DeanoL

It's at least partly that but also cutting a lot of public camping space to grow the hospitality/accessible areas and probably people bunking in if you believe that's happening.

Because if they go into the local area trying to find a pub to watch it on, en masse, it causes major complaints from locals. I believe it's cropped up in licensing hearings before - the necessity for the festival to ensure punters stay within the festival grounds.

They have the option of suspending pass-outs for a bit if needed. 2014 didn't seem to have any visible areas it could be shown if it came to it, they'd been clear they wouldn't be showing it if it happened, and there didn't really seem to be much fuss about it pre-festival.

In a way it sort of makes it more likely as they could do dedicated infrastructure for it, and it wouldn't just be used for one thing. But I'd agree it won't happen. There were no plans in place for last time (we'd have seen it if so) so I think that ship has sailed.

The sealed pouch thing is ridiculous. Just ask people not to take photos/videos. To me it either means you know your fanbase are such c**ts they won't listen to a reasonable request, or you know your show is so sh*t you can't be sure people won't start browsing BBC News in the middle of it.

Loving the theme park geek chat!

Yeah likewise, got it wrong. Also expected the ticket price to go up a bit more than it did (less than inflation, in the end). The reality is where the cost of living crisis is truly hitting though is people who couldn't afford to even dream about the festival in the first place. While I can *sort of* feel it, what's led to me going to fewer gigs is the price of gigs going up so much (well above what other stuff has), rather than having less money because the weekly shop is 20% more.

It's distracting when people move past you to get in/out to go to the bar too, but I doubt many would argue for banning that. The cameras wind me up too but many things do and I've basically given up on standing gigs now as the experience is just so unpredictable.

The recent James orchestra tour they just asked people to not film or take photos, but then before one song (the new one) they said "you can film or photograph this one if you must". Good compromise, lets people get a digital memento without spoiling the show. Side benefit of having the new single be the thing that's all over social media as well. Unfortunately TikTok and InstaStories or whatever have really changed things up the past few years. Used to be someone would film their whole favourite song, and then put it on YouTube, bit annoying, but was one song and after the gig you could at least see some of the footage on YouTube. Now it's 30 second clips of as many songs as possible which last online for a day then vanish. Total waste.

Someone claimed it was posted on this thread though I don't remember that happening myself.

This was on the public facing internet too. You needed to look, but it wasn't a secret bit of information, it wasn't a secret, otherwise undisclosed server that you could only find out about by someone telling you. It was possible for people to puzzle it out themselves, as incident did. I'd probably be more tempted to agree with your stance on cancelling the orders if it was how you say it was. But it wasn't. Anyone with enough knowledge and the desire to go looking could have figured it out.

They're within their rights to cancel the orders for any reason. If that right didn't exist then they'd absolutely struggle to justify to any court that they had a publicly accessible website, that would accept connections from the Glastonbury ticket site, that took the person's details, fetched their details from the Glastonbury registration database, requested their credit card details, took their money, and then told them they had a ticket... but it was the customer's fault for using the "wrong" website.

In both cases, they'd side with See, because somewhere there will be T&Cs that say See can cancel the order for any reason and have no liability.

It reveals a lot though, I think, about the intent of the festival and what they want to ticket buying experience to be, which is what we've discussed a fair bit here. They want one person per device with one tab. That's obviously nowhere near what happens, but when discussing alternative systems it's interesting to consider what systems get closer to that ideal.

Those are different. Passwords are a security system. If you login using a default password and login, you're essentially impersonating someone. The act of logging in is an act of declaring "I am this person and have these credentials for this system". This isn't that. This is just telling your browser to access a publicly accessible server. It's not a "hack" - the HOSTS file in Windows isn't some fancy thing you're not meant to touch, it's a tool, put in by the designers of Windows, to allow you do *exactly what people were doing*. They're using it exactly as intended. Accessing a publicly available server and using it for the purpose it was designed for (buying tickets) seems fair to me. If the server didn't want to sell you Glastonbury tickets, it could have been set not to sell you Glastonbury tickets. On the other hand, as I say, if someone posts on social media that got in 3 devices trying and can be traced, do See have every right to cancel those tickets as well? Because in that case, they're specifically doing something they've been told not to do by See Tickets and the festival. That would be ridiculous, but it's far easier to justify that being a rule-breaking act than the server workaround.

