What Makes A R&L headliner?

[cheeseisamazing]

Ok so i was reading through ‘the Cure’ topic post and i people are arguing weather or the cure should be a headliner. This Topic is not about that argument however a

‘mrtourette’ i believe rasied a interesting point (if i have understood him correctly) A great band DOES NOT equall a headliner band. I was wondering if any other saddacts like me would be interested in trying to create essentially a Formula on What makes a R&L Headliner. This module could apply to other festivals as well.

Here is My theory so far, and obviously it needs work

If we start with this question: Why does A great band DOES NOT necessarily equal a great headliner

Great is obviously a subjective word, however if taken in context of 'popularity', Madness springs to mind. A very popular Band, everyone fucking knows madness, Love them or hate them they're a good Scar band. Are they a Headliner. No. I believe it is because they're is no DEMAND to see them.

Surly R&L picks they're Headliners On a demand principle, they are a business and want they're festival to make as much money for them as possible (This may make them sound like Bastards, but that's surly what a good business does)

If they're is a DEMAND for a band; the band will sell tickets.

If a band is in High demand it will be put HIGHER up on the bill to be given more time. Also there is essentially a DEMAND for a band to be a headliner, for example you want to see MUSE as a headliner because its more of atmosphere show etc

There is however a Limitation. the fact of whether or not they have the potential To play a high spot surly a limitation, Take say Ed sheeran, Weather or not you like him There’s a lot of demand for him atm, if he plays R&L he will be given a high spot, but he couldn’t headline, he hasn’t got enough Experience Or songs.

Demand Can also be riddled with Controversy. For example MCR last year Actually got a HUGE crowed, and i believe it was due to a lot of people seeing if they were up for the Challenge. Jay-Z at Glastonbury is possible the most famous example

Controversy creates Excitement and Press

Remember as Demand is not quantifiable it can be wrong, perhaps Like Razor light 2007

Examples of bands being Higher than Perhaps they 'deserve'

Midnight beast Headlining Festival Republic stage last year

The strokes Headlining reading After one album (Be it a brilliant Album)

Therefore I suggest A headliner happens under 3 principles

When they exceed or meet the Limit’ of a ability a headliner requires

When there is a high DEMAND

Or limitations and demand can be exaggerated to Create excitement & Press

Note this Does not take Availability into account

[cheeseisamazing]

Basically, There are a shit load more Varibles to work in

[mrtourette]

A noble thought but it's nigh on impossible. Like you say theres no way you can put a figure on things like demand or accurately predict how much excitement or coverage an announcement may get. It's liek asking what's more important, massive record sales over a twenty year span or good sales over a more recent six year span? Everyone has an opinion but nobody knows the real answer or the answer that will sell more tickets.

You are right, whether a band is good or not isn't the sole factor and neither is how long they've been going, how many records they've sold, how long ago it was since their last hit, what size venues they fill, how many songs of theirs people know (how could anyone possibly know this?), when they last played the festival, when they last played other festivals, when they last toured, whether they have an album out, what spot they played at other festivals, what spot they last played at that festival - it's all of them weighed up at the same time. If you could work out a formula that brings all of those into the equation then it would still be different every year as you then have to take other festivals into account and what they're doing and whther they're happening or not.

[theramm]

Simple - A band who's touring Europe at the time of the fest & that Melvin believes will shift tickets.

[thetime]

A gpod starting point would be a band who could sell out arenas easily, kasabian hmmmmm.

I will be spending the next 6 months moaning about kasabian.

[mrtourette]

It isn't just Kasabian who may fall short (depending on your definition of easily) of that requirement.

[Gingo]

I reckon if a band is in high enough demand and that couples with (and should) selling tickets then they are worthy of a headline status

A festival is based off of their headline acts by the majority of their possible customers no matter how good the undercard is so they have to make it appealing to as many people as possible and if at least one or two of the headliners catch peoples eye then they have done their job.

