Will the 2021 festival go ahead?

[zahidf]

By summer 2021, the vaccine should be available for all if they want it. If you chose not to have it, then I don't have much sympathy if you can't do things involving crowds

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

7 minutes ago, tigger123 said:

If that's the situation then they need to call the festival off. Simple as that

I’m not sure if it’s that black and white is it? What if that put the entire festivals future at risk? I’m certainly not young, but I wouldn’t want the festival to not go ahead simply because I happened to be in a group that had to be excluded. 

[kalifire]

7 minutes ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

I’m not sure if it’s that black and white is it?

Nothing is ever completely black and white, but in terms of public perception and political consequence (which as we all know is more important than things like 'ethics' to our elected representatives), thousands of pensioners dying vs Glastonbury being given the go-ahead is a no-brainer. The electorate at large wouldn't care about Glasto, but oldies dying before their time would literally cost votes, and therefore has consequence. The government care about perception and power - that's it.

Like others have said, this is now a matter of timing. If events unfold in favour of the government's drive to be seen to care and to win, we all benefit. It's messed up, but there it is.

Edited November 29, 2020 by kalifire

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

3 minutes ago, kalifire said:

Nothing is ever completely black and white, but in terms of public perception and political consequence (which as we all know is more important than things like 'ethics' to our elected representatives), thousands of pensioners dying vs Glastonbury being given the go-ahead is a no-brainer. The electorate at large wouldn't care about Glasto, but oldies dying before their time would literally cost votes, and therefore has consequence. The government care about perception and power - that's it.

Like others have said, this is now a matter of timing. If events unfold in favour of the government, we all benefit.

I meant in terms of the festival having to be cancelled if any younger people hadn’t had the vaccine couldn’t go. I was agreeing with you, I think? 

Edited November 29, 2020 by Deaf Nobby Burton

[shoptildrop]

As someone who is mid-40s and on the bigger size I don't think I'd be comfortable going to a festival without a jab (I know my other half defo doesn't want to as he's literally afraid he will die from this thing ), issue is and rightly so there is priority to the vulnerable 1st but I don't view myself as low risk so would be super nervous having to go back to a full office, gig and defo a festival without a vaccine...

With 2 of those things I can control whether I go, my biggest fear come April is going back to an office of 750 people with an similar sized DC adjacent to it before I can be vaccinated  

I'm not feeling confident for Bearded in May be I believe they have a 2nd later date provisional penned in that might be better

Edited November 29, 2020 by shoptildrop

[Sawdusty surfer]

1 hour ago, henry bear said:

That wasn’t the point I was making. I think to get into festivals/gigs next year we’ll need to show either a) we’ve had the jab, or b) we haven’t got the virus, by way of a test.

 

Was talking to a friend earlier about testing or immunization being mandatory for attending events.  I'm fine with that and so is he but he told me that dodgy test certificates are already available online.  I've just been reading this thread and messaged my friend about the dodgy tests.....he has just sent me this!!!

It could cause SO much damage.

Edited November 29, 2020 by Sawdusty Surfer

[shoptildrop]

9 minutes ago, Sawdusty Surfer said:

Was talking to a friend earlier about testing or immunization being mandatory for attending events.  I'm fine with that and do is he but he told me that dodgy test certificates are already available online.  I've just been reading this thread and messaged my friend about the dodgy tests.....he has just sent me this!!!

It could cause SO much damage.

This doesn't surprise me but I'm sure they talking about marking passports for travel so that should stop use of fake certs....

I fully expect these to be tried by folk as look how much legs the magna thing got 

[Sawdusty surfer]

1 minute ago, shoptildrop said:

This doesn't surprise me but I'm sure they talking about marking passports for travel so that should stop use of fake certs....

I fully expect these to be tried by folk as look how much legs the magna thing got 

I'd like to see a QR code on certificates so they could be instantly scanned and fakes would be immediately identified as the linked info wouldn't exist or wouldn't match the ID of the holder of the certificate. Easy enough to do.

[tigger123]

54 minutes ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

I’m not sure if it’s that black and white is it? What if that put the entire festivals future at risk? I’m certainly not young, but I wouldn’t want the festival to not go ahead simply because I happened to be in a group that had to be excluded. 

You're right, its definitely not black and white.

