£20 Admin Fee

[McCor]

They're now keeping £20 of the deposit for those who don't pay their balance. If 5% of people don't pay, they gain £120k. Or am I wrong?

[incident]

135k by my calculation.

I don't think there's a problem with that, actually, I'd rather the whole deposit was non refundable - anything that caused the maybes and the lineup shoppers to think twice about buying "just in case" would be welcome.

[Anderson19]

Yep the the whole deposit being non refundable would be great.

[themuel]

A non refundable deposit would be fine with me,  The other thing which would be very fine is a payment plan option.

[thewayiam]

Yeah I think £20 is fine myself, if the festival that is majorly charity based manage to make a bit for themselves, it at least gives them a chance to put it towards increasing rental and the extra needed for certain high a acts now while having a balance with ticket prices too. I'm not saying that's how it totally works but it's how I'd like to think and I'm don't think Eavis is charging above what he has to hence I imagine the idea of relocating to keep costs down.

 

[McCor]

I'd agree with none refundable deposit definitely!

[robin]

The concept of a deposit makes me expect it to be non refundable. It's surely weird that they do let you have it back. 

[UEF]

i doubt they'll make it non-refundable. Glastonbury will remember all too well the years where it didn't sell out - the point is getting as many bums on seats as possible and the mostly-refundable deposit is a) a way of them doing that and B] a way for them to avoid tax

[arcade fireman]

Yeah, it's not like Michael is gonna be buying himself loads of pairs of expensive denim shorts with that 120k. 

[Jennings74]

Deposits non refundable for the 'fence sitters'!! ..... they could donate any profits after taking out the running costs on Ticket Day to charity.

So even if you genuinely can't go, your money is going to a good cause and not more shorts for Michael 

[Rose-Colored Boy]

3 hours ago, incident said:

135k by my calculation.

I don't think there's a problem with that, actually, I'd rather the whole deposit was non refundable - anything that caused the maybes and the lineup shoppers to think twice about buying "just in case" would be welcome.

But then what happens if someone genuinely can't go for genuine changes in circumstance or what have you.. part of the problem driving the secondary market is that there's no 'official' way of getting your money back if you can no longer go to an event you genuinely were planning to go to when you booked it, Glastonbury don't need to join in with that.

Edited October 9, 2016 by Zac Quinn

[pjadnoo]

I don't think it's unreasonable for Glasto/SeeTickets to keep some of the deposit in the event of cancelling tickets. After all, the costs of selling the tickets in the first place is an overhead that they need to pay for. I don't know how much of the £20 is costs, but I doubt it's as simple as saying thinking of it as 100% profit.

However, I'm not sure that removing the refund altogether as a way to deter people who would only go to Glastonbury for the line-up is the way to go. I agree that there's a lot more to the festival than the headliners, but if people only want to attend because, say, Daft Punk might attend, then that's fair enough. Besides, those are people who might go along, and then see how much more Glastonbury has to offer.

Edited October 9, 2016 by pjadnoo

[verrymerry]

I'm quite sure the fee is to put people off getting tickets in October, waiting for the line-up & then cancelling. I'd be happy if they kept the whole deposit tbh, but understand some people may genuinely have to cancel, but be outside the remit of the insurance. Tough cookie that 

[robin]

The deposit came in when the price became so much that you'd never have 6 times the total ticket price just resting in your account on the off chance that you'd be the one to get through. 

[Guest]

I know a lot of people who have had to let their tickets go back in the pot, and it's never been the mythical creatures talked about on here who don't like the line-up. It's people who have work and family commitments, or changes in personal circumstances that mean they can't go. Yep, sure, they'd be within their rights to retain the whole deposit, but I'm personally glad they don't do. We all like to think on here that anybody who dares put anything else above Glastonbury is a Daily Mail reader, but that's really not true in reality, let's not get so excited about punishing people for imaginary crimes.

