DeanoL

Unless your tastes are really eclectic, I've found more focused, genre/style specific festivals work better. Like you say, there's far less choice, so what that means is the festival needs to have more of your sort of thing on.

It's the easiest change for you to make. For others it's different. For us the easiest change to make is giving up having kids. Because we don't have kids and don't want kids either. But I can't pretend we're doing that for the benefit of the planet.

Land hire as well. Both for the land they use from other people, and the fee that the festival pays to the Eavis farm company as "compensation for lost earnings". This was £500,000 in 2015 which was the last time the figure had to be declared separately on the accounts. That's the cheap rate that Eavis essentially charges himself and would be known to the owners of the surrounding land...

Not to put you off but Lime Kiln was really busy and hard for us to get a spot when we arrived around 4pm Wednesday this year. With the removal of Pylon and Rivermead this year there appear not to be any non-crowded camping spots left. Part of what factored into our decision. (LK not huge fun this year after previously camping at the back of Rivermead since it opened)/ I mean we've had this discussion before but the food offering is really quite good and its the same reason I'd ever eat out rather than make my own food when I have a house. Also aren't half the campers in Bath and West?

Never actually been in a glamping field, though I wonder how true this is - at least with pre-erected camping they can actually space it very efficiently, and the fact you pay a lot more for a bigger tent means there's less "bring a six-man tent for two people" that you get in general camping. Not saying you're wrong though, but I guess there's no real way of knowing how many people are camped in eg. Pennards. If you're right, it raises an interesting question though - some of the driver for glamping is from people who can't carry their own stuff such long distances - I do wonder if a shuttle from the car parks to the gates could have actually reduced that. Or even offer parking at Bath & West - you're further away but can get dropped at Gate A. Wonder what sort of impact that would have had.

I think, had we still been committed to camping festivals, we'd have done the same. For us the extra cost of glamping or a van doesn't justify the enjoyment we get from it anymore.

The pitch your own thing is telling, honestly. Lots of people willing to double the cost of the festival because they're not willing or able to carry their stuff and camp up in regular camping. Because that's literally the only difference. I'll admit to being one of them, it's the only way I can see myself doing the fest in the future (but not this year).

Yup, saw them in Blackpool and Birmingham, after that got tickets for the rescheduled Nottingham orchestra date in a few weeks. The problem is they're an expensive band. They're expensive because they sell tickets - hence you'll see them headlining half the C-tier festivals in the country over summer. But you don't seem them in the middle of the bill at the bigger festivals much anymore because those festivals don't need them to shift the tickets (the headliner will do that) and at this point at Glastonbury they might not even manage a televised slot, so there's very little benefit for them to do it on the cheap.

Like Sticklinch then *mic drop* But yeah in seriousness, that's the thing isn't it. It's almost like the cost of car versus coach argument. Most people in campervans have some sort of shower or toilet anyway. The festival doesn't provide them, no, but if the cost of the campervan has already been paid for, then the campervan owner isn't really paying either. It's the bedfellow of the car/coach argument. And the festival can probably sell two pre-erected tent pitches for every campervan space (if not more) and while they have to provide some extra facilities, those costs are marginal. Which is sort of what I'm getting at: do you charge based on what the festival are providing? Or do you charge based on the overall experience the customer has? Worthy View is still more expensive than taking a campervan, but I'd imagine if they were the exact same price, everyone with a van would still rather bring that than stay at WV right? Because it's a better overall experience. Even if the festival is providing less for your money. From a business point of view, it doesn't really matter if it costs you a bit less to offer campervan facilities than pre-erected camping. What matters is what people are willing to pay. (Related: when I was in my 20s, I'd go see bands I loved in arenas and look at the prices and standing was always the most expensive ticket and was always what we'd buy because we wanted to get to the front and jump and shout and dance. These days I look at those same bands in the same places and seats are more expensive than standing. There's nothing specific about one or the other being "better" or "cheaper" - you can pack people more tightly on the floor sure, but that didn't stop it being more expensive in the 00s. It's just priced based on demand of that audience at that point in time.)

I sympathise I do, part of the reason this year was our last. Physically, at the moment, it's either glamping or not going at all and it's going to be the latter. But that was what I was getting at "glamping" is needed for anyone that can't physically cope with the camping, or carrying their stuff large distances. The CV fields offered a cheaper alternative to other such options for those who already had CV's, but I think the festival is rightly seeing they can charge as much for that as as an option as any other glamping option.

Same as any other Glamping option. But with an actual bed. But y'know, if it's actually no better than camping just leave it behind and camp in a tent instead and save yourself a few hundred quid.

