Ticket refund

[Binturong]

37 minutes ago, bombfrog said:

 

Not answering the question though, are you. How many of the 140,000 people do you think would pay £500 for a ticket?

It’s not how many of the 140,000. It’s how many of the people that try to get tickets. I read there were between 1-2 million people registered. If we use the ratio of how many of your group would go, two out of twelve, so 1:6, you would need 840,000 people interested to sell out at £500 per ticket.

There are possibly 2 million. 

It would sell out. 

[tarw]

13 minutes ago, bombfrog said:

How about we start from the beginning but I get to ask the loaded questions?

Do you you think if my wife and I save up £500 and spend it on two tickets to an event that we shouldn't be able to then sell that on to somebody else if we want to, the same way you're allowed to sell your car if you don't want it any more, or take your phone into CEX to trade it in? Does that seem fair to you?

 

Totally different. If cars or phones are in short supply then more can be manufactured to meet the demand. Glastonbury tickets are a finite resource due to licensing conditions. If the market price was charged it would change the whole demographic of the attendees. That would probably kill the festival as part of the atmosphere would be lost. I’ve seen it happening at big sporting events were true fans have been replaced by Tim from purchasing on a hospitality ticket from one of his suppliers. 

[Madyaker]

31 minutes ago, bombfrog said:

How about we start from the beginning but I get to ask the loaded questions?

Do you you think if my wife and I save up £500 and spend it on two tickets to an event that we shouldn't be able to then sell that on to somebody else if we want to, the same way you're allowed to sell your car if you don't want it any more, or take your phone into CEX to trade it in? Does that seem fair to you?

 

Do you think demand for glasto outstrips supply of tickets? It isn't a loaded question.

[Kashkin]

1 hour ago, bombfrog said:

How about we start from the beginning but I get to ask the loaded questions?

Do you you think if my wife and I save up £500 and spend it on two tickets to an event that we shouldn't be able to then sell that on to somebody else if we want to, the same way you're allowed to sell your car if you don't want it any more, or take your phone into CEX to trade it in? Does that seem fair to you?

 

I do think it's broadly fair, assuming you're made aware of the terms when you purchase, and given that you can in fact get a refund for most of the time since you bought the ticket, just not for the final six weeks, and there is also the option to take out insurance. Lots of other things, such as flights, operate with similar (or worse) parameters. It's not ideal but the amount of people affected by this situation must be pretty tiny, certainly smaller than the amount who would be negatively affected by touting in an unrestricted system. 

[Flysheet]

1 hour ago, tarw said:

Totally different. If cars or phones are in short supply then more can be manufactured to meet the demand. Glastonbury tickets are a finite resource due to licensing conditions. If the market price was charged it would change the whole demographic of the attendees. That would probably kill the festival as part of the atmosphere would be lost. I’ve seen it happening at big sporting events were true fans have been replaced by Tim from purchasing on a hospitality ticket from one of his suppliers. 

It's already changed massively, in part due to licensing but also the anarchic edge has gone in the main. I didn't go for the mid 90s and when I came back in 99 there'd been a shift 

[gigpusher]

To be honest the other key factor for ensuring against the touting of tickets of any kind is where does the money go. If you look at a standard concert ticket (though obviously for a festival it is similar but scale-able) You pay x amount for your ticket and a % goes to the person who is performing (the talent) then some goes to the venue (organiser) and money for security, cleaning the venue, safety etc. If touts are allowed to exist and we are happy with them existing then we are saying that the person who hits f5 at the right time is entitled to more money than the artist or the organiser. Now that to me is shit. 

You could say that they should just make the tickets dearer themselves and take a bigger piece of the pie but that makes the world a culturally poorer place. I, for example would probably pay up to double for my Glastonbury ticket but I don't have any more money to spend on the arts so I'd probably end up buying less vinyl and going to less gigs which would have a detrimental impact on the nurturing of new talent which would in time make the festival circuit less interesting in the first place. I know I made a decision years ago to avoid the big overpriced arena tours unless it was someone I adore to ensure I could go to more gigs. 

