Rolling Stones...

[The Nal]

It's alway struck me that his persistent courting of The Stones and his willingness to pursue them despite them showing 'anti-Glasto' behaviour and motivations in previously refusing a bit odd.

What about Beyonce and Jay-Z? Or Lady Gaga. These are worst type of "musicians" out there. Vulgar c**ts, to their core. Money money money. Everything is fake about them.

At least the Stones exist(ed) in the studio, on stage, writing songs, on the road etc.

The Jay-Z/Beyonce lot spend their time in executive meetings with clothes manufacturers, perfume designers and writing songs (paying other people to write songs for them) to coincide with the release of products. Either their own products or others, but they're coining it regardless.

They sign up with product placement companies before they write any music!

Yet I didn't hear this much giving out when Beyonce was announced. She's as anti Glasto as you can get! As for Jay-Z being an "edgy" headliner as people said!!?? Fuck me.

Weeping Jesus on the cross.

[russycarps]

Yet I didn't hear this much giving out when Beyonce was announced. She's as anti Glasto as you can get! As for Jay-Z being an "edgy" headliner as people said!!?? Fuck me.

Weeping Jesus on the cross.

I moaned about it

[Arronbury]

Whoooooo!

I have a busy life (not as a bono's personal photographer as you seem to believe) so can't even read these lovely replies but my how easily you all get worked up. I will come and play some more later in the week if I can.

And I'll tell Michael next time I see him that he's wasting his time with those other stages with other acts as alternatives to the Pyramid. Arronbury said so.

I think he (like 90+% of glasto visitors, and everyone who's not a regular on this forum and stuck up Neil's bottom) is aware of this. Hence why this years performers budget will be higher than ever and almost enrirely go to the Stones.

This is what's fuelling Lady Gaga rumours. Save money by putting some cheaper acts on who can make money in other ways.

If the stones play you will see a decline in financial support to other acts and areas.

[mrtourette]

What about Beyonce and Jay-Z? Or Lady Gaga. These are worst type of "musicians" out there. Vulgar c**ts, to their core. Money money money. Everything is fake about them.

At least the Stones exist(ed) in the studio, on stage, writing songs, on the road etc.

The Jay-Z/Beyonce lot spend their time in executive meetings with clothes manufacturers, perfume designers and writing songs (paying other people to write songs for them) to coincide with the release of products. Either their own products or others, but they're coining it regardless.

They sign up with product placement companies before they write any music!

Yet I didn't hear this much giving out when Beyonce was announced. She's as anti Glasto as you can get! As for Jay-Z being an "edgy" headliner as people said!!?? Fuck me.

Weeping Jesus on the cross.

Why did you chop off my last sentence? My point was about this supposed Glastonbury ethos and how nowadays it's changed and if Michael Eavis wants to book acts that some people consider anti-Glasto then that's his perogative. Yes Beyonce fits in with that (and there was a significant amount of shit about her playing, I particularly remember the suff about Gadaffi) but his pusuit of The Stones is another example.

[eFestivals]

For what its worth, which is nothing, I think the Rolling Stones will play. Just because of the amount of rumours flying around. If they weren't going to play I am sure one of the Eavis' would have said they weren't playing by now (like Emily did with the Stone Roses rumour) I know they cant confirm or deny all rumours, but the Rolling Stones rumour is so big, I am sure they would have denied it if they weren't in negotiations at the very least

the situation is exactly the same as it's been with previous attempts at getting the Stones - that Glasto will get its answer at around the end of the year.

The chances are perhaps stronger this time around than they've been previously, but I still don't think it's particularly high. Glasto got U2 -I believe - because U2 felt they needed a credibility boost. That's not something which will concern the Stones.

[eFestivals]

I think he (like 90+% of glasto visitors, and everyone who's not a regular on this forum and stuck up Neil's bottom) is aware of this. Hence why this years performers budget will be higher than ever and almost enrirely go to the Stones.

