Oxbow RV Resort - Offer to Purchase

[southy]

Twobits, I have to agree with you with regard to the tourism nostalgia. I really do believe there are a lot of folk out there who wish things were like they were 10 - 15 - 20 years ago. Not being realistic at all. Tourism has changed, the way families travel has changed, the way people camp has changed. The price has also changed and is a restriction for some. Penticton had a number of campgrounds ... what happened to them? Why did they close? I believe it was the singer Ann Mortifee who had a song titled ..."you can't go back to where you're coming from". So true.

[Bsuds]

RV sales are at an all time high and someone who pays $50k-$150k or more for a high end RV does not want to stay at a run down RV park or one that doesn't provide the services they want. Full hook ups with 50a electric and clean wash rooms etc.

Look at some of the places in the US and they make ours look like dumps. We drove past this place last week and I had a closer look as well as their website and there is no way we would stay there.

[southy]

Exactly!

[fluffy]

Facilities and management can be upgraded. Isn’t this pretty much the last RV park within city limits? Is it wise to let this go by the wayside? Isn’t there some benefit to bring a “full service” tourist destination or are we going to get exclusive now?

[southy]

Facilities and management can be upgraded. Isn’t this pretty much the last RV park within city limits? Is it wise to let this go by the wayside? Isn’t there some benefit to bring a “full service” tourist destination or are we going to get exclusive now?

But should this be the job of the city or private enterprise? I say private enterprise. If the campground market is there then I would expect someone to come to the plate and develop a full service campground. But something tells me this really is not a priority for this market. Tourism has changed. It seems that Penticton's tourism is now event driven, be it wine festivals, concerts, Jazzfest, Elvisfest, triathalons, hockey, soccer, etc. I mean this can't more evident than with the announcement by the City of Penticton today that they are now hiring a full time (non-union) Events Project Manager. They must feel this is a pretty important position because they are budgeting $90k per year. Here is link to story: https://www.castanet.net/news/Penticton ... l-time-job

[twobits]

Facilities and management can be upgraded. Isn’t this pretty much the last RV park within city limits? Is it wise to let this go by the wayside? Isn’t there some benefit to bring a “full service” tourist destination or are we going to get exclusive now?

It is not about being exclusive Fluff. The topic is the Oxbow RV Resort and the best use for that piece of real estate. The place is marginal at best. The people running it are not the owners of the real estate. They are not going to invest any capital in making it a high end resort with 50 amp hookups and a modern washroom shower laundry facility. And the owners, the City of Penticton, certainly are not going to either and nor should they as they have no business being in the camping business competing with private enterprise.
The only compromise I see here is offering up a 25 yr long term lease to the current operators with the caveat that the site be upgraded with the operators own capital at a required rate much like what the City demands of the Marina property. And also a lease rate that reflects the value of the property.
Anything less than that is a subsidy for a private venture from taxpayers. Sorry.

[XT225]

And the owners, the City of Penticton, certainly are not going to either and nor should they as they have no business being in the camping business competing with private enterprise.
Anything less than that is a subsidy for a private venture from taxpayers. Sorry.

Good points twobits. Slightly off topic, but a direct comparison, is the City not doing the exact same thing by being in the Convention Centre business, competing with the Lakeside Resort...AND losing over a million dollars every year, to boot? If Mr. Prystay was losing money, he would not be in business, period. Why are we, the taxpayers subsidizing the T&C Center?

[twobits]

Good points twobits. Slightly off topic, but a direct comparison, is the City not doing the exact same thing by being in the Convention Centre business, competing with the Lakeside Resort...AND losing over a million dollars every year, to boot? If Mr. Prystay was losing money, he would not be in business, period. Why are we, the taxpayers subsidizing the T&C Center?

To be fair tough xt......the city was not competing with any convention facilities prior to the Lakeside. Maybe now that there is a private facility that can handle some person numbers, the City should consider their involvement in the convention hosting business and let private enterprise take over. Given that the Convention Center requires a subsidy and is competing with private enterprise now that is not receiving taxpayer funding.....it tells me private enterprise can do it better and the City should not be in the Convention business.
In keeping with topic.....it would be like Oxbow being the only campground available and the City subsidizing it. It is not.

[XT225]

To be fair tough xt......the city was not competing with any convention facilities prior to the Lakeside. Maybe now that there is a private facility that can handle some person numbers, the City should consider their involvement in the convention hosting business and let private enterprise take over. Given that the Convention Center requires a subsidy and is competing with private enterprise now that is not receiving taxpayer funding.....it tells me private enterprise can do it better and the City should not be in the Convention business.
In keeping with topic.....it would be like Oxbow being the only campground available and the City subsidizing it. It is not.

