The Future of Glastonbury

[Skip997]

3 minutes ago, Suprefan said:

 

Fully agree with this post.

[Xeph1995]

I don't think think the festival needs a pay monthly scheme tbf, it has a deposit and you have to rest of the year to save up between the full payment date which is basically the same thing anyway. 

It's also always going to sell out no matter the cost, people will pay because they love it so much. 

Edited June 29, 2023 by Xeph1995

[efcfanwirral]

23 minutes ago, Suprefan said:

And there still needs to be something for last minute cancellations. Fair exchange and sucH. A waitlist.

Absolutely does need to be, but I would say that because I'd keep the week free and make sure I can get myself down there, as would many others on here. Probably doesn't help with getting that new demographic in though.

Tickets do go un-used too - our friend decided they just didn't fancy it, so went on holiday with their family instead. I got the reasons but I would've loved to see it go back into the pot. Made me think of if I didn't get a ticket, and at that point (3 weeks before the festival) would still be more than happy to buy one. I also think the pool who could genuinely do it at that short notice isn't that large, so those of us on here would have a final chance, nobody loses money etc

A See managed waitlist where you don't nominate the person, but the next in line gets it. Not much different from the Seetickets exchange I sold some Blur tickets I accidentally booked on

Edited June 29, 2023 by efcfanwirral

[MEGABOWL]

21 minutes ago, Suprefan said:

You mean like Coachella? Be in the now with sprinkles of the past? If only. Michael's influence will always be there. As we've said so many times theyre running out of the mum and dad lawn chair artist headliners so thatll take care of itself. Its just a matter of how the Eavii go forward with having to book all 3 headliners being under the age of 35 year in and year out. You can only do Coldplay or Foo Fighters so many other times too. The thing is at this time with the system in place its always going to lean older with the crowd anyway.its a legacy festival in terms of passing down the tradition of being taken as a kid for years with your parents til youre old enough and then you go on your own. 2 generations of that have passed now.  Dont know how you remove that aspect of it even with the music side being waaaay younger if the old folk will just hang out in other places of the fest cause they can enjoy themselves one way or a other

 

The one thing they could do if they wanted was to let you put your £50 deposit in on T day and then theres a payment plan for 6 months that follows. They payments would be made before the tax year ends and such so they keep their exception or whatever it is with financials. I think having to make people in the future fork over £300 in one shot could be a challenge. Some people arent good at saving up. So if youre making everyone pay £50 a month then you have that in mind more. 
 

Would like it if they did try the tradtitional way just to see if they can analyze the shift in demographics When it came to the lineup. Most people will just pay their full fee in March cause they cant make other plans by then.

 

And there still needs to be something for last minute cancellations. Fair exchange and sucH. A waitlist.

Agree on a need for younger headliners. Older people (me essentially) can still be catered for elsewhere, there’s plenty of stages. With that I would recommend more variety in music elsewhere and after dark too-it doesn’t have to all be Dance music.

Totally agree on the deposit scheme. Other fears that attract younger crowds do it-Id have jumped at that when I was in my twenties.

And again I agree on cancellations. They need something like a ‘linked group’ of up to, say, 20 Accounts. All the linking has to be done by T-Day. That would stop the worry that changing the ticket system to remove the payment step gives increased chance to influencers and those with many helpers. They could then allow ticket transfer within that predefined group.

[MEGABOWL]

5 hours ago, Hags said:

Given I assume that glamping demand outstrips supply at the minute, this makes a tonne of sense (if it’s possible!). 

win win for everyone involved! 

Depends how it’s done. An increase in overpriced glamping alone would be uncomfortable. But if it’s some more glamping along with a big increase in the simple pre-erected tents it absolutely should happen. 
 

The demand is clearly there so take the money off those who want the extra convenience. It frees up space inside the festival and eases pressure on the camping fields for those who can’t/won’t pay more as well as allowing more space for entertainment. 
 

I would be tempted to tie it in with a big increase in Coach tickets though. It maximises the Environmental benefit, lots of people bringing less stuff and leaving their cars behind. They could even sell packages or give priority to those with Thursday Coach tickets.

[steviewevie]

No at any glamping ffs.

[CaledonianGonzo]

Younger headliners is it? Youngest ever headliner was only just last year.

[steviewevie]

[mungo57]

3 hours ago, Suprefan said:

Hey, some of us travelling to the fest from another continent like to walk in there without needed to carry more sh*t than needed. Sorry if we are willing to pay for it. Doesnt mean we're rich. Thank you for assuming we're elitists.

That’s not what I said is it though?

more glamping = more rich people by default as they’re the ones that primarily buy those tickets. That will impact on the general populus as they’ll lose general camping to keep the capacity at the reasonable level.

no issue with foreigners doing it, if that’s what you want to do, you can afford it and you do it in the already plentiful options available to you.

but right now there are at least 3/4 that I can think of dedicated glamping sites in or next to the festival. That’s plenty. Why should I as a general punter suffer markedly decreased odds of getting a ticket so that your average person that can afford to glamp can do?

it’s a ridiculous idea entirely.

