Worthy View Review

[Jules62]

Took the eldest lad in 2000 aged 9 and took the next in 2008, again aged 9 and didn't have or want the option of staying anywhere more "comfortable" or "safer " than the family camping inside the fence. Does seem like some are trying to convince themselves that it's unsafe somehow to stay with the masses,utter bollocks of course.

This is utter bollocks of course... I've not read anything from anyone saying they stay there because it's unsafe with the masses or didn't you read the whole thread, just decide to get in on the end?

[davidd]

In what way is it bollocks and what's rattled you ?

Yes i have read the whole thread and my view is that some are implying that it would be safer, cleaner or whatever to stay in WV or elsewhere. I turned up on the coach wednesday morning ahead of schedule,waited an hour or so for the gates to open and all our group had our tents up and were happy campers before 9:30 am.

I don't give a shite where you stay and reserve my right to have views different to yours.

[Jules62]

I was quoting you " utter bollocks of course" again I have not read anywhere that anyone is trying to convince themselves that's it's safer than staying with the masses - people are exercising their choice to stay where they want, just as you are exercising your right to have a different opinion

[Ommadawn]

God these forums! I love them and hate them at the same time. People are so quick to jump on each other if someone is doing something other than what they think is "the right and pure way to do Glasto" or if someone dare word something that's taken out of context. Chill out FFS (not the shit "super" group).

I went for my 7th year and as there were only 2 of us and we couldn't go till Thurs we decided to book WV. We were worried about it being too far out, too quiet, no atmosphere and couldn't have been more wrong.

Yes the hill's a bit steep (it's over in 5 minutes max and you're that ratted you don't even really feel it!), yes it's quieter and yes you have to be more planned for the day as you can't just nip back to the tent but that's the beauty of the lock ups, take everything you need for the day!

We found the whole thing brilliant. A quick walk in from the car to our squirt (yes, we were slightly pissed off as they weren't advertised) and we were settled in within an hour of parking. We hardly took anything with us as we're packing professionals after years of going. We had lovely people around us who all swapped stories any time we happened to be at the tents at the same time. People really helped us out too when we lost our car keys and therefore couldn't get to some of our stuff.

NONE of these people were snobs and weren't looking for glamping. They were all ages and nationalities which was brilliant. Everyone either wanted a change, had travelled from abroad or couldn't get there during the mental Wednesday rush to get a good spot and didn't want to be sniffing the bogs for the whole weekend from their pitch in a ditch.

I would definitely do it again, however I will be going with my little boy next time and it might be a bit far for him to trek every day so will look at other options which I'm sure will piss purists off for countless reasons. Maybe even the fact I'm taking a child will already have pissed them off!

Anyway, rant over.

We really enjoyed WV and it was nice to see a different side to the festival. The views were incredible, the tent sturdy and convenient and we didn't even use the showers as we didn't want to miss out on stuff queuing.

Would definitely recommend it.

 

This

[davidd]

I was quoting you " utter bollocks of course" again I have not read anywhere that anyone is trying to convince themselves that's it's safer than staying with the masses - people are exercising their choice to stay where they want, just as you are exercising your right to have a different opinion

Yes of course they are but you went on to ask if i'd bothered reading the thread and i clearly have. The OP states that WV is cleaner, less crowded and safer. I'll say that there are plenty of places that are equally safe ,spacious and (almost) as clean and don't cost a penny more than the cost of your ticket,plus whatever you choose to leave as a donation at the lockups- should you use them.

[DeanoL]

Plus I'm really weirded out how people keep bringing it back to WV - not many people have a problem with that, it's more the Tangerine Fields and LoveFields and Snoozebox etc end of the mental market who are nothing to do with the festival, they're purely taking advantage. WV was set up by the festival - only problem i have with it is it discouraging folk from actually trying joining the hoi polloi and realising we're nice

Mostly.

 

Yeah. I figure WV makes a profit - it's not costing them to run it the same as they charge. And since the festival doesn't make a profit, it means the WV folks are essentially subsidising the rest of us.

 

So I get the dislike, I get that it creates a certain us/them affect but, (and assuming you're not willing to have your favourite bit of the festival taken away to save the money that way), is the greater crime to have this disparity, or to up the ticket price for everyone, thus forcing an entire group of people out of the festival entirely, because they can no longer afford it?

 

[Pinhead]

Long time reader of these forums but had to make an account just for this post.

Camped in Pennards this year and I've got nothing but good things.