But that's behaviour that See Tickets explicitly asked people not to do: Whereas they never asked people to stop using that secondary server. I 100% agree the server should have been configured properly so it wasn't able to sell Glasto tickets, but it wasn't, some people figured it out, got on to it, and it sold them tickets. At no point were they told "you're not allowed to do that". So the idea they should have their tickets cancelled is unfair. Whereas having multiple devices and windows? See Tickets tweeted to ask people not to do that and Glasto also retweeted it. Should we cancel your tickets because you ignored that. No of course not. You probably didn't even see it. But equally the people using the secondary servers never saw anything telling them not to do it either.

It's not a guarantee at all - a work colleague of mine had a group of 24 all trying and none of them got anything in the main sale (they got one group through in the coach sale). But it does tilt the odds and it can snowball. If one group get through really early (first five minutes) then the odds get much better.

Not really. I'll take every tax break the government offers me while still campaigning for people like me to be charged more in tax. Not everyone is purely motivated by self-interest. The notion you can't criticise a system that you participate is one that's become pretty prevalent everywhere in UK society of late and it's massively problematic.

What do you think the dire consequences of letting touts buy tickets were? Again, Glasto invested in a whole new, never done before photo registration ticket system just to stop touts. Regardless of the fact that touts actually increased demand, made tickets harder to get hold of, increased the rarity and let them say "sold out in minutes". A entire new ticketing system just to make it fairer. I mean, maybe they've changed and wouldn't do that if we were in a similar situation today.

Yeah but I'd wonder how much they care about that. Could certainly make it ballot as well though, nothing stopping them. Point was just in the current system you put your deposit down and agree to go before you know if you'll get a campervan or glamping spot.

Isn't that how it works already? Separate sale for those things? I'd probably just leave those as is to be honest.

A ballot system would keep groups of friends together better, as you could remove the 6-person limit. Mathematically, you could enter the ballot as any size group you wanted, and your odds would be the exact same. One group, one entry. Doesn't matter if it's a group of 2 or a group of 26. So you could actually guarantee that friends didn't get left behind. The only reason you'd need a limit would be administratively, but you could easily make it much higher than the current 6. Again, ballot might not be the best way of doing things, but it'd actually improve issues with not everyone in the group getting to go. (Of course, it would also remove the advantage large groups currently have over smaller groups, which means overall the odds of a group of 24 getting to go would be reduced. But in terms of keeping groups together it helps.)

The festival was selling out straight away and they changed the whole system before just to eliminate touts, either because they didn't want people getting ripped off or because they didn't want the tickets going to those with the most money. It's taken a while, but this is now creeping back in - every year there are more and more "pay us £100 and we get you a ticket" things, some of which are scams, some are legit and just leveraging bots or real people to try and book your ticket. I do find the idea that the festival which invented an entire new ticketing system to beat touts back in the day would look at this becoming more and more common and just shrug. (I do however, take the point I may be overstating the growth of this stuff and it's never going to be as big a problem as touting used to be, so they might not bother for that reason. I just don't believe if it does continue to grow they would ignore it.)

I don't think taking "ticket & resale days" out of that and replacing it with "ballot draw and returns draw" would massively impact the festivals year-round marketing plan. Yes, it's marginally less exciting, although that's also if you make zero effort. You can actually make a ballot draw far more exciting and an actual event in a way you can't really with ticket sales.

It's an interesting idea which runs into the problem that having a load of people all trying to login at 9am potentially creates the same overloaded server issue you have at the moment. So you'd be refreshing to even get the chance to login. But the question is how much of the current "holding screen" system is because the system *can't* go any fast, and how much of it is because Glasto want the ticket sale to last around an hour and so throttle it.