Edited June 29, 2023 by mungo57

[Jose Pose]

GA ticket numbers have no correlation to the offsite camping options available. They’re completely independent of each other.

[mungo57]

6 hours ago, Hags said:

Yeah but we're talking about the options available after people have bought tickets, the tickets presumably would't come with the obligation to 'glamp'. The same number of wealthy people would still have tickets, they'd just be camping off site! 

Still, you increase the glamping side and decrease the general side - this will mean that X proportion of people that buy tickets will HAVE to glamp as per of the terms and conditions. You can’t have a capacity of say 100k for arguments sake with a capacity of 10k for glamping and then let the 10k glamping slide and let all 110k into the general camping when there isn’t enough room. Not workable.

7 hours ago, Skip997 said:

Not in my opinion.

It'll result in an increase of wealthier, more "middle class", older folk. Whereas what the festival needs is more lower income types and younger people.

Plus it paves the way to turning it into an arena event with all the nonsense that brings.

The second part of this would stop me going to Glastonbury altogether I think. That’s one of the special unique things about Glasto over other festivals.

3 hours ago, robith said:

in fairness, being able to afford transcontiental flights, a Glastonbury ticket and glamping at the fest is out of reach of what, like 95, 96% of the world's population?

What this person said.

3 hours ago, goldfishboy said:

in general i have no issue with people who want to glamp, but if it's taking space away from regular festivalgoers, then i am dead against it

Agreed 100%.

[mungo57]

1 minute ago, Jose Pose said:

GA ticket numbers have no correlation to the offsite camping options available. They’re completely independent of each other.

Unless you ‘add more venues’ and ‘increase glamping to pay for it’. You’d have to remove some of the general camping. Where are they going to put those new venues? The moon? Free shuttle rocket to/from leaving PGA once an hour on round trips?

[Jose Pose]

5 minutes ago, mungo57 said:

Unless you ‘add more venues’ and ‘increase glamping to pay for it’. You’d have to remove some of the general camping. Where are they going to put those new venues? The moon? Free shuttle rocket to/from leaving PGA once an hour on round trips?

What have offsite camping/glamping sites (I.e. stuff outside the fence, on private land that has nothing to do with the festival) got to do with any of that? 

Edited June 29, 2023 by Jose Pose

[Lizzim]

We went for the so called glamping (aka pre pitched) option of Sticklinch because we are old and apart from the campervan option the only way we could physically do it.  

I was surprised at how many younger folk chose this option, I expected a slightly older or overseas crowd.

Anyhow I agree that more pre pitched camping would skew the demographic to older and wealthier, which is not a good thing.

We are hanging up our boots now, this was our last Glastonbury I reckon.

[Skip997]

3 minutes ago, mungo57 said:

Unless you ‘add more venues’ and ‘increase glamping to pay for it’. You’d have to remove some of the general camping. Where are they going to put those new venues? The moon? Free shuttle rocket to/from leaving PGA once an hour on round trips?

Glamping is increasing year on year, I couldn't believe how many tents in rows (like a POW camp) I saw as I drove from Glastonbury to Red gate on the Saturday prior to the event.

General camping areas seem to have slightly decreased this year and some crew camping has been moved further from their place of work (e.g. Glade core crew) to accomodate larger arenas.

It's a slippery slope which will change the demographic, it's arguably already too white and middle class, and I've previuosly sugested lead to an arena event. Areas such as the Green Fields and T&C will be in danger, maybe even the likes of Greenpeace, after all why bother donating millions to charity.

We're still safe while Michael's alive, but he's no "spring chicken" and I'm not sure Emily can keep things the same.

[mungo57]

6 minutes ago, Jose Pose said:

What have offsite camping/glamping sites (I.e. stuff outside the fence, on private land that has nothing to do with the festival) got to do with any of that? 

You add capacity there using the funds to pay for more venues etc within the festival.

those extra venues take up space which means less people can use the general camping facilities.

 

not hard to understand. More expensive options, less general admission options.

[Jose Pose]

4 minutes ago, mungo57 said:

You add capacity there using the funds to pay for more venues etc within the festival.

those extra venues take up space which means less people can use the general camping facilities.

 

not hard to understand. More expensive options, less general admission options.

You’ve lost me. What pre-erected camping/glamping options are inside the super fence exactly? And the capacity of Glastonbury is currently fixed, so I don’t understand why you’re talking about adding venues? 

Edited June 29, 2023 by Jose Pose

[mungo57]

Just now, Jose Pose said:

You’ve lost me. What pre-erected camping/glamping options are inside the super fence exactly? And the capacity of Glastonbury is currently fixed? 

Tipi field is inside the fence

 

they do have a fixed capacity as far as I know, yes. By adding say 2000 extra glamping places they therefore have to remove the same number of general.

im going to stop engaging now as I feel I’ve explained myself well enough. If you can’t understand where I’m coming from that’s your problem, not mine.

