Opinions on what will happen if Glastonbury 50 gets cancelled

[Hugh Jass]

5 minutes ago, Garrett_Salas said:

Bit weird to think people would have no financial costs sunk. Some of us have already sorted out travel back to the UK, paid for a hotel next to king's cross, we've had to make sacrifices each month to save money for April. Your stance on a tent is pretty dumb too - yeh they can donate it after, but you've spent money because you wanted to use it. 

I didn’t say people wouldn’t have put costs in. Of course those who live abroad would have, and it sucks that you stand to lose out on this. But if you get a ticket for next those costs will lot transfer over will they? Either way you’re losing out, and that’s a shame, genuinely, but it doesn’t make anyone more deserving in my eyes. Otherwise it just comes down to who is prepared to spend the most for a ticket.

The tent thing was a flippant response to Luke’s straw man argument.

[Garrett_Salas]

just find it crazy that there seems to be a prevailing opinion that its more unfair to compensate people who've made financial and personal commitments to a festival, when ticketless people would still be missing one festival. bonkers.

[grumpyhack]

We still haven't been given details of how any large gathering ban will work or how long it will run for.  Trying to look on the bright side, Glastonbury is still more than three months away so any ban could be lifted before then.  

[Waynolol]

2 minutes ago, Garrett_Salas said:

just find it crazy that there seems to be a prevailing opinion that its more unfair to compensate people who've made financial and personal commitments to a festival, when ticketless people would still be missing one festival. bonkers.

It’s just people being selfish because they didn’t get tickets, it’s literally nothing but that. 

[Garrett_Salas]

3 minutes ago, Hugh Jass said:

I didn’t say people wouldn’t have put costs in. Of course those who live abroad would have, and it sucks that you stand to lose out on this. But if you get a ticket for next those costs will lot transfer over will they? Either way you’re losing out, and that’s a shame, genuinely, but it doesn’t make anyone more deserving in my eyes. Otherwise it just comes down to who is prepared to spend the most for a ticket.

The tent thing was a flippant response to Luke’s straw man argument.

I don't really understand how you can marry these two points of view?

Edited March 14, 2020 by Garrett_Salas

[circus92]

19 minutes ago, Brave Sir Robin said:

Yep. Obviously you took a risk when you booked those, and you’ll be left (significantly) out of pocket if it’s cancelled, but this is a good example of why those with tickets and have planned their time accordingly should have priority over those without, who won’t be inconvenienced at all.

I simply cannot fathom the idea that it’d be “unfair” for tickets to be rolled over.

Yeah - I suppose this debate is no different to any other in that it polarises opinion, but I am with you all the way in that I just cannot fathom how anyone can think rolling the tickets over is unfair. I would say that regardless of whether I had tickets or not - its just common sense.

As for the “taking a risk” element - I did not see it as a risk at all- otherwise I would never had sunk £2k in.  I mean the odds last October of it being cancelled would have been pretty long.

[Superscally]

5 hours ago, circus92 said:

Why not?

...because it's a different event. It's not tickets to a Paul McCartney gig. The lineup will probably be 50% different and people will have paid their deposits in large numbers for a lineup. It'll be refunds across the board as it's easier to do that, especially as Glasto won't worry about selling tickets next year.

[Superscally]

9 minutes ago, Waynolol said:

It’s just people being selfish because they didn’t get tickets, it’s literally nothing but that. 

Nope. Not entirely. Some people will be saying that in hope, but it would be a huge hassle to differentiate those who don't want to go next year and those who do. Administrative headache for an organisation that will already have lost money. 

[Garrett_Salas]

Just now, Superscally said:

Nope. Not entirely. Some people will be saying that in hope, but it would be a huge hassle to differentiate those who don't want to go next year and those who do. Administrative headache for an organisation that will already have lost money. 

How is this the case at all? They literally know every registration that has a ticket for 2020 and everyone that doesn't

[Hugh Jass]

13 minutes ago, Garrett_Salas said:

I don't really understand how you can marry these two points of view?

I empathise with your situation but it doesn’t change my opinion. That’s how they marry.

[barcelonista1899]

I think if it's cancelled they should allow the 2020 people to pay in full now for 2021 (normal cancellation rules apply) or they receive their deposit back. 

Would help with cash flow for the fest, and it would probably mean the less serious people drop out.  

[Matt42]

Dunno. Strong arguments for both sides. I think 2020 ticket holders need to be honoured in some way. 

[Garrett_Salas]

Just now, Hugh Jass said:

I empathise with your situation but it doesn’t change my opinion. That’s how they marry.

Fair enough - but can you please explain the logic behind believing that it's more fair to not have them rollover. You posted before that you want everyone to have an equal chance - so you support a lottery system for 2021, no?

[circus92]

4 minutes ago, Superscally said:

refunds across the board as it's easier to do that, especially as Glasto won't worry about selling tickets next year.

Surely for Glastonbury it would be more about doing the fairest thing as opposed to what is easier?
In any case this would ridiculously easy to facilitate anyway - they have reg numbers etc - not difficult at all

[Superscally]

4 minutes ago, Garrett_Salas said:

How is this the case at all? They literally know every registration that has a ticket for 2020 and everyone that doesn't

...because not everyone will want to go next year and not everyone knows if they do or not yet. Uncertainty.

