The Future of Glastonbury

[Skip997]

17 minutes ago, Sawdusty surfer said:

Having said that, as you will well know, there are plenty of pockets of counter culture, including of  the old school variety, that still thrive there. 

 

 

True.

Anyway good post. Am out of reactions for today.

[Madyaker]

As long as the demand is strong enough to sell it out 5 times over I think it'll be ok.

[Olshansky]

5 hours ago, Ayrshire Chris said:

 There’s many many Glastonburys still to come. 

ill drink to that 

[Neil]

6 hours ago, Bike_Like_A_Mum said:

@The Nal on top form 👌🏼 

I don't think it'll change too much from what it is today for the forseeable...

its continuing success, the instant sell-out, is based within an idea of the sort of acts who will headline, there's fewer and fewer of those mega acts, without many new ones being created. -hence guns n roses this year, which bursts a bubble, and now other festivals can equal it, and Glastonbury has lost its unique advantage its cutting edge. in the same way that the idea of mega acts has taken decades to build up its going to take a number of years to deflate, and i think we're going to see some big changes in Glastonbury ticket buying habits. which will alter the confidence the team can approach all other aspects of the festival, as the risk of financial failure becomes a bigger consideration.

 

 

[Guest]

I don't think Michael has much interest in the festival now, particularly after his recent illness. I'm also not sure about Emily's long term commitment. The festival is important to the local community (£57 million a year I think I read) but not to the UK as a whole. I would say the sizeable number of punters are solely there just to say they've 'done Glasto' and a few years of average headliners could well see numbers drop.  I could see it not existing in 10 years time. I sincerely hope I'm wrong.

[Isaaclk]

everyones talking about the weather conditions averaging out. Climate change isnt averaging out its only increasing. Might not be another scorcher but i reckon it won't be wet either

[Avalon_Fields]

I’ve faith in Emily. For me the biggest threat is the continuing rising costs which will force upon them further significant large ticket prices and/or a reduction in quality through cost savings. The festival only thrives if young people can still afford to come. There’s enough magic and love for the festival to be ok for a few more years no matter what. 

[clarkete]

8 hours ago, THEBOILERMAN said:

I first went in 1981 so I already sit around the Stone circle  and talk about the good ole days. "Remember when they had food for a 50p?! Can't get a toasty for under 5 quid these days"    🙂 

I first went in 85 and as I've mentioned somewhere before was flogging cheese rolls 50p each or 3 for a quid. 

The local Liberal party (of which ME's brother Philip was a very active member) went there every year for their main fund raiser and did very well. I think the rolls were made by local volunteers and we sold from a couple of trestle tables, but because 85 was also their first muddy year and people struggled to get to our stall, we also took a bread basket and flogged them wandering through tents and fields.  

So even in those years that some people think were largely counter culture, there were some middle aged folks dotted about, or the occasional councillor (he was savy enough to invite the ones from MDC as some of them didn't know much about it). 

They also used to do that thing on Sunday where, because so many people left that day to go back to their home towns or cities, they would simply open the ped gates and unman them, so the locals would come down to get pissed. 

I don't believe anybody has mentioned Michael being a quaker, which in that fiftieth anniversary film was referred to a couple of times as why the money for good causes was so important to him and a driver for him allowing some things which weren't necessarily his bag - eg dance music - hopefully that continues to be a force for good and a powerful incentive to keep it running. 

[kalifire]

So much pessimism in this thread! Yes the festival is now a cultural behemoth, so big and expensive that it's evolved beyond its roots, but this has been the case for many years. I see no danger of them 'selling out' and having a Barclays Bank stage or anything like it. We're already seeing them choose to downgrade rather than do that.

I think the decision to re-involve Melvin, and the refreshed operational approach to the festival (which will be a work in progress, as last year demonstrated), should reassure anyone nervous of the festival's existential future in the post-ME era. Although it's an Eavis institution and it's fun to have Michael as the 'folksy farmer who runs it', realistically it's been far too big for him to be anything much more than the face of it for a long time.

For all the big mainstream stuff it's become more famous for, it's still possible to learn from and be inspired by environmentalists and progressive movements in the Speaker's Forum; to engage with counter-culture figures and free thinkers in the green fields; and to recharge your activism in Leftfield. The beating heart of Glasto is still there, with a huge groundswell of passionate support, and it isn't going anywhere.

[Neil]

7 hours ago, Ommadawn said:

I could see it not existing in 10 years time.

i've seen that comment a lot in the last 25 years. 😛 

[MEGATRONICMEATWAGON]

7 hours ago, Neil said:

its continuing success, the instant sell-out, is based within an idea of the sort of acts who will headline, there's fewer and fewer of those mega acts, without many new ones being created. -hence guns n roses this year, which bursts a bubble, and now other festivals can equal it, and Glastonbury has lost its unique advantage its cutting edge. in the same way that the idea of mega acts has taken decades to build up its going to take a number of years to deflate, and i think we're going to see some big changes in Glastonbury ticket buying habits. which will alter the confidence the team can approach all other aspects of the festival, as the risk of financial failure becomes a bigger consideration.

