Glastonbury festival is 'over' according to Harvey Goldsmith

[Hugh Jass]

I know what you mean, it seems a bit lost in what it's trying to do and be.

I suspect, tho, it'll be fine because of where it's coming from. It has all of the UK's biggest promoters involved in it, and the ability to use that muscle so that it would be other smaller festivals who go down and not V.

I do wonder what impact this year's lineup, which even to the casual observer, is absolutely dire, has had on ticket sales.

As you say, they've got the financial muscle to survive, but I'm not sure they'll continue to run over two sites for much longer. Can't remember the last time either site sold out.

[CaledonianGonzo]

I know what you mean, it seems a bit lost in what it's trying to do and be.

I suspect, tho, it'll be fine because of where it's coming from. It has all of the UK's biggest promoters involved in it, and the ability to use that muscle so that it would be other smaller festivals who go down and not V.

What's your prognosis for T in the Park? It feels like it might be on its last legs, even aside from the issues with having to move sites?

[glasto-worker]

My Harvey Goldsmith story.

Harvey Goldsmith put on Live Aid 13 July 1985 - I gave my ticket to my girlfriends niece who showed up from Glasgow thinking she could buy a ticket on the door.

anyway at some point Harvey Goldsmith left the VIP area but for some reason had forgotten his pass - now where he went I don't have a clue all I know is when he tried to reenter he was blocked by Security because he did not have a pass - he went Nuts and was ranting and raving - for how long I don't have a clue but at some point some star walked in and was able to vouch for him and he got back in - now I heard that he tried to get the Security Guard replaced now how true that is I cant say and have no information if the Security Guard was sacked or not.

But seeing the Security Guard was only doing his job it does reflect on the character of Harvey Goldsmith.

I would like to put a bet on that Glastonbury is still going well after Harvey Goldsmith is dead and buried.

[glasto-worker]

clicked once and it posted twice

Edited June 3, 2015 by glasto-worker

[eFestivals]

What's your prognosis for T in the Park? It feels like it might be on its last legs, even aside from the issues with having to move sites?

I'd say it's got the opportunity to re-invent itself on the new site, so I suspect that's what they'll try to do to some extent.

I've not been paying any attention to what the plans are for the new site, but my guess would be that it has a feel more similar to the briefly-running Connect than it does to windswept-airfield Balado.

[CaledonianGonzo]

The site looks pretty similar, at least superficially. If the level of organisation is anything like Connect then it'll be the death knell for T, cos that was a total shambles. Immense line up, but deeply shonky logistics.

[whisty]

Glastonbury could always trim down if the necessity arises. The others, what would they trim down to!

[eFestivals]

The site looks pretty similar, at least superficially. If the level of organisation is anything like Connect then it'll be the death knell for T, cos that was a total shambles. Immense line up, but deeply shonky logistics.

I was more on about the cosier feel that Connect had, than any other aspects of it.

The big-bare-field sorts of festivals have become less like that over the last decade or so, but T was always compromised with trying to change by the site - at least, more so than other festivals.

[eFestivals]

Glastonbury could always trim down if the necessity arises. The others, what would they trim down to!

I'm not sure there's too much scope for any festival to slim down by too much.

I think it would start to be perceived (both by punters and music biz) as that festival starting to fail, which would be likely cause further flight from it.

[Alan_C]

It's scary looking at the lineup at V from recent years. It's just not value for money at all for two days of music as well. Having said that though, they seem to have attracted a different crowd to people who go to other festivals. A few years ago, I hardly knew anyone who went to music festivals out of 'Facebook friends'. Now, I've got a few who go to Glastonbury, a few Leeds and TITP, but more than anything people go to V. It's all women mind. It's probably only a few years away from completely moving away from any of the old bands they still book low down the lineup at the minute. I think they can survive. It's an awful festival though, horrible lineups and attracts complete bellends. TITP needs to change a bit as well. It's getting a bit lost now I think. The lineups are getting worse every year.