As for the campfires, there were a few 'villages' scattered around the field, formed by the Green Party who encouraged people to keep the area clean and tidy. They were fantastic, it was like a chill out circle, with campfire in the middle which was lit pretty much all night, every night, benches around it, some vine looking archways, etc. Everything was made with wood that the people could find on site before the festival opened. Everyone that contributed were extremely welcoming and nice and made the whole atmosphere incredible.

Sitting around the fire with 4/6 other people, chatting away in the early hours of Monday morning, overlooking the festival is probably my favourite moment of the whole festival.

Also, apparently after the festival, about with a circumference of about 7/8 tents the whole area was left litter free.

So, being nice and welcoming really does work in keeping the area free.

Seriously think these 'villages' should be introduced through out the campsites as they really do make a difference and add on to the Glasto atmosphere

I was camped at one of the 'villages' there this year and it was great. Tbh 2 years of camping in Pennards and it has been fine anyway. This years 'green communial spaces' experiment there went really well and may be rolled out to the other large campsites next year. Got lots of positive feedback from what was done.

[ThomThomDrum]

And since the festival doesn't make a profit, it means the WV folks are essentially subsidising the rest of us.

Well that's bollox.......

The festival makes no profit?

[russycarps]

This

Finally remembered your other password huh Carol.

[Smitho77]

Yeah. I figure WV makes a profit - it's not costing them to run it the same as they charge. And since the festival doesn't make a profit, it means the WV folks are essentially subsidising the rest of us.

 

So I get the dislike, I get that it creates a certain us/them affect but, (and assuming you're not willing to have your favourite bit of the festival taken away to save the money that way), is the greater crime to have this disparity, or to up the ticket price for everyone, thus forcing an entire group of people out of the festival entirely, because they can no longer afford it?

 

 

Eh?  From what some of the stewards told me, WV is not even situated on Eavis's land, and the local farmer is paid *very* handsomely not just for letting his fields but also for allowing those showers to be plugged into his water supply.  

[frostypaw]

or couldn't get there during the mental Wednesday rush to get a good spot and didn't want to be sniffing the bogs for the whole weekend from their pitch in a ditch.

I would definitely do it again, however I will be going with my little boy next time and it might be a bit far for him to trek every day so will look at other options which I'm sure will piss purists off for countless reasons. Maybe even the fact I'm taking a child will already have pissed them off!

Anyway, rant over.

We really enjoyed WV and it was nice to see a different side to the festival. The views were incredible, the tent sturdy and convenient and we didn't even use the showers as we didn't want to miss out on stuff queuing.

Would definitely recommend it.

Again the reason is entirely your own fallacy that you have to face horror queues to have some magic camping spot or it means smelling shit all weekend and being forced to camp next to the loos. 11 years, never happened here. Am I doing something magic?

And Christ knows how you could bear bringing a child into that!

No you going to WV didn't piss anyone off - but your attitude towards your fellow festival goers is clearly 'interesting'. That you wouldn't consider for a second bringing your kid without going raises questions - just what is your, or your other profiles, opinion of us?

[Ommadawn]

Finally remembered your other password huh Carol.

 

 

Ouch

Edited July 8, 2015 by Ommadawn

[DeanoL]

Well that's bollox.......

The festival makes no profit?

 

Yup, it's effectively run as a non-profit with most of the operating surplus in any given year donated to charity - though they have started saving a little for potential capital investments in recent years.

 

[Smitho77]

 

Ouch

 

Proper rumbled. 

[ThomThomDrum]

Yup, it's effectively run as a non-profit with most of the operating surplus in any given year donated to charity - though they have started saving a little for potential capital investments in recent years.

And they have been making massive investments over the last decade or so. Yes charities do well from Glastonbury but run as a non profit it is not....

[DeanoL]

It's not technically run as a non-profit anymore (I seem to remember at one point it was). But we're talking a company with a turnover in excess of £20 million keeping cash on hand of less than £100k - significantly less than the charitable donations each year.

 

The margins on everything are close enough that my original point still stands.

[Smitho77]

It's not technically run as a non-profit anymore (I seem to remember at one point it was). But we're talking a company with a turnover in excess of £20 million keeping cash on hand of less than £100k - significantly less than the charitable donations each year.

 

The margins on everything are close enough that my original point still stands.

 

No it doesn't as you are completely guessing as to the finances of Worthy View.   The festival may well not actually make any money from it at all if the land owner is taking any profit.  You could well be more accurate saying that WV keeps the festival going in it's original location by appeasing the surrounding landowners, just like the external 'glamping' sites..

