21 replies to this topic

[Sam Lanham]

People are saying how Blink, Arcade Fire and MCR are all exclusives and have to be for some reason.

But what about GNR, Gorillaz, Foo Fighters, Linkin park and even The Who. None of them are playing festivals in the UK (And Possibly Europe) this year.

All of them are bigger than MCR and Arcade Fire at the moment. Maybe blink are bigger than a couple of them but I think could've done better.

Anyone else agree or disagree?

[scottt]

Sam Lanham, on Mar 13 2010, 12:56 AM, said:

People are saying how Blink, Arcade Fire and MCR are all exclusives and have to be for some reason.

But what about GNR, Gorillaz, Foo Fighters, Linkin park and even The Who. None of them are playing festivals in the UK (And Possibly Europe) this year.

All of them are bigger than MCR and Arcade Fire at the moment. Maybe blink are bigger than a couple of them but I think could've done better.

Anyone else agree or disagree?

Maybe FR didnt want them. Maybe they didn't want to play. Maybe they wanted to much money, maybe they're not playing festivals this year etc.

[stephen07]

scottt, on Mar 12 2010, 11:59 PM, said:

Maybe FR didnt want them. Maybe they didn't want to play. Maybe they wanted to much money, maybe they're not playing festivals this year etc.

Im now looking forward to the Foos , Qotsa and TCV .

Edited by stephen07, 13 March 2010 - 12:05 AM.

[Sam Lanham]

scottt, on Mar 12 2010, 11:59 PM, said:

Maybe FR didnt want them. Maybe they didn't want to play. Maybe they wanted to much money, maybe they're not playing festivals this year etc.

Maybe

[kev1664]

Sam Lanham, on Mar 12 2010, 11:56 PM, said:

People are saying how Blink, Arcade Fire and MCR are all exclusives and have to be for some reason.

But what about GNR, Gorillaz, Foo Fighters, Linkin park and even The Who. None of them are playing festivals in the UK (And Possibly Europe) this year.

All of them are bigger than MCR and Arcade Fire at the moment. Maybe blink are bigger than a couple of them but I think could've done better.

Anyone else agree or disagree?

Neil did say that there was a problem with getting bigger bands to play, he wouldnn't divulge the information but that is probably why they couldn't get the top bands. Maybe arcade fire and MCR were signed as sub-headliner and then all of a sudden had to be bumped up to headliners as deals fell through for higher acts.

[jordanuk90]

kev1664, on Mar 13 2010, 08:35 AM, said:

Neil did say that there was a problem with getting bigger bands to play, he wouldnn't divulge the information but that is probably why they couldn't get the top bands. Maybe arcade fire and MCR were signed as sub-headliner and then all of a sudden had to be bumped up to headliners as deals fell through for higher acts.

Makes perfect sense it's disappointing but oh well

[sjp_121]

I have a theory over the bigger bands deal falling through
I think one day would have been Green Day then MCR

Because Green Day and MCR are good friends, I have a feeling the amount each one was being paid was announced in the banter, and I think it must have been incredibly similar for each one for Green Day to drop out.

Which, if true, is very sad, that a band will only be focused on the money not playing what is known as one of the best British Festivals.

But thats just a theory. Slay me if you think I'm wrong

[redcarsgofaster]

Sam Lanham, on Mar 12 2010, 11:56 PM, said:

People are saying how Blink, Arcade Fire and MCR are all exclusives and have to be for some reason.

But what about GNR, Gorillaz, Foo Fighters, Linkin park and even The Who. None of them are playing festivals in the UK (And Possibly Europe) this year.

All of them are bigger than MCR and Arcade Fire at the moment. Maybe blink are bigger than a couple of them but I think could've done better.

Anyone else agree or disagree?

probably because out of those bands you mentioned only Gorillaz are plugging an album, and I still hink there is a chance they will play, but the three that are 'expected' to headline all have albums to come or in blinks, rather desperate case, a comeback after dire solo-projects.
plus greenday, gnr and linkin park, although big bands, are all rubbish and the who are past it
foo fighters are unlikely but they do put on a good show but isnt the drummer doing solo stuff?

can everyone stop with the 'we want muse or greenday to headline' stuff, they arent playing so get over it

[tombenj]

sjp_121, on Mar 13 2010, 01:37 PM, said:

I have a theory over the bigger bands deal falling through
I think one day would have been Green Day then MCR

Because Green Day and MCR are good friends, I have a feeling the amount each one was being paid was announced in the banter, and I think it must have been incredibly similar for each one for Green Day to drop out.

