New 2015 Map

[Bradders]

I doubt that very much.

[incident]

Could it be that a sizeable chunk is made to go to charity? As in "If someone can afford £1000 for this, put the price at £1200 and you will give £200 to wateraid". Just wondering...

For most of them? No. If they were giving a percentage to charity, they'd most likely be publicising the fact.

[DeanoL]

Firstly, a big part of the Glastonbury experience is the camping. It's getting equipment together, hauling it to the site, selecting a good spot, setting up base, meeting neighbours and settling into the festival the way nearly everybody else is.

No, that's a big part of your Glastonbury experience, but that doesn't mean it applies to everyone else. It's entirely arrogant to assume that the way you enjoy the festival is the way everyone should enjoy it, we all get different things out of it. If people don't want to camp (which could be for many reasons, notably maybe they're just not as young and healthy as you) then they can enjoy the festival how they want to. They aren't hurting anyone else.

I camp in with the rest of us 'plebs', I probably wouldn't take the posh option if I could afford it (though in twenty years time, I probably will do) but that's out of convenience and location, rather than a desire to sleep on the floor.

The whole site could be fitted with hot showers and proper toilets (it has them anyway in places but whatever) if it stopped giving so much to charity. For me, these campsites don't sit right with the ethics of the festival.

The Glastonbury charity fallacy in full swing again. There's lots of things Glastonbury could do if it gave less money to charity. There's also lots of things it could stop doing and give more money to charity. They could probably have booked Mumfords instead of Kanye to headline this year and had a spare half a million to give to charity.

[ThomThomDrum]

I always think at Glastonbury the good will outweigh the twats but it does have to be careful otherwise this might happen

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/new-festival-aimed-directly-at-twats-201203285064

Bit unfair on poor aul Faithless

[kalifire]

No, that's a big part of your Glastonbury experience, but that doesn't mean it applies to everyone else.

It applies to everyone who camps, and that's almost everybody. Are you seriously suggesting that there's a sizeable number of people camping who spend their time wishing they were outside of the fence, sleeping in a bed for thousands of pounds? Or is it more likely that part of their experience is to camp?

[Bradders]

The Glastonbury charity fallacy in full swing again. There's lots of things Glastonbury could do if it gave less money to charity. There's also lots of things it could stop doing and give more money to charity. They could probably have booked Mumfords instead of Kanye to headline this year and had a spare half a million to give to charity.

It's not really the same thing though. This site is not offering £1200 of facilities, it's hugely overcharging. The comparable hypothetical would be Glastonbury charging £300+ a ticket, which people would probably pay, just so they can make more personal profit.

Perhaps I shouldn't have brought charity into it, I only did because it highlights the idea that Glastonbury isn't about making as much money as possible for the owners.

Edited June 4, 2015 by Bradders

[JoeyMester]

Oh heck, I know someone who is going in Festibell! He and his wife are big live music fans but last year's Glastonbury was their first time and they absolutely loved it. He's in his 60s (I think) so they stopped in Worthy View just for a bit of extra comfort. He was gutted to miss out on tickets and didn't get any luck in the resale, and even more annoyed when he saw the line-up with plenty of acts they like. Anyway, I saw a tweet about Festibell and sent him a link to the article, just as a bit of a laugh really. Two days later he said him and his wife had decided to cancel their planned holiday later in the year and go for the £1,200 option as it was the only way they could get tickets. The thing is, he just really wanted to go to the festival and that was his last option. I have to say if I failed to get tickets and had that sort of money to get one when such an opportunity arose... I'd give it at least some consideration. (I'd probably bring a tent and just end up camping with everyone else mind, that walk looks a right git.).

[DeanoL]

It applies to everyone who camps, and that's almost everybody. Are you seriously suggesting that there's a sizeable number of people camping who spend their time wishing they were outside of the fence, sleeping in a bed for thousands of pounds? Or is it more likely that part of their experience is to camp?

I camp. It's just not a big part of my festival experience. I would enjoy the festival just as much, if not more, without the camping element. Just like I watch one or two bands on the Pyramid stage every year, but that's not a big part of my festival experience either. I'd enjoy it just as much without the Pyramid being there. That doesn't mean I don't think the Pyramid should exist.

Yeah, I'm sure thats the reason Festibell are doing this, because they are just so damn thoughtful and want everyone to be able to enjoy the festival. Nothing to do with lining their own pockets!