We all, I think agree that we wish there was some system for people with genuine reasons to return tickets in this 6 week period but ultimately the very small amount of harm done by that 6 week window is tiny in comparison to the harm of allowing full scale touting. 

[gigpusher]

1 hour ago, tarw said:

 That would probably kill the festival as part of the atmosphere would be lost. I’ve seen it happening at big sporting events were true fans have been replaced by Tim from purchasing on a hospitality ticket from one of his suppliers. 

Indeed I knew someone who boasted about having gone to Wimbledon every year for a decade and never having watched a match. I also knew a tennis fanatic meanwhile who tried for over a decade before he was successful in getting 'normal tickets' to a Wimbledon final. 

[Ayrshire Chris]

1 hour ago, Binturong said:

It’s not how many of the 140,000. It’s how many of the people that try to get tickets. I read there were between 1-2 million people registered. If we use the ratio of how many of your group would go, two out of twelve, so 1:6, you would need 840,000 people interested to sell out at £500 per ticket.

There are possibly 2 million. 

It would sell out. 

You could easily make it 750 a ticket. 1500 for a 5 day holiday for two , party time every night, great bands wherever you look almost round the clock. An experience of a lifetime. 

[bombfrog]

1 hour ago, Binturong said:

It’s not how many of the 140,000. It’s how many of the people that try to get tickets. I read there were between 1-2 million people registered. If we use the ratio of how many of your group would go, two out of twelve, so 1:6, you would need 840,000 people interested to sell out at £500 per ticket.

There are possibly 2 million. 

It would sell out. 

??? 

Where to even begin with this?

2 million people? You must be kidding. I know ticket day is difficult but you're saying that only 1 in 14.28 people who want tickets get them? So, the odds of my group of 12 (it fluctuates slightly but lets say that it's 12) all getting tickets for 15 years in a row has the following chance ...

( (0.07^12)^15 ) * 100 = 1.31113437138e-206 % 

We need to start playing the lottery, we'd win it every week!

I joke of course, it's impossible to work it out exactly because we're all trying to buy tickets for each other, not in isolation, but you see my point. Your numbers are totally wrong.

That's before you even take into account that my group is not representative of your average person who signs up, many of which don't care nearly as much as we do. If you're going to start doing the maths you need to start with better assumptions.

 

 

[bombfrog]

Oh, and the inverse snobbery in this thread is now palpable!

[MetaKate]

Ok but I already solved it. I havent bothered to read the last couple pages. 

Ok so no one likes Touts. Touts are the problem with reselling a ticket. Touts are only going to buy the tickets if they know they can make money. 

If Glastonbury implemented a system in which you could sell on your ticket in a blind sale (so no communication between seller and buyer to prevent asking for more on the downlow), but it was only sellable at face value, it eliminates touts wanting to get in on it. 

I cant see any flaws in implementing a system like this. 

 

[bombfrog]

3 minutes ago, MetaKate said:

Ok but I already solved it. I havent bothered to read the last couple pages. 

Ok so no one likes Touts. Touts are the problem with reselling a ticket. Touts are only going to buy the tickets if they know they can make money. 

If Glastonbury implemented a system in which you could sell on your ticket in a blind sale (so no communication between seller and buyer to prevent asking for more on the downlow), but it was only sellable at face value, it eliminates touts wanting to get in on it. 

I cant see any flaws in implementing a system like this. 

 

Not really. Obviously just the technical challenges of making it work but I'm sure they could if they wanted to. They spent an awful lot of time and effort developing the existing system after all.

This would work right up until the point that the tickets are mailed out but they'd be within their rights to charge a few quid for doing it.

[MetaKate]

4 minutes ago, bombfrog said:

Not really. Obviously just the technical challenges of making it work but I'm sure they could if they wanted to. They spent an awful lot of time and effort developing the existing system after all.

This would work right up until the point that the tickets are mailed out but they'd be within their rights to charge a few quid for doing it.