 

 

But I think there's a lot more to Glasto's cutting edge than just the mega acts. All the healing fields, the craft field, etc, the Park, the features like Cinemarmeggeddon (although I thought that was a bit of a failure) and it's general ethos on inclusion and loving thy neighbour and all that, gave it it's cutting edge. It did have a small blip around 2008 for different years; consecutive years of rain, the shift from just indie and rock to more pop/hip-hop acts... I dunno. But I think there's an advantage for Glasto outside of the mega acts.

I think there will be a slow down in interest though when they do run out of these huge artists. We've written them down on this forum, who's big enough and not done it, and there's perhaps 8-10 in total. That's only enough for perhaps the next 5-6 festivals.

But still, even then, the demand will be so huge, I think.

[Neil]

2 minutes ago, MEGATRONICMEATWAGON said:

But I think there's a lot more to Glasto's cutting edge than just the mega acts.

so do i, but the acts are the primary driver for ticket sales, particularly for attracting new people.

Edited April 20, 2023 by Neil

[MEGATRONICMEATWAGON]

Just now, Neil said:

so do i, but the acts are the primary driver for ticket sales.

Maybe. I guess we'll see this year when they announce how many resales there were. Normally they release that kind of info, right?

Although could also be coupled with rising prices across the board.

[Neil]

1 minute ago, MEGATRONICMEATWAGON said:

Maybe. I guess we'll see this year when they announce how many resales there were. Normally they release that kind of info, right?

Although could also be coupled with rising prices across the board.

they don't normally say how many tickets are returned.

[Neil]

2 minutes ago, MEGATRONICMEATWAGON said:

Although could also be coupled with rising prices across the board.

value for money for the line-up is also a factor.

[Supermerv]

9 hours ago, Neil said:

its continuing success, the instant sell-out, is based within an idea of the sort of acts who will headline, there's fewer and fewer of those mega acts, without many new ones being created. -hence guns n roses this year, which bursts a bubble, and now other festivals can equal it, and Glastonbury has lost its unique advantage its cutting edge. in the same way that the idea of mega acts has taken decades to build up its going to take a number of years to deflate, and i think we're going to see some big changes in Glastonbury ticket buying habits. which will alter the confidence the team can approach all other aspects of the festival, as the risk of financial failure becomes a bigger consideration.

 

 

Realise you're not impressed with Guns 'n' Roses as a headliner, but do you really think that might mark a turning point for the festival? There have definitely been other headliners who were undeserving of a headline slot, and it hasn't affected the Glasto's upward trajectory.

[balti-pie]

skunk anansie

travis

rod stewart 

stereophonics

moby 

verve

mumfords

kasabian

florence and the machine

now i appreciate its all taste-based, but all of the above are at best middling and at worst absolutely bollocks, and theyve all headlined in the last 25 festivals. Yet its still managing to continue, somehow. . . . i think Guns n Roses will be fine, serviceable, enjoyed by the people into it and ignored by the rest - kind of like every other headliner show then! 

[rwoo]

The demand for tickets just goes up every year. Emily is just getting started. Even if the headliners aren’t amazing, the festival always has an amazing lineup with something to see for everyone. Headliners over the next few years are going to be pretty big time. 
 

I think the festival will be fine for the considerable future. 

[Neil]

2 hours ago, Supermerv said:

Realise you're not impressed with Guns 'n' Roses as a headliner, but do you really think that might mark a turning point for the festival? There have definitely been other headliners who were undeserving of a headline slot, and it hasn't affected the Glasto's upward trajectory.

think the timing is bad with the big hike in ticket price.

[Skip997]

Nobody I know who regularly attends have ever made their decision on whether to go or not dependent on the line up.

[goonerben]

Neil's earlier point about headliners, I think is a good one. 

Top end festival headliners are retiring and/or dying, much more quickly than they are being replaced.  For a festival like Glastonbury (who need "top end" headliners, as opposed to say Truck or Kendal Calling who can have headliners that wouldn't get near the business end of the Pyramid Stage), this is going to be an increasing problem.  

We all know there is a lot more to Glastonbury than the (Pyramid) headliners - but it IS the Pyramid headliners that lead the news headlines and shape a lot of perception of what the festival is.

I think with a combination of less choice at the top end of the market, plus people like Beyonce and Taylor Swift finding that they can make MUCH more money doing their own stadium shows, there is a problem in store.

[themunn]

Guns and Roses will be a better and more fun headliner than Paul McCartney was last year, and The Cure in 2019.

 

I'm still mad at how many clashes there were on Saturday in 2019 only for the Sunday line-up to be extremely middling.

[Neil]

9 minutes ago, themunn said:

Guns and Roses will be a better and more fun headliner than Paul McCartney was last year, and The Cure in 2019.

you might be right about that but they don't feel as special or as much value for money against today's high ticket price.

[balti-pie]

11 minutes ago, Skip997 said:

Nobody I know who regularly attends have ever made their decision on whether to go or not dependent on the line up.

Me neither, but there's a generation of younger people who need to go a few times until they become the old twats like us who automatically go without thinking about the lineup 😊 we need to fish in our replacements! (though i'll be going for as long as i have the physical capability to do so, which should be a few years yet, legs permitting)

[Neil]

15 minutes ago, goonerben said:

I think with a combination of less choice at the top end of the market, plus people like Beyonce and Taylor Swift finding that they can make MUCH more money doing their own stadium shows, there is a problem in store.

they can make more money like that but i don't think its only about the money, also about the amount of control they can have over the whole production.