Glamping...how many

[Sawdusty surfer]

OH, my lovely converted Bedford removals lorry, red with white roof, top left in pic

[Superscally]

20 hours ago, DeanoL said:

That's really not who is using glamping. The instagram-tastic bucket listers are young people, mostly on limited income, generally found in regular camping. The glampers are old-timers in their 40s and 50s who can't hack camping anymore but have large disposable incomes.

The idea that dropping the glamping would lead to less instagrammers and more "proper glasto goers" is entirely backwards. It would lead to a significantly higher number of young, physically fit people. Now ask yourself how many people that fit into that bracket give you the "vibe of what Glastonbury should be" these days.

Not at all. People who don't want to camp normally because it's "skanky" are the issue. There are more than enough accessible camping spots onsite. There is an attitude difference when it comes to convenience. There is. Camping together and slumming it enhances the community sense. Always has, always will. If you haven't noticed the increasing c**ntiness of a significant percentage of attendees, then I don't know where you've been looking 😄. Fortunately there are enough sound people to still make it worth it. The inexorable slide towards it being another Coachella is well underway though.

I'm not bagging out everyone who chooses other options, by the way, I'm saying the availability of them us a symptom of the above. Fully understand people wanting to take the easy life, but saying people COULDN'T attend if those options didn't exist isn't true. Wouldn't perhaps, but thats very different. I've attended with enough people with mobility issues in normal and accessible campsites to know it's entirely possible to have an incredible time and not miss out.

Edited November 10, 2023 by Superscally

[Superscally]

3 hours ago, Johnnyseven said:

And there was me thinking the vibe of Glastonbury was inclusivity.

It is. See point above. Glasto wasn't exclusive of people before these options existed.

[Superscally]

...and another thing. The demographic on this site is VERY different to the wider world view of Glasto and likely a lot of the newer attendees from all ages. I'd imagine a very high percentage, 90% of people here would be awesome and fully get the festival and how to behave and treat others. Unfortunately I'd say there is a lot less of that than there used to be, so yes, I'm wailing into the wind, harking for people to be nicer so don't take offence. My written tone, as stated before appears very different to the way I'd be saying this in a pub, hence this.

[DeanoL]

10 hours ago, Superscally said:

Not at all. People who don't want to camp normally because it's "skanky" are the issue. There are more than enough accessible camping spots onsite. There is an attitude difference when it comes to convenience. There is. Camping together and slumming it enhances the community sense. Always has, always will. If you haven't noticed the increasing c**ntiness of a significant percentage of attendees, then I don't know where you've been looking 😄. Fortunately there are enough sound people to still make it worth it. The inexorable slide towards it being another Coachella is well underway though.

I'm not bagging out everyone who chooses other options, by the way, I'm saying the availability of them us a symptom of the above. Fully understand people wanting to take the easy life, but saying people COULDN'T attend if those options didn't exist isn't true. Wouldn't perhaps, but thats very different. I've attended with enough people with mobility issues in normal and accessible campsites to know it's entirely possible to have an incredible time and not miss out.

Oh yeah. People could attend and just be in constant pain all the time. They just choose not to.

[stuie]

10 hours ago, Superscally said:

Not at all. People who don't want to camp normally because it's "skanky" are the issue. There are more than enough accessible camping spots onsite. There is an attitude difference when it comes to convenience. There is. Camping together and slumming it enhances the community sense. Always has, always will. If you haven't noticed the increasing c**ntiness of a significant percentage of attendees, then I don't know where you've been looking 😄. Fortunately there are enough sound people to still make it worth it. The inexorable slide towards it being another Coachella is well underway though.

I'm not bagging out everyone who chooses other options, by the way, I'm saying the availability of them us a symptom of the above. Fully understand people wanting to take the easy life, but saying people COULDN'T attend if those options didn't exist isn't true. Wouldn't perhaps, but thats very different. I've attended with enough people with mobility issues in normal and accessible campsites to know it's entirely possible to have an incredible time and not miss out.

I think the idea that glamping sites house the 'increasingly c**ty percentage of attendees' is anecdotal at best and way off the mark.  These additional external camps have mixtures of people and they have a community sense of their own, they're just a bit more comfortable. 