This is what's fuelling Lady Gaga rumours. Save money by putting some cheaper acts on who can make money in other ways.

If the stones play you will see a decline in financial support to other acts and areas.

I'm so glad you're the font of all knowledge, and know exactly what Glasto is planning - including them booking the world's most popular current act as a cheap fill-in because Glasto has got a much less popular act in the Stones. :lol:

Can I suggest that ask The Comedy Store for a booking?

FYI: the budgets for other areas will be sorted out long before the Stones give their answer.

Edited October 16, 2012 by eFestivals

[The Nal]

Why did you chop off my last sentence? My point was about this supposed Glastonbury ethos and how nowadays it's changed and if Michael Eavis wants to book acts that some people consider anti-Glasto then that's his perogative. Yes Beyonce fits in with that (and there was a significant amount of shit about her playing, I particularly remember the suff about Gadaffi) but his pusuit of The Stones is another example.

Sorry didn't mean you personally. Was just using your post to make another point, that we've had some horrible acts playing over the last few years.

Anywhere heres the bit I chopped!

I guess he wants to put on the biggest party he can, maybe that is the new Glato ethos.

Maybe it is. But theres a limit in my opinion. Beyonce being that limit.

[zahidf]

I'm so glad you're the font of all knowledge, and know exactly what Glasto is planning - including them booking the world's most popular current act as a cheap fill-in because Glasto has got a much less popular act in the Stones.

Can I suggest that ask The Comedy Store for a booking?

FYI: the budgets for other areas will be sorted out long before the Stones give their answer.

Maybe they should just have the Stones playing on the Staurday, with no other acts anywhere? Just have clips of old Stones performances and testimonials from other acts on the big screens saying how great they are in the lead up to them playing.

At the end of the show, we can then sacrifice someone to Mick Jagger. I'm sure whoever is chosen will go happy and smiling after such a great performance.

[Ted Dansons Wig]

To say the Stones are any more or less about "product" than anyone else, Bouncy and Jay Z included is splitting hairs. They all sell luxury items - themselves principally. Once upon a time they did it through records and tapes - then when it went digital we figured out how to get it for nowt by downloading it. Now its reversed. Where it used to be a tour promoted an album to maximise sales of that record - its the other way round. When you can get a cd for £7.99 in Asda - their just going to shift the money making bit to the sale of tour tickets and merchandise not directly associated with the music.

Thats why (IMO) Stones tickets come at £100 a pop and why everyone in the industry as bad/ the same. If they didnt the Sony's et al of this world wouldn't fund it and it wouldnt exist in the same way. And we buy into into by demanding bigger and bigger acts at places like Glastonbury. They will continue to charge as much as the traffic will bear until people stop stumping up ever increasing wedges of cash.

[The Nal]

To say the Stones are any more or less about "product" than anyone else, Bouncy and Jay Z included is splitting hairs.

Seriously?

[Arronbury]

I'm so glad you're the font of all knowledge, and know exactly what Glasto is planning - including them booking the world's most popular current act as a cheap fill-in because Glasto has got a much less popular act in the Stones. :lol:

Can I suggest that ask The Comedy Store for a booking?

FYI: the budgets for other areas will be sorted out long before the Stones give their answer.

Performers budget!

I just thank God we have Neil, the Guru, the all-seeing-eye to give us his dribbled opinion as fact to save the day.

Wow you're easy to wind up.

You need to grow up a bit.

Only child I'm guessing...

If the Rolling Stones are playing Glastonbury, things will be very different. Security will be tighter around the Pyramid (as it was with Springsteen), media coverage better regulated, some acts are likely to try to pay to be on prior to the Stones for exposure (possibly).

You really are underestimating the size of this act.

Gaga would not be expensive, the way her people can spin the media response to her headlining glasto would be worth so much more than a couple of hundred thousand. The credibility she would get would be priceless and gaining acceptance to an entirely new demographic would be reward enough on its own.