Edited July 9, 2015 by Smitho77

[e_p]

why dont you just get better jobs then you can afford to camp in WV?

[The Placid Casual]

Looks like you forgot to log in to your other username Carol.

rekt

[eFestivals]

It's not technically run as a non-profit anymore (I seem to remember at one point it was). But we're talking a company with a turnover in excess of £20 million keeping cash on hand of less than £100k - significantly less than the charitable donations each year.

 

The margins on everything are close enough that my original point still stands.

that's how it used to be, but as your previous post said they've started holding money back to build up a 'reserve fund' - as a result of the scare they had in 2008, which might have bankrupted the festival if the tickets hadn't sold.

 

But the festival was never run on an official basis as 'not for profit', tho in effect that's what it was.

[ThomThomDrum]

I was under the impression that the festival was created to support the farm and as such would have to generate a profit to do so. (Although its probably extracted as "cost" technically rather than profit for tax purposes)

 

I have always had in my mind that the festival is quite profitable and with that "profit" the farm(s), charity and the Eavis family benefit (most likely in that order)

Edited July 9, 2015 by ThomThomDrum

[frostypaw]

IIRC the festival has only been profitable recently and has at times severely taxed the Eavis' finances

There's a load about it in the Glastonbury book I think, but there's astonishingly little advantage taken of the chance for profit

2008 almost broke them, as has been stated before, though this should be taken with a grain of salt as they consider breaking them being unable to make the charitable donation - but of course that priority is their prerogative and one we rather like them for.

Someone more resourceful will probably find the data, but I'm being feeble

[DeanoL]

I was under the impression that the festival was created to support the farm and as such would have to generate a profit to do so. (Although its probably extracted as "cost" technically rather than profit for tax purposes)

 

Well yeah, I never claimed people weren't getting rich off it - Glastonbury as a company pays huge amounts of money to both Eavis and the high level staff in wages, and a significant fee to the farm for 'rent' of the land it is held on.

 

But my point was, those are fixed fees, they likely rise with inflation and so on, but what isn't happening, that happens at other festivals, is the guy owning the company seeing a way to make an extra million, which then just becomes company profit, or gets paid to the owner/director as a bonus. If Glastonbury somehow has a really good year in terms of money, the charitable donation goes up, and they put a fraction of that away for a rainy day, but Eavis etc. don't directly benefit - they get paid the fixed amount agreed regardless.

 

Point being, the festival tries to balance the books - if they go "oh we can make an extra 200k here", they'll then look at where to spend that 200k in improving the festival. So if Worthy View is making a profit, that money is going back into the festival, not into the pockets of the people running it.

 

As someone pointed out, there's a chance Worthy View doesn't make a profit, and was just set up to break even, which normally wouldn't make sense, but as an attempt to undercut and discourage other 'glamping' options I acknowledge it's a possibility.

[eFestivals]

I was under the impression that the festival was created to support the farm and as such would have to generate a profit to do so. (Although its probably extracted as "cost" technically rather than profit for tax purposes)

that was the case with the 1970 festival, tho I think it lost money in the end.

1971 wasn't really anything to do with Eavis. He perhaps got a farm rental fee, I'm not sure.

The 'festivals' from 72-78 were not really 'festivals'. It was merely a number of people arriving at the farm and camping. I don't really have much idea how much commercialism there might have been to generate a fee for the farm.

In 1979 the 'proper' festival was re-started, with Bella Churchill as the driver and profits going to her charity, 'Children's World'. I'm pretty sure it lost money again.

For 1981, a whole new financial structure was created (by a guy who became one of Michael's most-trusted as a consequence, and who only ended his Glasto involvement a few years ago when he emigrated), and it did make money.

Whether the farm collected its fee in those loss making years I've no idea.

 

I have always had in my mind that the festival is quite profitable and with that "profit" the farm(s), charity and the Eavis family benefit (most likely in that order)

The festivals has been 'profitable' since the 1981 festival (with perhaps a few years since then when it wasn't profitable, i'm not entirely sure).

The farm gets a fee. I think it's currently somewhere around £1/2M (comparable with land rental elsewhere for an event of similar size, I think).

Eavis takes a wage for his work on the fest. The last time I can remember him saying what it was publicly I think it was £60k (I guess Emily gets similar; Jean Eavis used to get the same as Michael).

What was left over used to be given away in full, aside from a small amount which was retained to cover a few costs going forwards to the next festival (a small number of full time staff).