 

[Jose Pose]

9 minutes ago, mungo57 said:

Tipi field is inside the fence

 

they do have a fixed capacity as far as I know, yes. By adding say 2000 extra glamping places they therefore have to remove the same number of general.

im going to stop engaging now as I feel I’ve explained myself well enough. If you can’t understand where I’m coming from that’s your problem, not mine.

 

Tipi field has been there for yonks, and adds to the iconography of the place, at the price they sell at them it helps to subsidise GA tickets anyway.

Worthy View and Stiklinch are offsite, they aren’t really even glamping anyway but again they help subsidise the GA ticket cost.

All other Glamping like Love Fields, Pop up Hotel, Windinglake, Camp Kerala are offsite privately run enterprises. Some of these get access to hospitality tickets to sell on to rich punters to keep them sweet (which helps everyone) but again this has no impact on space within the actual festival, and neither does the hospitality ticket allocation as that exists as it’s own entity regardless.

if the festival added 2000 glamping spaces inside the fence, then yes that would ever so slightly diminish public camping, but other than you cooking that up as a scenario, I don’t see anywhere where it’s suggested or stated that will happen? 

Edited June 29, 2023 by Jose Pose

[Neil]

10 hours ago, 09matthewsw said:

Yeah with summers clearly getting hotter each year the festival will need to adapt. We saw consistent temperatures above 35 in 2022 and the festival is not at all adapted to deal with these. Would be a health disaster. Granted that the end the of June isn’t generally the temperature peak for UK summers but even 30 would be unbearable. I think we’ll see adaptations to the site in future years. 

festival needs to adapt to the climate change, but (just heard this on the radio)  most people who die from heat die indoors in poorly ventilated rooms.

[Crazyfool01]

14 minutes ago, Jose Pose said:

You’ve lost me. What pre-erected camping/glamping options are inside the super fence exactly? And the capacity of Glastonbury is currently fixed, so I don’t understand why you’re talking about adding venues? 

my whole camping field got lost to hospitality this year .... the field just outside woodsies lower mead pushed us into another tighter camping area .... at some point that room is going to disappear and those that pay for the hospitality options will take more and more of the site .... understand the reasons why because of funds but hope its not the start of a slippery slope . Also talk of blue pre erected camping below the pier at some point too 

[stuie]

29 minutes ago, Jose Pose said:

What have offsite camping/glamping sites (I.e. stuff outside the fence, on private land that has nothing to do with the festival) got to do with any of that? 

This discussion started because someone said they’d heard on the grapevine that there will more glamping outside the fence to replace current general camping so they can add more venues. 

[Ayrshire Chris]

Everyone who buys a GA ticket has the option to camp on site in the traditional way. It’s up to the individual if they want to opt for, and pay for, off site camping.  The WV, Sticklinch option must increase the revenue for the festival and keep GA costs down. They arnt glamping, just a basic pre erected tent. 
I did notice the amount of hospitality, there seemed to be more this year.  Walking to gate A from Woodsies you passed a large area of it. I reckon the festival is always looking for revenue streams to keep the basic ticket costs down. 

Edited June 29, 2023 by Ayrshire Chris

[Jose Pose]

13 minutes ago, stuie said:

This discussion started because someone said they’d heard on the grapevine that there will more glamping outside the fence to replace current general camping so they can add more venues. 

So presumably more worthy view type accommodation, that isn’t really glamping though it’s just pre erected tents? They presumably aren’t going to have a situation where people have no place to put a tent though? Has that ever happened and are they ever likely to let that happen?

They'll know the demand for things like Worthy View, and they’ll know how much take up there is likely to be and obviously anyone buying one of these pre-erected tents is one less person camping anyway. The Worthy View stuff is probably a more efficient use of space the way it’s laid out as well, compared to people taking huge 8 man tents for less people and putting gazebos on the middle (I appreciate not everyone does that) So it won’t be very hard to judge that what is being taken away is effectively being offset by this.

Edited June 29, 2023 by Jose Pose

[giantkatestacks]

32 minutes ago, Skip997 said:

Glamping is increasing year on year, I couldn't believe how many tents in rows (like a POW camp) I saw as I drove from Glastonbury to Red gate on the Saturday prior to the event.

General camping areas seem to have slightly decreased this year and some crew camping has been moved further from their place of work (e.g. Glade core crew) to accomodate larger arenas.

It's a slippery slope which will change the demographic, it's arguably already too white and middle class, and I've previuosly sugested lead to an arena event. Areas such as the Green Fields and T&C will be in danger, maybe even the likes of Greenpeace, after all why bother donating millions to charity.

We're still safe while Michael's alive, but he's no "spring chicken" and I'm not sure Emily can keep things the same.

I actually think prepitched options have the potential to increase racial diversity rather than lessen it. One of my friends main issues is that camping is totally unfamiliar and hideous sounding to them.