There has to be a better way to allocate tickets

[northernringo]

4 minutes ago, Ayrshire Chris said:

It’s easy to say now that I’ve got tickets but I reckon the current system is far better than a ballot. Currently you’ve to commit to the half hour of hell, prepare , get organised and of course have a large slice of luck.  A ballot is just a large slice of luck. I would imagine it would attract more applicants, many of whom not to bothered if they succeed, for want of a better phrase,  it’s a lazy way of getting a ticket.    

I agree and I didn't get a ticket.

Although it has its flaws, the current way is much better than a ballot.

[Ayrshire Chris]

Just now, northernringo said:

I agree and I didn't get a ticket.

Although it has its flaws, the current way is much better than a ballot.

Best of luck in the resale, oh. And the ballot!! And the competitions, I got the resale in 2017, almost right away when the sale started. 

[northernringo]

2 minutes ago, Ayrshire Chris said:

Best of luck in the resale, oh. And the ballot!! And the competitions, I got the resale in 2017, almost right away when the sale started. 

If I end up being successful in the ballot I think my views on the ticket selling process might change somewhat ?

[Ragingbunion93]

14 hours ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

Isn’t that exactly what you do now but in reverse? Holding page, enter regents details.. enter reg details, holding page? I’m always intrigued when people say join a ‘queue’ as well. What exactly do you mean by queue? Just in fact a free for all which isn’t a queue at all and is exactly how the current system works?

Yes, it is, but the thing is that this system would at least weed out the people who don't even have a valid registration. I don't now what the numbers of people without registrations trying to access the site would be, but I imagine it's probably a decent amount of people that are just making things harder for the serious ticket buyers.

 

I realize there is no queue; the system is a holding page, and essentially a lottery. I used the term queue colloquially. Sorry about that.

[uscore]

1 hour ago, Ayrshire Chris said:

It’s easy to say now that I’ve got tickets but I reckon the current system is far better than a ballot. Currently you’ve to commit to the half hour of hell, prepare , get organised and of course have a large slice of luck.  A ballot is just a large slice of luck. I would imagine it would attract more applicants, many of whom not to bothered if they succeed, for want of a better phrase,  it’s a lazy way of getting a ticket.    

I don't think anyone here at all is suggesting a ballot, at least not for more than a very small % of the total ticket sales. 

I've suggested a few times that the festival might want to think about ways to tinker with the current system a bit in an attempt to level the playing field, which people have argued with me about, even though Emily has pretty much already said that's what they are doing.

[Ayrshire Chris]

3 minutes ago, uscore said:

I don't think anyone here at all is suggesting a ballot, at least not for more than a very small % of the total ticket sales. 

I've suggested a few times that the festival might want to think about ways to tinker with the current system a bit in an attempt to level the playing field, which people have argued with me about, even though Emily has pretty much already said that's what they are doing.

Biggest frustration for many this year was crashing out half way through the procedure. If there was some way of ensuring that doesn’t happen then that would be a start. Whatever tinkering or alterations are considered you can be sure that there will be complaints!  Take the whole cost right away and that discriminates against those who struggle to find the cash, cut the ticket allocations from six to four per booking and that breaks up friends groups etc. There’s an argument for and against every suggestion! 

[parsonjack]

9 minutes ago, Ayrshire Chris said:

Biggest frustration for many this year was crashing out half way through the procedure. If there was some way of ensuring that doesn’t happen then that would be a start. Whatever tinkering or alterations are considered you can be sure that there will be complaints!  Take the whole cost right away and that discriminates against those who struggle to find the cash, cut the ticket allocations from six to four per booking and that breaks up friends groups etc. There’s an argument for and against every suggestion! 

Pre-pay deposit window for a week before T-Day...any registration not successful gets an automatic refund.

[dotdash79]

5 minutes ago, parsonjack said:

Pre-pay deposit window for a week before T-Day...any registration not successful gets an automatic refund.

Adds cost to manage would have to increase cost.

[Ayrshire Chris]

8 minutes ago, parsonjack said:

Pre-pay deposit window for a week before T-Day...any registration not successful gets an automatic refund.

Can’t see much wrong with that, though I am positive someone will find a negative. That would cut out the most stressful stage of booking, entering bank details and speed up the booking process on t day. 

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

Cost and admin involved in processing and refunding millions of refunds would be one reason I’d imagine. The other would probably be that having pre authorised payment from everyone, the sale could literally last <5 minutes which would lead to even more unhappiness/uproar.

[parsonjack]

57 minutes ago, dotdash79 said:

Adds cost to manage would have to increase cost.

True.

41 minutes ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

Cost and admin involved in processing and refunding millions of refunds would be one reason I’d imagine. The other would probably be that having pre authorised payment from everyone, the sale could literally last <5 minutes which would lead to even more unhappiness/uproar.

Sale time could be manipulated by adjusting the amount of concurrent sessions....general opinion is that it already is.

Edited October 18, 2019 by parsonjack

[MrZigster]

20 hours ago, incident said:

They almost certainly got the number by taking the number of registrations quoted by the festival (2.4 million), and dividing it by the number of tickets available (up to 142k depending on whether the festival chose to use the allowed increase).

So not a safe number at all.

Yep. That's as good as 17 to 1. Lazy journalism then.

I'm sure it's not just me who'd like to know the real amount of wannabe attendees.

[Ayrshire Chris]

There must be many registrations that are redundant, just folk who might have registered some time ago but now have no intention of going. Maybe cancelling all registrations in the fallow year and giving us the two years to re register for the next five year phase of festivals would give a more accurate idea of the demand for tickets. No matter what demand will seriously outstrip supply. . 

