Report

Maybe missing the point slightly there.   Compared to 2013? Yes, it is more commercial. For sure.   Compared to late 90s and the 00s? Much less so, and we were poking fun at the "back in my day" people who choose to forget that.   Starting with the 2010 festival, the Festival made a noticeable effort to get rid of a lot of the unnecessary brands that had found their way on site. Those places we namechecked earlier - none of them were made up, and that list was nowhere near exhaustive. But yeah, since the pandemic it's swung back in the other direction a fair bit.

But yes, all the available evidence backs up the feeling that Charli’s moment in the sun is very much a bubble thing, which doesn’t make for a sensible Glastonbury headliner (and might well be over by this summer anyway). 

I love Glastonbury and have no strong opinions about what NY has said as we don’t and probably never will know the real reason, although broadcasting the whole show seems most likely if he objected to this before.   but those of you saying the festival hasn’t got more commercial over the years are kidding yourselves, I’ve noticed a massive change and have only been going since 2013, yes it’s still way less commercial than a Reading or APE but it’s there and noticeable all the time now. The final straw for me would be if they ever change their alcohol policy and try to limit what you can bring in, despite the fact I’m now at the stage where I buy most of my beer I think that would be such a fundamental change, anyway one for another thread. I probably wasn’t going to see NY anyway but I think it’s a shame. Let’s go and get Oasis 😉

f**king Benson Boone and Noah Kahan above Chappell. What have we become 

I'm guessing that he assumed he'd get the same deal as he got last time, 5 songs on the beeb or whatever it was. I reckon what happened is that the GFL offered him x much cash and he was happy with the reduced fee based on x number of songs being shown on the telly but when the beeb started making demands for the whole set and rights to re-show it anytime they please he wasn't happy with that for the [reduced] fee GFL were going to pay him. From what little I know about NY I know he very much likes to control his catalogue, so giving up the rights to one of his live performances in perpetuity for no extra cash coming his way was just not something he was prepared to do, which is fair enough in my view.