For sure, they could have a processing fee or something tacked on. I know it's a lot of tickets they handle so im not knocking their current system but I do think it's a shame for a ticket to go to waste when there are people dying to go. 

[MetaKate]

Also... I read back a bit because I'm avoiding work... but I don't think Id pay £500 for a ticket. That's a lot of money. 

Im Canadian..  I fly over for the festival and I already shell out to do that. If the festival then became a money grab full of people that are willing to pay that? Im out. 

Yeah a lot of people would be in... but I think they would lose a lot of the dedicated regular crowd. A lot of festivals have been ending because theyve alienated their core attendees. Bonnaroo almost did the same, but they realized it in time, that's why you've got Phish headlining 3x this year. 

Coachella tickets were going for $300 this year and didnt sell out. 4 years ago a resold ticket would go for $800+. 

My point basically is the festival game isnt eternal. Glastonbury is doing it right and that's why it's the amazing place that it is, but if things start to change in the wrong direction the bubble could pop and that could be the end of it as we know it. 

I really dont even understand what the actual discussion is at this point, but that's my 2 cents. 

[Kashkin]

30 minutes ago, MetaKate said:

 

 

 

41 minutes ago, MetaKate said:

Ok but I already solved it. I havent bothered to read the last couple pages. 

Ok so no one likes Touts. Touts are the problem with reselling a ticket. Touts are only going to buy the tickets if they know they can make money. 

If Glastonbury implemented a system in which you could sell on your ticket in a blind sale (so no communication between seller and buyer to prevent asking for more on the downlow), but it was only sellable at face value, it eliminates touts wanting to get in on it. 

I cant see any flaws in implementing a system like this. 

 

Is there a need for a new system which connects buyer and seller? Wouldn't it be easier to just extend the refund deadline to a point closer to ticket mailout, and then See resell any returned tickets as per usual secret resale process? Although presumably they have their reasons for the deadline being where it is. 

Edited May 14, 2019 by Kashkin

[philipsteak]

7 hours ago, jyoung said:

Whatever you think about reselling tickets and whether or not you'd be brave enough to go with someone elses ticket... It's worth remembering that the people working on the gates have volunteered to do so and have given up their own time to be a part of the festival. I don't think that a steward flagging something up when the photo on the ticket clearly doesn't match the person with the ticket makes them cold hearted or not funny at parties. It makes them someone who has volunteered to work a position and is doing so with accordance of the rules in exchange for entry themselves. Why would they be expected to do anything to jeopardize that. Just my opinion.

Yep, I've said this before on a very similar thread that's cropped up before. Me and GFL (through Oxfam) have an agreement. They agreed to give me a ticket and a few perks. I agreed to do the job asked of me. So I will.

4 hours ago, incident said:

And as has been pointed out, by myself and others - those are not the only people trying to get in. That's a simple statement of fact. You can't even say with any confidence whether it's a majority of not (and nor can I)

There's definitely mystery shoppers - To be honest I don't know the percentage that got caught last time - I know some did, and I know some didn't.

There's also very likely to be - especially if tickets were transferable or if stewards are thought likely to ignore the photos - people who've acquired them by less scrupulous means. To this day the festival still warns people about giving/showing your ticket to "stewards" before you reach the gate because before the photo system that was a common scam.

If you're working on the gates, it's very problematic to start making up your own rules. The guidelines are clear, published, and there for a reason - ultimately whether you or me or anyone else agrees with them isn't all that relevant. Should I have let in the group who turned up with forged (stall holder) tickets? I spotted them because I knew what to look for, but I bet they thought they were real, sold on by a trader who had a few spare. Maybe I should have let it go? After all - they're people who love the festival and have paid a ot of money for ticket, travel, kit, etc. They're just like you and me (except they weren't lucky like we were to get a ticket on T-day).

 

I've turned away people. Some have come in after being verified (not my fault they chose a terrible photo), some I never saw again (either didn't get in, didn't notice them get in or they tried at another gate) and at least one, I'm 99% certain, was a mystery shopper

3 hours ago, incident said:

If he turned out to be a mystery shopper, and it was as blatant as that, then you would definitely care.