[Garrett_Salas]

1 minute ago, Superscally said:

...because not everyone will want to go next year and not everyone knows if they do or not yet. Uncertainty.

So you give them the option of either...

Edited March 14, 2020 by Garrett_Salas

[Superscally]

3 minutes ago, Garrett_Salas said:

So you give them the option of either...

You're not aware of the logistical and financial implications of the situation... Trust me, that wouldn't work. I've experience in events organisation, not of the same size, but in the thousands. The headache for an event the size of Glasto would be biblical.

 

7 minutes ago, Matt42 said:

Dunno. Strong arguments for both sides. I think 2020 ticket holders need to be honoured in some way. 

Good shout. All tickets cancelled, first sale is for those who were winners this year. Then the rest.

Edited March 14, 2020 by Superscally

[Brave Sir Robin]

2 minutes ago, Hugh Jass said:

I empathise with your situation but it doesn’t change my opinion. That’s how they marry.

Doesn’t make sense. How can you possibly think that people who bought a ticket in October and would be left out of pocket, through no fault of their own, are no more deserving of a ticket than people who aren’t inconvenienced at all, and, as of today, may never have even thought about going?

[Superscally]

1 minute ago, Brave Sir Robin said:

Doesn’t make sense. How can you possibly think that people who bought a ticket in October and would be left out of pocket, through no fault of their own, are no more deserving of a ticket than people who aren’t inconvenienced at all, and, as of today, may never have even thought about going?

You could argue those without tickets have been through a lot more! 😂

[Garrett_Salas]

1 minute ago, Superscally said:

You're not aware of the logistical and financial implications of the situation... Trust me, that wouldn't work. I've experience in events organisation, not of the same size, but in the thousands. The headache for an event the size of Glasto would be biblical.

I don't have a background in event management, so yeh I could be completely missing stuff - but giving the option of a refund / honouring tickets for a postponed/future version of the event seems to be way most other festivals are working in this situation, so I'm not really sure why glastonbury is any different?

[fatyeti24]

1 minute ago, Brave Sir Robin said:

Doesn’t make sense. How can you possibly think that people who bought a ticket in October and would be left out of pocket, through no fault of their own, are no more deserving of a ticket than people who aren’t inconvenienced at all, and, as of today, may never have even thought about going?

Just playing devil's advocate, but the festival can, presumably, refund this year's tickets. Whatever anyone has spent beyond that is non of their concern and not something they should really be bringing into next year's ticketing. 

[Superscally]

1 minute ago, Garrett_Salas said:

I don't have a background in event management, so yeh I could be completely missing stuff - but giving the option of a refund / honouring tickets for a postponed/future version of the event seems to be way most other festivals are working in this situation, so I'm not really sure why glastonbury is any different?

Just a real admin ballache. My suggestion based on @Matt42's musing would be hella easier and doesn't shaft anyone apart from super disorganised current ticket holders.

[Garrett_Salas]

4 minutes ago, fatyeti24 said:

Just playing devil's advocate, but the festival can, presumably, refund this year's tickets. Whatever anyone has spent beyond that is non of their concern and not something they should really be bringing into next year's ticketing. 

Thing is I totally get that - and I certainly wouldn't be banging on Emily Eavis' door demanding a refund and echoing my posts this morning, i think the practical side will prevail and that's understandable. What I don't understand is having your starting point that it's more unfair to try and compensate people who lose out through no fault of their own - to me that's a pretty basic tenet of fairness.

Edited March 14, 2020 by Garrett_Salas

[Hugh Jass]

1 minute ago, Brave Sir Robin said:

Doesn’t make sense. How can you possibly think that people who bought a ticket in October and would be left out of pocket, through no fault of their own, are no more deserving of a ticket than people who aren’t inconvenienced at all, and, as of today, may never have even thought about going?

To this and @Garrett_Salas point above, we have the same arguments every year about the “fairness” of the ticketing system, and every year we always conclude that whilst the current system has its flaws it is also the fairest we have. How is it fair to tell the people who missed out in October 2019 that they won’t be setting foot on the farm until June 2022 at the earliest?

My personal view is that having a ticket for 2020 does not gift any divine right to 2021, it will suck so hard if we all can’t go in June, but you know what? That’s life, sometimes shit things happen.

[fatyeti24]

1 minute ago, Garrett_Salas said:

Thing is I totally get that - and I certainly wouldn't be banging on Emily Eavis' door demanding a refund and echoing my posts this morning, i think the practical side will prevail and that's understandable. What I don't understand is having your starting point that it's more unfair to try and compensate people who lose out through no fault of their own - to me that's a pretty basic tenet of fairness.

Yeah I'm inclined to agree. As a ticket holder for this year I'd be very happy to get, say, a link to a pre sale for next year, along the lines of how they used to do it for those that cycled to the festival. 

I'm just not convinced that what will inform whatever decision they make will align with my wishes. 

Wait and see, innit.