I think what Bradders was trying to point out is that the festival does give to charity and this should be applauded. They could do luxury camping and hot showers for all but they choose to give to charity instead. These glamping companies do no such thing and instead get rich from jumping on the festival bandwagon.

They take but give nothing back. Fuck them.

What they give back is paying the adjoining land-owners a ton of money and making the festival a net positive for them, thus ensuring they don't complain and keep the festival viable. You could shut down Festibell, but then Eavis would have to pay them off directly, which means the festival giving less money to charity, charging more for a ticket, or reducing the amount of stuff they do.

Festibell's biggest expense isn't the cost of the tents, or the showers or the bedding. It's renting that land off nearby farmers.

[ThomThomDrum]

(I'd probably bring a tent and just end up camping with everyone else mind, that walk looks a right git.).

Dont you fret, they get a golf buggy down from their camp to gate C. You gotta get something in return for throwing your mula away...............

[ThomThomDrum]

What they give back is paying the adjoining land-owners a ton of money and making the festival a net positive for them, thus ensuring they don't complain and keep the festival viable. You could shut down Festibell, but then Eavis would have to pay them off directly, which means the festival giving less money to charity, charging more for a ticket, or reducing the amount of stuff they do.

Festibell's biggest expense isn't the cost of the tents, or the showers or the bedding. It's renting that land off nearby farmers.

You do know Festibell did not exist last year and the festival was AOK without it? In fact where Festibell is situated this year was a Campervan field previous years. Now those campervans have to be accommodated on other lands or removed from the amount of Campers allowed. Either way this will cause some level of inconvenience to other festival goers..............

Also the tickets given to Festibell will have come from the removal of tickets elsewhere, as the site is only allowed have a limited number of people on it, so again someone somewhere is being inconvenienced by its existence already...............

Maybe these sorts of things are being more and more deemed a necessary evil, but evil none the less...............

[DeanoL]

You do know Festibell did not exist last year and the festival was AOK without it? In fact where Festibell is situated this year was a Campervan field previous years. Now those campervans have to be accommodated on other lands or removed from the amount of Campers allowed. Either way this will cause some level of inconvenience to other festival goers..............

Also the tickets given to Festibell will have come from the removal of tickets elsewhere, as the site is only allowed have a limited number of people on it, so again someone somewhere is being inconvenienced by its existence already...............

Maybe these sorts of things are being more and more deemed a necessary evil, but evil none the less...............

Because the people who owned the campervan field land chose to go with Festibell rather than GFL, as is their right. We don't know why that happened.

The tickets don't necessarily have to have come from somewhere else though. I believe the festival license currently has the numbers increasing year-on-year but for hospitality/crew tickets rather than general sale.

[ThomThomDrum]

That's slightly different though. At least they wanted normal (ish) tickets first - and they're cancelling their hols. 99% of the people there will not be in the same yacht though.

[frostypaw]

Could it be that a sizeable chunk is made to go to charity? As in "If someone can afford £1000 for this, put the price at £1200 and you will give £200 to wateraid". Just wondering...

HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHhaaaaaaaa... *gasp* hahahahahhahahahahHAAHHAHA!

Sorry. I wish I still thought like you - but no way never. It's all going in their pocket.

Because the people who owned the campervan field land chose to go with Festibell rather than GFL, as is their right. We don't know why that happened.

Idiots willing to pay £1200 is why that happened - they're going to rake in somewhere well into five figures in a few days.... it's not difficult to see why.

You are VASTLY underestimating the money they are making if you have a single question about why they are doing this. Those tents are what £400 maybe £350 buying a load - write those off over several years and they're sub £100. Add in a bunch of staff that you pay with tickets or at most a week's wage another few hundred, hire some catering crap and a loo and shower, few more hundred - get a bunch of rich folk in and if per person you're getting £600, costing you £80 a person, they pay their ticket and you get just twenty in and you're walking off with over ten grand.

There's a lot of money to be made by those willing to hold the festival ransom, but do keep telling me how they're lovely folk and deserve something back - they do deserve something, but not this. Previously not complaining then pulling such stunts should be grounds to have future complaints from them ignored by local councils imho, shouldn't be allowed. Is like the guy who moved in next to alton towers then complained to the council and forced them to turn the music/sounds off in an area - shitty even if legal.

