2024 Headliners

[Hugh Jass II]

The SZA rumour has been going for a few days now and I have not seen a single person stating whether their mum has heard of her or not. (Mine hasn’t)

Standards around here really have slipped.

[philipsteak]

4 minutes ago, Hugh Jass II said:

The SZA rumour has been going for a few days now and I have not seen a single person stating whether their mum has heard of her or not. (Mine hasn’t)

Standards around here really have slipped.

I'm not sure mine has heard of Coldplay, never mind SZA

[CaledonianGonzo]

Probably we can all assume the answer given that decent sized chunk of the progeny haven't heard of her either.

[Mich1268]

4 minutes ago, Hugh Jass II said:

The SZA rumour has been going for a few days now and I have not seen a single person stating whether their mum has heard of her or not. (Mine hasn’t)

Standards around here really have slipped.

Are you trolling me? Fess up. Asked my son if he liked ceaser. He said who is that. I said it's spelt SZA. I wasn't far off!!

[clarkete]

12 minutes ago, Hugh Jass II said:

The SZA rumour has been going for a few days now and I have not seen a single person stating whether their mum has heard of her or not. (Mine hasn’t)

Standards around here really have slipped.

My mum has been to the festival a couple of times about 40 years ago and tbh I'd have been surprised if she knew the headliners then.  If she knew them all now I'd be a bit worried about their contemporary tag. 

I'm genuinely delighted she still remembers who we are 😳

[nikkic]

57 minutes ago, Hugh Jass II said:

The SZA rumour has been going for a few days now and I have not seen a single person stating whether their mum has heard of her or not. (Mine hasn’t)

Standards around here really have slipped.

I asked my Mum and she passed me these 

[CaledonianGonzo]

I asked my mum and she said "Like RZA and GZA then?"

But she pronounced those as Reeza and Geeza - so I confiscated her Wu Tang baseball cap.

 

 

 

 

Edited March 9 by CaledonianGonzo

[Simsy]

1 hour ago, Hugh Jass II said:

The SZA rumour has been going for a few days now and I have not seen a single person stating whether their mum has heard of her or not. (Mine hasn’t)

Standards around here really have slipped.

My mum has moved beyond radio 2 and now listens to absolute 60s. It's probably a positive that glasto are booking headliners she's never heard of.

[CaledonianGonzo]

Granny's never heard of Elton John?

[Euphoricape]

Is Rhianna out of the question?

[CaledonianGonzo]

There's a world of difference between 'out the question' and 'unlikely' - but she's very much the latter.

[fullfathom5]

6 hours ago, Crazyfool01 said:

Have we overlooked this post ? Personally I could only see her at headliner level and they might want to give her that after she pulled out . 

If she's playing a set she is headliner or nothing after already doing the legends slot.

[clarkete]

47 minutes ago, Euphoricape said:

Is Rhianna out of the question?

Not according to the bookies that the scum have been talking to

 

 

Edited March 9 by clarkete

[incident]

13 minutes ago, clarkete said:

Not according to the bookies that the scum have been talking to

 

 

Tbh even if those odds were real (ie there was a bookie offering them for actual bets) - all of those odds would pretty much equate to "definitely not happening". When the announcement is this close, anyone who had any chance of headlining would either not be on the list, or would be priced so short that you'd probably earn more by bunging the cash in a savings account.

[festivalgolem]

I dont really understand what those odds mean. Could someone explain please?

[CaledonianGonzo]

They mean that none of them are playing Glastonbury 2024

[incident]

8 minutes ago, festivalgolem said:

I dont really understand what those odds mean. Could someone explain please?

With bookies odds, the two numbers given are relative to each other - the first one is what you'd win, the second number is your stake.

So if as above the odds are 7/2 on Rihanna - A £10 bet would win you £35, plus if you win you get your £10 back.

Whereas for Stevie Nicks at 16/1 - A winning £10 bet would return £160 plus the stake back.

Except in both cases, neither are headlining so you'd end up with nothing. For a market like this, with everything locked in and ready to announce, no bookie is going to offer odds like that on anyone that they think has even an outside chance of headlining.

