ticket tips and tricks Glastonbury 2024 resales

[neil93]

20 hours ago, Sorcha17 said:

Is the national express coach a lot more expensive than the seetickets coach? thinking of coming from Edinburgh but can't afford to put £200 down in 2 Thursdays so was going to look at the other coach options.

I was £189.00 from Glasgow with National express this year, likely to be closer to £200.00 this year. There was a cheaper option but it was an extra hour and involved changing, which I suspect would be very easy to miss given how much I slept on the way home.

[leath02]

14 minutes ago, harryy said:

Maybe answered somewhere in the 50 pages but when on the booking holding page, how quick do we spam f5? 

max amount of refreshes you can do is 60 inside a minute 

so once a second

[moogster]

47 minutes ago, gfa said:

Over 60 times a minute gets you locked out, so as close to that as possible. The page generally won't even load in less than a second so just as soon as it loads refresh again really 🙂 good luck!

That's a very good point, and why if I do auto refresh I prefer to do different machines/browsers at 2 or 2.5 seconds. Otherwise you don't even see the result. Or does anyone with superfast internet actually manages?

[CJB]

What’s the general consensus for using auto refresh to get tickets? I have considered it in the past but have also heard that the festival can cancel any booking if they detect any kind of multi hit software. Does it just come down to taking the risk? 

[TheFullShaboo]

1 hour ago, gfa said:

Over 60 times a minute gets you locked out, so as close to that as possible. The page generally won't even load in less than a second so just as soon as it loads refresh again really 🙂 good luck!

I can never seem to find a definitive answer on this, but is it 60 times per minute, per; browser? Per device? Per Wi-Fi connection? Per household Wi-Fi?

Apologies for the lack of technical terminology
 

Edited October 19, 2022 by TheFullShaboo

[p.pete]

1 minute ago, TheFullShaboo said:

I can never seem to find a definitive answer on this, but is it 60 times per minute, per; browser? Per device? Per Wi-Fi connection? Per household Wi-Fi?

Apologies for the lack of technical terminology
 

Per wi-fi connection, which is the same as per household wifi.  If you have a phone on 4G then that comes out of a different budget of 60.  

What I'm unsure of is that it takes forever for the page to load - and mostly doesn't load at all - on ticket day.  Does it make a difference/count if you're refreshing on a load that was failing anyway?

[leath02]

2 minutes ago, p.pete said:

Per wi-fi connection, which is the same as per household wifi.  If you have a phone on 4G then that comes out of a different budget of 60.  

What I'm unsure of is that it takes forever for the page to load - and mostly doesn't load at all - on ticket day.  Does it make a difference/count if you're refreshing on a load that was failing anyway?

Believe it's per IP address no? 

[gfa]

3 minutes ago, leath02 said:

Believe it's per IP address no? 

Household wifi = ip address

[TheFullShaboo]

3 minutes ago, p.pete said:

Per wi-fi connection, which is the same as per household wifi.  If you have a phone on 4G then that comes out of a different budget of 60.  

What I'm unsure of is that it takes forever for the page to load - and mostly doesn't load at all - on ticket day.  Does it make a difference/count if you're refreshing on a load that was failing anyway?

I’m sure that I tried this last year with 2 different browsers, both with auto refresh, one going at a rate quicker than 1 a second, the other less. Only the browser that triggered the 1 second barrier brought up the dreaded “you are held” page, the other was still continuing to refresh and remaining on the extras page…

This was all done prior to the sale by the way, so not sure if that would make any difference? 

[scatteredscreens]

3 minutes ago, leath02 said:

Believe it's per IP address no? 

In which case it's per household as it's likely your household will be sharing the IP address. Unless you've got different ISPs or VPNs on per device. 

[p.pete]

1 minute ago, leath02 said:

Believe it's per IP address no? 

maybe - is that at my end or at seetickets end?

i believe they have multiple (four?) servers that my page request can arrive at - so technically you have 4x60 tries per minute, but that generally will direct all of your traffic at the one point on their side (so unless you're doing something clever it'll just be 60).  Similarly does your router just has the one IP address?  You can expand that by using VPNs etc but that falls into the category of clever again, so I assume for most households it'll just be the one connection - thus don't all get together for ticket purchases in the same house!