[briddj]

If the people on the land around are making so much money, let's hope they scrap the fallow year in favour of their pension fund!

[blackred]

HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHhaaaaaaaa... *gasp* hahahahahhahahahahHAAHHAHA!

Sorry. I wish I still thought like you - but no way never. It's all going in their pocket.

Idiots willing to pay £1200 is why that happened - they're going to rake in somewhere well into five figures in a few days.... it's not difficult to see why.

You are VASTLY underestimating the money they are making if you have a single question about why they are doing this. Those tents are what £400 maybe £350 buying a load - write those off over several years and they're sub £100. Add in a bunch of staff that you pay with tickets or at most a week's wage another few hundred, hire some catering crap and a loo and shower, few more hundred - get a bunch of rich folk in and if per person you're getting £600, costing you £80 a person, they pay their ticket and you get just twenty in and you're walking off with over ten grand.

There's a lot of money to be made by those willing to hold the festival ransom, but do keep telling me how they're lovely folk and deserve something back - they do deserve something, but not this. Previously not complaining then pulling such stunts should be grounds to have future complaints from them ignored by local councils imho, shouldn't be allowed. Is like the guy who moved in next to alton towers then complained to the council and forced them to turn the music/sounds off in an area - shitty even if legal.

Not disagreeing with the gist of what you're saying, but i think your costs are well under.

From what I've seen they are using decent bell tents, so start at about £600, closer to £1k with the accessories (inner, carpets etc), plus all the beds, bedding, furniture, electrics. The wear and tear on these will be high so your probably looking at refreshing them in less than 10 outings, after each outing they need to be professionally cleaned and properly stored. I reckon sites like festibell are just hiring the kit, so £3-400 at a guess for the tent and kitting it out, still making a killing but not quite as much.

The only reason I mention this is that if you take this into consideration Worthy View doesn't seem like bad value, I would take a guess that the scout tents are being subsidised by some of their fancier offerings. It's quite an expensive business to run and the profits will be low to non-existent when priced affordably, it wasn't sustainable for MyHab.

Edited June 4, 2015 by blackred

[incident]

Idiots willing to pay £1200 is why that happened - they're going to rake in somewhere well into five figures in a few days.... it's not difficult to see why.

And if enough of those idiots continue to pay (literally) thousands going forward, then ultimately in the long term it could have some very negative consequences for the Festival. Remember that the area inside the fence accounts for less than half of the actual land used and pretty much all of the land outside and even some inside is rented by the Festival. If it becomes more difficult / too expensive / impossible to get the fields the Festival needs then difficult decisions will have to be taken. For example they could cut the amount or car park and/or campervan space available, and start insisting on larger number of coach-only tickets*. They've already had to move some stuff off-site entirely to the Bath & West Showgrounds and run shuttles.

It's not even impossible that the Festival loses the use of one or more of the fields inside the fence and has move the fence line and cut ticket numbers accordingly.

*if they haven't already.

[frostypaw]

Not disagreeing with the gist of what you're saying, but i think your costs are well under.

From what I've seen they are using decent bell tents, so start at about £600, closer to £1k with the accessories (inner, carpets etc), plus all the beds, bedding, furniture, electrics. The wear and tear on these will be high so your probably looking at refreshing them in less than 10 outings, after each outing they need to be professionally cleaned and properly stored. I reckon sites like festibell are just hiring the kit, so £3-400 at a guess for the tent and kitting it out, still making a killing but not quite as much.

The only reason I mention this is that if you take this into consideration Worthy View doesn't seem like bad value, I would take a guess that the scout tents are being subsidised by some of their fancier offerings. It's quite an expensive business to run and the profits will be low to non-existent when priced affordably, it wasn't sustainable for MyHab.

You're probably much more right, I wasn't feeling charitable. I don't think wv are fleecing anyone, it's just a bit soulless

[DeanoL]

You are VASTLY underestimating the money they are making if you have a single question about why they are doing this. Those tents are what £400 maybe £350 buying a load - write those off over several years and they're sub £100. Add in a bunch of staff that you pay with tickets or at most a week's wage another few hundred, hire some catering crap and a loo and shower, few more hundred - get a bunch of rich folk in and if per person you're getting £600, costing you £80 a person, they pay their ticket and you get just twenty in and you're walking off with over ten grand.

