Would a ballot be a fairer system?

[billum]

9 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

The site never tells you that your odds are better if you manually refresh. And while that might be obvious to some, I'm not sure it is to everyone.

I totally take your point, but the holding page does in fact say "You can attempt to access the booking page more frequently by manually refreshing your browser. As soon as one transaction is completed the next person will be allowed on to book." This strongly suggests that bashing F5 gives you an advantage, but I'd be very surprised if most people either read this at all, and if so, take it to mean that it's in their own interest to get refreshing like mad.

[DeanoL]

Just now, somecoolusername said:

Even a cursory glance at Twitter on ticket day would tell you that hitting F5 is very much public knowledge.

That you think Twitter is representative of the population as a whole when it's around 25% is exactly what I'm talking about. 

Quote

I assume you don't have an answer to my question I asked twice yesterday about how the festival could legally take ticket money from thousands of people until it is returned/they get a ticket?

I'm not sure what makes it illegal, you asked the question twice but didn't source what law it would be breaking so it's impossible to answer. 

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

If you've got a holding page in the first place that's half the battle, sure refreshing more often is a big advantage but if you have a holding page you're in the game at least. I think where inexperience kicks in, is just having a blank screen and not even seeing a holding page and just staring at it and not knowing what to do from here.

[fur_q]

22 minutes ago, somecoolusername said:

.

I assume you don't have an answer to my question I asked twice yesterday about how the festival could legally take ticket money from thousands of people until it is returned/they get a ticket?

I don't understand how it wouldn't be legal the festival takes a deposit to be entered into a ballot and by paying the deposit the buyer agrees to these terms. 

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

I admit to not fully understanding it though, do you pay for every entry in the ballot? But then you get a full refund if you aren't successful? But if you are you lose all of the money or just the cost of one entry? If you win twice you lose two lots of money? Or all of it? But then you've won two tickets when you only need one? What happens to the other ticket? Another ballot? 

Edited April 26, 2017 by Deaf Nobby Burton

[Digi]

42 minutes ago, somecoolusername said:

Even a cursory glance at Twitter on ticket day would tell you that hitting F5 is very much public knowledge.

I assume you don't have an answer to my question I asked twice yesterday about how the festival could legally take ticket money from thousands of people until it is returned/they get a ticket?

Hmm.. I can't see anything illegal about it. We would all have to agree to the terms and conditions before we paid up. Not all that unlike a raffle really except you'd get refunded if you didn't win 

[fur_q]

11 minutes ago, Digi said:

Hmm.. I can't see anything illegal about it. We would all have to agree to the terms and conditions before we paid up. Not all that unlike a raffle really except you'd get refunded if you didn't win 

 I could only it being an issue if they didn't give a full refund to those that where unsuccessful as the system would then have to licensed and regulated as a lottery by the Gambling Commission 

Edited April 26, 2017 by fur_q

[somecoolusername]

33 minutes ago, fur_q said:

I don't understand how it wouldn't be legal the festival takes a deposit to be entered into a ballot and by paying the deposit the buyer agrees to these terms. 

Yeah, but that's not what he said. He said everyone would pay the full ticket price upfront to enter. I.e. they are paying for a festival ticket that they're not necessarily getting. And apparently everyone unsuccessful would get a full refund, not a refund less the admin fee as is the current system. So that's millions of pounds the festival would have to fully account for in the time between taking money and refunding the unsuccessful. 

[Digi]

2 minutes ago, somecoolusername said:

Yeah, but that's not what he said. He said everyone would pay the full ticket price upfront to enter. I.e. they are paying for a festival ticket that they're not necessarily getting. And apparently everyone unsuccessful would get a full refund, not a refund less the admin fee as is the current system. So that's millions of pounds the festival would have to fully account for in the time between taking money and refunding the unsuccessful. 

So everyone would be paying for the chance to get a ticket. The cost they pay whether it be a deposit or the full price is irrelevant really if it was known up front and that was what was agreed to at the point of payment. 

Yep, it's potentionally millions of pounds going through their accounts and its never going to happen. I'm just not sure why it would be illegal. I suppose they could always minimise the length of time they have that money. Payment one week, ballot and refunds the next 

... There is a reason I'm a nurse and not an accountant though

[somecoolusername]

2 minutes ago, Digi said:

So everyone would be paying for the chance to get a ticket. The cost they pay whether it be a deposit or the full price is irrelevant really if it was known up front and that was what was agreed to at the point of payment. 

Yep, it's potentionally millions of pounds going through their accounts and its never going to happen. I'm just not sure why it would be illegal. I suppose they could always minimise the length of time they have that money. Payment one week, ballot and refunds the next 

... There is a reason I'm a nurse and not an accountant though

Well I didn't say it was illegal. Just that it would raise a lot of legal questions about how to deal with money, the legal status of applicants (are they competition winners or consumers?) etc. 

And the amount is relevant - it's the difference between a deposit (which there certainly is precedent for with other major events) and buying a ticket which isn't actually necessarily being bought (which I don't think there is precedent for - can you point me in the direction of any other major events that do this?).