Re the Ox-bow situation, I am tending to agree with you. If there are other RV parks in town (getting to be a big IF) then the city should not be giving the lease holders any super deal compared to other land owners in town offering the same services. I believe that I heard that the Riverside RV is going at the end of this year; think that leaves one other on the East side of South Main St. That land was going to be changed to high condos some time back but I believe the deal fell through or they couldn't get the re-zoning on it. The campsite near Riva Ridge in my opinion (I could be wrong) looks like it will be year-round RV'ers; much like Ilahei campground in Trout Creek (full timers there for sure; not much, if any room for drop ins). Wrights is till there of course and the Barefoot Beach resort (though I see quite a few in there have now built decks/additions; likely to be year rounders). Native lands do seem like the best choice for campgrounds, considering the value of city land.
Re the city competing with private convention business; they weren't in past but sure the heck are now and its time to seriously consider getting out, especially if its not making a profit. Maybe tear down the T&C Center and use it for parking thats so badly needed there, especially if they decide to go with two new twin rinks in that block.

[Darkre]

And the owners, the City of Penticton, certainly are not going to either and nor should they as they have no business being in the camping business competing with private enterprise.
Anything less than that is a subsidy for a private venture from taxpayers. Sorry.

Good points twobits. Slightly off topic, but a direct comparison, is the City not doing the exact same thing by being in the Convention Centre business, competing with the Lakeside Resort...AND losing over a million dollars every year, to boot? If Mr. Prystay was losing money, he would not be in business, period. Why are we, the taxpayers subsidizing the T&C Center?

XT, the entire SOEC complex, including the trade and convention centre, is subsidized for a little over $1million. The trade and convention centre is subsidized for about $200,000 according to this article http://www.bclocalnews.com/news/penticton-trade-and-convention-centre-is-a-generator-for-the-city/. Generally the PTCC attempts to book events for the shoulder seasons to help local businesses survive the quieter times. It's a relatively small investment to help everyone that works in the tourist industry prosper or at least survive what would otherwise be a difficult time of year.

Businesses such as the lakeside that operate convention centres operate on a similar model and look at them as loss leaders. They may lose money on the operation of the centre itself but the hotel will be fully booked during those events when that otherwise may not have been the case.

If you look at the costs of the PTCC as an advertising expense you can recognize the value for money it offers. Thousands of people a year attend conferences at the facility that otherwise would not have ventured to Penticton. The nature of cenferences usually means that it is the higher end client that is visiting and discovering the city.

$200,000 to help the tourist industry in lean times and to advertise the city to what is generally a more well off segment of society is pretty cost effective. Convention guests stay in hotels and eat out every meal. They network over drinks afterwards. Conventions bring big money to the city.

Receiving $9700/year for a property that could be worth up to $2million depending on it's size, and that may host as few as 30 families a week for 12 weeks a year in the city isn't a great return on investment. RV'ers bring their food and beverages with them for the most part. They may do some touristy things but generally are happy to relax with a beverage at the resort or on the beach.

[Darkre]

Another way to look at this is to consider the revenue generated on the property. Due to the lack of financials available there is a lot of assumptions made below but I think they are fair.

The nightly rate is $56. I will assume a weekly of $350 is available.
Each rv site probably averages out to 10 weeks fully utilized each year.
Assuming 40 sites on the city portion of the land (of the 68 total sites in the park):
$350 X 10 weeks X 40 sites = $140,000

Even after expenses that is a HUGE return on the $9700 it is costing the owners to lease the land from the city.

[twobits]

Another way to look at this is to consider the revenue generated on the property. Due to the lack of financials available there is a lot of assumptions made below but I think they are fair.

The nightly rate is $56. I will assume a weekly of $350 is available.
Each rv site probably averages out to 10 weeks fully utilized each year.
Assuming 40 sites on the city portion of the land (of the 68 total sites in the park):
$350 X 10 weeks X 40 sites = $140,000

Even after expenses that is a HUGE return on the $9700 it is costing the owners to lease the land from the city.

Ya, and kinda my point on subsidy. Two million in cash for the sale invested at 3% (easy and safe for that coin) is 60k a yr for the taxpayer and City services vs. $9700.
If the land were privately owned, no one in their right mind would operate a campground if they could sell and make 60k yr sitting on the couch.