£200 barrier breached

[abdoujaparov]

I just think it's pointless saying that it doesn't matter if the system is abused or that you don't care if there are loopholes. It just smacks of a bunch of chin-strokers sitting around and congratulating each other for being decent human beings and showing compassion when in reality the system potentially gives very little benefit to the 'deserving' and 'needy'. It's almost as if the ability to say that Glastonbury does this and the sense of satisfaction that comes along with it is more important than whether it actually helps the people that it's supposed to.

[Wooderson]

AFAIK the Festival has neither a responsibilty to it's roots nor to any single "group" in society.

It merely has a responsibility to exist or not exist. From this decision flows a price point for tickets enabling this existance.

This tickets are offered to everyone who then have a chance (small at that!) to get a ticket at the price set by the festival organisers.

If they fail to get a ticket or be unable to meet the ticket price financially yet are still determined to attend there are many options for work or volunteering. If this is deemed unacceptable then thats where the festival and the festival goer part company.

Glastonbury Festivals is not responsible for the well being or enjoyment of a broad swathe of society irrespective of their passing or long established relationship with it. It cannot partition a % of its attendees on the basis of income, employment status or otherwise.

Nor should it need to. If the price point set by the festival is not approved of by a group of people, there are many that would hold the opposite view given changing circumstances.

Edited October 9, 2012 by Wooderson

[abdoujaparov]

AFAIK the Festival has neither a responsibilty to it's roots nor to any single "group" in society.

It merely has a responsibility to exist or not exist. From this decision flows a price point for tickets enabling this existance.

This tickets are offered to everyone who then have a chance (small at that!) to get a ticket at the price set by the festival organisers.

If they fail to get a ticket or be unable to meet the ticket price financially yet are still determined to attend there are many options for work or volunteering. If this is deemed unacceptable then thats where the festival and the festival goer part company.

Glastonbury Festivals is not responsible for the well being or enjoyment of a broad swathe of society irrespective of their passing or long established relationship with it. It cannot partition a % of its attendees on the basis of income, employment status or otherwise.

Nor should it need to. If the price point set by the festival is not approved of by a group of people, there are many that would hold the opposite view given changing circumstances.

[Wooderson]

it's not quite that straightforward. The festival has always professed to have a social conscience, and has expressed that through donations to CND and to the current charities Eavis supports. There has also always been a strong thread of (for want of a better term) left wing politics at the festival. Whether you like it or not, that aspect of the festival (which isnt shared by any other major festival) has attracted a core of people who share some or all of those values

[abdoujaparov]

The festival has attracted a core of people who are into a variety of things. None of these aspects have been explicitly factored into the ticket price.

[random_man]

On top of the ticket price you've also got the price of Annual leave to take into account - for workers especially self employed people they will have a loss of earnings from taking 4 days off to go to Glastonbury - should this be taken into account and somehow subsidised? I wouldn't say so as Glastonbury is a choice - yes unemployed people can have fun too but does it have to be the more expensive option? You live within your means! I would like to go to Tahiti every year on holiday but that's a luxury that I cant afford so I find a cheaper (maybe not as nice) version of and do that instead.

Yes it is nice to have a mixture of all-sorts at Glastonbury, but one thing that puts everyone on common ground is that they have payed £215 for a ticket and we all got them in a fair way! This causes no-one to be any better than anyone else and have no more reason to be there than anyone else!

We all know from these boards the view of people getting in as VIP's etc.. for sometimes little reason such as because they're a supermodel and look how this is frowned upon? This is caused by tiers of payment options, who can afford what.

[elbongo]

Only have read a limited number of points here I have to say that unless you all know for sure how much the festival costs, how much they pay to local people and causes, how much they donate to greenpeace, CND, wateraid etc and how much profit they make at the end of the day I am not sure how you can judge all the other discourses your talking about.

