So who are the "fat cat organisers"? Most professionals in the folk world are struggling to make even a basic living. But supposing someone is getting rich from running folk festivals, why should that matter? If they're successful, it's because they provide the audiences with what they want - that's called a win-win situation. If someone is providing something I want at a price I find agreeable, why should I care how much he's making from it? If I don't like the product or the price, I don't have to buy it. If you don't like big concert festivals and think they're too expensive, you don't have to go, but why stop people who do like them and are prepared to pay for them?

You seem to be very concerned about what you see as exploitation of volunteers. But the volunteers don't see it that way, or they wouldn't be queuing up to offer their services. Most of them are in fact being "paid" in tickets, which they find perfectly acceptable. Who are you to tell them they shouldn't do this?

In fact this is a clear example of why your theories are not only wrong but contradictory. I don't believe for a moment that cost is a genuine barrier, as there are many other venues where people can see the very best in folk music for much less, or even for free. However if they can't afford a weekend festival ticket, they could volunteer to be stewards and get in for free - but you would stop them doing that.