Areas you would cut to save money

[Hugh Jass II]

There’s an interesting conversation in the tickets thread that probably deserves spinning off into its own thread to prevent the other one being derailed further.

With costs potentially rising what areas would you sacrifice to save money if you were running the show?

Personally I’m against any cuts as it would be the start of a slippery slope towards a greatly watered down experience, but this is just a hypothetical discussion so here goes:

Arcadia - it’s had it’s day and is a crowd control nightmare.

Pilton Palais/Cineramageddon - Do they justify the real estate they take up?

Theatre and Circus - Wouldn’t do away with it altogether, but could it be scaled back a bit?

[Crazyfool01]

wouldn't cut any .... things start getting cut then so does customer experience and then the numbers of attendees drops its a slippery slope ..... remove an area and it leads to that demographic going to an alternative type festival . The beauty of the festival is that it serves so many different requirements 

[Hugh Jass II]

1 minute ago, Crazyfool01 said:

wouldn't cut any .... things start getting cut then so does customer experience and then the numbers of attendees drops its a slippery slope ..... remove an area and it leads to that demographic going to an alternative type festival . The beauty of the festival is that it serves so many different requirements 

Yes I’d be against cutting anything too, I said as much in the opening post.

This is a purely hypothetical “if I had to…” discussion.

[scatteredscreens]

8 minutes ago, Hugh Jass II said:

There’s an interesting conversation in the tickets thread that probably deserves spinning off into its own thread to prevent the other one being derailed further.

With costs potentially rising what areas would you sacrifice to save money if you were running the show?

Personally I’m against any cuts as it would be the start of a slippery slope towards a greatly watered down experience, but this is just a hypothetical discussion so here goes:

Arcadia - it’s had it’s day and is a crowd control nightmare.

Pilton Palais/Cineramageddon - Do they justify the real estate they take up?

Theatre and Circus - Wouldn’t do away with it altogether, but could it be scaled back a bit?

Just chipping in to say that Pilton Palais/Cineramageddon slap on Wednesday/Thursday when you're chilling out (or at least I am) but I don't bother when the main festival is on obviously.

Agreed though it's a slippery slope getting rid of stuff, what might not be much value for us there's a group of people who will adore it and that's part of the soul of glastonbury imo, the sub communities it fosters in the types of entertainment it offers.

[Skip997]

1 minute ago, scatteredscreens said:

Agreed though it's a slippery slope getting rid of stuff, what might not be much value for us there's a group of people who will adore it and that's part of the soul of glastonbury imo, the sub communities it fosters in the types of entertainment it offers.

Agree, there's areas I can't stand, but some fools love them so let them have them.

I'm serious in my want to have Shangri-La revamped. It's become stale and very cramped.

[dotdash79]

I would get rid of the pier, it looks great but doesn't add anything, takes up premium camping space and must cost a fortune to set up and take down.

I would also lose one of the theatre and circus tents.

 

However I would rather the festival didn't start cutting stuff (not without a replacement)

Edited September 27, 2022 by dotdash79

[Crazyfool01]

1 minute ago, Hugh Jass II said:

Yes I’d be against cutting anything too, I said as much in the opening post.

This is a purely hypothetical “if I had to…” discussion.

im struggling .... maybe cinemacarmageddon .... but dont think that would save much as the cars would already have been purchased ..... and its a bit of a hike and seems sort of outside the festival . Problem is once the festival have spent out the costs will be lower .... Pier and Arcadia the same .... Although I guess the arcadia project is back at square 1 so might not have had a significant spend yet 

[gfa]

37 minutes ago, Hugh Jass II said:

There’s an interesting conversation in the tickets thread that probably deserves spinning off into its own thread to prevent the other one being derailed further.

With costs potentially rising what areas would you sacrifice to save money if you were running the show?

Personally I’m against any cuts as it would be the start of a slippery slope towards a greatly watered down experience, but this is just a hypothetical discussion so here goes:

Arcadia - it’s had it’s day and is a crowd control nightmare.

Pilton Palais/Cineramageddon - Do they justify the real estate they take up?