I do not have a particular view as I do not know these facts, I agree that it is and always has been a massive expense to everyday people and it hits me particularly hard. But I have that choice to attend or not attend, providing I can get a ticket that is. Which is another issue altogether.

Every year we have these same debates, and related ones like its not how it used to be and its all middle class this and that, but its not simply saying its a change for the worse its an evolution the festival either had to make or was the natural way of things. Most likely both.

I have not missed one since 94 and in general I am happy with how its evolved. I miss the madness, but its safer now than it was 12 years ago. In my view the choice was that it either changed or stopped. So for all those who still go and enjoy themselves its a success. I can't understand for a second anybody attending the next festival who is complaining, just don't go. It's that simple.

Edit: I left my brain at home today...

Edited October 9, 2012 by elbongo

[Wooderson]

errr, not entirely sure what point you're making...I dodnt say anything about the price of tickets. My point was that the festival has always been grounded (to a degree - much less so now than it used to be, which is a matter of some sadness to some) on some "progressive" principles. It is not surprising, therefore, that some people might gib a bit at the current ticket prices and want to think about whether there are ways of making the festival more inclusive

[LondonTom]

it's not pointless at all...it just recognises the fact that sometimes doing something is better than nothing and sometimes the search for a perfect answer gets in the way of doing something worthwhile, even if it has rough edges

[abdoujaparov]

Ticket price creep indicating a lessened interest in the "progressive principles" you speak of seems to be at the core of the matter. Basically that the festival is turning its back on those of lower or no means of attending on the basis of charging more for the ticket. The implication being that the festival "owes" them on the basis of their support or otherwise throughout the years. I don't think the festival owes them anything. Certainly no more than those who save up every penny they have to attend, those who go into debt to attend or those who make other sacrifices to attend.

That the festival is betraying its roots by charging more for a ticket is illogical to me. Families have always attended the festival too. Is this increase in ticket prices anti-family? No.

Edited October 9, 2012 by abdoujaparov

[abdoujaparov]

No because all it really would do, is let people who in a position to make some sacrifices else where get the discount while those who actually couldn't afford still can't....Which is what the vast majority are saying, if you can't afford it (and an extra increase to pay for this might price others who don't qualify out) there are other ways to come to the festival.

A nice idea but ultimately wouldn't benefit the very people you want it to. I'd think getting more "Social" traders in where people could do a day's work to enjoy the rest of it in would work better than a discount on the ticket. (Bit like the stewards etc, but selling food. I've had some thoughts along this sort of line if I won the lottery I'd set it, and then have any profits from the stall go towards funding the year/even shared to everyone who worked)

[Wooderson]

Yes, the festival has lost its roots (to a degree) and that is a matter of some sadness for me and others.

I dont think Eavis "owes" anything to people that have been going to the festival for a long time, and have never claimed that he does. But it would perhaps be a reconfirmation of the progress principles the festival once had to consider more affordable tickets for the unwaged. There are, of course, a whole load of other things he could do. It is just one option (and the one I happen to be devil's advocate for).

I also didnt for a moment suggest that the festival is betraying its roots by charging a ticket price which is economically viable.

[Rufus Gwertigan]

To address the original post I mentioned some time ago that the slight increase has tipped the scales for me and I would not attend as a punter. For the total cost there are so many other things out there that I want to experience.

[MEGABOWL]

I agree, there are other ways of getting in other than buying a ticket

Just to be clear - I am not particularly arguing for discounted tickets for the unemployed (or whatever), although I dont see the insurmountable problems with this that others do, it's the attitude of the Daily Mail readers in here that I'm really having a pop at

[Verbal]

I agree, there are other ways of getting in other than buying a ticket

Just to be clear - I am not particularly arguing for discounted tickets for the unemployed (or whatever), although I dont see the insurmountable problems with this that others do, it's the attitude of the Daily Mail readers in here that I'm really having a pop at

[Verbal]

nope, it's too silly

is that how everyone who is unemployed has ended up where they are?