[kalifire]

17 hours ago, eFestivals said:

remember, 50% of the population are below average intelligence. 

This is incorrect. 

[mcshed]

1 hour ago, kalifire said:

This is incorrect. 

Would you prefer 50% of the population are below median intelligence?

[Ayrshire Chris]

22 minutes ago, mcshed said:

Would you prefer 50% of the population are below median intelligence?

Mean, mode , median, this place is awash with statisticians!

[dotdash79]

23 minutes ago, Ayrshire Chris said:

Mean, mode , median, this place is awash with statisticians!

What are the chance that this place is awash with statisticians?

[mcshed]

3 minutes ago, dotdash79 said:

What are the chance that this place is awash with statisticians?

Looking at the frequency of stats posts on an internet forum seems like ropey methodology no matter what sort of significance values it comes up with.

[Sasperella]

14 hours ago, uscore said:

even though Emily has pretty much already said that's what they are doing.

I think I might have missed some intel here...did she say something about it in a recent interview?

24 minutes ago, mcshed said:

Looking at the frequency of stats posts on an internet forum seems like ropey methodology no matter what sort of significance values it comes up with.

True....however, this thread has proven a lot more entertaining than reading the argument about Foals again

[mcshed]

37 minutes ago, Sasperella said:

I think I might have missed some intel here...did she say something about it in a recent interview?

True....however, this thread has proven a lot more entertaining than reading the argument about Foals again

Frequency of Foals or fF shows a strong negative correlation with absolute thread entertainment value E.

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

This will probably be an unpopular view, but in the grand scheme of things I reckon the amount of failed transactions at payment stage is relatively low. I also think that although it’s frustrating for those it affects, it’s a side affect of an infrastructure that struggles slightly with the demand, and hence doesn’t allow tickets to sell out in literally a couple of minutes. I’ve no doubt they could solve it but the question is does anybody really want a ruthlessly efficient system. If we had that would you have even been at the payment screen in the first place?

The reason I state I think the amount of failures at payment stage is relatively low, is that across 5 sales I’ve got a booking page four times and on two of those occasions I’ve got a booking page twice. On all of those occasions it’s always been stable and I’ve had no issues. I reckon they have a few servers and it’s just bad luck if you get on one that’s playing up. I’d say for anyone with a failed payment they’re more likely to come on here and talk about it than if everything just went through smoothly.

Edited October 19, 2019 by Deaf Nobby Burton

[lukethekid]

1 hour ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

This will probably be an unpopular view, but in the grand scheme of things I reckon the amount of failed transactions at payment stage is relatively low. I also think that although it’s frustrating for those it affects, it’s a side affect of an infrastructure that struggles slightly with the demand, and hence doesn’t allow tickets to sell out in literally a couple of minutes. I’ve no doubt they could solve it but the question is does anybody really want a ruthlessly efficient system. If we had that would you have even been at the payment screen in the first place?

The reason I state I think the amount of failures at payment stage is relatively low, is that across 5 sales I’ve got a booking page four times and on two of those occasions I’ve got a booking page twice. On all of those occasions it’s always been stable and I’ve had no issues. I reckon they have a few servers and it’s just bad luck if you get on one that’s playing up. I’d say for anyone with a failed payment they’re more likely to come on here and talk about it than if everything just went through smoothly.

Spot on ??

[lukethekid]

Surely if the system was able to process an infinite amount of tickets all at the same time it would be sold out in about 90 seconds. That way it really would be unfair because it is advantageous to those who can type quicker. 

The current system is clearly the best way to do it. And I’m sorry to say it but the people saying otherwise are more than likely going to be those who have missed out on tickets and are potentially arguing for another method of the ticket day procedure with a small dose of bitterness because they didn’t get a ticket.

There’s obviously a stroke of luck involved but if you know what you’re doing you’ve got a pretty good chance of getting a ticket. 

Edited October 19, 2019 by lukethekid

[naomi1303]

1 hour ago, lukethekid said:

Surely if the system was able to process an infinite amount of tickets all at the same time it would be sold out in about 90 seconds. That way it really would be unfair because it is advantageous to those who can type quicker. 

The current system is clearly the best way to do it. And I’m sorry to say it but the people saying otherwise are more than likely going to be those who have missed out on tickets and are potentially arguing for another method of the ticket day procedure with a small dose of bitterness because they didn’t get a ticket.

There’s obviously a stroke of luck involved but if you know what you’re doing you’ve got a pretty good chance of getting a ticket. 

Nah, I've been successful 3 out of 4 years trying and I honestly believe a straight ballot would be fairer. My other half and I have a military operation going. We took his mum one year and she would have had no chance getting tickets on her own (and in fact, just having her try was more stressful for us!). There are a lot of people not tech savvy who are at a vast disadvantage.

[Ayrshire Chris]

3 minutes ago, naomi1303 said:

Nah, I've been successful 3 out of 4 years trying and I honestly believe a straight ballot would be fairer. My other half and I have a military operation going. We took his mum one year and she would have had no chance getting tickets on her own (and in fact, just having her try was more stressful for us!). There are a lot of people not tech savvy who are at a vast disadvantage.

You make a point but a simple ballot in my opinion would just encourage even more folk to apply for tickets, many not really committed to the festival and it’s ethos. And what about groups of friends who could be separated if only one or two of them were successful?  I reckon the tech savvy argument is overrated. This year I use one pc, refreshing every 5 seconds and a 4g phone. Also had an I pad but gave up on it after a few minutes. In the past I just used the pc. Been successful for the last 5 festivals. There’s more luck than tech knowledge involved in getting the tickets.