Glasto = Too Commercial?

[Funkfarley]

Hey all,

There was little ol' me just sitting thinking about the good times to be had and about the festivals I have been to.

Now, there have been, on number of occasions, people who have said that Glastonbury Festival is too commercial and nothing like it used to be.

Well granted, its not quite like it used to be, there is a monorail and everything now (!) but with regards to being commercial??!

I have only ever been to V festival and Glastonbury and in comparison I feel Glasto is nothing compared to V for commercial'ness (I made that up.. ) The year of my last V was the year of my first Glasto and I vowed never to go back as I just couldn't stand the "you can only drink virgin water, virgin coke, carling lager at £5 per pint which you need tokens for first" In my opinion V is a very commercial festival....but then is Glasto selling itself to the BBC??

Just curious as to what people think about this...so please. Discuss.

[Joshuwarr]

An event of such size has to be broadcasted to the masses. It would be selfish not to do so and a bit of a f**k you to those who couldnt make it. The commercialism is minimal and not quite as in your face as other festivals where it cant be escaped.

[Kyelo]

Hey all,

There was little ol' me just sitting thinking about the good times to be had and about the festivals I have been to.

Now, there have been, on number of occasions, people who have said that Glastonbury Festival is too commercial and nothing like it used to be.

Well granted, its not quite like it used to be, there is a monorail and everything now (!) but with regards to being commercial??!

I have only ever been to V festival and Glastonbury and in comparison I feel Glasto is nothing compared to V for commercial'ness (I made that up.. ) The year of my last V was the year of my first Glasto and I vowed never to go back as I just couldn't stand the "you can only drink virgin water, virgin coke, carling lager at £5 per pint which you need tokens for first" In my opinion V is a very commercial festival....but then is Glasto selling itself to the BBC??

Just curious as to what people think about this...so please. Discuss.

Edited February 28, 2009 by BenchBuddah

[Funkfarley]

An event of such size has to be broadcasted to the masses. It would be selfish not to do so and a bit of a f**k you to those who couldnt make it. The commercialism is minimal and not quite as in your face as other festivals where it cant be escaped.

[strudders]

I agree...I didnt go to glasto last year and remember seeing snippits on BBC and feeling a little of the "F**k you" for not being there!

It is something that should be broadcast to the nation as it is an institution in itself however it p*sses me off when people use that as their excuse to fob off Glasto as too commercial and beyond them, when you are right, it is minimal in comparison to the point that when I'm there I don't even notice!!

Edited February 28, 2009 by strudders

[Kyelo]

.....supply and demand rather than in your face commercialism.

[Sawdusty surfer]

glastonbury has the option to do what the hell it wants. it sells a HUGE variety of drinks.........it could be a single brand with massive tag logoing everywhere and that goes across the board on most things. M.E. could choose to make an absolute fortune and direct every profit option in to his own pocket, yet he doesn't. as already stated, it is as commercial enough to survive. mind you, have you been able to buy any bottled water that isnt Glastonbury Spring Water???....but hey, its proper local, and not a multinational importing water from S. America or the Alps or somewhere just as stupid.

shit, as they have done the same at Disneyland Paris (Mouse Auchfitz) with the narrow gauge railway i bet McDonalds would sponsor the monorail given half the chance.

Talking of McD's i would love to see a McD's put an outlet within the festival...........................

[incident]

It'd be absolutely impossible to run a regular event of that scale without an element of commercialism creeping in - and I'm pretty sure Glastonbury comes as close as it's possible to get right now. None of the major stages are sponsored in any way, and any logos shown on TV tend to be Greenpeace, Wateraid, or Oxfam - which is astonishing when you think about how much money the festival is effectively turning down.

As far as I can remember, all of the official "commercial" branding on site tends to be either the BBC, Guardian, Q, or Carlsberg - with each of those putting something important back into the festival*. Even then, their logos only tend to appear in relevant places.

The only exception I can really think of is the Playstation co-sponsorship of the Queens Head, which is bad, but that's still limited to one mid sized tent.

If people are moaning that it's all too commercial, then either they're seriously deluded or the festival just isn't for them anymore and they don't want to admit that they've changed. If anything, the festival is less commercial now than it was 5 years ago simply by virtue of the Carlsberg sponsorship being less intrusive than Budweisers was.

* meaning more than just cash.

[grumpyhack]

Don't get confused between commercial and well organised. Glasto is now very well organised - it has to be because of its scale. That requires money, expertise and resources. But it manages to balance the money-making side and the laid-back 'hippy dippy' side better than any other festival I know.

Thanks to the cross-subsidy from the commercial areas Glasto provides alternative areas and space that you won't find on such a scale at any other festival.

And you can still spend a week at Glasto without seeing any of the commercial side if that offends you.

[Funkfarley]

Don't get confused between commercial and well organised. Glasto is now very well organised - it has to be because of its scale. That requires money, expertise and resources. But it manages to balance the money-making side and the laid-back 'hippy dippy' side better than any other festival I know.

Thanks to the cross-subsidy from the commercial areas Glasto provides alternative areas and space that you won't find on such a scale at any other festival.

And you can still spend a week at Glasto without seeing any of the commercial side if that offends you.