I've seen Michael and Emily mention this 'fine for the next 10 years' with regards to headliners a few times now. I wonder who they have in mind who gives them that thought of security.

[HurrahBrother]

Harvey Goldsmith was big, but now knows less than Jon Snow!

Things have changed. Glastonbury has certainly evolved it will continue to evolve. Festivals that are too niche or just throw a venuesup and say "that will do" are possibly numbered, for a few years at least. Festivals that are too tied up in their "commercial opportunities" should also suffer.

[Sofa]

I think if Glastonbury was going to stop it would of a long time ago .Its unique in so many ways ,the way its run ,its location etc.I personally cannot see it going anywhere for a good few years to come regardless of lineup or whatever.As everyone else has said its about being there and how you feel inside that makes it so special .

[Rose-Colored Boy]

It's all women mind. and attracts complete bellends.

Both myths.

[grumpyhack]

Harvey is partly right that we don't have the depth of great headlining bands around at the moment who have not only got a body of work but have honed their stage-craft.

But I think his conclusion doesn't apply to Glastonbury because it's so much more than a straightforward music festival with a few big bands playing in a field.

Looking at the Glasto line up my problem is going to be finding time to see so much of what there is on offer this year.

His comments do apply in part to some festivals. I kicked off this year with Wychwood and a lot of the main stage acts did seem a bit past their sell-by date.

To find the underlying problem you have to look at the current music scene. I place the problem at the feet of the likes of Simon Cowell and programmes like X Factor where bands are encouraged to perform their take on existing classic songs. (Follow the money and follow the royalties ).

This year's three biggies for me are Patti Smith, The Moody Blues and The Who - all of whom have been around for years but all of whom have that body of work and well-honed stage-craft. But who am I to talk? I'm just a grumpy old fart like Harvey.

[Alan_C]

Both myths.

By all women, I meant people I know. I never used to know anyone who used to go, now (just going from people I know on Facebook), there's a lot of lasses I know who go most years now, who wouldn't have even considered a 8-10 years ago. I have been a few times, it does attract a lot of bellends.

[waynewdk]

The thing is we can re use headliner if needed, as I've only ever been to 3 glastonbury so far, so I've not seen many Headliners, and there always bringing out new material, plus new people join every year, and it ain't just about the Headliners. Glastonbury has a magical feel about it that draws me in, I'm guessing same for others, don't think we've got anything to worry about.

Edited June 3, 2015 by waynewdk

[Matt42]

To me Glastonbury feels immortal but nothing is immortal

It seems to me Glastonbury's greatest success is how it promotes itself, it's so different. I am a firm believer that actions speak louder than words, Glastonbury is a major success because it's kept 'relatively' exclusive until (on the festival) or close to.

The Lineup is released ->
People who are interested or going get excited / jealous ->
media coverage and TV coverage throughout the whole of June ->
Festival is over, people who go that year plan on going again, people who watch on TV plan to go to attend something similar to the year they saw before (AKA they look at the headliners and the big acts and subcioncisouly expect the same next year). ->

Ticket sale in October / coverage of it selling out - the fact it sells out so quick adds to the hype and exclusivity of the festival (To a lot of people) it really feels special if you get the chance to go. Those who aren't successful watch it on TV get excited and want to return even harder so they try again next year.

I've probably explained it badly, but the whole system / cycle of Glastonbury separates it so exclusively from the rest. It is it's own "brand" which generates its own type of hype. Unless something drastic comes to break that cycle I can't see Glastonbury ever ceasing to exist.

TL;DR - Harvey Goldsmith is talking utter bollocks, Festivals (not just Glastonbury) are more popular than ever. It's a small sample but pretty much everyone in my sixth form / age group is going to at least one regardless of its size. It's become part of the summer to either attend or watch a festival on TV.

Personally I (right now) Glastonbury has plenty of time left. Emily seems to know what she's doing and it's 100% working.

[NorthernScum]

Glasto's organisers should keep a keen eye on efforts to retain the special charm of the festival. Freedom of movement 24/7 (ie you can visit all public areas/campsites at all times) and freedom to bring your own booze are just two of the several fundamentally brilliant features that make GF special.