Theatre and Circus - Wouldn’t do away with it altogether, but could it be scaled back a bit?

If Arcadia went the south east corner would be ridiculous (unless they moved the acts to a bigger wow tent or something

[gazzared]

Get rid of Bath West Showground to save on renting the place and all the security that it uses (their was loads), slim down silver hayes shit bits and move arcadie to within the silver hayes, move oxfam and festaff to arcadia site ( a little bit of tweaking to get enough space). Make the oxfam&festaff fields another camper van area to replace bath & west. Ive done some ruff measuremnts and the areas arent that much differnt. I think this idea could save alot of money and no need for all the crappy old fume buses running all day everyday .

 

Bath West - 67,000 square metres

Oxfam & Festaff including parking - 108,000 square metres

Arcadia - 64,000 square metres

Without parking at oxfam then oxfam would fit into the arcadia space, I know the downside would be that oxfam couldnt park right next to the site but When I did it I think I'd prefer to be within the festival.

 

 

Edited September 27, 2022 by gazzared

[Skip997]

1 minute ago, gfa said:

If Arcadia went the south east corner would be ridiculous (unless they moved the acts to a bigger wow tent or something

The SE corner is currently overcrowded. The original version of arcadia was where Block 9 currently is, they moved it to take pressure off the SE corner.

 

[gfa]

Just now, Skip997 said:

The SE corner is currently overcrowded. The original version of arcadia was where Block 9 currently is, they moved it to take pressure off the SE corner.

 

I know - i'm saying if they got rid of arcadia it would mean more people would go to the already rammed south east corner

[Matt42]

Haven’t read but I’m expecting most people are saying silver hayes. I don’t think it should be cut, and it was much cooler this year, but it feels like an area of the festival most people here do not spend their time.

[moogster]

It's quite hard without having an idea of where the money goes now. Let's say Pilton Palais must be super cheap for example.

Do we have any idea where the money goes? Infrastructure, security, artists, stages etc?

And you can probably ask for a cost reduction on some areas more than in some others. Like you can remove something from Avalon, as they did, but what are you going to remove from West Holts?

I personally can't choose. Not a big SH fan, but liked the old Gully/blues and now the Lonely hearts. Don't like SE corner now but have fond memory of the old set up with the alleys and all.

I do find it a bit sad to see sometimes the amount of people INSIDE the tent during the day at Acoustic... Maybe those artists should be on a smaller stage and everyone would enjoy it more. I mean Greenpeace can be great atmostphere wise even with a small audience.

[Crazyfool01]

17 minutes ago, gazzared said:

Get rid of Bath West Showground to save on renting the place and all the security that it uses (their was loads), slim down silver hayes shit bits and move arcadie to within the silver hayes, move oxfam and festaff to arcadia site ( a little bit of tweaking to get enough space). Make the oxfam&festaff fields another camper van area to replace bath & west. Ive done some ruff measuremnts and the areas arent that much differnt. I think this idea could save alot of money and no need for all the crappy old fume buses running all day everyday .

 

Bath West - 67,000 square metres

Oxfam & Festaff including parking - 108,000 square metres

Arcadia - 64,000 square metres

Without parking at oxfam then oxfam would fit into the arcadia space, I know the downside would be that oxfam couldnt park right next to the site but When I did it I think I'd prefer to be within the festival.

 

 

A+ for homework 

[MEGATRONICMEATWAGON]

I don't know how big the affect would be on the festival, but wouldn't one easier way of cutting costs would be to simply tell each stage/venue/tent to cut one performance from their schedule per day whether it meant starting an hour later or finishing an hour earlier in the evening?

Would it really matter if places that finish at 6am finish at 5? And if they spread out some of the bands out over the day and had 8 performers at the JP instead of 9, would change much?

I don't know if that would even save that much money, but for a one off festival, and then return to normal in 2024?

Edited September 27, 2022 by MEGATRONICMEATWAGON

[Guy Incognito]

1 hour ago, Hugh Jass II said:

Theatre and Circus - Wouldn’t do away with it altogether, but could it be scaled back a bit?

Terrible take. Best bit of the festival. 

