FLEETWOOD MAC not doing Glastonbury 2015.

[ghostdancer1]

well given that Beyonce headlined, and Swift is a bigger act than Beyonce is, it's not that surprising. Swift is one of the biggest acts in the world at the moment, far bigger than those pop acts.

having said that, the only reason that she's being rumoured is because she's playing in London that weekend, which is a pretty flimsy reason, and I seriously doubt she'll play Glastonbury.

if she did play/headline, it wouldn't bother me, there's far worse pop acts every year, plus it's another less reason to go to the Pyramid stage and avoids a clash with an act I want to see elsewhere....

Edited November 11, 2014 by ghostdancer1

[Winslow Leach]

Loads were suggesting headliner - and many said it was the ONLY place she could play. Some slightly more sensible people reckon she can sub a big name, but bump up if said big name doesn't happen. People were shot down in flames for suggesting daytime pyramid.

Sub with bump up potential definitely seems like the most likely option to me. I can't see why she'd agree to play any lower given how big she currently is.

[Zoo Music Girl]

oh yeah I'd love to see them play too.

I still love watching a pyramid headliner after all these years. I think it's still the best musical experience you can have at the festival. It really irritates me when there are none I want to see. I would happily see all 3 pyramid headliners if they were bands I like, though the chances are pretty much zero of that ever happening now.

I know a lot of people would be horrified at that prospect.

I'm with you on this one. When it's someone like the Stones or Blur it's nothing short of magical.

I don't follow Scruffy's pattern of diminishing Pyramid headliners though. It's entirely dependent on who plays.

For me, the amount of Pyramid headliners per year:

2008 - 1

2009 - 2

2010 - 1

2011 - 1.5 (well more like .25)

2013 - 1

2014 - 2

I think my ideal ratio is one Pyramid, one Other/West Holts and one random somewhere else. Rarely goes that way though.

I'd like one decent Pyramid headliner next year so the boyfriend could get the full Glasto experience as it were, but it's not looking too hopeful!

[fred quimby]

I can't see why she'd agree to play any lower given how big she currently is.

So she could get off her rocker and enjoy the rest of the day?

[FloorFiller]

the only acts that play in lower slots than they usually would are the Sunday legends, who are often headliners in their own right. Taylor ain't one of them, so a headliner (or a very good sub) she is. if the lineup is released and she's in a lower position then i'd love to know what the Eavi' have done to fandangle that one

[Winslow Leach]

So she could get off her rocker and enjoy the rest of the day?

If Skrillex managed both so can she!

[Winslow Leach]

the only acts that play in lower slots than they usually would are the Sunday legends, who are often headliners in their own right. Taylor ain't one of them, so a headliner (or a very good sub) she is. if the lineup is released and she's in a lower position then i'd love to know what the Eavi' have done to fandangle that one

Oh yeah, when I said sub I meant to someone like Fleetwood Mac. I wasn't suggesting she'd be on before an Arcade Fire or Muse sized band.

[FloorFiller]

Oh yeah, when I said sub I meant to someone like Fleetwood Mac. I wasn't suggesting she'd be on before an Arcade Fire or Muse sized band.

yeah Fleetwood Mac is the name that instantly springs to mind when i think of her subbing, but with that seemingly down the shitter a bump up seems likely (if that was the plan)

[russycarps]

well given that Beyonce headlined, and Swift is a bigger act than Beyonce is

this cant be right can it?

beyonce is appalling, but she's a bigger star than swift. I can name a couple of beyonce songs, but nothing from swift. I suspect that's the case with most people in the world.

[Winslow Leach]

this cant be right can it?

beyonce is appalling, but she's a bigger star than swift. I can name a couple of beyonce songs, but nothing from swift. I suspect that's the case with most people in the world.

I suppose it depends what you mean by 'bigger.' I imagine if two of their singles went head to head tomorrow, Swift might come out on top but Beyonce has the weight of a longer career behind her.

[tweed1981]

IMO Beyonce was a much bigger star at the time than Taylor Swift is now and still is for that matter

[FloorFiller]

I suppose it depends what you mean by 'bigger.' I imagine if two of their singles went head to head tomorrow, Swift might come out on top but Beyonce has the weight of a longer career behind her.

and i think Beyonce constantly being tabloid fodder helps her as well, whereas that's not really the case for Swift (the occasional ex boyfriend story but nothing compared to the all seeing eye on Beyonce's life)

[Woffy]

Is it not all a big in-joke?

I listened to some of the clips linked and it's just frothy pop music for prepubescents. I cannot fathom why anyone would view it as potential headliner music.

Some of the people in that THREAT are the usual cretins, but some of the more usually sensible people are just on a wind up, surely?

Wonderfully apt typo of the day?

[Woffy]

On a small scale i think Midlake helped the FM revival with Van Occupanther...with certain persons who - rightly or wrongly - consider themselves more 'discerning' music fans thinking, "Hmm, well if i like this AND Radiohead and they're mentioning FM maybe i should give them a go".

[ghostdancer1]

this cant be right can it?

beyonce is appalling, but she's a bigger star than swift. I can name a couple of beyonce songs, but nothing from swift. I suspect that's the case with most people in the world.