This opens up chances for festivals to take risks and have a 'smaller' band headline that hasnt previously because if they have two strong recognisable names then the third headliner can be used to expand the market and draw in extra people that would have normally dismissed a festival much like The Prodigy and Download which is a good example this year, so really any band can headline if the promotor feels this would draw in a worthy crowd for the festival

[YumYum]

Things that make up an R&L headliner;

- have a few 'hit' singles e.g. Kol with sex on fire

- have enough material, unless you can do a Muse OoS style set, you need to have enough albums to fill a set

- fan base, most headliners in recent years have played to minimum 10k+ venues at around £30+ a ticket

- draw: I think this is a combo of all the above, will you have enough songs to keep the casual fans happy, a reason maybe people are questioning the cure?

Similarly, do you fit the demographic? Will 16-30 year olds want to see you?

Will your fans buy day tickets? (libertines, blink '10)

[jump]

Things that make up an R&L headliner;

- have a few 'hit' singles e.g. Kol with sex on fire

- have enough material, unless you can do a Muse OoS style set, you need to have enough albums to fill a set

- fan base, most headliners in recent years have played to minimum 10k+ venues at around £30+ a ticket

- draw: I think this is a combo of all the above, will you have enough songs to keep the casual fans happy, a reason maybe people are questioning the cure?

Similarly, do you fit the demographic? Will 16-30 year olds want to see you?

Will your fans buy day tickets? (libertines, blink '10)

[YumYum]

Libertines didn't headline.

[Mouseboy11]

A gpod starting point would be a band who could sell out arenas easily, kasabian hmmmmm.

I will be spending the next 6 months moaning about kasabian.

[JoeMo]

...eventually.

[cheeseisamazing]

Cheers Guys, I'm going to take all the Variables and come up with a key hopefully by next weekend, Watch this space

[dclarke12]

Ok so i was reading through ‘the Cure’ topic post and i people are arguing weather or the cure should be a headliner. This Topic is not about that argument however a

‘mrtourette’ i believe rasied a interesting point (if i have understood him correctly) A great band DOES NOT equall a headliner band. I was wondering if any other saddacts like me would be interested in trying to create essentially a Formula on What makes a R&L Headliner. This module could apply to other festivals as well.

Here is My theory so far, and obviously it needs work

If we start with this question: Why does A great band DOES NOT necessarily equal a great headliner

Great is obviously a subjective word, however if taken in context of 'popularity', Madness springs to mind. A very popular Band, everyone fucking knows madness, Love them or hate them they're a good Scar band. Are they a Headliner. No. I believe it is because they're is no DEMAND to see them.

Surly R&L picks they're Headliners On a demand principle, they are a business and want they're festival to make as much money for them as possible (This may make them sound like Bastards, but that's surly what a good business does)

If they're is a DEMAND for a band; the band will sell tickets.

If a band is in High demand it will be put HIGHER up on the bill to be given more time. Also there is essentially a DEMAND for a band to be a headliner, for example you want to see MUSE as a headliner because its more of atmosphere show etc

There is however a Limitation. the fact of whether or not they have the potential To play a high spot surly a limitation, Take say Ed sheeran, Weather or not you like him There’s a lot of demand for him atm, if he plays R&L he will be given a high spot, but he couldn’t headline, he hasn’t got enough Experience Or songs.

Demand Can also be riddled with Controversy. For example MCR last year Actually got a HUGE crowed, and i believe it was due to a lot of people seeing if they were up for the Challenge. Jay-Z at Glastonbury is possible the most famous example

Controversy creates Excitement and Press

Remember as Demand is not quantifiable it can be wrong, perhaps Like Razor light 2007

Examples of bands being Higher than Perhaps they 'deserve'

Midnight beast Headlining Festival Republic stage last year

The strokes Headlining reading After one album (Be it a brilliant Album)

Therefore I suggest A headliner happens under 3 principles

When they exceed or meet the Limit’ of a ability a headliner requires

When there is a high DEMAND

Or limitations and demand can be exaggerated to Create excitement & Press

Note this Does not take Availability into account

[dclarke12]

Ok so i was reading through ‘the Cure’ topic post and i people are arguing weather or the cure should be a headliner. This Topic is not about that argument however a

‘mrtourette’ i believe rasied a interesting point (if i have understood him correctly) A great band DOES NOT equall a headliner band. I was wondering if any other saddacts like me would be interested in trying to create essentially a Formula on What makes a R&L Headliner. This module could apply to other festivals as well.