I think taking away or scaling back one of the most popular and enjoyable non-music based parts of the festival in order to save money would be a huge mistake.

 

 

[maelzoid]

I'd actually cut back on the number of acts they get. I think they should set it up where a lot more of the lower and middle-tier acts are playing more than once over the weekend and on different stages. I miss so much due to clashes anyway and this would solve that, bring costs down without impacting the amount of entertainment, and also go some way to reducing the number of people on site,

[Ayrshire Chris]

1 hour ago, Hugh Jass II said:

Yes I’d be against cutting anything too, I said as much in the opening post.

This is a purely hypothetical “if I had to…” discussion.

Exceptionally difficult question to answer. What might have no appeal to one person will certainly be the must go to of someone else. Maybe the pier but the cash has already been spent on its prefabricated structure.  I’ve never ventured near Cinema Armageddon and don’t know if it would be missed. Every time I think of cutting back something there’s a valid counter argument to retain it. You cant remove any major field or stage without upsetting a part of the wide demographic of the festival goers. 
 

of course a lot of cash is spent setting up the infrastructure of the five day festival. So why not make more use of it and have two festivals a week or so apart and you can only get a ticket for one of them😉😊. And before I’m shot down, I’m not being serious! 

Edited September 27, 2022 by Ayrshire Chris

[Supernintendo Chalmers]

San Remo. I would have said Silver Hayes until this year but it was much better. That whole area from San Remo to the entry to Silver Hayes feels like dead space since they shifted John Peel up the hill. Maybe increase the camping space there, if possible? 

Cineramegeddon has also maybe had its day and it's quite out of the way. Again, increase the surrounding camping space instead. 

Still not sure about Glastonbury-on-Sea. Does it add anything? 

Arcadia needs a total rethink, if not a cull, but that's been discussed ad nauseum. I was a big advocate for the Spider over the Crane, but it fell flat with me this year. 

[Crazyfool01]

2 minutes ago, Supernintendo Chalmers said:

San Remo. I would have said Silver Hayes until this year but it was much better. That whole area from San Remo to the entry to Silver Hayes feels like dead space since they shifted John Peel up the hill. Maybe increase the camping space there, if possible? 

Cineramegeddon has also maybe had its day and it's quite out of the way. Again, increase the surrounding camping space instead. 

Still not sure about Glastonbury-on-Sea. Does it add anything? 

Arcadia needs a total rethink, if not a cull, but that's been discussed ad nauseum. I was a big advocate for the Spider over the Crane, but it fell flat with me this year. 

Felt a bit like the spider got dumped there as a bit of a last minute fill in . Obviously they didn’t have time to sort a better plan … hopefully the start of the new plan will be next year and not the following one … 

[danmarks]

If anything it will be more pre paid camping? Or start charging for camping? I know it is in the price anyway but knock 50quid off for no camping cos youll have pre booked (cos where it is there's no other option) and camping is an 'extra' rather than a given. Like many other festivals already tbh

[Skip997]

1 minute ago, danmarks said:

 Like many other festivals already tbh

Are there festivals that charge extra for camping?

I'm not aware of any.

[danmarks]

Yeah loads of smaller ones theres options to buy without camping or camping is charged as extra. Hang on I'll find some but its a thing

[gfa]

1 hour ago, Matt42 said:

Haven’t read but I’m expecting most people are saying silver hayes. I don’t think it should be cut, and it was much cooler this year, but it feels like an area of the festival most people here do not spend their time.

Thing is it will take a while to get people to realise SH is decent now, good few years of solid bookings / vibes. Maybe get someone big there thursday ala williams green to draw people in so they return later in the weekend or something.

Could maybe move San Remo into WH too ? 

[gfa]

4 minutes ago, danmarks said:

Yeah loads of smaller ones theres options to buy without camping or camping is charged as extra. Hang on I'll find some but its a thing

Only like Victorious or Tramlines which are in city centres ... taking away camping would be a complete pisstake.

Charging people to camp in better spots though would probably open up a decent revenue stream (or like 1hr early bird tickets). Cannot see either happening though.

Edited September 27, 2022 by gfa