The only c**ty people I can across this year were a group of homophobic twat bags camped on Pennards. They must be sound because they're in it with the people, camping together and slumming it, right? 

 

[DeanoL]

10 hours ago, Superscally said:

...and another thing. The demographic on this site is VERY different to the wider world view of Glasto and likely a lot of the newer attendees from all ages. I'd imagine a very high percentage, 90% of people here would be awesome and fully get the festival and how to behave and treat others. Unfortunately I'd say there is a lot less of that than there used to be, so yes, I'm wailing into the wind, harking for people to be nicer so don't take offence. My written tone, as stated before appears very different to the way I'd be saying this in a pub, hence this.

It doesn't work like that in reality though. It's fine to think you're going around the festival being openly really nice and lovely, and it's only secretly, behind the eyes, that you're judging people on if they're "sound" or if they're "c**ts" - but the reality is people can't hide that judgmentalism half as much as they like to think they do.

Yes, I've noticed a big increase in loutish, nasty aggressive behaviour from folks over the past ten years. But I've also noticed a similar increase in aloofness, closed-off-ness, cliques and such from those who are convinced the festival belongs to them, and that other people are doing it wrong. 

[CaledonianGonzo]

I got robbed at my first Glastonbury in 1995, whereas this year I lost a wallet full of cash, cards and various other things and it got handed into the lock-up entirely intact without even a finder's fee taken from the contents.

Ergo the quality of punters has improved exponentially in the intervening years.

[DeanoL]

10 hours ago, Superscally said:

Fully understand people wanting to take the easy life, but saying people COULDN'T attend if those options didn't exist isn't true. Wouldn't perhaps, but thats very different.

I dunno what to tell you mate. Regular parking can be a couple of miles from even the gates. If you don't know a single person who can't carry/push a tent and five days of clothes that far who isn't disabled then... yeah I dunno.

I'll give you that it's a continuum, rather than a binary. It gets harder and harder until you say "I just can't" and then at that point, you probably can if you just push a bit more. But people do reach the point they just physically can't do it.

Bringing your stuff in is always unpleasant, that's not a fun walk. Where it sits on the line of unpleasant, to actively painful, to completely exhausting, to literally unachievable will vary with age, fitness and health. And yes, some people are opting out and glamping instead at the "unpleasant" point - you're not wrong there - but how much does someone have to suffer before it's in the glastonbury "vibe" to opt out?

[Supernintendo Chalmers]

@Superscally genuine question, is it more the concept of "glamping" that you have an issue with? Or purely a perception of the type of person that chooses this option? 

[blutarsky]

Where do you stand on campervan folk @Superscally? I can (and have in the past) walk from the outer reaches of the car parks carrying a seriously heavy load, but I'd much prefer to drive up in my van, carry nothing, and have a double bed kitchen, toilet and shower on hand all weekend. Is that anti-vibez? 

[Skip997]

@Superscally is getting a bit of a battering here.

I'm largely in agreement with him.

[stuie]

7 minutes ago, Skip997 said:

@Superscally is getting a bit of a battering here.

I'm largely in agreement with him.

But you don't camp with the masses, slum it, carry your stuff in or "enhance the community sense" in general camping.

You are agreeing with him from the comfort of your van, away from all the people creating the vibe. 

[worthyraver]

7 minutes ago, Skip997 said:

@Superscally is getting a bit of a battering here.

No more Scally bashing, in fact I remember something similar happening before this years festival, all a bit Craig David 🙂

I am still waiting for more answers to the original question as that was interesting.

[Avalon_Fields]

Very, very approximately, excluding festival accommodation (Worthy View, Sticklinch, CV's) outside the fence there's 2,500 tents and other accommodation units set up (As per the satellite image).

So, there must be up to 10,000 people truly glamping in style, quite a significant proportion of the festival.

[stuie]

13 minutes ago, Avalon_Fields said:

Very, very approximately, excluding festival accommodation (Worthy View, Sticklinch, CV's) outside the fence there's 2,500 tents and other accommodation units set up (As per the satellite image).