[swede]

4 hours ago, McCor said:

They're now keeping £20 of the deposit for those who don't pay their balance. If 5% of people don't pay, they gain £120k. Or am I wrong?

Why is it an issue if your planning on going ? 

Things like this and the parking are things that will rise if the neighbouring farmers keep putting the rent up, I'd rather they make the money this way than adding it to the ticket price 

[incident]

Just now, GETOFFAMYLAWN said:

it's never been the mythical creatures talked about on here who don't like the line-up.

Those creatures certainly do exist.

I was asked to buy some tickets for someone who got excited by the current rumours but I know for sure would have cancelled if neither Radiohead or the Stone Roses were on the final bill. I didn't do so, mostly because I'd already made a commitment elsewhere rather than any idealogical reason.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, incident said:

Those creatures certainly do exist.

I was asked to buy some tickets for someone who got excited by the current rumours but I know for sure would have cancelled if neither Radiohead or the Stone Roses were on the final bill. I didn't do so, mostly because I'd already made a commitment elsewhere rather than any idealogical reason.

Yep, they exist, but in my experience they're vastly outnumbered by those who've got pregnant, not got the money, not been able to get time off work, etc. Life is never certain.

[funkychick2007]

Are we not forgetting the true spirit of glastonbury! If you dont want to venture into the unknown then dont buy a ticket! Glastonbury is so much more than who plays on the main stage! Its another world created by many many unseen and unheard of people! Thank you so much to those who make it possible! 

[Mollyanne&Mike]

I fully agree with the £20 retention, maybe a way forward could be an option to donate the remaining £30 to Greenpeace, Wateraid or CND or a combination of.

what do you think? 

I already donate to each of these each month, but would probably give the balance ..... fingers crossed I am not in this position though.

[McCor]

1 hour ago, swede said:

Why is it an issue if your planning on going ? 

Things like this and the parking are things that will rise if the neighbouring farmers keep putting the rent up, I'd rather they make the money this way than adding it to the ticket price 

It's not a issue as such, and I am 100% going. Just saying that a lot of cash....

[DeanoL]

Now it's £20 I honestly don't think there's much point making it £50. When it was less than £20 it could seem like a flutter, a gamble on the lineup, but once you hit that £20 mark... I'm not sure there are many people who would risk £20 on it but wouldn't risk £50.

[muffled oars]

I reckon it's about right. By getting a chunk of your money back, it makes it worthwhile for those who can't go to actually cancel their ticket. If the deposit was non-refundable, people wouldn't bother cancelling and those tickets wouldn't be available in the resales. On the other hand by retaining a fee, it does put off a number of the chancers.

I should declare an interest, I have paid a deposit for one of my lot who at this stage has no idea whether work and commitments will make it possible. But we couldn't book and leave one person out just in case they couldn't join us, so it makes sense and the twenty quid is affordable in those circs. We all have our own lives to juggle.

[swede]

36 minutes ago, McCor said:

It's not a issue as such, and I am 100% going. Just saying that a lot of cash....

Yes, I agree, but while the festival is still giving money to good causes and long may that continue they need to create potential revenue for things like the land rental from other avenues apart from hiking the ticket prices up ridiculously. 

I agree with the OP as well, I think it should be non refundable, that'd start to weed out the casuals 

Edited October 9, 2016 by swede

[Avalon_Fields]

19 minutes ago, muffled oars said:

I reckon it's about right. By getting a chunk of your money back, it makes it worthwhile for those who can't go to actually cancel their ticket. If the deposit was non-refundable, people wouldn't bother cancelling and those tickets wouldn't be available in the resales. On the other hand by retaining a fee, it does put off a number of the chancers.

I should declare an interest, I have paid a deposit for one of my lot who at this stage has no idea whether work and commitments will make it possible. But we couldn't book and leave one person out just in case they couldn't join us, so it makes sense and the twenty quid is affordable in those circs. We all have our own lives to juggle.

Is your location really a tree in Norway? 

Lat 59.8 Long 10.4