All headliners are Exclusives

[El4d]

http://www.nme.com/news/various-artists/54670

hmmm?

[Dave The Hedgehog]

To be fair, did anybody on here think Foo Fighters, Kasabian, Kings Of Leon, System Of A Down, Linkin Park, Biffy Clyro, Slipknot, Blink-182 or Metallica would headline anyway?

Most people are saying The Strokes, My Chemical Romance and Muse - which aren't exactly 'staggering' bands.

[jump]

This would rule out Foo Fighters, Kasabian, Kings Of Leon, System Of A Down, Linkin Park, Biffy Clyro, Slipknot, Blink-182 (who headlined the events last summer) and Metallica, who are all confirmed to headline elsewhere.

Edited January 24, 2011 by jump

[rachbon]

To be fair, did anybody on here think Foo Fighters, Kasabian, Kings Of Leon, System Of A Down, Linkin Park, Biffy Clyro, Slipknot, Blink-182 or Metallica would headline anyway?

Most people are saying The Strokes, My Chemical Romance and Muse - which aren't exactly 'staggering' bands.

[Dave The Hedgehog]

If he really wanted to throw a cat amongst the pigeons he should have said something like, "our headliners this year have never headlined a festival before" or something to that effect. This is a rubbish update.

[fuzzylogic]

I don't know why the organisers of the big festivals make a big deal about exclusivity, the festival will sell out regardless anyway.

[VCK]

"Staggering"

Muse - One of the best live bands in the world.

The Strokes - A comeback that has been long awaited by a lot of people.

My Chemical Romance - Staggeringly shit.

[joe1990 fresh account]

To be fair, did anybody on here think Foo Fighters, Kasabian, Kings Of Leon, System Of A Down, Linkin Park, Biffy Clyro, Slipknot, Blink-182 or Metallica would headline anyway?

Most people are saying The Strokes, My Chemical Romance and Muse - which aren't exactly 'staggering' bands.

[Dave The Hedgehog]

Muse - One of the best live bands in the world.

[eFestivals]

I don't know why the organisers of the big festivals make a big deal about exclusivity, the festival will sell out regardless anyway.

My take on it (which could be wrong of course) is that by having exclusives every year, the reputation of the fest is maintained in what has become a VERY competitive festivals marketplace, and via that reputation the sell-out every year is maintained and assured for the next year.

The problem as I see it for Reading/Leeds is that in the last 10 years or so their traditional place in the festival calendar has been undermined - by V doing the popp-ier end of things, and Download the heavier end of things, so they've needed to create a new position for the fest to maintain its popularity. Having exclusive headliners does this to a large extent.

[zeppelin]

Must we...?

Edited January 24, 2011 by zeppelin

[Dave The Hedgehog]

My take on it (which could be wrong of course) is that by having exclusives every year, the reputation of the fest is maintained in what has become a VERY competitive festivals marketplace, and via that reputation the sell-out every year is maintained and assured for the next year.

[Yellow_Fellow]

Doesn't say his subs aren't headlining anywhere else, which just makes me think Biffy & SOAD still in hope.

[kev1664]

My take on it (which could be wrong of course) is that by having exclusives every year, the reputation of the fest is maintained in what has become a VERY competitive festivals marketplace, and via that reputation the sell-out every year is maintained and assured for the next year.

The problem as I see it for Reading/Leeds is that in the last 10 years or so their traditional place in the festival calendar has been undermined - by V doing the popp-ier end of things, and Download the heavier end of things, so they've needed to create a new position for the fest to maintain its popularity. Having exclusive headliners does this to a large extent.

[harderfaster]

But then it begs the question - why, if a festival prides itself on exclusivity, does it choose to keep us in the dark on who they've actually booked? If they know the bands they have, and they ARE exclusive, surely it makes sense for them to tell us exactly who the bands are because it's not as if they're going to go anywhere - as they are, after all, exclusive.

[joe1990 fresh account]

But then it begs the question - why, if a festival prides itself on exclusivity, does it choose to keep us in the dark on who they've actually booked? If they know the bands they have, and they ARE exclusive, surely it makes sense for them to tell us exactly who the bands are because it's not as if they're going to go anywhere - as they are, after all, exclusive.

I find it only really serves to damage the reputation of the festival if the organisers say 2 months before general sale that the bands are 'staggering' and then it turns out that they're just bands the other festivals didn't want and... well, a bit crap.

[Dave The Hedgehog]

Don't you find that if a festival prides itself on the exclusivity of its headliners, it undermines the value of the 'lesser' bands? Like, more focus is placed on how great (or 'staggering') their headliners are and a band like, say, Pixies or Soundgarden become nothing more than footnotes to a band like My Chemical Romance?

[jump]

mcr and green day and muse come to mind, i hope the strokes play, i think they will. what about pulp dose that effect there exclusivity?

[jump]

Don't you find that if a festival prides itself on the exclusivity of its headliners, it undermines the value of the 'lesser' bands? Like, more focus is placed on how great (or 'staggering') their headliners are and a band like, say, Pixies or Soundgarden become nothing more than footnotes to a band like My Chemical Romance?

[Dave The Hedgehog]

the hype does work wonders. i for one would rather a big build up to the ticket date to find out who's headlining than a random press release in december saying 'oh by the way guys, booked muse today' followed by one-off lineup announcements until august...

[lucastang]

One thing to note here, the band that will headline may not be headline material, thus, apart from The Strokes of course who look dead on, it is still more or less a lottery.

[jump]

Correct - the only reason they say in advance that they have 'staggering' headliners is to build up hype - but if they actually give us no direct confirmation, it just strikes me as if they have no confidence in their bookings; using a word like 'staggering' to show their stoicism rather than a means of disuading us from believing the idea that - yeah they're not the best bands on the planet but they're the best they could do when other festivals book bands a year in advance.

[Dave The Hedgehog]

One thing to note here, the band that will headline may not be headline material, thus, apart from The Strokes of course who look dead on, it is still more or less a lottery.

[joe1990 fresh account]

last year we had 3 top headliners for all different reasons,this year seems dyer in comparsion if the rumours are to be true. with the exception of the strokes and pulp, headliner an sub respectively.

this thread is read hot

[Joe-]

Hes bound to say that, I can't imagine a festival booker saying that the headliners they have spent a lot on are "ok".

Muse, Strokes and MCR would not be staggeringly good, would be like a shrug of the shoulders from me. Strokes are good, would like to see them again. I'd be more interested in whats happening elsewhere.