tickets and how it could be done better

[Don Hagliatelli]

You may be over-thinking it. You enter the ballot in late April, entry is open for just one day 9am-9pm. Registration works as normal. When you enter, you put in your card details. The draw happens the following day, if you're successful, the card is charged. There are no refunds on tickets.

 

So you could enter five times, but if you win five times you're paying for five tickets, four of which are useless to anyone as they have your photo etc. on. It's not a flawless system but it seems better than trying to enforce it through technology. And if you want to pay £1000 for a ticket you can get one anyway.

 

 

How would this system accommodate groups?

 

 

Regardless of the lead time, there are plenty of legitimate reasons why somebody who bought a ticket may not be able to go and could expect a refund (as they’re not able to sell the ticket on).

 

A ‘no refunds’ rule would hurt a lot of people and may put some people off from trying to get a ticket altogether.

 

If the system doesn’t prevent duplicates then it can have none of the potential benefits of tracking who has been already and factoring this into the draw. (Personally, I’m not sure that’s the best thing to do anyway but it is often mentioned as a potential improvement)

 

How would the dead tickets be managed? (i.e. ones purchased by duplicate accounts or by people who can’t go)

 

If they can’t get a refund, how would the organisers know that these tickets weren’t going to be used and so could be resold? I would worry about tickets going unused and so others missing out.

 

 

A straight ballot with a no refunds rule does have its merits in that it could be pretty simple to implement and the risk of creating multiple accounts then being charged for multiple tickets would discourage many from trying to cheat the system.

 

On the cons side, people who could afford it could still create multiple accounts and the no refunds rule would penalise some people and discourage others from trying. I’m also worried about these potential dead tickets.

[Memory Man]

i think the logical conclusion (as per every year) is that the current system is fine as it has more advantages than any other system that anyone has yet thought of.

 

Generally speaking it (in conjunction with the April resale) ensures that those most committed get to go and ensures that all of your group can attend if you get tickets.

 

the complete lottery of a ballot would put an end to full groups and wouldnt necessarily reward those most willing to get up and try for tickets (twice) at 8.30am on a sunday morning.

[DeanoL]

How would this system accommodate groups?

 

 

Regardless of the lead time, there are plenty of legitimate reasons why somebody who bought a ticket may not be able to go and could expect a refund (as they’re not able to sell the ticket on).

 

A ‘no refunds’ rule would hurt a lot of people and may put some people off from trying to get a ticket altogether.

 

If the system doesn’t prevent duplicates then it can have none of the potential benefits of tracking who has been already and factoring this into the draw. (Personally, I’m not sure that’s the best thing to do anyway but it is often mentioned as a potential improvement)

 

How would the dead tickets be managed? (i.e. ones purchased by duplicate accounts or by people who can’t go)

 

If they can’t get a refund, how would the organisers know that these tickets weren’t going to be used and so could be resold? I would worry about tickets going unused and so others missing out.

 

 

A straight ballot with a no refunds rule does have its merits in that it could be pretty simple to implement and the risk of creating multiple accounts then being charged for multiple tickets would discourage many from trying to cheat the system.

 

On the cons side, people who could afford it could still create multiple accounts and the no refunds rule would penalise some people and discourage others from trying. I’m also worried about these potential dead tickets.

 

Groups are easy to handle - you just list the group you want to go in, any size from 1 to say, 50. Your group gets one entry in the ballot, regardless of size. Everyone has the exact same chance then (smaller groups have a marginally better chance - ie. if it gets down to 25 tickets left, groups of over 25 people aren't eligible, but it's so tiny as to be insignificant).

 

Glastonbury already has a "no refunds" rule after the end of May. Most gigs and festivals have a straight up no refunds policy anyway. It's pretty much standard across the board. When Glastonbury tickets just went on sale in April with no deposit, I'm not sure they offered refunds back then either.

 

You would get a few hundred dead tickets. But then, that already happens now. It's not designed to factor in people who have or haven't gone before.

 

You could risk £500 and get two entries into the 'draw' but that still doesn't guarantee a ticket. You could pay £750 and get three entries but then if you're willing to spend that much money, you can already guarantee yourself a ticket. I mean, that's why this system works now and wouldn't have five years ago - if you're happy to pay three times the price, you can get in now. Glamping packages, unused corporate tickets etc. And note that if you were in a group you'd need everyone in the group to take the same gamble.

 

It's not a perfect system, but it's not utterly unworkable. A ballot system along these lines is totally feasible.

[DeanoL]

Generally speaking it (in conjunction with the April resale) ensures that those most committed get to go and ensures that all of your group can attend if you get tickets.

Yep - this system isn't about rewarding those who really want to go. Let's be clear, this system would make it a lot harder for you, me, and all the obsessives on here from getting tickets.