[incident]

I've seen Michael and Emily mention this 'fine for the next 10 years' with regards to headliners a few times now. I wonder who they have in mind who gives them that thought of security.

Check the Headliners 2016 thread. I'm sure there'll be at least 30 names on there who could plausibly headline in the next year or two and haven't done it before. I counted 11 on the first page alone before I got bored and stopped.

In fact they don't even need that many, because there'll no doubt be more acts coming through over that time, there'll be 2 fallow years (so 24 headliners needed), and no doubt we'll have the odd repeat visitor - so maybe about 15-20 acts to "debut" as headliners over 10 years.

[jimmyt]

The point people have made regarding the re-evaluation of what a headliner is seems to be the most pertinent, to me, going forwards.

There was a time when record sales didn't entirely govern who played last at Glastonbury and festivals in general (The Levellers, for example). Perhaps the ability of an act to put on a damn good show should be taken into account? There are plenty of acts at or nearing "heritage" status who could easily pull off great headline shows, such as James and Nick Cave &TBS; there are fantastic live bands that haven't had the chance yet but would absolutely nail a headliner slot, like The National. Obviously, I'm choosing from personal preference but, even more importantly, there are loads of bands that might be something special if someone took a punt on them. It used to be that festivals set trends in music rather than slavishly following them; once there was festival-fashion, now there's fashion for festivals.

Even more obviously, every year there's an act in the middle of the afternoon that nearly everyone goes to see; last year it was Dolly; I can think of Paul Simon as another obvious example (even if he was dreadful); this year I'd guess it'll be Burt or Lionel. Every one of those acts could have headlined and a great time would have been had by a very big crowd.

There's plenty of potential headliners out there and coming up for all stages. Now, if they could just stop booking quite so many I want to see on Saturday nights.

[Rose-Colored Boy]

Sorry, I know he's adored on here, but Nick Cave headlining Glastonbury would go down like a lead balloon in the real world.

[Mardy]

Has anyone ever noticed you never see Russy and Harvey Goldsmith in the same room?

[Northern-Monkey]

So the days of a festival that sells out in minutes even before the 1st act is named is destined to fail?

OK then......

I probably see 3 or 4 bands on the main stage tops, this year might be the most time I'll spend at it looking at the line up. If someone thinks Glasto is about headliners then they know nothing about Glasto!

[Northern-Monkey]

Glasto's organisers should keep a keen eye on efforts to retain the special charm of the festival. Freedom of movement 24/7 (ie you can visit all public areas/campsites at all times) and freedom to bring your own booze are just two of the several fundamentally brilliant features that make GF special.

The main problem with most large festivals in the UK is a large public company with many shareholders expecting a return on their investment are behind them.

Yes Live Nation I'm looking at you!

[Matt42]

I don't even think headliners need to be re-evaluated. I think Glastonbury's doing just fine...

only thing i'd like to see is the occasional 'sub headliner' with a new album the year of the festival with rising popularity possibly be given a shot at headlining *cough* Florence.

But I don't think there's a need for acts playing lower than a headline to be given an unwarranted headline spot.

In terms of Bands who've never headlined / could headline in the future

Glasto has Biffy, Queens Of The Stone Age, AC/DC, Fleetwood Mac, Ed Sheeran, Rihanna, Adele, Taylor Swift, Foals, Florence, Disclosure, Depeche Mode, The Black Keys, Lorde, Sam Smith, Alt-J, The Stone Roses, Justin Timberlake, The Libertines, Paolo Nutini, Ellie Goulding, Kendrick Lamar, Daft Punk, Prince

That's not including acts that could appear in the next few years.

Despite some of those being polarising potential ideas, Glastonbury is all about booking polarising acts.

Glastonbury is fine, Goldsmith just probably failed to get a ticket.

EDIT: I Keep thinking of new acts every time i'm finished posting Just goes to show...

Edited June 3, 2015 by Matt42