I think quite a few of the mystery shoppers are pretty blatant. the one I suspect I had really was

[MetaKate]

2 minutes ago, Kashkin said:

 

 

Is there a need for a new system which connects buyer and seller? Wouldn't it be easier to just extend the refund deadline to a point closer to ticket mailout, and then See resell any returned tickets as per usual secret resale process? Although presumably they have their reasons for the deadline being where it is. 

Probably not, but I would assume the festival doesnt want to chance losing out on revenue or dealing with finances close to the festival for whatever reason, and a buy/sell situation would make sure Glastonbury wasnt shifting any significant money around right before the festival. 

[Titters]

Hi everyone,

 

Sorry I'm late - I had to lock up this evening and the trebuchet delivery got stuck on the A47... 

Anyway. 

*Ahem* 

(Is this thing on?) 

 

Let the market decide. 

[scaryclaireyfairy]

I cancelled my ticket one day before the deadline in '11. Apparently, at that point a good portion of the tickets were already enveloped and ready to be posted. My ticket was one of two being sent in the same envelope. If our order was already in the envelope then the whole order would have to be scrapped rather than just my ticket. Security thing about opening the envelopes and stuff to prevent tickets 'going missing'. It got quite squeaky. Money had to be rearranged so that if the whole order got cancelled, the remaining ticket-wanter could re-buy it off customer services before the refund properly hit their account. Assuming no one on e-fests found a back door and bought it first. I was soooo popular that year...

Edited May 14, 2019 by scaryclaireyfairy

[tmcintosh]

Just thought I'd throw my two cents in about a potential resale marketplace, as such a system does exist.

I try every year for tickets to a non-festival event which, albeit on a smaller scale, is still pretty big and leads to a bit of a Glastonbury style "refresh and pray" ticket scramble when they come out. The event offers a marketplace where, if you can no longer go, you can sell on your ticket for no more than about 10-15% profit (and a little bit of your "profit" gets sucked up by fees I think.) On top of that the buyer has to pay an admin fee for name change of about a fiver if they sell it on within two weeks of buying their ticket, then £10 if it's been 3 weeks, £15 if it's been a month etc. etc. 

If you want to sell on to a friend, you can opt for your ticket not to be listed to the public on the marketplace and just upload your ticket and send them a private link to access it and complete the transaction. You have to verify you want to sell to that person if they request access. In fairness, I can see the argument for not allowing trades between friends here - I could quite easily whack my ticket on Glasto Chat and promise to only give you access if you bought the ticket AND then transferred me another £X to my bank account, and I know with this particular event I'm talking about that this is something that has happened before. If you're caught bending the rules of it, the owners of the event have the power to ban you from their's and any similar events (there's a co-operative scheme in place because a couple of events use the marketplace concurrently), though how strictly this is enforced I'm not sure.

Hope that all makes sense! The system works well, cuts out the margin for touting (OK you can make a couple of quid profit but given that I paid about £90 for my ticket to this particular event this year I'm not sure you'd see people going through the stress of buying tickets they don't need on ticket day for an extra tenner) and ensures that pretty much every ticket which is sold goes to a good home - I think the marketplace closes maybe a week before the event. I don't see why Glastonbury couldn't operate that. I'm sure demand would still completely outstrip supply and not everyone would get a ticket on the hypothetical marketplace, but it seems like a lot less messing round than having a pagechecker or what have you.

[Kashkin]

1 hour ago, MetaKate said:

Probably not, but I would assume the festival doesnt want to chance losing out on revenue or dealing with finances close to the festival for whatever reason, and a buy/sell situation would make sure Glastonbury wasnt shifting any significant money around right before the festival. 

I guess, yeah. Ultimately, regardless of the approach used, we're talking about approx a two week window between the existing refund deadline and despatch (assuming tickets go out from mid May), which is a really tiny window for anyone to actually benefit from any changes to the system - numbers must be miniscule. From their perspective, would it really be worth the effort of implementing a new system? 