I think they'd be getting onto potentially very dodgy ground.

[Digi]

5 minutes ago, somecoolusername said:

Well I didn't say it was illegal. Just that it would raise a lot of legal questions about how to deal with money, the legal status of applicants (are they competition winners or consumers?) etc. 

And the amount is relevant - it's the difference between a deposit (which there certainly is precedent for with other major events) and buying a ticket which isn't actually necessarily being bought (which I don't think there is precedent for - can you point me in the direction of any other major events that do this?).

I think they'd be getting onto potentially very dodgy ground.

Haven't got a bloody clue! I just hope it never happens as I like the system as it is now. I like calling in favours on ticket day and asking everyone I know to get up at stupid o clock 

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

8 minutes ago, somecoolusername said:

Well I didn't say it was illegal. Just that it would raise a lot of legal questions about how to deal with money, the legal status of applicants (are they competition winners or consumers?) etc. 

And the amount is relevant - it's the difference between a deposit (which there certainly is precedent for with other major events) and buying a ticket which isn't actually necessarily being bought (which I don't think there is precedent for - can you point me in the direction of any other major events that do this?).

I think they'd be getting onto potentially very dodgy ground.

The long and the short of it is it's a farcical idea which will never happen.

[somecoolusername]

4 minutes ago, Digi said:

Haven't got a bloody clue! I just hope it never happens as I like the system as it is now. I like calling in favours on ticket day and asking everyone I know to get up at stupid o clock 

Me too! And I say that as someone who's missed out on tickets in the past 

[thesaint78]

2 hours ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

I admit to not fully understanding it though, do you pay for every entry in the ballot? But then you get a full refund if you aren't successful? But if you are you lose all of the money or just the cost of one entry? If you win twice you lose two lots of money? Or all of it? But then you've won two tickets when you only need one? What happens to the other ticket? Another ballot? 

The way i was thinking when I started this thread was you would still register like you do now but then you would enter the ballot whilst giving your card details in your entry

You can either enter on your own or as a group so there shouldn't be issues about 1 person getting a ticket and 1 not. You could just draw out each application until all tickets have gone and then your deposit would be debited in the same way it is now. 

I got 2011 , 2013 and 2014 tickets but have failed in the last 3.

Admittedly I started this thread thinking broadband speed played a part but now realise it doesn't. I don't come on here loads so didn't realise this has been discussed to death already.

Good discussion anyway even if it has been done to death.

 

 

 

[DeanoL]

6 hours ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

I admit to not fully understanding it though, do you pay for every entry in the ballot? But then you get a full refund if you aren't successful? But if you are you lose all of the money or just the cost of one entry? If you win twice you lose two lots of money? Or all of it? But then you've won two tickets when you only need one? What happens to the other ticket? Another ballot? 

You can technically only register once. Just like now. If you make multiple registrations with different credit cards/photos/addresses then yes the system is gameable. But even if you do you run the risk of winning multiple times, while there's only one person that looks like you that can use the three tickets you'd get.

5 hours ago, somecoolusername said:

Well I didn't say it was illegal. Just that it would raise a lot of legal questions about how to deal with money, the legal status of applicants (are they competition winners or consumers?) etc. 

And the amount is relevant - it's the difference between a deposit (which there certainly is precedent for with other major events) and buying a ticket which isn't actually necessarily being bought (which I don't think there is precedent for - can you point me in the direction of any other major events that do this?).

I was going to say 2012 Olympics did, but I'm mistaken, that used the system someone just suggested, where you register your card details when you enter and it's only charged if you're successful, which on reflection is a better system that essentially accomplishes the same thing, and would address all your concerns. 

I'm still not convinced there's anything illegal about the other method though and no-one seems to be able to say what law it breaks. Certainly I've ordered stuff online, paid for it, and then it not been available so have been refunded. Oftentimes after months of waiting for them to obtain stock. It's possible there's some legal difference around intent there but that seems very wooly and unlikely.

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

10 hours ago, DeanoL said:

You can technically only register once. Just like now. If you make multiple registrations with different credit cards/photos/addresses then yes the system is gameable. But even if you do you run the risk of winning multiple times, while there's only one person that looks like you that can use the three tickets you'd get.

I think a system like this would either encourage touting, as the person who had two or three tickets would try and sell the spare tickets to those willing to take the chance on them. Or if it worked like the current system and you could get a refund up to May, then it would just massively encourage multiple registrations, as you could just get a refund on extra tickets, so either way it would create new and bigger issues that you don't have with the current system.

[waterfalls212434]

your broadband speeds makes no difference what so ever, this is my connection speed http://beta.speedtest.net/result/6251911469 obviously if speed was an issue id be well in every year as virgin with homeworks+(other then pure fibre providers) do the fastest connection you can get for a residential address at 300Mbps

And guess what last 2 years in the general sale I had no luck with tickets! (last year no luck at all, my mate got mine, this year I was successful in the coach sale but was trying in general for mates) 

so yeah, its not speed but luck. simple as.

[Breeze]

On 25/04/2017 at 9:07 PM, russycarps said:

Why is this a bad thing?

Nobody said it was.