The Campervan provision used to be for people who were effectively lifestyle campers and it was priced that way. As others have observed with the changing nature of what vans you get in there, it's not that anymore. It's glamping. It's actually the most luxurious glamping option available. They're moving towards pricing it that way.

You're not wrong... exactly. But you're also not entirely right either. Yes, you can amortise the cost of your car and any associated expenses across all the travel you do in the lifetime of the care, in order to generate a "cost" for every journey. But where it starts to come apart is that certain of those costs are not liked to distance travelled, but to time elapsed (tax, insurance and to an extent some maintenance). Those costs don't go away if you don't travel to the festival by car, but being at the festival also means you won't be using the car elsewhere either. So you sort of need to take those out. The second issue is where it gets really tricky. Cars are not all created equally. And people do not buy cars solely for getting from A to B. Otherwise everyone would own the cheapest car that does that. I mean, you mentioned earlier that if you buy a car and sell it back after five years, you might get back £10K less than when you bought it. And you're right, so we should split that £10K cost across all the journeys you've taken in that five years right? Except, if you'd bought that car, turned it right around, back into the dealership and sold it, you would probably still lose at least £2K. That's value you never get back, regardless of any journeys you take. So why should we allocate a portion of that expense to your Glastonbury trip? Again, you'd incur it whether you took the car or the coach. And if you've got a fancy car, you bought it for a reason, either comfort, ease of driving, a status symbol, etc. None of those benefits are getting you from A to B, they're additional things.

I thought I'd confirmed mine but got that and checked and it is gone. Not intending to go this year anyway so not a problem (and may not have been so careful when confirming as I might otherwise have been).

I think there's some logic to what they're saying, but for it to make sense it should be based on buying the most efficient car. Because you only need a basic vehicle to get to the festival. If you've bought a BMW or something fancy to show off, or something big as you go offroad often, or a huge family vehicle as you often take the kids out (but they're not coming to the festival) then including any aspect of those taxes in the calculation is flawed.

The problem with incentivising coach travel by upping the parking cost, is that coach travel is already really popular. While I agree some of the prices are eye-watering, bear in mind that for some people, the coach or train is the only real option, and there's a need to balance making it appealing to those who would otherwise drive, with ensuring those who don't still have access.

The reality is you're no longer the target audience for the campervan fields. It used to be mostly folk like you, but as time has gone on it's become a glamping option instead. And the festival are leaving money on the table not pricing it that way. It's a shame, but I do think it's deliberate.

I suspect the campervan increase is a result of them going "how much could we get out of this field if we made it like Sticklinch/Worthy View instead?" and then it was re-done to that price.

So £73 is the cost from Stoke, which is 150 miles. 300 mile round trip. Let's say you're only getting 30 miles a gallon, you need 10 gallons of fuel, about £80. There's two of you so £105 per person is £210 so take off the fuel you're left with £130. Let's allow £30 for road tax and insurance. £100 left to "buy" the car Average car does 200,000 miles, so your 300 mile trip is 0.15% of the cost of the car is £66k. So yeah, maybe if you're drive a BMW or something?

Definitely seems to be a plan to bring them in line with the other glamping options then.

How much did campervans go up the past few fests?

Depends when you arrive. And you don't get a choice on the coach. If you're put on a coach that arrives 2pm on Wednesday it'll be the same 10 minute queue drivers arriving then will be in. Yeah it's quicker than if you drive and arrive Wednesday morning but it's only about 30% of the Wednesday coaches that will get you in then.

I don't think they'd be in with a shot on a regular fee basis but the fact thr history with the festival means they'd probably do it for a lower price, in a time where money is clearly going to be tight... I mean, I think there will be one "dissappointing" headliner this year. Unimaginative, not that relevant, played before. If you can make that Pulp, then knock it out the park with the other two, you've done well.

I'd argue that Glastonbury's extensive and generous volunteering system does it in a "meaningful way" - just a different one. They could still fill the volunteering spots even if they doubled it from 3 shifts to 6. Then half the number of volunteers and sell that many extra tickets instead. But those people then wouldn't really get to experience the festival in any real way.

What I'm getting at is, I don't have any issue with people like you who accept the situation we are in. That understand that no, many companies can't afford to give you a pay increase in line with inflation, and no Glastonbury can't afford to not increase ticket prices in line with inflation, not if you want the same festival. That's pretty much where I am. What does my head in is people who don't question the first, but think the second is unreasonable, and place all the weight of them not being able to afford things on "greedy companies" that they're buying things from.