Bet they wouldn't need to pay her a bean.

[SonOfTroyMcClure]

Whoooooo!

I have a busy life (not as a bono's personal photographer as you seem to believe) so can't even read these lovely replies but my how easily you all get worked up. I will come and play some more later in the week if I can.

I think he (like 90+% of glasto visitors, and everyone who's not a regular on this forum and stuck up Neil's bottom) is aware of this. Hence why this years performers budget will be higher than ever and almost enrirely go to the Stones.

This is what's fuelling Lady Gaga rumours. Save money by putting some cheaper acts on who can make money in other ways.

If the stones play you will see a decline in financial support to other acts and areas.

Obvious Troll is Obvious.

[TheBigJT]

I've seen the Stones three times. At the first one all their wonderful fans actually boo'd Prince off the stage, so offending Bill Graham that he came out and cursed at them for being idiots.

The second time I had a horrible view and was mostly fixated by Mick's thinning hair best seen from behind the stage. The music was average at best.

The last time they were basically tired and flat and I swore that I was done with them.

I did see Keith, Ronnie and company on the New Barbarians tour, and that was a pretty solid show.

On the other hand, I've seen Springsteen 35 times going back to 1978, and never walked away disappointed. That includes four times this year alone. But, I know there are folks on here who don't like him...which has zero effect on me, except maybe freeing up a few tickets when I go see him.

I like Frank Turner.

I thought Muse were horrible live. (Rehashed licks and pompous attitudes.)

Gorillaz were bad at my only Glastonbury visit...but, in LA a few months later, were great.

I finally saw Radiohead at Coachella this year...and as much as I try...just don't get their appeal. But, Pulp played before them, and were epic.

So, I'm confused by this thread...do I deserve a ticket or not?

[Ted Dansons Wig]

Seriously?

I see little difference between jaggers lips and beyonces arse when it comes to merchandising.

Saying that though - its probably why I've never been very successful with women.

[eFestivals]

Only child I'm guessing...

The only child around here is you matey. It's you that needs to grow up, and recognise that your opinion means fuck all except to yourself.

If the Rolling Stones are playing Glastonbury, things will be very different. Security will be tighter around the Pyramid (as it was with Springsteen), media coverage better regulated, some acts are likely to try to pay to be on prior to the Stones for exposure (possibly).

You really are underestimating the size of this act.

All the self-obsessed arseholes demand better security, it ain't unique to the stones.

All the self obsessed arseholes demand to vet the snappers list.

You are under-estimating how many arseholes there are.

Gaga would not be expensive, the way her people can spin the media response to her headlining glasto would be worth so much more than a couple of hundred thousand. The credibility she would get would be priceless and gaining acceptance to an entirely new demographic would be reward enough on its own.

and of course all the same things don't apply to your heroes, oh no.

Except they all do apply. The only difference is that greed doesn't come any bigger than the greed of the Stones.

Bet they wouldn't need to pay her a bean.

perhaps not. And that would be because she has enough of a conscience to realise that grabbing every penny for herself is not the only way of doing things.

[Sketchead]

I've seen the Stones three times. At the first one all their wonderful fans actually boo'd Prince off the stage, so offending Bill Graham that he came out and cursed at them for being idiots.

The second time I had a horrible view and was mostly fixated by Mick's thinning hair best seen from behind the stage. The music was average at best.

The last time they were basically tired and flat and I swore that I was done with them.

I did see Keith, Ronnie and company on the New Barbarians tour, and that was a pretty solid show.

On the other hand, I've seen Springsteen 35 times going back to 1978, and never walked away disappointed. That includes four times this year alone. But, I know there are folks on here who don't like him...which has zero effect on me, except maybe freeing up a few tickets when I go see him.

I like Frank Turner.

I thought Muse were horrible live. (Rehashed licks and pompous attitudes.)