There's a lot of money to be made by those willing to hold the festival ransom, but do keep telling me how they're lovely folk and deserve something back - they do deserve something, but not this. Previously not complaining then pulling such stunts should be grounds to have future complaints from them ignored by local councils imho, shouldn't be allowed. Is like the guy who moved in next to alton towers then complained to the council and forced them to turn the music/sounds off in an area - shitty even if legal.

It's the landowners making most of the money I'd wager, not Festibell. Festibell just offered them more money than Glastonbury did, clearly.

Are they really so wrong to want a bigger slice of the pie? When every year they see the ticket price go up, the amount of money given away to charity go up, and probably Michael's money go up too? I really don't see the wrong in people wanting to capitalise on a big money-making music festival happening next door to them at their inconvenience.

These things haven't sold out yet, so there's clearly not a huge amount of demand, so I don't see some slippery slope happening where everyone starts doing this. And it's a clever way of funding it rather just having GFL pay out more money and stick more on our ticket price to cover it.

[frostypaw]

The landowners you say, there's a surprise.

You're quite right, that's how we should run things. It's like the woodpiles and how the first person to find them fences them off and forces everyone else to pay - it works so well because everyone is taking as big a slice as they can of the pie, that always makes sure there's enough for everyone

[Perks]

It's the landowners making most of the money I'd wager, not Festibell. Festibell just offered them more money than Glastonbury did, clearly.

Are they really so wrong to want a bigger slice of the pie? When every year they see the ticket price go up, the amount of money given away to charity go up, and probably Michael's money go up too? I really don't see the wrong in people wanting to capitalise on a big money-making music festival happening next door to them at their inconvenience.

These things haven't sold out yet, so there's clearly not a huge amount of demand, so I don't see some slippery slope happening where everyone starts doing this. And it's a clever way of funding it rather just having GFL pay out more money and stick more on our ticket price to cover it.

If they haven't sold out and say they don't, what happens to them actual entrance tickets?

[Mr November]

If they haven't sold out and say they don't, what happens to them actual entrance tickets?

Pretty sure they don't include a ticket. If they don't sell out, it means people chose to camp elsewhere, that's all.

[giantkatestacks]

They have sold out I think - do people know that they rent the land as a separate company, the blurb on the front page strongly implies that the landowners are running it, For almost 100 years, since the 1920’s, our family has farmed the land that now helps to make up the Glastonbury Festival site.

[ThomThomDrum]

Tickets come with most posh camping packages

The idea that there is something built into licence that allows it to be flexible upward only with regards the numbers of people allowed inside the fence year after year over the licenced period, but only for posh campers and hospitality doesnt seem right to me. Can anyone confirm this or is it bullshit?

My understanding is that the licensed period we are currently in has a limit to numbers allowed in the fenced area and thats the same year on year over this period and so if more tickets are being allocated to the likes of posh camping and hospitality then a reduction in general tickets and/or workers on site is a result................

[DeanoL]

The landowners you say, there's a surprise.You're quite right, that's how we should run things. It's like the woodpiles and how the first person to find them fences them off and forces everyone else to pay - it works so well because everyone is taking as big a slice as they can of the pie, that always makes sure there's enough for everyone

Okay but if we follow that logic through, Michael's land should be parcelled up and given to the people and then we don't have a festival at all.

[DeanoL]

Tickets come with most posh camping packages

The idea that there is something built into licence that allows it to be flexible upward only with regards the numbers of people allowed inside the fence year after year over the licenced period, but only for posh campers and hospitality doesnt seem right to me. Can anyone confirm this or is it bullshit?

My understanding is that the licensed period we are currently in has a limit to numbers allowed in the fenced area and thats the same year on year over this period and so if more tickets are being allocated to the likes of posh camping and hospitality then a reduction in general tickets and/or workers on site is a result................

First page of results for "Glastonbury license increase" gives you various news articles about it including one here http://www.efestivals.co.uk/news/14/140312a.shtml

The new license allows a year on year increase in staff/performer tickets, they just can't change the number of general sale ones. So these tickets likely either come out of staff allocation, then they add more staff tickets in, or they're coming out of the existing hospitality tickets, so they're being sold here instead of given to some big business as freebies or to d-list celebs.