 

My point is that the young (unfortunately I can't class myself as one of them anymore!) have on the whole made a real effort during the pandemic to do the right thing (yes there are some that haven't but that is the case in all age groups) and they've had to sacrifice a lot for the greater good of the population. They've had their exams results screwed up, a lot of them have had to pay £9000 to basically be taught online at uni and in some cases have been locked into their halls. A lot of them work in hospitality too and so unemployment will be high amongst their age group. This is before you take into consideration their social lives. Clearly all of our social lives have been impacted but I think this has had far more impact on theirs. I would have been far less happy staying at home constantly if I was younger. To ensure compliance, it has been sold to them along the lines of 'don't kill your granny', as they know that the majority of them won't get that ill if they contract Covid. They are then told that not only are they back of the line for the vaccine, but they will not be able to attend Glastonbury as they haven't had an opportunity to have a vaccine, while all the older generations who they have sacrificed their way of life to protect can now attend the festival they were using as a point to focus on as an end point to all of this.

We're either all in it together or we're not. Given the young have mostly done their bit thus far, I think it would be deeply unfair for them then not to be able to attend Glasto, while all those they have been protecting can live their fully free lives. This just doesn't seem right to me and that's why I think it's unlikely Glasto would mandate a vaccine for entry if we were in a situation where not everyone had been vaccinated by then.

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

18 minutes ago, tigger123 said:

You're right, its definitely not black and white.

 

My point is that the young (unfortunately I can't class myself as one of them anymore!) have on the whole made a real effort during the pandemic to do the right thing (yes there are some that haven't but that is the case in all age groups) and they've had to sacrifice a lot for the greater good of the population. They've had their exams results screwed up, a lot of them have had to pay £9000 to basically be taught online at uni and in some cases have been locked into their halls. A lot of them work in hospitality too and so unemployment will be high amongst their age group. This is before you take into consideration their social lives. Clearly all of our social lives have been impacted but I think this has had far more impact on theirs. I would have been far less happy staying at home constantly if I was younger. To ensure compliance, it has been sold to them along the lines of 'don't kill your granny', as they know that the majority of them won't get that ill if they contract Covid. They are then told that not only are they back of the line for the vaccine, but they will not be able to attend Glastonbury as they haven't had an opportunity to have a vaccine, while all the older generations who they have sacrificed their way of life to protect can now attend the festival they were using as a point to focus on as an end point to all of this.

We're either all in it together or we're not. Given the young have mostly done their bit thus far, I think it would be deeply unfair for them then not to be able to attend Glasto, while all those they have been protecting can live their fully free lives. This just doesn't seem right to me and that's why I think it's unlikely Glasto would mandate a vaccine for entry if we were in a situation where not everyone had been vaccinated by then.

All good points, and to be honest I think it’s all moot anyway as it won’t come to this, but let’s just say for the festival to get insurance, one condition is that all attendees have to be vaccinated and it just so happens by the time the festival rolls around, let’s say under 25s or under 20s haven’t been vaccinated, so are blocked from attending.

The festival can go ahead if it wants, but it shouldn’t in support of this group?

So the festival itself, all the businesses associated with it (suppliers, food traders etc) all the acts, should suffer in solidarity for this one group of people.

But for what? Let’s not forget at the moment the festival is sold out, anybody who couldn’t attend because they hadn’t been given a vaccine could just be given a ticket for 2022 instead.

So there are two scenarios, the festival goes ahead and they can’t go, but get automatic attendance for 2022. Or the festival is cancelled because they can’t go, and obviously they still don’t get to go, everyone else suffers and they possibly get to go in 2022, assuming tickets are rolled over twice?

I get the principal, but I really don’t get what it actually achieves for anybody involved.

 

 

Edited November 29, 2020 by Deaf Nobby Burton

[shoptildrop]

33 minutes ago, Sawdusty Surfer said:

I'd like to see a QR code on certificates so they could be instantly scanned and fakes would be immediately identified as the linked info wouldn't exist or wouldn't match the ID of the holder of the certificate. Easy enough to do.

Maybe they can scan you arm for the Bill Gate microchip we're all going to receive  

[squirrelarmy]

2 minutes ago, shoptildrop said:

Maybe they can scan you arm for the Bill Gate microchip we're all going to receive  

Elon Musk is sorting out everyone with Neuralink

[xxialac]

1 hour ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

I’m not sure if it’s that black and white is it? What if that put the entire festivals future at risk? I’m certainly not young, but I wouldn’t want the festival to not go ahead simply because I happened to be in a group that had to be excluded. 

