On my travels around festivals I often come across the debate about what makes a successful festival.

This debate usually revolves around the balance between the line up of named artists and concerts and all the "fringe" stuff in the pubs and clubs.

The 'fringe',as you know, is mostly unplanned gatherings of musicians and sing-arounds that do not appear on a festivals programme. Although I guess some of the planned sing-arounds and musician sessions/workshops can also fall into this category.

I tend to go to some selected concerts but prefer to enjoy the happy and less stuffy atmosphere of the fringe.
I rarely buy a season ticket for this reason ( sorry festival organisers).

I know some will say that I am feeding off the festival and not putting money back into it but that is my preference and I do put a lot into the local community in terms of beer and food.

At most festivals I have been to there seems to be three camps of people : those that mainly attend concerts/workshops/ceilidhs, those that mainly mix with the fringe and those that do a bit of both.
My overrideing impression though is that the festivals would be all the sadder, quieter and less colourful if they did not have the fringe, even though this does not contribute much to the festivals coffers.

So what's the secret of success?
Can a mainly concert/workshop etc festival work and can a mainly fringe festival work? Everyone I have spoken to seems to be split on this with strong views either way and of course many feel that you need a good balance of both to make it work.

Some say that the fringe element is a cheap parasite that leeches onto the main festival programme and could not exist without it.

What do you think O wise ones ?