2023 legend slot

[stuie]

19 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

It's not that well regarded these days. I mean, it's well regarded, but it's no longer the historic, counter-cultural thing it used to be. It's become commercialised, for the better I think. But that, coupled with it losing a bit of global relevance - the whole BBC thing, which was great for the profile of the event in the UK, suffers globally when it's only available on iPlayer. Plus other festivals are matching it for size. 

And while it donates money to charity, it's a tiny fraction of what it brings in, it's by no means a charitable event. And it doesn't need massive "profits" on paper as it doesn't have shareholders, and the people that own it own the land it takes place on, and pay themselves a huge fee from the festival to them for renting "the festival" the land. 

Maybe Madonna would agree to play one year if the Eavis' donate half their personal festival income to charity...

That’s partly your opinion and partly a load of nonsense that is speculation.
 

[Crazyfool01]

35 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

It's not that well regarded these days. I mean, it's well regarded, but it's no longer the historic, counter-cultural thing it used to be. It's become commercialised, for the better I think. But that, coupled with it losing a bit of global relevance - the whole BBC thing, which was great for the profile of the event in the UK, suffers globally when it's only available on iPlayer. Plus other festivals are matching it for size. 

And while it donates money to charity, it's a tiny fraction of what it brings in, it's by no means a charitable event. And it doesn't need massive "profits" on paper as it doesn't have shareholders, and the people that own it own the land it takes place on, and pay themselves a huge fee from the festival to them for renting "the festival" the land. 

Maybe Madonna would agree to play one year if the Eavis' donate half their personal festival income to charity...

Glastonbury donates over 1 million each year to charity … not exactly small numbers . They also don’t own all the land https://www.glastonburyfestivals.co.uk/worthy-causes/local-benefits/

[stuie]

2 minutes ago, Crazyfool01 said:

Glastonbury donates over 1 million each year to charity … not exactly small numbers . They also don’t own all the land https://www.glastonburyfestivals.co.uk/worthy-causes/local-benefits/

And they lose the use of the land that they do own for farming and the associated income for 3-6 months of each year the festival operates. 

[The Nal]

Duncan Sheik has never played it has he?  

 

 

[GrumpyRaver]

3 hours ago, leath02 said:

Umm, not particularly, other stage headliner makes infinitely more sense than Norman blasting out 90s rave bangers in the mid afternoon sun on a Sunday  

🤣

[GrumpyRaver]

2 hours ago, p.pete said:

When he's done his beach gigs did that have to wait until it was dark?  Get everyone on the pyramid field dancing in Hawaiian shirts in the sunshine - scenes not seen since Brian Wilson in 2005 

Absolutely this... the mega beach gig was light for ages.  He doesn't need darkness, he's basically a pop act, especially if he was playing that slot.

[giantkatestacks]

1 hour ago, CiaranMc said:

Don Henley as a Stevie guest belting out Boys Of Summer would make my day to be honest.

Saw him do it at Hop farm and it made me really teary. He had really good visuals to go with it and it just set me off.

[Skip997]

46 minutes ago, The Nal said:

Duncan Sheik has never played it has he?  

Who the f*ck is Duncan Sheik?

[DeanoL]

1 hour ago, stuie said:

That’s partly your opinion and partly a load of nonsense that is speculation.
 

It's partly my opinion and partly confirmed facts you can see from looking at the Glastonbury accounts.

1 hour ago, Crazyfool01 said:

Glastonbury donates over 1 million each year to charity … not exactly small numbers . They also don’t own all the land https://www.glastonburyfestivals.co.uk/worthy-causes/local-benefits/

Compared to what a headliner fee is? Well yes, it is small numbers. What I was objecting to was the idea that bands refusing to play Glastonbury were taking money away from charities. Pretty much any headliner act would do more for charity if they just put on their own gig and donated their fee.

It's a couple of percent of the ticket price. It's not nothing, but the notion that Glastonbury is some sort of charity event has always been and remains a convenient nonsense. And yes, a lot more people are seeing through that now, including acts, and so not playing for much smaller fees any more. 

(And to be clear, I have absolutely no problem with the Eavis' making a tonne of money through putting on such a great event. Nor has the festival itself ever branded itself as a charitable event. That's just nonsense that people on here come up with. They leverage PR from their charitable donation every year but plenty of companies do the same thing.)

Edited January 23, 2023 by DeanoL

[Jose Pose]

37 minutes ago, GrumpyRaver said:

Absolutely this... the mega beach gig was light for ages.  He doesn't need darkness, he's basically a pop act, especially if he was playing that slot.

He’s a pop act in so much as he’s dance music for dummies, but he’s not an actual pop act, if we’re after a pop act then surely we can just get an actual pop act, like spice girls take that etc? Rather than someone just pressing play on their decks to churn out some edm style dance music that was popular 10/15 years ago. 

[CaledonianGonzo]

More to the point, why would you waste a Legend Slot (and the chance of a gig by someone like Stevie Nicks) on someone who'll be playing another half dozen slots across the weekend?

[Skip997]

4 minutes ago, Jose Pose said:

He’s a pop act in so much as he’s dance music for dummies, but he’s not an actual pop act, if we’re after a pop act then surely we can just get an actual pop act, like spice girls take that etc? Rather than someone just pressing play on their decks to churn out some edm style dance music that was popular 10/15 years ago. 

He's also not that good live.

[Jose Pose]

7 minutes ago, CaledonianGonzo said:

More to the point, why would you waste a Legend Slot (and the chance of a gig by someone like Stevie Nicks) on someone who'll be playing another half dozen slots across the weekend?