[abdoujaparov]

So those who don't agree with your idea are Daily Mail readers?

[abdoujaparov]

So me and a friend were born and raised on a council estate in the southwest. We went to school together, he dossed about, got into to trouble and started dealing at 14. I worked hard, got the piss taken out of me as we could only afford 2nd hand school uniform, I worked harder, got bullied for being a swot, finished school with average grades, he was expelled

Went to college he went to prison

Started work, he carried on dealing and in and out of prison

And here we are in our 30's, one living in London working hard and earning a living, one still living in the southwest part time dealer, part time thug, 3 or 4 kids with different mums

And he should get a discounted ticket?

No!!

If that makes me Daily Mail then so be it, but surely you can see the wrong in that scenario

[abdoujaparov]

No not at all, its a deliberately extreme example to prove a point, although the story is true

But it would be in my mind wholly unfair if I was to bump into this guy at Glasto and find out that he had got a 1/2 price ticket purely due to the fact he is an arsehole

I was trying to highlight the ridiculouness of the subject, in life there are always going to be people that miss out for one reason or another

[indieboymatt]

I wonder why, if offering discounts to the unwaged for artistic or cultural events is so patently ridiculous, so many organisations do it and have done so for such a long time?

Edited October 9, 2012 by indieboymatt

[Ed209]

Personally I don't agree with tiered ticket prices. But giving unemployed priority on the work opportunities there could be a happy medium.

disclaimer: playing devil's advocate.

Edited October 9, 2012 by Ed209

[MJMilz14]

On the face of it £200 sounds like a lot of money, but when you really think about it, what else can you do for 5 days solid that's as much fun for that price?

Just for example, supporters of Premiership football teams will pay £30-40 for 2 hours of entertainment at the weekend... 2 hours.

Even the cinema.... your looking at £10 plus (even more in london) to watch a film for an hour and a half.

Ten pin bowling.... easily a tenner for an hour at peak times.

Going to a gig... one gig with one act, and one support act.... £20-£35 for your average medium sized band.... £50 upwards for a big international band (the likes of which you get headlining Glastonbury).

Drive there, take your own food and drink, and it's not only not really that expensive, I'd argue that it's actually bloody good value for money.

[shoptildrop]

I've said it once, and I'll say it again, the level of middle class hate going on in parts of this thread is creepy.

Plus, we're all writing in good sentences with proper grammar, so... it's all just bourgeois whining really, isn't it? <she says, in danger of being hoisted by her own petard>. Clearly none of us are writing on this thread having left school at 11 to work on the rag and bone market in Watford. Just sayin'.

I mean, if we want to push this to its fullest potential... It's shit to be unemployed, It's shit to have no money, It's shit to miss out on an awesome festival and experience lovely people, lovely times and lovely music. Do you know what's more shit? Living in a refugee camp in Darfur. So let's take that 10% extra all us hunter-wearing, Torygraphy reading w*nkers were about to pay for some "poor" (ahahaha) English people to go to a pop festival, and spend it on sending circumcised 11 year old Sudanese girls to school. BOOM!

Seriously. I mean, the slow decline of the peaceandlove ethos is sad and all. But middle class people aren't intrinsically dicks by definition. And poor people aren't all "deserving". This whole issue is super shades of grey (not in a porn way). Having the moral high ground does not make you 'right'. It is what it is. And, at the end of the day, there are bigger things for us all to worry about from a social conscience point of view than an unemployed person not getting to listen to The Rolling Stones this year.

[thesecretingredientiscrime]

I've said it once, and I'll say it again, the level of middle class hate going on in parts of this thread is creepy.

[ICGenie]

Don't places tend to offer discounts for such things in order to help sell tickets to quiet day time shows?

Rather than to aid the less welloff by giving them access to such cultural experiences? I've always thought of that as a side product of their intitial goal - selling tickets.