[MetaKate]

3 hours ago, Titters said:

Hi everyone,

 

Sorry I'm late - I had to lock up this evening and the trebuchet delivery got stuck on the A47... 

Anyway. 

*Ahem* 

(Is this thing on?) 

 

Let the market decide. 

 

[Binturong]

8 hours ago, bombfrog said:

??? 

Where to even begin with this?

2 million people? You must be kidding. I know ticket day is difficult but you're saying that only 1 in 14.28 people who want tickets get them? So, the odds of my group of 12 (it fluctuates slightly but lets say that it's 12) all getting tickets for 15 years in a row has the following chance ...

( (0.07^12)^15 ) * 100 = 1.31113437138e-206 % 

We need to start playing the lottery, we'd win it every week!

I joke of course, it's impossible to work it out exactly because we're all trying to buy tickets for each other, not in isolation, but you see my point. Your numbers are totally wrong.

That's before you even take into account that my group is not representative of your average person who signs up, many of which don't care nearly as much as we do. If you're going to start doing the maths you need to start with better assumptions.

 

 

No complicated math going on here. Just using your group and the amount of people reportedly registered as possible figures. Of course these are extreme figures at the top end, but there doesn’t need to be 2 million, nowhere near, just the 840k with 1:6 willing to pay the extra. 

Its only just over a decade or so ago that tickets were around £150, car parking £10-£15 and the festival didn’t sell out. It’s now £300 in total and sells out in between 30-60 minutes every year. The festival and the perception of it has changed a lot in that time. With the increasing BBC and social media coverage, the festivals popularity has sky-rocketed. It’s really not hard to believe that people would be willing to pay an extra £200-£250 for a ticket, especially when the demographic of those attending is changing to that of a younger punter, a younger punter who statistically is more likely to be living in the parental home and have more disposable income. Much more fashionable for the “gram” to be at Glastonbury then on ITV with your pants down in Faliraki. 

I’m sure the festival would sell out, touts would line their pockets, and people like myself who barely scraped the £255 together would be forced out (This isn’t strictly true as I’d just put it on the credit card and cancel Christmas instead). Although I’m 42 this year and thinking i may bow out at lucky number 13 next year if I can get tickets to the 50th. 

 

[hfuhruhurr]

10 hours ago, bombfrog said:

( (0.07^12)^15 ) * 100 = 1.31113437138e-206 % 

Ah, maths, so, here's the odds (on the assumption everyone trying has one PC and presses F5 at the same frequency - yeah, I love assumptions):

Let's say, 1m trying for 135k, no idea what it is, but let's go with this. 13.5% chance.

If you have a group of 6 of you trying, you have to look at the probability of failure: 86.5%, do that by power of triers and then convert back to success: 1-(86.5%^6) = 58.5%.

Each year is independent, so you can't do more maths. The only maths you could do is to say "What's the probability that I'll go to Glastonbury for the next 10 years" - then you can repeat the above. But you can't look to the past - re: tossing a coin, no matter what the past outcomes, there's still 50/50, but if you want odds on 3 heads in a row before any tossed, then you can calculate it.

As a matter of interest, if there are 1m people trying for 135k tickets, the optimum number of triers is around 10.

Now, a trier could be more than one browser on different IP addresses.

I'll stop now.

[Johnnyseven]

20 hours ago, bombfrog said:

... it certainly sounds to me like you're suggesting that we should cut them some slack becuase they are somehow doing something altruistic, which is not the case. They're doing it for a free ticket.

I'm a bit late in the discussion here but the above statement is not true.

At the point where Oxfam ticket checkers are doing their job they have paid to be there, it is not free. They get a refund of the cost of their ticket when they have completed their requisite number of shifts. So if they fail a mystery shopper ticket check and let someone in who they shouldn't and this results in them getting booted off the festival site I would assume they would not get their ticket cost back and they would not be able to stay at the festival.