Edited March 9 by incident

[clarkete]

2 hours ago, incident said:

With bookies odds, the two numbers given are relative to each other - the first one is what you'd win, the second number is your stake.

So if as above the odds are 7/2 on Rihanna - A £10 bet would win you £35, plus if you win you get your £10 back.

Whereas for Stevie Nicks at 16/1 - A winning £10 bet would return £160 plus the stake back.

Except in both cases, neither are headlining so you'd end up with nothing. For a market like this, with everything locked in and ready to announce, no bookie is going to offer odds like that on anyone that they think has even an outside chance of headlining.

Good tips and seems accurate. 

This is the site they linked to and I struggle to see any mention of things that aren't sport (especially footie) bets 

https://betideas.com/

[Suprefan]

6 hours ago, Euphoricape said:

Is Rhianna out of the question?

Emily has $9 million sitting around? 

[Euphoricape]

19 minutes ago, Suprefan said:

Emily has $9 million sitting around? 

If that's the money she expects then I wouldn't want to see her anyway. 

[fraybentos1]

43 minutes ago, Suprefan said:

Emily has $9 million sitting around? 

Because Glastonbury is the best festival in the world, people often play it for way less than they would play other gigs 🙂 

[clarkete]

2 hours ago, Suprefan said:

Emily has $9 million sitting around? 

The reserves that ensure the future of the festival? 

Is this your cunning plan? 

[Superscally]

23 hours ago, Superscally said:

The reason why headliners and overall lineups this year seem underwhelming? Because the public are suckers for being TOLD what is good. Lineups are picked on the basis of who the industry tell you that you are supposed to like, when in fact, a lot of these artists are f**king shite with 8 or 9/10 reviews from reviewers who are self satisfied gurners pretending their finger is on the pulse. If the industry wants an act to succeed it gets the airplay and you hear it over and over again until you think it ACTUALLY is good. So, the top end of lineups appear poor, because they're diluted by crap. People moaning about LCD and PJ Harvey being poor picks to be high up? Mental. THEY'RE not the problem. The undercards are actually good too, you just have to do your research as they're not getting pushed. Before you moan about lineups, actually listen to stuff outside what's getting pushed on you. The lineup for Glasto, as ever, will be boss, you might just have to look beyond the Pyramid for it. 

I mean - there's so much good sheeeeeeet out there right now. 

Sorry about Liam/Squire thing. Hopefully it will go away soon.

BUT THE REST!

[Ben7amin_]

9 hours ago, Superscally said:

I mean - there's so much good sheeeeeeet out there right now. 

Sorry about Liam/Squire thing. Hopefully it will go away soon.

BUT THE REST!

Your not wrong.  

Bigger name acts actually often mean more publicity not better acts. 

For example- 

While we know acts like Young Fathers etc are not "big enough" to headline they are one of the best live acts around. 

I would much rather see the festival full of great live acts than chase as many big names as possible .  

But the problem is people they want the names they are familiar with they are not prepared to risk an unfamiliar thing (hopefully present company excluded)

It's the Dominoes Pizza effect. Most people probably have an independent local Pizza shop that makes amazing pizza with quality ingredients for less money. 

But when they want a Pizza  they have seen 20million bits of advertising for Dominoes so they go straight there. 

I wish the general public were more interested in music quality than familiarity of names. Would be a better festival for everyone. 

 

 

Edited March 10 by Ben7amin_

[Superscally]

10 minutes ago, Ben7amin_ said:

Your not wrong.  

Bigger name acts actually often mean more publicity not better acts. 

For example- 

While we know acts like Young Fathers etc are not "big enough" to headline they are one of the best live acts around. 

I would much rather see the festival full of great live acts than chase as many big names as possible .  

But the problem is people they want the names they are familiar with they are not prepared to risk an unfamiliar thing (hopefully present company excluded)

It's the Dominoes Pizza effect. Most people probably have an independent local Pizza shop that makes amazing pizza with quality ingredients for less money. 

But when they want a Pizza  they have seen 20million bits of advertising for Dominoes so they go straight there. 

I wish the general public were more interested in music quality than familiarity of names. Would be a better festival for everyone. 

 

 

Bang on.