tickets and how it could be done better

[FloorFiller]

The ballot idea as I suggested would actually make it easier for groups, as you could enter the ballot in whatever size group you want, that group gets one entry in the ballot, either you all get in or none of you do. Payment would then be processed separately for each group member. You'd have the exact same odds as anyone else (except when literally down to the last five tickets, groups of eight would be out, but that's tiny.

 

what if i want to enter the ballot in a group of a thousand?

[DeanoL]

what if i want to enter the ballot in a group of a thousand?

 

Then why not? At those sort of numbers though, you will start to actually limit your chances to a point where it's significant (though not high) - you essentially won't have a shot at the last 999 tickets, so you're 0.7% or so less likely to get in than smaller groups.

 

I'd posit that in such a ballot system though, the chances of your group of 1000 all getting tickets would be significantly higher than the chance of all 1000 getting tickets in the current system - you'd need 166 successful groups of six (and one group of four). Even if the success rate of a given group is a (generous) 80%, the chance of all 1000 of you getting tickets is therefore 0.000000000000000065467812%

 

So in short, you'd be far better off!

To be precise, using the 80% figure, you're about 1.2 (European) trillion times more likely to get tickets for your entire group.

Edited October 7, 2015 by DeanoL

[MichaelsBeard]

I think a £50 deposit is fair but making it non refundable would stop some of the just in case buyers, freeing up tickets for people who really want to go.

Charm x

I agree but maybe they'd be legal issues with people paying for a festival where they have no clue what the lineup is without having the option to get a refund?

[pc6090]

Stop it. The current system is the best/fairest /easiest for the festival to use. When demand outstrips supply their is no other way that gives everybody the same equal chance. Surely that's the "glasto" ethos.

[DeanoL]

Stop it. The current system is the best/fairest /easiest for the festival to use. When demand outstrips supply their is no other way that gives everybody the same equal chance. Surely that's the "glasto" ethos.

 

It's not though. You've listed three things there. That it's the best system is arguably true. That it's the easiest for the festival to use is nonsense - if they wanted that they wouldn't bother with pre-registration and so on. Just let the tickets go on the open market.

 

It's not the fairest either. It contains designed biased towards rewarding effort and some preparation (and group sizes of exactly six) - it's specifically designed not to give everybody an equal chance. If you actually want to give everyone an equal chance, a ballot system does that.

 

I'm not proposing they adopt one. I'm just sick of the attitude on here that "this is fairest system" from people that get tickets every bloody year. And I'm one of those people that get tickets every year, but I realise that's because I prepare, have overlapping groups, multiple people trying, and am willing to do the resale if needs be. With the amount of people trying for tickets, it's completely and totally unfair that I get to go 12 times in a row. The chances of that in truly fair, random system are tiny.

 

I'm still very happy that I get to go - I'm just aware that I'm benefiting from the inherent biases in the system, and not pretending that it's fair and that everyone has an equal shot. And I'm willing to contemplate and discuss what a fairer system would look like because I don't think I have some special right to always have a system that's biased towards me.

[MichaelsBeard]

It's not though. You've listed three things there. That it's the best system is arguably true. That it's the easiest for the festival to use is nonsense - if they wanted that they wouldn't bother with pre-registration and so on. Just let the tickets go on the open market.

It's not the fairest either. It contains designed biased towards rewarding effort and some preparation (and group sizes of exactly six) - it's specifically designed not to give everybody an equal chance. If you actually want to give everyone an equal chance, a ballot system does that.

I'm not proposing they adopt one. I'm just sick of the attitude on here that "this is fairest system" from people that get tickets every bloody year. And I'm one of those people that get tickets every year, but I realise that's because I prepare, have overlapping groups, multiple people trying, and am willing to do the resale if needs be. With the amount of people trying for tickets, it's completely and totally unfair that I get to go 12 times in a row. The chances of that in truly fair, random system are tiny.

I'm still very happy that I get to go - I'm just aware that I'm benefiting from the inherent biases in the system, and not pretending that it's fair and that everyone has an equal shot. And I'm willing to contemplate and discuss what a fairer system would look like because I don't think I have some special right to always have a system that's biased towards me.

So what system would you implement? The ballot system would have flaws and ways of favouring others and giving more people a chance etc as well (IE - what's to stop someone making 100 accounts to entered into it?). Probably every other system possible would have drawbacks.

As for it rewarding larger groups - there's nothing to stop people with fewer in their group having others trying for them etc everyone has the same opportunity to put the effort in. Regardless - it's still all about that one person getting through at the right time and is pure luck no matter what the group size is.