IMO Beyonce was a much bigger star at the time than Taylor Swift is now and still is for that matter

Beyonce released "4" the day after she played Glastonbury 2011. it sold 89,000 in the UK in it's first week (no doubt with a BBC Glasto sales bump), and 310,000 in the US in it's first week.

Taylor Swift released her album "89" two weeks ago. in it's first week, it sold 90,000 in the UK, and 1.2 million in the US.

so if we're going by album sales, Swift is at least on par with Beyonce in the UK, and far, far bigger in the US.

i'm not really sure what other metric there is for judging who is bigger as anecdotal name/song recognition probably depends on the person and obviously Beyonce has been around for much longer and is more "well-known" due to her long career and Jay-Z.

[Winslow Leach]

Beyonce released "4" the day after she played Glastonbury 2011. it sold 89,000 in the UK in it's first week (no doubt with a BBC Glasto sales bump), and 310,000 in the US in it's first week.

Taylor Swift released her album "89" two weeks ago. in it's first week, it sold 90,000 in the UK, and 1.2 million in the US.

so if we're going by album sales, Swift is at least on par with Beyonce in the UK, and far, far bigger in the US.

i'm not really sure what other metric there is for judging who is bigger as anecdotal name/song recognition probably depends on the person and obviously Beyonce has been around for much longer and is more "well-known" due to her long career and Jay-Z.

To be honest I'd say it's her keeping Jay-Z's career afloat these days.

[russycarps]

Beyonce released "4" the day after she played Glastonbury 2011. it sold 89,000 in the UK in it's first week (no doubt with a BBC Glasto sales bump), and 310,000 in the US in it's first week.

Taylor Swift released her album "89" two weeks ago. in it's first week, it sold 90,000 in the UK, and 1.2 million in the US.

so if we're going by album sales, Swift is at least on par with Beyonce in the UK, and far, far bigger in the US.

i'm not really sure what other metric there is for judging who is bigger as anecdotal name/song recognition probably depends on the person and obviously Beyonce has been around for much longer and is more "well-known" due to her long career and Jay-Z.

Problem with using record sales is that would make one direction the biggest band in the world.

but then having said that, they probably are!

[Thearg]

I don't understand why already incredibly wealthy people who live in 5-star hotels and live as well as it is possible to live (Fleetwood lives in Maui FFS) need MORE money.

http://www.fleetwoodmacnews.com/2012/01/mick-fleetwoods-maui-estate-becomes.html

Christ,that's nearly as much as Camp Kerala!

[stuartbert two hats]

Problem with using record sales is that would make one direction the biggest band in the world.

but then having said that, they probably are!

The problem is that record sales are seemingly being used to determine whether a band is suitable to headline Glastonbury, which is totally wrong headed to me. Bands get to headline because they're good. Not because they have large record sales. A good band might get more sales, but they may not. Correlation is not causation!

[russycarps]

The problem is that record sales are seemingly being used to determine whether a band is suitable to headline Glastonbury, which is totally wrong headed to me. Bands get to headline because they're good. Not because they have large record sales. A good band might get more sales, but they may not. Correlation is not causation!

yep, when record sales are used to determine headliners we end up with the likes of mumford & sons!

[Space Shanty]

The problem is that record sales are seemingly being used to determine whether a band is suitable to headline Glastonbury, which is totally wrong headed to me. Bands get to headline because they're good. Not because they have large record sales. A good band might get more sales, but they may not. Correlation is not causation!

Spot on... this is the way it should be but Mumford & Sons showed a worrying trend away from this.

Some of the names being bandied about for headline slots are appalling.

Taylor Swift might sell records, but headlining Glasto?

Nightmare stuff

[home to you]

The problem is that record sales are seemingly being used to determine whether a band is suitable to headline Glastonbury, which is totally wrong headed to me. Bands get to headline because they're good. Not because they have large record sales. A good band might get more sales, but they may not. Correlation is not causation!

Very well said. I'm sure we could compile a list of acts with impressive sales figures but the majority of them are shite and won't be headlining Glastonbury Edited November 11, 2014 by TomViolence

[ghostdancer1]

The problem is that record sales are seemingly being used to determine whether a band is suitable to headline Glastonbury, which is totally wrong headed to me. Bands get to headline because they're good. Not because they have large record sales. A good band might get more sales, but they may not. Correlation is not causation!

well I was using record sales to underline the fact that Taylor Swift is a bigger act than Beyonce, not to gauge suitability for headlining Glastonbury.

"good" is subjective. i'd rather listen to Taylor Swift than a lot of the crap that has been deemed "suitable" to headline Glastonbury in the past, and even then, I wouldn't go see her if i was given a free ticket for her gigs.

Edited November 11, 2014 by ghostdancer1

[Thearg]

The problem is that record sales are seemingly being used to determine whether a band is suitable to headline Glastonbury, which is totally wrong headed to me. Bands get to headline because they're good. Not because they have large record sales. A good band might get more sales, but they may not. Correlation is not causation!

With the current demographics of the festival I should imagine most people are pleased with that.

[alframsey]

This is quite sad.