[gfa]

38 minutes ago, p.pete said:

maybe - is that at my end or at seetickets end?

i believe they have multiple (four?) servers that my page request can arrive at - so technically you have 4x60 tries per minute, but that generally will direct all of your traffic at the one point on their side (so unless you're doing something clever it'll just be 60).  Similarly does your router just has the one IP address?  You can expand that by using VPNs etc but that falls into the category of clever again, so I assume for most households it'll just be the one connection - thus don't all get together for ticket purchases in the same house!

VPNs are the kind of thing that seetickets would straight up ban (touts/bots use that sort of thing)

Best bet is just to get as many different connections e.g. wifi, 4g, private mode browser etc and get 1 device on each

[stuie]

57 minutes ago, TheFullShaboo said:

I can never seem to find a definitive answer on this, but is it 60 times per minute, per; browser? Per device? Per Wi-Fi connection? Per household Wi-Fi?

Apologies for the lack of technical terminology
 

 

54 minutes ago, p.pete said:

Per wi-fi connection, which is the same as per household wifi.  If you have a phone on 4G then that comes out of a different budget of 60.  

What I'm unsure of is that it takes forever for the page to load - and mostly doesn't load at all - on ticket day.  Does it make a difference/count if you're refreshing on a load that was failing anyway?

 

 

It's not based on IP address.  I've just done a test, in my office where the whole computer network only has one external IP address.

1. Triggered the refresh rate limit on https://glastonbury.seetickets.com/content/extras by hitting F5 over and over while using Google Chrome and could only get the 'holding page'
2. Went to another PC also using Chrome and was able to view https://glastonbury.seetickets.com/content/extras on this PC
3. Tried the original computer using Edge and internet explorer and both browsers on the original PC were still able to view https://glastonbury.seetickets.com/content/extras

It's some kind of timed session cookie or something, not external IP address. 

[scatteredscreens]

2 minutes ago, stuie said:

 

 

 

It's not based on IP address.  I've just done a test, in my office where the whole computer network only has one external IP address.

1. Triggered the refresh rate limit on https://glastonbury.seetickets.com/content/extras by hitting F5 over and over while using Google Chrome and could only get the 'holding page'
2. Went to another PC also using Chrome and was able to view https://glastonbury.seetickets.com/content/extras on this PC
3. Tried the original computer using Edge and internet explorer and both browsers on the original PC were still able to view https://glastonbury.seetickets.com/content/extras

It's some kind of timed session cookie or something, not external IP address. 

Great detective work.

[parsonjack]

1 hour ago, CJB said:

What’s the general consensus for using auto refresh to get tickets? I have considered it in the past but have also heard that the festival can cancel any booking if they detect any kind of multi hit software. Does it just come down to taking the risk? 

Given that a human can easily F5 at 1/second (although it's probably too quick to allow the page to load....) it would be somewhat harsh if the festival cancelled bookings made against any attempts at that rate, so as long as your auto-refresh doesn't exceed that rate you should be fine. 

[moogster]

hmmm I'm now wondering if I can use the virtual machine I run some things on at work so that I have one extra IP address *off to investigate* ...... Urgh. Not gonna work. Need a word with helpdesk.

[p.pete]

2 hours ago, parsonjack said:

Given that a human can easily F5 at 1/second (although it's probably too quick to allow the page to load....) it would be somewhat harsh if the festival cancelled bookings made against any attempts at that rate, so as long as your auto-refresh doesn't exceed that rate you should be fine. 

No notion of them ever cancelling tickets, it's more what they've put in place to stop you getting to the ticket page if you go faster than 1/second - I guess they see that as a reasonable limit.

[p.pete]

2 hours ago, stuie said:

 

 

 

It's not based on IP address.  I've just done a test, in my office where the whole computer network only has one external IP address.

1. Triggered the refresh rate limit on https://glastonbury.seetickets.com/content/extras by hitting F5 over and over while using Google Chrome and could only get the 'holding page'
2. Went to another PC also using Chrome and was able to view https://glastonbury.seetickets.com/content/extras on this PC
3. Tried the original computer using Edge and internet explorer and both browsers on the original PC were still able to view https://glastonbury.seetickets.com/content/extras

It's some kind of timed session cookie or something, not external IP address. 

Interesting, that might mean some of the stuff I thought is wrong.  I know company network setup is likely to be a lot more complex than our home internet connections and lots of funny stuff happens with IP addresses as there aren't enough of them for everyone to have their own.