That's changed a little since 2008, w2here some has also been retained as a 'reserve fund' to cover any shortfall should the festival face financial difficulties in the future.

Michael has become comparatively rich for a farmer over the years (40+ years!) because of the extra income for the farm and him personally, but by nothing like the amount he'd have done if the festival was run on purely commercial lines.

[storm]

Don't you go challenging their assumptions about the world eh, they know they're of a better calibre than the unwashed, toilet filthing, litter dropping, noisy criminals inside and there's no arguing with them.

Way too many scousers in there too. Generally a lot of assumptions about people and things and a way of spending a bunch of cash and avoiding the whole 'challenging' situation. Who wins out of that? I genuinely don't see how anyone comes out better off apart from the scammers. I fucking loved the sunday evening chats I used to have with spangled first timers whose whole system of values had been shaken to the ground, lost and bemused at how they were going to go back to their job at the bank and give a single shit.

This does not happen anymore :/ they probably stayed in a yurt next to a stock broker and estate agent and shared some bubbly before a shower and heading out for the evening

 

Haha nice one

 

 

 

God these forums! I love them and hate them at the same time. People are so quick to jump on each other if someone is doing something other than what they think is "the right and pure way to do Glasto" or if someone dare word something that's taken out of context. Chill out FFS (not the shit "super" group).

I went for my 7th year and as there were only 2 of us and we couldn't go till Thurs we decided to book WV. We were worried about it being too far out, too quiet, no atmosphere and couldn't have been more wrong.

Yes the hill's a bit steep (it's over in 5 minutes max and you're that ratted you don't even really feel it!), yes it's quieter and yes you have to be more planned for the day as you can't just nip back to the tent but that's the beauty of the lock ups, take everything you need for the day!

We found the whole thing brilliant. A quick walk in from the car to our squirt (yes, we were slightly pissed off as they weren't advertised) and we were settled in within an hour of parking. We hardly took anything with us as we're packing professionals after years of going. We had lovely people around us who all swapped stories any time we happened to be at the tents at the same time. People really helped us out too when we lost our car keys and therefore couldn't get to some of our stuff.

NONE of these people were snobs and weren't looking for glamping. They were all ages and nationalities which was brilliant. Everyone either wanted a change, had travelled from abroad or couldn't get there during the mental Wednesday rush to get a good spot and didn't want to be sniffing the bogs for the whole weekend from their pitch in a ditch.

I would definitely do it again, however I will be going with my little boy next time and it might be a bit far for him to trek every day so will look at other options which I'm sure will piss purists off for countless reasons. Maybe even the fact I'm taking a child will already have pissed them off!

Anyway, rant over.

We really enjoyed WV and it was nice to see a different side to the festival. The views were incredible, the tent sturdy and convenient and we didn't even use the showers as we didn't want to miss out on stuff queuing.

Would definitely recommend it.

 

Could've turned up Friday evening and had loads of (quiet,clean area, clean toilets, showers, litter and thieving free) free camping space near us. Again you miss the point, it's not about snobs, money or anything else in your rant. What I can't understand is what did you pay for in WV (or any off site camping) that you couldn't get for free elsewhere? What is the reason to pay more when there is nothing off site not available on site? That's my point.

 

On the subject of children why would anyone slate you for bringing children? Most would agree it's a great idea. Regarding camping mine were well able for the (onsite) family camping at 5 years (they even survived 2005 and 2007) so I  doubt you'll have any issues with yours either.

 

In what way is it bollocks and what's rattled you ?

Yes i have read the whole thread and my view is that some are implying that it would be safer, cleaner or whatever to stay in WV or elsewhere. I turned up on the coach wednesday morning ahead of schedule,waited an hour or so for the gates to open and all our group had our tents up and were happy campers before 9:30 am.

I don't give a shite where you stay and reserve my right to have views different to yours.

 

 

Yes of course they are but you went on to ask if i'd bothered reading the thread and i clearly have. The OP states that WV is cleaner, less crowded and safer. I'll say that there are plenty of places that are equally safe ,spacious and (almost) as clean and don't cost a penny more than the cost of your ticket,plus whatever you choose to leave as a donation at the lockups- should you use them.

 

David my point exactly but I think frostypaw is right, they must get that but don't want to say so for some reason.

 

 

In 1979 the 'proper' festival was re-started, with Bella Churchill as the driver and profits going to her charity, 'Children's World'. I'm pretty sure it lost money again.

 

 

I've always wondered why the café (great prices btw) in the Cabaret field was called Children's World, thanks for that Neil

Edited July 9, 2015 by storm