You wouldn’t, and Glastonbury wouldn’t, but as usual some people are contorting reality to fit something they personally want to happen.

[Bike_Like_A_Mum]

32 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

It's partly my opinion and partly confirmed facts you can see from looking at the Glastonbury accounts.

Compared to what a headliner fee is? Well yes, it is small numbers. What I was objecting to was the idea that bands refusing to play Glastonbury were taking money away from charities. Pretty much any headliner act would do more for charity if they just put on their own gig and donated their fee.

It's a couple of percent of the ticket price. It's not nothing, but the notion that Glastonbury is some sort of charity event has always been and remains a convenient nonsense. And yes, a lot more people are seeing through that now, including acts, and so not playing for much smaller fees any more. 

(And to be clear, I have absolutely no problem with the Eavis' making a tonne of money through putting on such a great event. Nor has the festival itself ever branded itself as a charitable event. That's just nonsense that people on here come up with. They leverage PR from their charitable donation every year but plenty of companies do the same thing.)

In the grand scheme of things...I really don't think this is much at all to pay themselves.

At the end of the day, if the costs stayed down and more profits were made....it wouldn't go into the Eavis's pockets it would be donated 

[sjseabass]

31 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

It's partly my opinion and partly confirmed facts you can see from looking at the Glastonbury accounts.

Compared to what a headliner fee is? Well yes, it is small numbers. What I was objecting to was the idea that bands refusing to play Glastonbury were taking money away from charities. Pretty much any headliner act would do more for charity if they just put on their own gig and donated their fee.

It's a couple of percent of the ticket price. It's not nothing, but the notion that Glastonbury is some sort of charity event has always been and remains a convenient nonsense. And yes, a lot more people are seeing through that now, including acts, and so not playing for much smaller fees any more. 

(And to be clear, I have absolutely no problem with the Eavis' making a tonne of money through putting on such a great event. Nor has the festival itself ever branded itself as a charitable event. That's just nonsense that people on here come up with. They leverage PR from their charitable donation every year but plenty of companies do the same thing.)

Half a million (some of which I assume genuinely is related to stopping the farm for 3 months) a year would be negligible spread over all the acts that play - it’s less than the pay ‘cut’ one headliner takes to perform. You really think bands are going to start demanding he pay himself nothing so they can get an extra £500 each, or otherwise refuse? They’re clearly happy to do it for some reason other than the money (provided they don’t actually make too much of a loss, I guess) - for a few it might be the charity donations, for a few more it’s probably the exposure, but I honestly think for quite a lot it’s just about being part of a fucking good party. And I fail to see why that would suddenly be any different now compared to 10 years ago.

[NorthernSoul52]

The Boys of Summer is a banger, to be fair, though really dig New York Minute too.

Could get behind Nicks. She was decent supporting Petty a few years back.

[Alex DeLarge]

This might sound daft, but I'm guessing a good 70% of the lower, lower undercard just do it for a free ticket. Anything they get paid is a bonus.

[Jose Pose]

13 minutes ago, Alex DeLarge said:

This might sound daft, but I'm guessing a good 70% of the lower, lower undercard just do it for a free ticket. Anything they get paid is a bonus.

There was this blog from Greg Wilson that gives little bit of insight: 

https://blog.gregwilson.co.uk/2016/06/why-no-glastonbury/

[Ayrshire Chris]

2 hours ago, stuie said:

And they lose the use of the land that they do own for farming and the associated income for 3-6 months of each year the festival operates. 

Yes and this means a loss of the summer months that could be used for arable farming. That’s quite a loss of income. I remember visiting the site in the 2018 fallow year and some of the fields were in crop. 

Edited January 23, 2023 by Ayrshire Chris

[BenG92]

30 minutes ago, NorthernSoul52 said:

The Boys of Summer is a banger

In my top 10 songs of all time. Just not bothered about practically anything else he's written.

[The Nal]

Jaki Graham would knock it out of the park. Probably better if it was sunny though.

 

 

[adcarr_]

 

Sadly think this is Stevie ruled out.

[DeanoL]

30 minutes ago, Bike_Like_A_Mum said:

In the grand scheme of things...I really don't think this is much at all to pay themselves.

Nor do I. I think it should be higher if anything. Wasn't the point I was making,

26 minutes ago, sjseabass said:

Half a million (some of which I assume genuinely is related to stopping the farm for 3 months) a year would be negligible spread over all the acts that play - it’s less than the pay ‘cut’ one headliner takes to perform. You really think bands are going to start demanding he pay himself nothing so they can get an extra £500 each, or otherwise refuse?

No - it's a commercial, not a charity event and bands will do it or not based on commercials - whether that's the actual fee or the publicity that can generate sales/streams down the line.

My point is acts aren't doing it for charity, and acts not doing it doesn't mean they hate charity. 

I mean, you sort of hit the nail on the head with the figures yourself. Half a million is less than the "pay cut" a headliner takes? Okay. So three headliners are taking a "pay cut" of £1.5 million collectively at least. The festival charitable donation is normally around £1 million.

So if they wanted to help a charity, the three headliners could just play their own gigs and donate the difference between what they normally get and what Glastonbury pays them, and the charity would be better off.

[BenG92]

1 minute ago, adcarr_ said:

Sadly think this is Stevie ruled out.

Bugger, you're probably right.

[p.pete]

1 minute ago, adcarr_ said:

 

Sadly think this is Stevie ruled out.

Fatboy back in the game!  Any chance of Billy Joel?  Think he's exclusive somewhere else, but how watertight is that?