So, there must be up to 10,000 people truly glamping in style, quite a significant proportion of the festival.

How have you got to that figure? I think it’s an overestimation. Just by counting? 

For example, this whole area is Oxfam and there are other crew camps outside.

 

[DeanoL]

I'd also add that I think a decent Fresh and Black tent is way more "glamp" than Worthy View or Sticklinch scout tents.

People are doing it so they don't have to carry their stuff or because they can't arrive Wednesday and want to get space together. *Maybe* for the showers but I'm not convinced the queues for those are any better than those on site at this point. Albeit you'll likely be nearer to them.

[gooner1990]

15 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

I'd also add that I think a decent Fresh and Black tent is way more "glamp" than Worthy View or Sticklinch scout tents.

People are doing it so they don't have to carry their stuff or because they can't arrive Wednesday and want to get space together. *Maybe* for the showers but I'm not convinced the queues for those are any better than those on site at this point. Albeit you'll likely be nearer to them.

Most of my friends go in WV or Sticklinch these days, one thing that puts me off with them is that they aren't 'fresh and black' .....

And for the 2nd point I broadly agree, most people I know who do pre-errected/glamping can't get there Tues night and sit outside the fence for 7 hours just to claim a decent pitch as they have other commitments/families etc. 

 Most come from an era where you didn't have to do it so now have decided that if the only way to avoid that is to pay for WV/Sticklinch then so be it....added bonus is that you don't have to put up a tent, no queues for either the car park or to get in and no massive hike, most of them are in a financial position that they can afford it too.

[Skip997]

19 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

I'd also add that I think a decent Fresh and Black tent is way more "glamp" than Worthy View or Sticklinch scout tents.

You've finally gone mad.

A fresh and black tent plonked in the middle of general camping is in no way "glamp"

[CaledonianGonzo]

I certainly buy the argument that an excess of glamping can skew the demographics in favour of the wealthy and so it shouldn't get out of hand.

But the Four Yorkshireman-style romanticising of the standard camping also whiffs a bit. Better to have a balance, which is what there is.

I'm also be interested in the theory that pre-pitched camping also opens up the festival more to demographics who don't traditionally go camping and so have no experience/ equipment / desire to do so.  Could be that the lokes of Worthy View and Tangerine Fields actually help to diversify the place a bit  

[DeanoL]

4 minutes ago, Skip997 said:

You've finally gone mad.

A fresh and black tent plonked in the middle of general camping is in no way "glamp"

No it's not. And yet it's better than much of what you get in WV and Sticklinch.

It's almost like those places aren't really glamping either, but that would be mad, because then who do we blame for ruining the vibe?

[Skip997]

6 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

It's almost like those places aren't really glamping either, but that would be mad, because then who do we blame for ruining the vibe?

Channel 4 and The BBC

[stuie]

3 minutes ago, Skip997 said:

Channel 4 and The BBC

Emily quotes the BBC partnership and the superfence as the two things that saved Glasto.  Without them, the vibe would be empty fields in the countryside vibe. 

[CaledonianGonzo]

2 minutes ago, stuie said:

Emily quotes the BBC partnership and the superfence as the two things that saved Glasto.  Without them, the vibe would be empty fields in the countryside vibe. 

But that would be better, no? We could recreate the days of the old free festivals.

I mean, they didn't happen exactly on Worthy Farm, but we could probably put up some big speakers in a van in a car park nearby and play some rave classics.

[DeanoL]

3 minutes ago, stuie said:

Emily quotes the BBC partnership and the superfence as the two things that saved Glasto.  Without them, the vibe would be empty fields in the countryside vibe. 

And it's the fence, and elimination of the free for all, the "edge" and provision of space by the central festival for groups like Skip's that has led to them still having space (extremely valuable space) within the festival for the past 25 years.

I mean, his group are based in Dragon, which was public camping in the early 00s, and they (rightly) got the festival to reserve that space for them because of the work they do. But when someone who literally sits in a campervan, on a field that was previously public camping and was then fenced off and general public excluded, talks about how they agree we should all be in it together in general camping... it's just bizarre.