-
Recently Browsing 0 members
- No registered users viewing this page.
-
Latest Activity
-
By Lemon T-wig · Posted
I agree. The alternative would have been to let Neil have a say in which parts of his set were televised. It's relatively recently that it's been assumed that most main acts would have their whole set broadcast live. -
By thatTFBguy · Posted
Heard from a reasonable source or more just a bit of a guess? -
By Lemon T-wig · Posted
So, because he didn't say what you think he should have (even though the reality isn't that different( you accuse him of behaving immaturely? -
By FKA SOSOTWS · Posted
At the end of the day they are both variations of pop music (who have even collaborated). Seems way too early to suggest one will have crazy staying power over the other. -
By Lemon T-wig · Posted
You don't show much evidence of having an understanding of what Glastonbury is about. Yes, it could make lots more money through sponsorship, maybe streaming, all kinds of things. But it isn't about the money. It gives most of its profits away to charities. This is probably why Neil Young likes the festival in the first place. The fact that the TV rights are free for UK viewers will undoubtedly be why they let the BBC broadcast it. Besides the fact that the logistics of broadcasting it are monumental. Who else could do it as effectively?
-
-
Latest Festival News
-
Featured Products
-
Hot Topics
-
-
Latest Tourdates
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.