Here is My theory so far, and obviously it needs work

If we start with this question: Why does A great band DOES NOT necessarily equal a great headliner

Great is obviously a subjective word, however if taken in context of 'popularity', Madness springs to mind. A very popular Band, everyone fucking knows madness, Love them or hate them they're a good Scar band. Are they a Headliner. No. I believe it is because they're is no DEMAND to see them.

Surly R&L picks they're Headliners On a demand principle, they are a business and want they're festival to make as much money for them as possible (This may make them sound like Bastards, but that's surly what a good business does)

If they're is a DEMAND for a band; the band will sell tickets.

If a band is in High demand it will be put HIGHER up on the bill to be given more time. Also there is essentially a DEMAND for a band to be a headliner, for example you want to see MUSE as a headliner because its more of atmosphere show etc

There is however a Limitation. the fact of whether or not they have the potential To play a high spot surly a limitation, Take say Ed sheeran, Weather or not you like him There’s a lot of demand for him atm, if he plays R&L he will be given a high spot, but he couldn’t headline, he hasn’t got enough Experience Or songs.

Demand Can also be riddled with Controversy. For example MCR last year Actually got a HUGE crowed, and i believe it was due to a lot of people seeing if they were up for the Challenge. Jay-Z at Glastonbury is possible the most famous example

Controversy creates Excitement and Press

Remember as Demand is not quantifiable it can be wrong, perhaps Like Razor light 2007

Examples of bands being Higher than Perhaps they 'deserve'

Midnight beast Headlining Festival Republic stage last year

The strokes Headlining reading After one album (Be it a brilliant Album)

Therefore I suggest A headliner happens under 3 principles

When they exceed or meet the Limit’ of a ability a headliner requires

When there is a high DEMAND

Or limitations and demand can be exaggerated to Create excitement & Press

Note this Does not take Availability into account

[ArcticDan]

someone at the top of the poster

[Vieuphoria]

dude come on, it's an internet forum. wE cAn t,ype how we's wanting to?

[cheeseisamazing]

sorry guy's, i'm actually quite Dyslexic and have real problems with grammar and spelling, i'm not excusing my mistakes as i should have proofed read it more. i can appreciate your frustration and i will correct and update this post when i'm finished what i'm working on... havent finished it yet as have too much Uni work to do... ...but it will be very interesting.

[micawber]

If you approach this from a mathematical perspective then you'll find an inverse relationship between probability of headlining and the number of their CD's on sale in Blockbusters. Hence, Stereophonics will never headline.

[mrtourette]

If you approach this from a mathematical perspective then you'll find an inverse relationship between probability of headlining and the number of their CD's on sale in Blockbusters. Hence, Stereophonics will never headline.

[micawber]

I've always wondered how Blockbusters is still in business, i did a little bit of digging and it turns out that 53% of their turnover is generated by sales of Stereophonics and Ocean Colour Scene CD's. It's an impressive stat and the 21% from sales of those little tubs of Haagen Dazs pales in comparison.

[mrtourette]

Cash Converters? lol yeah that makes sense too.

[AcademicPistol]

they're is they are,

their is possessive. learn the difference!

oh and whats with the completely random capital letters at the start of words? I understand a full word in capitals emphasises it, but some of the words with capitals at the beginning just seem random....

shame about these little points, what you said was interesting and made sense, but your grammar really got on my tits

[mooseman]

Ska

[The Mean Bean]

they're is they are,

their is possessive. learn the difference!

oh and whats with the completely random capital letters at the start of words? I understand a full word in capitals emphasises it, but some of the words with capitals at the beginning just seem random....

shame about these little points, what you said was interesting and made sense, but your grammar really got on my tits