Totally agree with you.

"Well I can't enjoy myself so no one should get to enjoy themselves"

[xxialac]

43 minutes ago, tigger123 said:

You're right, its definitely not black and white.

 

My point is that the young (unfortunately I can't class myself as one of them anymore!) have on the whole made a real effort during the pandemic to do the right thing (yes there are some that haven't but that is the case in all age groups) and they've had to sacrifice a lot for the greater good of the population. They've had their exams results screwed up, a lot of them have had to pay £9000 to basically be taught online at uni and in some cases have been locked into their halls. A lot of them work in hospitality too and so unemployment will be high amongst their age group. This is before you take into consideration their social lives. Clearly all of our social lives have been impacted but I think this has had far more impact on theirs. I would have been far less happy staying at home constantly if I was younger. To ensure compliance, it has been sold to them along the lines of 'don't kill your granny', as they know that the majority of them won't get that ill if they contract Covid. They are then told that not only are they back of the line for the vaccine, but they will not be able to attend Glastonbury as they haven't had an opportunity to have a vaccine, while all the older generations who they have sacrificed their way of life to protect can now attend the festival they were using as a point to focus on as an end point to all of this.

We're either all in it together or we're not. Given the young have mostly done their bit thus far, I think it would be deeply unfair for them then not to be able to attend Glasto, while all those they have been protecting can live their fully free lives. This just doesn't seem right to me and that's why I think it's unlikely Glasto would mandate a vaccine for entry if we were in a situation where not everyone had been vaccinated by then.

I tell you what's not 'fair', it's for the over 70s to have been locked up most of the year when they should be enjoying their retirement, and to have to worry about being infected and dying when young people with the same illness shrug it off like it's nothing.

I think the only criteria for Glastonbury should be whatever makes most sense at the time for being able to run a safe event. Could be that it favours the young. Could be that it favours the old.

It's hardly discrimination if it's based on scientific advice, is it?

[Leyrulion]

34 minutes ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

let’s say under 25s or under 20s haven’t been vaccinated, so are blocked from attending.

We don't know exactly the demographics but even accounting for Glastonbury having an "older" market under 25s have to make up at least 50% of ticket holders. 

If they can't go the festival might be unviable. No guarantee that there would be enough demand from the over 30s to buy remaining tickets.

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

2 minutes ago, Leyrulion said:

We don't know exactly the demographics but even accounting for Glastonbury having an "older" market under 25s have to make up at least 50% of ticket holders. 

If they can't go the festival might be unviable. No guarantee that there would be enough demand from the over 30s to buy remaining tickets.

The tickets would be rolled over to 2022 For them and their tickets for 2021 snapped up in approximately 0.1 seconds in a resale. 

[Copperface]

Almost everything I have read and seen projects that everything is going to be on a 'vaccine plus' basis until approx 70% + of the population has received a vaccination - maybe more. It's not just about inoculating the 'vulnerable' and then letting it rip. It's a long term control strategy encompassing a vaccine, public health measures such as distancing and face coverings and outbreak management, testing, tracing and isolating. Even then, some people may not benefit from the jab, many will refuse it, transmission rates are unknown, how long it lasts is not known etc  etc. It's not just about deaths and hospital occupancy. 

The vast majority of scientific reports I have seen, in the UK, Europe and the US reckon on some measures lasting until Autumn 2021. Nobody is talking about a 'lockdown', but a graduated and steady and assessed lifting of measures to get to an area of balance -a happy medium if you like.

While the virus is spreading, you cannot simply 'shield the vulnerable'. Everything is linked and interconnected. Similarly, we cannot operate in isolation. If our borders are closed, then in no way is that 'back to normal'. Almost all the projections that I have seen from US sources, UK scientists and others clearly state this - even the UK govt is playing down expectations if you actually read what they put out. So by mid to late summer, much of what we remember to be 'normal' may have returned, but not convinced that large scale multiday mass gatherings are going to be part of that 'normal' until the latter part of the year.

[xxialac]

If nothing else, at the very least you'll be able to get mashed in Ibiza

[tigger123]

10 hours ago, xxialac said:

I tell you what's not 'fair', it's for the over 70s to have been locked up most of the year when they should be enjoying their retirement, and to have to worry about being infected and dying when young people with the same illness shrug it off like it's nothing.

