostels under 50 beds or any in what would be considered a remote location. I haven't got a copy to hand but I think this model was considered in the strategy paper but it looks like it wasn't proceeded with. If it were I think we would now be looking at a lot longer list of closures. Nigel replace SPAMHATER with n and tscli with totalise

	#5
Jacki	Re: Less time to hostel this year Hi Nigel, hoped you'd jump in ;-) > Same effect - if you aren't a full member when you arrive you pay a > supplement to stay. The only difference is that the English model > doesn't grant any membership priviledges at any time. True you pay a supplement, but my point was you no longer HAVE to be a member to stay at our hostels, they just make you pay £3 extra, whereas the Scandinavian hostels DO require you to be a member, and the supplement goes towards membership. Correct me if ours still do too, but I got the impression you just paid up your £3 with no requirement to acquiring membership. > IYHF Assured Standards, theoretically what you should get at any IYHF > affiliated hostel http://www.hihostels.com/openStandards.do gives you > the minimum. Not very specific but you get the gist. Exactly my point :-) They may be all be individually owned,independent businesses , but they all adhere to the assured standards offered by IYHF, whereas true "independents" don't. Some indies are extremely good, some are ghastly, the point being you never know what you're going to get, whereas with IYHF ones, you do. > ... The main function of the association then becomes to market the hostels well enough that this doesn't become an issue. That's the crux of the whole issue! The hostels are well marketed so no-one wants to leave the safety of the association's umbrella. > The potential downsides, to some readers here, are > > a) it's no longer a membership organisation - Not true, membership IS required by the ones I refer to, and SHOULD be required by the others. > b) the hostels tend to be larger and in (sub)urban areas - Granted, but ours seem to be going that way too. Not that many of the 50 closures are tiddlers or one-star, most seem to be medium sized 3-star hostels in err... rural areas. > c) they offer facilites some may see as undesirible e.g. tv - unfortunately everyone has one - or at least that's what TV licencing keep telling me when I tell them I haven't got one ;-) > d) a lot are family orientated - that's no bad thing. I'd rather see full hostels, families enjoying themselves and kids having fun than see our hostels go down the "boozy 18-25 backpacker" route with the accompanying all night noise, vomit, etc. > On my very unscientific investigation of the Danish hostel website I > haven't found few (2 out about the 50 I looked at) hostels under 50 > beds or any in what would be considered a remote location. I'll let you know! > I haven't got a copy to hand but I think this model was considered in > the strategy paper but it looks like it wasn't proceeded with. If it > were I think we would now be looking at a lot longer list of closures. It ain't over yet :-(

	#7
Jacki	Re: Less time to hostel this year Denmark makes it clear in it's pricing structure that families get beds at cheaper rate than indiviudals thus you will get more family booked rooms and potentially less interaction between all guests i.e. 'not real hostelling' :-) Their site says the maximum paid by an individual at any hostel is €20.15, or about £14.00, with family rooms costing slightly less per bed. So isn't that the same policy as YHA, where a 4-bed family room might cost £45.00, with a discount for single-parent families, but if it's 4 adults wanting their own room, it'll cost £56.00? (Hypothetical figures!) Interestingly, the €20.15 or 150DKK maximum price applies even to the 5-star central Copenhagen hostel, whereas our most expensive London equivalent currently costs £28.00 per person. Also of interest is that for everyone's wellbeing, alcohol is strictly forbidden at Scandinavian hostels! Yet they still seem to stay pretty full. So maybe YHA is sort of on the right track after all, with the idea of heading towards catering mostly for families, with family-rooms, and other beds taken up by individuals. If YHA could only get its head round the concept that it shouldn't also be trying to attract the "boozy backpacker" market as I call them, as the two don't mix. There are plenty of "backpacker" type independent hostels catering to their needs, where they are surrounded by other like-minded and similarly drunken room-mates. They'll most probably be grateful for the quieter, more family-oriented YHA once they've grown out of binge drinking and either started their own families or got to the age where they can't cope any more ;-)