The system - including the commendable anti-tout registration process,without which demand would be even higher from touts gaining tickets as well - IS as fair and easy as it's going to get.

Edited October 7, 2015 by MichaelsBeard

[Redwinevino]

It's not though. You've listed three things there. That it's the best system is arguably true. That it's the easiest for the festival to use is nonsense - if they wanted that they wouldn't bother with pre-registration and so on. Just let the tickets go on the open market.

 

It's not the fairest either. It contains designed biased towards rewarding effort and some preparation (and group sizes of exactly six) - it's specifically designed not to give everybody an equal chance. If you actually want to give everyone an equal chance, a ballot system does that.

 

I'm not proposing they adopt one. I'm just sick of the attitude on here that "this is fairest system" from people that get tickets every bloody year. And I'm one of those people that get tickets every year, but I realise that's because I prepare, have overlapping groups, multiple people trying, and am willing to do the resale if needs be. With the amount of people trying for tickets, it's completely and totally unfair that I get to go 12 times in a row. The chances of that in truly fair, random system are tiny.

 

I'm still very happy that I get to go - I'm just aware that I'm benefiting from the inherent biases in the system, and not pretending that it's fair and that everyone has an equal shot. And I'm willing to contemplate and discuss what a fairer system would look like because I don't think I have some special right to always have a system that's biased towards me.

 

As it should, a ballot can be rigged and favours people who can afford to risk paying 100 deposits on the off chance every ticket they put in the raffle come out.

[tweed1981]

It's not though. You've listed three things there. That it's the best system is arguably true. That it's the easiest for the festival to use is nonsense - if they wanted that they wouldn't bother with pre-registration and so on. Just let the tickets go on the open market.

 

It's not the fairest either. It contains designed biased towards rewarding effort and some preparation (and group sizes of exactly six) - it's specifically designed not to give everybody an equal chance. If you actually want to give everyone an equal chance, a ballot system does that.

 

I'm not proposing they adopt one. I'm just sick of the attitude on here that "this is fairest system" from people that get tickets every bloody year. And I'm one of those people that get tickets every year, but I realise that's because I prepare, have overlapping groups, multiple people trying, and am willing to do the resale if needs be. With the amount of people trying for tickets, it's completely and totally unfair that I get to go 12 times in a row. The chances of that in truly fair, random system are tiny.

 

I'm still very happy that I get to go - I'm just aware that I'm benefiting from the inherent biases in the system, and not pretending that it's fair and that everyone has an equal shot. And I'm willing to contemplate and discuss what a fairer system would look like because I don't think I have some special right to always have a system that's biased towards me.

But everybody has the opportunity to do what you are doing? You aren't doing anything special that is beyond the ability of anybody else trying for tickets. If people really want tickets they can do what you do, hence it is fair. I know enough people that every year say they want to go and "try" for tickets, there are a few at my work, on Monday morning I discussed it with somebody who has tried and failed 4 years in a row. By trying he means that this year he was a bit hungover so got up just after 9 but couldn't even get on the website so gave up. I questioned him further and he had his registration number but nobody else he was trying for, he said to me he would have txt them if he got through! Does he deserve to go more than you?

[Rumblestripe]

More than anything a random ballot would adversely affect the atmosphere of the Festival. It is entirely possible that you would get a crowd of complete noobs milling around, perhaps everyone at the Pyramid Stage. The current system does reward preparation and a group/community ethos but only to an extent. It isn't perfect but I can't think of a system that isn't worse. Perhaps a tweak to the system whereby you lose maybe £25 of your deposit if you decide not to pay in full might dissuade a few speculative buyers. But ultimately when you look at what you get for your £230ish it remains remarkable value.

[Room to sway]

It's not the fairest either. It contains designed biased towards rewarding effort and some preparation (and group sizes of exactly six) - it's specifically designed not to give everybody an equal chance. If you actually want to give everyone an equal chance, a ballot system does that.

 

I'm guessing your ballot system would be on a single-person basis? If so what happens if you get a ticket and the rest of your group doesn't? Do you want to go on your own? Or maybe with the one person in your group who doesn't like any of the music you do?

 

And if you're saying that you can make a group of 6 to go into the ballot together, you'd either have to accept you'll have 1/6th of a chance (if you have one ballot between the group), or (if you're saying if one of your group gets in, they all do) massively disadvantage single people / duos who won't have as big a chance because they don't have 6 chances.

 

The current system isn't ideal but it really is the fairest.

 

Your comment about preparation is bizarre. Is it "unfair" that Usain Bolt trains as hard as he does? Should he be stripped of his medals because he prepares so much? The whole point about preparation being an advantage is that anyone can prepare, anyone can educate themselves about how the system works which means anyone can get a ticket.