Gorillaz were bad at my only Glastonbury visit...but, in LA a few months later, were great.

I finally saw Radiohead at Coachella this year...and as much as I try...just don't get their appeal. But, Pulp played before them, and were epic.

So, I'm confused by this thread...do I deserve a ticket or not?

No more than anyone else does!

[The Nal]

I see little difference between jaggers lips and beyonces arse when it comes to merchandising.

Saying that though - its probably why I've never been very successful with women.

Beyonces arse is fine. No complaints there! I've no issue with either selling their music either. But if the Stones, or anyone else, started writing singles and realising them to coincide with the release of their perfume ads? Thats when they depart from music for me. And when I lose all interest.

[1waveydavey]

Blimey.....

Getting back on topic, I think everybody has said what they need to by now?

Im guessing that everything pretty much rests on how these 4 announced gigs go. I think if they go ok / well then Summer shows will be announced for next year (knowing how these things work they will have a load of options on hold waiting for a "yes"). I'm assuming that Hyde Park gigs will be part of that and quite probably Glastonbury.

One other thing, Frank Turner was mentioned earlier, and his politics, I dont speak on behalf of Frank but do know having read a lot of what he has to say that his politics are not right wing or left wing. He appears to take an altogether more open approach that if you want to comment on you should read more of what he has to say before you judge. Sadly I think the school he went to appears to sway peoples opinion, he was smart and because of that got a scholarship. Are we judging people badly for being smart now? If you dont like his music thats your choice but done throw the baby out with the bathwater and dismiss his politics without having all the facts to hand, not just the bits that suit your argument.

[Ted Dansons Wig]

Beyonces arse is fine. No complaints there! I've no issue with either selling their music either. But if the Stones, or anyone else, started writing singles and realising them to coincide with the release of their perfume ads? Thats when they depart from music for me. And when I lose all interest.

Doom & Gloom being recorded to fit on the end of yet another greatest hits compilation? Whats the difference? Bouncy's just better at diversifying - its all product in the end.

[abdoujaparov]

One other thing, Frank Turner was mentioned earlier, and his politics, I dont speak on behalf of Frank but do know having read a lot of what he has to say that his politics are not right wing or left wing. He appears to take an altogether more open approach that if you want to comment on you should read more of what he has to say before you judge. Sadly I think the school he went to appears to sway peoples opinion, he was smart and because of that got a scholarship. Are we judging people badly for being smart now? If you dont like his music thats your choice but done throw the baby out with the bathwater and dismiss his politics without having all the facts to hand, not just the bits that suit your argument.

the problem with Frank Turner's politics is twofold. First, he is a right wing libertarian. Second, he's mislead (consciously or unconsciously) a lot of people into believing that his sympathies lie elsewhere. I know lots of people who have been genuinely shocked that he is not the left-leaning liberal they thought he was

[sisterofmercy]

When did this thread become about Frank Turner?

I doubt he'd headline any time soon, at least not Pyramid anyway.

[mrtourette]

Whichever way he leans Frank Turner has a political message, and Glastonbury 2013 is no place for political messages.

[SonOfTroyMcClure]

Doom & Gloom being recorded to fit on the end of yet another greatest hits compilation? Whats the difference? Bouncy's just better at diversifying - its all product in the end.

true but then recording a new song to stick on the end of a greatest hits isn't exactly new or uncommon, but yeah the fact that there's another greatest hits at all does fit in with the whole 'corporate' mindset though.

[zahidf]

Beyonces arse is fine. No complaints there! I've no issue with either selling their music either. But if the Stones, or anyone else, started writing singles and realising them to coincide with the release of their perfume ads? Thats when they depart from music for me. And when I lose all interest.

So your not a Bob Dylan ( in lingerie adverts) or Jack WHite ( wrote song for a Coca Cola commerical) fan then?

[cornholio]

Right; enough of this potential lineup business... What route's the monorail taking this year?