Would this mean that multiple computers / browsers all trying from the same home router actually isn't that big an issue?  (so long as any one doesn't go over the 60/minute...)

[t0paz]

If I set an auto-refresher to hammer that page on my laptop I get the queue screen as expected. I also get it on other browsers / incognito tabs on that laptop as well. Other devices on the same network (and same external IP) are unaffected.

The ‘ban’ doesn’t last long though. Let the queue refresh naturally and you can go again.

No way of knowing if it will work the same way come ticket day of course!

[clarkete]

4 hours ago, parsonjack said:

Given that a human can easily F5 at 1/second (although it's probably too quick to allow the page to load....) it would be somewhat harsh if the festival cancelled bookings made against any attempts at that rate, so as long as your auto-refresh doesn't exceed that rate you should be fine. 

Do I recall correctly that you have previously done some testing and found an excess level of sessions and machines? 

I know I've previously over emphasised your technical ownership of this area 😉

[parsonjack]

52 minutes ago, clarkete said:

Do I recall correctly that you have previously done some testing and found an excess level of sessions and machines? 

I know I've previously over emphasised your technical ownership of this area 😉

Yes I've carried out similar tests to @stuie in the past and determined similarly that there is a refresh rate limit that should be avoided, hypothesising at the time that it was IP based, and that there could be risks where shared connections were used on a single IP.  

@stuie's tests do seem to suggest now that the 'block' is not solely IP based, which would be sensible so as not to disadvantage customers on shared connections, and it's therefore possible that See's system inspects requests at a lower level than IP, MAC address that is, to ensure the 'block' is device based rather than solely IP.

The only fly in the ointment here is that there has been evidence in the past, admittedly some time back, of multiple devices all on the same connection getting a booking page once one device does. This, if the case and not just anecdotal, *could* disprove the above.

The crux of all this is that we don't know for sure how it all works, and load balancing could add an extra level of complexity to boot.  We have some good ideas, but ultimately unless we can get a See tech to give us a PowerPoint we remain, somewhat, in the dark.

Whilst we can't be fully certain my advice would therefore be to use 1 browser, 1 tab, 1 device, with multiple devices using separate connections eg 1 x WiFi, 1 x 4G etc.  All devices then stay within the 1/second F5 rate. This would minimise any risk of 'blocking' and simultaneously maximise request attempts and therefore chance.

 

[Suprefan]

I thnk the trick this time is to just have more money than other folks and youre good.

[parsonjack]

3 hours ago, t0paz said:

The ‘ban’ doesn’t last long though. Let the queue refresh naturally and you can go again.

Yes.....once the refresh rate falls below 60/minute it's good to go.....that could be just a few seconds later therefore, but it's nigh impossible to determine when so waiting for auto refresh is safer.

[clarkete]

4 hours ago, parsonjack said:

Yes I've carried out similar tests to @stuie in the past and determined similarly that there is a refresh rate limit that should be avoided, hypothesising at the time that it was IP based, and that there could be risks where shared connections were used on a single IP.  

@stuie's tests do seem to suggest now that the 'block' is not solely IP based, which would be sensible so as not to disadvantage customers on shared connections, and it's therefore possible that See's system inspects requests at a lower level than IP, MAC address that is, to ensure the 'block' is device based rather than solely IP.

The only fly in the ointment here is that there has been evidence in the past, admittedly some time back, of multiple devices all on the same connection getting a booking page once one device does. This, if the case and not just anecdotal, *could* disprove the above.

The crux of all this is that we don't know for sure how it all works, and load balancing could add an extra level of complexity to boot.  We have some good ideas, but ultimately unless we can get a See tech to give us a PowerPoint we remain, somewhat, in the dark.

Whilst we can't be fully certain my advice would therefore be to use 1 browser, 1 tab, 1 device, with multiple devices using separate connections eg 1 x WiFi, 1 x 4G etc.  All devices then stay within the 1/second F5 rate. This would minimise any risk of 'blocking' and simultaneously maximise request attempts and therefore chance.

 

Really appreciate the comprehensive response, thanks. 

[rgill3]

Been quite cocky and confident I'll smash the sale - until last night.

Had a ticket sale nightmare where I went to the farm (for some reason) to take part in the sale, didn't log on until 9:02, got through then couldn't find the spreadsheet with everyone's details or even my own personal details. The however minutes allocated to enter the details ran out and I woke up and nearly pissed myself.

Hope everyone's having a great Thursday so far.