[Don Hagliatelli]

I'm sorry but I think what you are saying is quite bizarre! You think a ballot would be a fairer system, but you are trying to think of ways that you could cheat that system therefore making it, yes, completely unfair!

A ballot system would mean on the whole, people on here would get to go less as it would be completely random rather than having a bias towards the persistent and organised. Is that what people really really want? Things taken entirely out of their hands and left to chance?

Unless of course you can fabricate a way to cheat this supposedly fairer system!

I’m just trying to explore the reality of how a ballot could work.

 

It is often suggested, but usually as a concept rather than a thought through proposal.

 

In principle, it would be completely fair. In reality, depending on the system it may be open to abuse and so it would not be fair.

 

From discussion in this thread, we’ve been talking about a potential way to run a ballot which would make it difficult for people to increase their odds of getting a ticket. I’m just testing that proposed system for weaknesses.

 

 

Personally, I don’t want to see the system change. Between me and the friends I go with, it’s been years since I’ve missed out on a ticket.

 

 

The point of this thread is to discuss how ticket sales could be done ‘better’. This is often interpreted as how could the ticket system be ‘fairer’.

[Rumblestripe]

The point of this thread is to discuss how ticket sales could be done ‘better’. This is often interpreted as how could the ticket system be ‘fairer’.

No, usually when these threads are started they are more on the lines of "how could the system be tweaked to make sure that I would always get a ticket because I deserve one more than anyone else" fairness doesn't even come into it.

 

Even if you could make the ballot entirely random and fair...

 

So you've made sure that no-one can double enter, that no-one can tilt the system by buying hundreds of tickets for their friends, would that make the festival different? I think it would. In an entirely "fair" system the demographic of attendees would be more random, basically anyone who on a whim pops their name in the draw has as much chance as a regular festival goer. And I speak to a lot of people who say "I would like to 'do' Glastonbury at some point". Making it this easy would probably mean at least double (and probably more like quadruple) the number of punters in the draw. It's not hard to see that such a shift in applicants would significantly alter the demographic of the festival. I think it would kill the festival, firstly as we know it and secondly it would actually ultimately make the experience of attending the festival poorer and therefore threaten the continued existence of the Festival.

Edited October 7, 2015 by Rumblestripe

[robalotalob]

Not everyone has the benefit of trying for tickets in groups. None of my friends are interested in going any more.

The thing about people wanting to 'do' Glastonbury is the inherent problem. Mummy and Daddy forking out for them to 'do' festivals, their gap yaaa etc.

Maybe I'll just wait until festivals are no longer fashionable. Or maybe it's the universe telling me that at 40 I'm too old and Glastonbury is now a young people's game requiring big groups and fast internet connections.

[ivan]

As it always seems easier to get tickets in the resales than in October I do think far too many people buy them in October knowing they have until March to decide whether to attend or not.

 

I think if people had to pay the full price in October demand would drop considerably.

[jackarmy]

As it always seems easier to get tickets in the resales than in October I do think far too many people buy them in October knowing they have until March to decide whether to attend or not.

 

I think if people had to pay the full price in October demand would drop considerably.

 

But GFL want to sell these tickets, whilst at the same time not only catering to those who can afford to shell out the full ticket price in October without a single act being announced.

 

I think this is the best way of selling the tickets. I remember when I thought it should be done by ballot, it was in October 2012, after I missed out on the main sale...

[robalotalob]

As it always seems easier to get tickets in the resales than in October I do think far too many people buy them in October knowing they have until March to decide whether to attend or not.

 

I think if people had to pay the full price in October demand would drop considerably.

I'll hold onto that notion Ivan!

[DeanoL]

As it should, a ballot can be rigged and favours people who can afford to risk paying 100 deposits on the off chance every ticket they put in the raffle come out.

 

If you can afford that, you can just pay £1000 for a premium glamping package with ticket included. Glastonbury has already given up on the idea of that sort of monetary fairness - the rich can get in regardless already, so a potential system doesn't need to combat that sort of behaviour.

 

 

By trying he means that this year he was a bit hungover so got up just after 9 but couldn't even get on the website so gave up. I questioned him further and he had his registration number but nobody else he was trying for, he said to me he would have txt them if he got through! Does he deserve to go more than you?

 

I would say I deserve to go more. But then, other people will say they've been going ten years so they deserve to go more, and so on. Once you accept a system that isn't random and has some bias in it, people are always going to moan it's unfair when they don't get tickets. Because it is unfair. That's not necessarily a bad thing.