 

What this system is, essentially, is a thought experiment on how a completely 'fair' system could work. And to point out that it's not entirely impossible or unfeasible, and is something the festival could implement fairly easily (cash flow issues aside) if they had the mind to. I know it sounds shit to us, but that's kinda the point. It's to say "this is what fair looks like" - just because of the number of people complaining that the system isn't fair on the basis that they didn't get a ticket this year, and they want a more fair system. They don't, they want a less fair system that's more biased towards them.

[tinktink]

I know its £15 this year, but I know from previous years a lot of people who get them class it has "if I dont go I only lose £10"  I would be prepared to pay for half the ticket price and maybe lose a bigger chunk out of the deposit, I think this will get rid of the time wasters, 

[dicka]

As someone who never got a ticket this year,  I can't see a fairer way to get tickets than what is already happening.  Every system mentioned so far has a downside.  Because demand is higher than the number of tickets available people are going to lose out.  Fingers crossed I am lucky in then re-sale next year.

[robalotalob]

Glastonbury stop booking big name Pop / Heavy Rock Metal / Rap Acts. Announce the full line-up before tickets go on sale. This will put a lot of people off going and make it a better festival IMO.

[iamthehorn]

I know its £15 this year, but I know from previous years a lot of people who get them class it has "if I dont go I only lose £10"  I would be prepared to pay for half the ticket price and maybe lose a bigger chunk out of the deposit, I think this will get rid of the time wasters,

I just came in there to post something like this. A bigger down payment and no refunds seems like an easy first step.

[Thearg]

I just came in there to post something like this. A bigger down payment and no refunds seems like an easy first step.

 

The downside of this is that you will change the demographic even more making it inaccessible to some people.

[Charm]

I think a £50 deposit is fair but making it non refundable would stop some of the just in case buyers, freeing up tickets for people who really want to go.

Charm x

[Don Hagliatelli]

I’ve just been looking into the refund policy, for a regular refund you can only apply for one until May 6^th. So if the ballot was late April you could do away with regular refunds.

 

There is also the TicketPlan Refund Protection scheme which you pay extra for (£5.25). I’d not looked into this before, I’d assumed it would let you get a refund if you want one – actually it’s a very strict policy which only applies in certain circumstances which you’d have to prove in order to claim.

 

I agree that a straight ballot would be fairer. It wouldn’t be a huge change to their systems as you’re basically capturing the same personal and payment details as now, all that changes is the way you create groups and allocate tickets.

 

I’ve been trying to think of ways I could cheat this system.

 

Multiple registrations is basically a gamble that you don’t get multiple tickets or that you can afford it if you do.

 

I was thinking you could maybe create multiple registrations with the same payment details and only have enough money in the account to pay for one ticket, so if you got multiple then the subsequent payments would fail. I think they already don’t allow multiple payments from the same card so I they used the same rule you couldn’t do that.

 

You could potentially use different bank accounts and monitor them to see if a payment is taken, if it is then clear out the other accounts. It would be a hassle but if they’re processing tens of thousands of transactions there could reasonably be a delay between them.

[efcfanwirral]

I think the big issue with a straight up ballot would be around the atmosphere - lots of 1s and 2s rather than groups and I actually think that'd make people enjoy it less. Plus I think the effort levels required now are minimal but keep a good atmosphere, it could easily tip over into a very dodgy atmosphere from what I've seen of the dance village and late night areas.

It could also work the opposite way, where people don't go because they can't go with all their mates. No chance would group numbers be higher than the 6 you're allowed now. On the other hand, if it was one person one entry I'd go even if nobody I knew had tickets, which I don't think would be the majority opinion.

But I'm against a ballot for the same reason others are against the current system - because I'm very confident of tickets in the current system, whereas those complaining probably aren't.

It'd be an interesting experiment anyway!

[whisty]

The biggest issue with a ballot system is as mentioned above. I bet there are lots of large groups who go every year, I'd bet mines relatively small having grown to 9 with another 3 associated folk. You restrict that by ballot you end up decreasing  demand. The festival must love the current situation, demand outstripping supply, drives demand and ensures the future of the festival, It's fair for all as it is imho. 

Edited October 6, 2015 by whisty

[Untz]

I think the big issue with a straight up ballot would be around the atmosphere - lots of 1s and 2s rather than groups and I actually think that'd make people enjoy it less.

Could even improve it as people would be more willing to interact with others around them if they're not in large friendship groups?

It would put a lot of people off though, aye.

[tweed1981]

I’ve just been looking into the refund policy, for a regular refund you can only apply for one until May 6^th. So if the ballot was late April you could do away with regular refunds.

 

There is also the TicketPlan Refund Protection scheme which you pay extra for (£5.25). I’d not looked into this before, I’d assumed it would let you get a refund if you want one – actually it’s a very strict policy which only applies in certain circumstances which you’d have to prove in order to claim.