Which, if true, is very sad, that a band will only be focused on the money not playing what is known as one of the best British Festivals.

But thats just a theory. Slay me if you think I'm wrong

Is this just pure speculation or do you have any evidence?

Seems pretty tenuous!

[sjp_121]

tombenj, on Mar 13 2010, 06:49 PM, said:

Is this just pure speculation or do you have any evidence?

Seems pretty tenuous!

Pure speculation. They are good friends. And Niel said something happened... so I just randomly put two and two together... and came up with what I thought 4 could be.

But thats what I do

[rexclark]

Sam Lanham, on Mar 12 2010, 11:56 PM, said:

People are saying how Blink, Arcade Fire and MCR are all exclusives and have to be for some reason.

But what about GNR, Gorillaz, Foo Fighters, Linkin park and even The Who. None of them are playing festivals in the UK (And Possibly Europe) this year.

All of them are bigger than MCR and Arcade Fire at the moment. Maybe blink are bigger than a couple of them but I think could've done better.

Anyone else agree or disagree?

I'd imagine with perhaps the excetion of Gorillaz I'd imagine all those bands would cost more than the ones mentioned. I could be wrong of course.

[biglewhill]

kev1664, on Mar 13 2010, 07:35 AM, said:

Neil did say that there was a problem with getting bigger bands to play, he wouldnn't divulge the information but that is probably why they couldn't get the top bands. Maybe arcade fire and MCR were signed as sub-headliner and then all of a sudden had to be bumped up to headliners as deals fell through for higher acts.

Thats the theory i'll have to agree with.

[pink_triangle]

rexclark, on Mar 14 2010, 05:21 PM, said:

I'd imagine with perhaps the excetion of Gorillaz I'd imagine all those bands would cost more than the ones mentioned. I could be wrong of course.

Agreed, i think some people forget that the orgnaisers are running a business. The organisers have to work out what is the least they can spend on bands and still sell out. With the festival selling out so quickly every year, I can understand why the organisers feel they can get away without a massive headliner.

[rexclark]

pink_triangle, on Mar 16 2010, 03:10 PM, said:

Agreed, i think some people forget that the orgnaisers are running a business. The organisers have to work out what is the least they can spend on bands and still sell out. With the festival selling out so quickly every year, I can understand why the organisers feel they can get away without a massive headliner.

I think in the years previous they've been spending a fortune on acts, perhaps the money is slowly running out.

[kibble]

rexclark, on Mar 16 2010, 08:36 PM, said:

I think in the years previous they've been spending a fortune on acts, perhaps the money is slowly running out.

I don't think it's running out, just that they know Reading will bring crowds regardless of the line-up. Which equals more money for them!

[rexclark]

kibble, on Mar 16 2010, 08:40 PM, said:

I don't think it's running out, just that they know Reading will bring crowds regardless of the line-up. Which equals more money for them!

Perhaps, but I can't see them not going for the huge names purely out of complacency.

[redcarsgofaster]

the money wont be running out, they put the ticket prices up each year, and havent they recently increased the capacity?

[Sam Lanham]

pink_triangle, on Mar 16 2010, 03:10 PM, said:

Agreed, i think some people forget that the orgnaisers are running a business. The organisers have to work out what is the least they can spend on bands and still sell out. With the festival selling out so quickly every year, I can understand why the organisers feel they can get away without a massive headliner.

It's a sad state of affairs that it's more about the money now IMO

[rexclark]

redcarsgofaster, on Mar 16 2010, 08:53 PM, said:

the money wont be running out, they put the ticket prices up each year, and havent they recently increased the capacity?

Indeed, but they have other festivals etc... to fund. I'm not saying that Festival Republic are skint, but they're definately more cautious with how they spend there money.

[redcarsgofaster]

rexclark, on Mar 16 2010, 09:16 PM, said:

Indeed, but they have other festivals etc... to fund. I'm not saying that Festival Republic are skint, but they're definately more cautious with how they spend there money.

melvin needs to have a word with the guy in charge of t in the park money as they must have loads of it if they can afford to have eminem headline and jay-z sub-headline, muse,kasabian(less so) and i'm guessing black eyed peas wont be cheap(although granted they probably dont play many festivals)