 

 

And if you're saying that you can make a group of 6 to go into the ballot together, you'd either have to accept you'll have 1/6th of a chance (if you have one ballot between the group), or (if you're saying if one of your group gets in, they all do) massively disadvantage single people / duos who won't have as big a chance because they don't have 6 chances.

 

The current system isn't ideal but it really is the fairest.

 

Your comment about preparation is bizarre. Is it "unfair" that Usain Bolt trains as hard as he does? Should he be stripped of his medals because he prepares so much? The whole point about preparation being an advantage is that anyone can prepare, anyone can educate themselves about how the system works which means anyone can get a ticket.

 

The odds wouldn't work like that. You get one ballot between the group, an individual also gets one ballot. The chances for each are the same. Say there are 100,000 tickets, and 150,000 groups of sizes 1-50 apply. You are in a group of six, I register alone. First draw: what are your odds of getting a ticket? 1 in 150,000, exactly the same as mine. First group is drawn, it's a group of 4 people. Next draw, what are your odds of getting a ticket? 1 in 149,999, exactly the same as mine.

 

Now, if you all register individually, there is a much higher chance that one of you group will get in, but the chance for any given person in that group is the same.

 

Also worth noting that in the current system, a group of six with everyone trying already has three times the chances of tickets as a couple with both people trying.

 

And even if I trained as hard as Usain Bolt, I still wouldn't win the Olympics. Is that fair? Not everyone has time to do all the preparation work. And for some it's a lot more work than others, especially for people that just don't know technology. I imagine this forum would be amazed at how many people "try" for tickets by opening one browser window and letting it count down 20 seconds each time until it comes up sold out. Because that's basically what the page suggests you do.

 

[stuartbert two hats]

I agree but maybe they'd be legal issues with people paying for a festival where they have no clue what the lineup is without having the option to get a refund?

If that were the case, those issues would also have applied to this year, since the lineup wasn't out by deposit day for the last festival.

[TheParkAfterDark]

Actually I think you are right. 2007 was my first year back after a very long gap (1990!!), and I think it was set v low due to quick sale prior year. When did photo reg start?

Edit: I tried for tix in various years in interim, but never managed. Touch wood have not missed one since

I'm sure our group of 8 had to buy in pairs in 2007. Tickets sold out in roughly 1h 45 min and we all got them in the last 15 minutes!

[Room to sway]

DeanoL you're assuming in the current system that every member of a group will try to get tickets for their group, which isn't necessarily true (certainly wasn't in our case).

 

But I take your point on the odds in a ballot.

 

It might not be fair that you'll never win a medal at the Olympics, but that's not Usain's fault.

 

I feel happier rewarding people for effort (getting tickets) than just randomly picking people.

[DeanoL]

DeanoL you're assuming in the current system that every member of a group will try to get tickets for their group, which isn't necessarily true (certainly wasn't in our case).

 

But I take your point on the odds in a ballot.

 

It might not be fair that you'll never win a medal at the Olympics, but that's not Usain's fault.

 

I feel happier rewarding people for effort (getting tickets) than just randomly picking people.

 

But if you want to reward people for effort, and we're doing that honestly, doesn't that mean the people in your group that didn't try for tickets shouldn't get to go?

[Room to sway]

I didn't actually know they're weren't trying at the time in all honesty.

[michael eavis' beard]

I agree but maybe they'd be legal issues with people paying for a festival where they have no clue what the lineup is without having the option to get a refund?

 

You're not forcing people to buy a ticket.  It's up to them whether or not they buy one.  There'd be no legal issues at all.

[tweed1981]

 

 

And even if I trained as hard as Usain Bolt, I still wouldn't win the Olympics. Is that fair? Not everyone has time to do all the preparation work. And for some it's a lot more work than others, especially for people that just don't know technology. I imagine this forum would be amazed at how many people "try" for tickets by opening one browser window and letting it count down 20 seconds each time until it comes up sold out. Because that's basically what the page suggests you do.

 

I think a better analogy would be if you took the same exam as a person with an identical IQ to you, if they then spent ages revising every evening and you didn't bother, if they then got a better mark than you would that be unfair?

[DeanoL]

I didn't actually know they're weren't trying at the time in all honesty.

 

Wasn't having a go, I imagine most of us on here are the people in our groups that make the most effort. On an effort basis, I'd say everyone on here deserves to go. A lot of the friends we all got tickets for? Not so much

 

I think a better analogy would be if you took the same exam as a person with an identical IQ to you, if they then spent ages revising every evening and you didn't bother, if they then got a better mark than you would that be unfair?

 

It might be. "Free time" isn't a luxury we all have in the same amount. A single mother of three working two jobs isn't going to have as much time as a student to do that revision.