 

I agree that a straight ballot would be fairer. It wouldn’t be a huge change to their systems as you’re basically capturing the same personal and payment details as now, all that changes is the way you create groups and allocate tickets.

 

I’ve been trying to think of ways I could cheat this system.

 

Multiple registrations is basically a gamble that you don’t get multiple tickets or that you can afford it if you do.

 

I was thinking you could maybe create multiple registrations with the same payment details and only have enough money in the account to pay for one ticket, so if you got multiple then the subsequent payments would fail. I think they already don’t allow multiple payments from the same card so I they used the same rule you couldn’t do that.

 

You could potentially use different bank accounts and monitor them to see if a payment is taken, if it is then clear out the other accounts. It would be a hassle but if they’re processing tens of thousands of transactions there could reasonably be a delay between them.

I'm sorry but I think what you are saying is quite bizarre! You think a ballot would be a fairer system, but you are trying to think of ways that you could cheat that system therefore making it, yes, completely unfair!

A ballot system would mean on the whole, people on here would get to go less as it would be completely random rather than having a bias towards the persistent and organised. Is that what people really really want? Things taken entirely out of their hands and left to chance?

Unless of course you can fabricate a way to cheat this supposedly fairer system!

[Vacant0]

If you had to queue up at a HMV which opened at 9am to buy one what time would you start queuing.

July.

[Vacant0]

All this talk of a ballot somehow being fairer and more preferable to the current system, its making my head hurt.

[Neville Street]

Haven't read the whole thread so apologies if this has been said.

They dropped the max per booking to 4 in about 2008 and tickets took until just before the festival to sell. I think it was 8 the year before that. Went straight back to 6. Stopping people being able to aim for a reasonable gang with ballots, etc., would risk reducing demand.

[sime]

Glastonbury stop booking big name Pop / Heavy Rock Metal / Rap Acts. Announce the full line-up before tickets go on sale. This will put a lot of people off going and make it a better festival IMO.

How? I'm confused by how not having some good pop, rock and rap acts would make for a better festival. Music diversity is one of the best things about that side of the festival. I guess you mean for them to not book big popular crowd drawing acts as a way to lessen the festivals popularity. From a business point of view that would not be a good idea. Glastonbury is a brand which needs to sell itself. It would be impossible for the festival to release a full line up in October 8 months before it opens as 95% plus of the acts would not yet be booked. Edited October 6, 2015 by sime

[TheParkAfterDark]

Haven't read the whole thread so apologies if this has been said.

They dropped the max per booking to 4 in about 2008 and tickets took until just before the festival to sell. I think it was 8 the year before that. Went straight back to 6. Stopping people being able to aim for a reasonable gang with ballots, etc., would risk reducing demand.

I ssem to recall it only being 2 in 2007? Or was that 2004?

[Neville Street]

Actually I think you are right. 2007 was my first year back after a very long gap (1990!!), and I think it was set v low due to quick sale prior year. When did photo reg start?

Edit: I tried for tix in various years in interim, but never managed. Touch wood have not missed one since

Edited October 6, 2015 by Neville Street

[topmarksbri]

I've thought before about a system that allowed people to donate their time in the form of charitable work in order to better get themselves a ticket but ultimately this too favours the rich as they have more time on their side - what's to stop some hoorah henry who doesn't have to work because his dad pays for everything from just doing a few weeks of charitable work in the middle of the day to guarantee himself a ticket? Obviously not charitable work is a bad thing but ultimately it doesn't make it any fairer. 

 

One system that's been suggested on here before I like is decreasing the amount of request the server can handle to turn it into more of a slog over one day - this still favours people with more time on their hands but certainly to a lesser degree. 

[guypjfreak]

I think a £50 deposit is fair but making it non refundable would stop some of the just in case buyers, freeing up tickets for people who really want to go.

Charm x

yea i like that idea ...they lose the whole £50 ....unless they can prove they really cant go

Edited October 6, 2015 by guypjfreak

[FloorFiller]

aye as has been stated, the ticket system isn't perfect, but you'd struggle to think of another plausible system that isn't full of even more gaping holes. the current system ensures that a random selection of people are allotted tickets, complete with being allowed to secure tickets for others in their parties (or total strangers if they want) - it may not always work for you, but as people have mentioned, if you really want to be at Glastonbury, you can 99% make it so

[DeanoL]

The ballot idea as I suggested would actually make it easier for groups, as you could enter the ballot in whatever size group you want, that group gets one entry in the ballot, either you all get in or none of you do. Payment would then be processed separately for each group member. You'd have the exact same odds as anyone else (except when literally down to the last five tickets, groups of eight would be out, but that's tiny.

I'm not proposing they adopt a ballot, I would rather keep going every year, but if they did it to make things fairer is probably vaguely support it.