[Paul ™]

I'd like to hear the arguements for the people who say it is too commercial..

I agree with pretty much all of the above, it's adapted to survive and there is a lot more festivals around that I would class as commercial before Glastonubury

[Funkfarley]

I'd like to hear the arguements for the people who say it is too commercial..

I agree with pretty much all of the above, it's adapted to survive and there is a lot more festivals around that I would class as commercial before Glastonubury

[Funkfarley]

Maybe MrFunk would like to comment...??

[Staberinde]

The commercialism is minimal and not quite as in your face as other festivals where it cant be escaped.

[caramello]

The Dance Village had a taste of commerciality a few years back when the Smirnoff Ice tent was dumped in the area. They spent a fortune on DJs, very big PA, solid dancefloor, big lights etc and paid a lot of money just to have a presence at Glastonbury, and lots of people had a good time and drunk lots of their vile concoction, surrounded by wall to wall advertising. Unfortunately, they were a complete bunch of tossers to deal with for the festival - they never complied with noise restrictions (for which the festy was fined and Dance Village blamed i believe), their staff were arsey and out of order backstage, and the amount of rubbish they left behind was enormous! Needless to say, when they asked to come back the next year they were denied. Also, a few years back Cream (remember them?) offered a rumoured million quid to run the Dance Village. They were turned down. Commercial interests are desperate to get into Glastonbury and it is because Michael Eavis' is not a greedy man that they are not there in any big way, he should be applauded. Aren't we bombarded with advertising enough as it is? Glastonbury is as commercial as it has to be but without selling its arse to book big acts that charge waaaay too much for playing anyway....blahblah....its still the best festy ever and incredible that it still survives in this day and age pretty much sorta like it used to be maaaan....

[pedmills]

I hear Glastonbury is too commercial now all the time and it pisses me off cause I honestly don't understand what people mean by that.

I have come to think that people either say that because:

a) Nostalga, when people remember things when they were younger, they seem better than they actually were. People thus need a explanation for why Glasto isn't as good as how they remember it and commercialism is probably the easiest explanation.

b ) Less hippies, which is probably due to rising ticket prices and better security, which although I can understand how that would add to the atmosphere, it was necessary.

c) More TV and newspaper coverage, and people don't like to share Glastonbury with the world. It's just the same concept as when people stop liking their favourite band when they become popular.

d) They think by saying it will make them sound like some kind of thoughtful counterculture hero, when actually all they are doing is copying other people by saying it.

e) It's become cool (although maybe after last year, not so much) to slag off Glastonbury.

There is obviously some appeal to small non-commercial festivals, but in order for Glastonbury to be so diverse, have so many attractions and acts, and be both big and small (e.g. Pyramid Stage and healing fields) then some degree of commercialisation is needed. It is a necessary evil. And Glastonbury only allows sponsorship if it benefits the festival. For example Q provide the Queens Head, the Guardian provide the magazine etc.

And people always complain about ticket prices..If there wasn't some degree of commercialisation then the prices would be even higher!

Edited February 28, 2009 by peteyboy

[Kyelo]

peteyboy, touche touche

[Paul ™]

Good post peteyboy

[eFestivals]

I hear Glastonbury is too commercial now all the time and it pisses me off cause I honestly don't understand what people mean by that.

I have come to think that people either say that because:

a) Nostalga, when people remember things when they were younger, they seem better than they actually were. People thus need a explanation for why Glasto isn't as good as how they remember it and commercialism is probably the easiest explanation.

while I agree with much of the other stuff you say, it's simply a fact that there used to be no commercial endorsements by the festival, and now there's some.

So while it's not gone anywhere near as far as other fests with its commercialisation, it is more commercial than it used to be.

[eFestivals]

I hear Glastonbury is too commercial now all the time and it pisses me off cause I honestly don't understand what people mean by that.

I have come to think that people either say that because:

a) Nostalga, when people remember things when they were younger, they seem better than they actually were. People thus need a explanation for why Glasto isn't as good as how they remember it and commercialism is probably the easiest explanation.

while I agree with much of the other stuff you say, it's simply a fact that there used to be no commercial endorsements by the festival, and now there's some.

So while it's not gone anywhere near as far as other fests with its commercialisation, it is more commercial than it used to be.

[incident]

while I agree with much of the other stuff you say, it's simply a fact that there used to be no commercial endorsements by the festival, and now there's some.

So while it's not gone anywhere near as far as other fests with its commercialisation, it is more commercial than it used to be.

[ralph250]

So while it's not gone anywhere near as far as other fests with its commercialisation, it is more commercial than it used to be.

[eFestivals]

Out of interest, when was the last time that the Festival was entirely free of commercial partners?

I'm guessing it must've been no more recent than the 70s or the very very early 80s - which is long enough ago to render any of the recent complaints are somewhat pointless.

as far as I remember it didn't have any properly commercial links until the early nineties, tho I could be wrong with that.

It did of course have its good causes partners prior to that, tho as they're not commercial organisations I'm excluding them.

[eFestivals]

surely just reacting and adapting to the health & safety/litigation culture we're in now?

nope - 'elf's don't make you put up banners saying "buy this".

[ralph250]

nope - 'elf's don't make you put up banners saying "buy this".