I think the only criteria for Glastonbury should be whatever makes most sense at the time for being able to run a safe event. Could be that it favours the young. Could be that it favours the old.

It's hardly discrimination if it's based on scientific advice, is it?

You're correct, it's not fair that the virus hits the over 70s harder, but unfortunately this is something completely out of human control. Whether or not a vaccine is mandated for entry for Glastonbury is not in the viruses control, but entirely in human control.

By your argument (and clearly I don't believe this, more just trying to make a point), maybe they should just ban anyone from a vulnerable category from attending Glastonbury? Maybe they should just only allow the under 40s to attend? Given that the Oxford vaccine (which is the vaccine majority of people are going to get given the 100m on order) is only 70% effective, that leaves 30% of instances of people that are going to get infected by Covid. 

The under 40s account for less than 1% of deaths, so maybe in order to create a safer event, you should simply have pre-festival testing, knowing that anyone who slips through the net is super unlikely to give anyone in attendance a severe bout of covid given that everyone in attendance is under 40? I imagine there are more people under 40 than over 65 who attend Glastonbury, so in terms of financial security for the festival this approach would make more sense, as there'd be fewer tickets going back in the pot and therefore a lower risk of the event not being a sell out, especially as the young will as you say just 'shrug it off' and snap up the tickets put back in the pot. The younger age groups are also going to be attending Glastonbury for longer in future, so I imagine the festival organisers will be keen not to piss off their future audience.

Anyway, as I said I'm just trying to make a point. Regardless of this and as @Deaf Nobby Burton says, I think it's all moot anyway as it most likely won't come to this.

Edited November 30, 2020 by tigger123

[xxialac]

1 minute ago, tigger123 said:

You're correct, it's not fair that the vaccine hits the over 70s harder, but unfortunately this is something completely out of human control. Whether or not a vaccine is mandated for entry for Glastonbury is not in the viruses control, but entirely in human control.

By your argument (and clearly I don't believe this, more just trying to make a point), maybe they should just ban anyone from a vulnerable category from attending Glastonbury? Maybe they should just only allow the under 40s to attend? Given that the Oxford vaccine (which is the vaccine majority of people are going to get given the 100m on order) is only 70% effective, that leaves 30% of instances of people that are going to get infected by Covid. 

The under 40s account for less than 1% of deaths, so maybe in order to create a safer event, you should simply have pre-festival testing, knowing that anyone who slips through the net is super unlikely to give anyone in attendance a severe bout of covid given that everyone in attendance is under 40? I imagine there are more people under 40 than over 65 who attend Glastonbury, so in terms of financial security for the festival this approach would make more sense, as there'd be fewer tickets going back in the pot and therefore a lower risk of the event not being a sell out, especially as the young will as you say just 'shrug it off' and snap up the tickets put back in the pot. The younger age groups are also going to be attending Glastonbury for longer in future, so I imagine the festival organisers will be keen not to piss off their future audience.

Anyway, as I said I'm just trying to make a point. Regardless of this and as @Deaf Nobby Burton says, I think it's all moot anyway as it most likely won't come to this.

I agree with all you are saying other than not pissing off certain demographics which shouldn't come into it. Let the science lead the decisionmaking.

And I agree all this is moot as it won't come to pass that they have to exclude any age group.

FWIW it appears the safest route is to allow everyone to attend provided they can show proof of testing or vaccination.

By June I expect barely anyone under the age of 50 in the UK will have had their two jabs so the vast majority of attendees will have to rely on testing.

[FrankieX]

Glastonbury have donated two 2021 tickets and backstage passes to Stagehand, so they are presumably confident it will go ahead next year...

 

[jparx]

Yep the positive noise is getting much stronger. BST announcing this morning as well. It’s all looking good!

[SwedgeAntilles]

58 minutes ago, tigger123 said:

Anyway, as I said I'm just trying to make a point. Regardless of this and as @Deaf Nobby Burton says, I think it's all moot anyway as it most likely won't come to this.

Moot, you say?

[giantkatestacks]

I think we will be seeing a very different festival if we have to either a) been vaccinated or b) have a negative test as large sections of the non mainstream that organise the green/craft/Joe Rush's crew may not want to do either of those things but then I suppose we are back to what @Sawdusty Surfer posted.

[zahidf]

Frankly if any of the crew want to work next summer for ANY festival they'll need to be tested regularly/vaccinated