Rolling Stones or Fleetwood Mac ?

[The Nal]

Although I prefer Peter Green era Mac, I'm fascinated by the personal relationships in the band, particularly Stevie/Buckingham.

And I love when a headliner gets up and does a song on the Pyramid with just an acoustic guitar. Staring out in the abyss (Neil doing Needle and the Damage Done, Macca doing Blackbird etc).

Would love to see this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=naAWX6OsHVI

[eFestivals]

Hang on, but this is Stevie's latest quote:

Discussing the prospect of playing European shows, meanwhile, she said: "If everything goes will we'll be in Europe doing festivals this summer. Then we'll actually tour Europe, which is different than just doing festivals. Then we might do 15 or so shows in Australia."

thanks - that sounds more likely then.

it's a bit crass of Eavis to have made the comment about them not being relevant.

not at all. He was spot on at the time he said it about 5 years ago. There was hardly any interest in them for Glastonbury then compared to now.

With the way these dates are being planned, I think Glastonbury would be missing a trick if they aren't at least talking to their people.

I think they're a band who are likely to go for the money just as Eagles did. If that's the case they won't be doing Glasto.

[Stu H]

Fleetwood Mac are easily on a par with many of the other 'legends' sets of the last 10 years. In terms of crowd pull & set list. I would be concerned whether they could fit a headline slot, but as I said, Sunday eve, definitely.

[fatyeti24]

i always thought of Fleetwood Mac as being really old.

then i see sentences like this

Plus since then they've had the whole Glee thing (which was cringe-worthy but had them top trending on twitter throughout the planet).

[FloorFiller]

i honestly can't see both bands playing - whilst not similar musically, they're both 'classic' bands that are beyond huge and would probably please a similar, older crowd at Glastonbury and leave a lot of the young'uns dissapointed (i know my sister was p!ssed when she heard Rolling Stones were rumoured, but then again, i think she just wanted Beyonce and Coldplay to headline again)

if i had to choose one it'd be the Stones. i'm not a massive fan of either band, but the Rolling Stones are the Rolling Stones, and it seems like this'd be the last ever chance to see such a legendary band. the same could be said for the Mac but their tour just seems a little less... final / special

[Mardy]

fiver says Fleetwood Mac will play Hop Farm (if it lasts another year)

[Justiceforcedave]

i honestly can't see both bands playing - whilst not similar musically, they're both 'classic' bands that are beyond huge and would probably please a similar, older crowd at Glastonbury and leave a lot of the young'uns dissapointed

[eFestivals]

fiver says Fleetwood Mac will play Hop Farm (if it lasts another year)

yeah, that's my feeling too. It's certainly what I'd expect in the normal scheme of things.

But there does seem to be a revival of interest in Fleetwood Mac right now, so they might be a property that all the promoters are trying to grab - in which case Vince probably won't get a sniff.

[Guest]

I don't know anyone interested in Fleetwood Mac #2 apart from on here

[The Nal]

I don't know anyone interested in Fleetwood Mac #2 apart from on here

[eFestivals]

they're getting a fair amount of radio airplay at the mo, which is something that's not really happened previously.

I'm wondering if any of that interest is off the back of them having been (wrongly) marked as a tbc in the rumours here around five year ago, cos there definitely wasn't the same amount of interest in them back then.

Or perhaps it's the result of screaming Flo having covered The Chain? ;lol;:

[dan05delaney]

they're getting a fair amount of radio airplay at the mo, which is something that's not really happened previously.

I'm wondering if any of that interest is off the back of them having been (wrongly) marked as a tbc in the rumours here around five year ago, cos there definitely wasn't the same amount of interest in them back then.

Or perhaps it's the result of screaming Flo having covered The Chain? ;lol;:

[The Nal]

Or perhaps it's the result of screaming Flo having covered The Chain? ;lol;:

Edited December 4, 2012 by The Nal

[zahidf]

they're getting a fair amount of radio airplay at the mo, which is something that's not really happened previously.

I'm wondering if any of that interest is off the back of them having been (wrongly) marked as a tbc in the rumours here around five year ago, cos there definitely wasn't the same amount of interest in them back then.

? ;lol;:

[thesecretingredientiscrime]

It;s your fault then!

I would have thought they'd be Sunday legends slot rather than headliner, but shows what i know i guess.

[eFestivals]

I would have thought they'd be Sunday legends slot rather than headliner, but shows what i know i guess.

in the normal scheme of things that perhaps wouldn't be so far wrong.

But i'd say that their fee for shows outside of Glasto would get to mean that they couldn't be realistically considered for anything less than headliner at Glasto.

[eFestivals]

Considering the amount they'd cost (rumoured), Eavis would have to be shitting money all year round to afford them and a headliner.

it all depends on the band tho, and whether they're happy to take a reduced fee.Glasto wouldn't offer them their normal money i'm sure.

I say "the band", but often it's the management who makes these decisions - and the management are unlikely to be warm towards a Glasto show. The management takes a cut of show fees, so a low show fee for Glastonbury means less money for the management (they probably don't get a cut of back catalogue sales).

[The Nal]

But i'd say that their fee for shows outside of Glasto would get to mean that they couldn't be realistically considered for anything less than headliner at Glasto.

[mrtourette]

On that subject has anyone seen the telly advert for Rod Stewart's Christmas record?

I nearly vomited all over myself, sickening stuff.

[Stu H]

I hear the argument a lot about the lack of substantial fee paid at Glastonbury compared to other fests, yet they still keep getting the huge names. So it can't be as simple as that.

Look at a kudos a big Glastonbury set brings. Not just record sales, but magazine covers, chat all over the internet. It's great PR and that is often worth more than the gig itself.

FM want to do a new album. A massive World Tour combined with a Glastonbury appearance makes sense to get them firmly back on the radar.

Or perhaps i'm just wishing too hard for a band I love?!

Glastonbury got Springsteen, a man who sells out stadiums, for very little money.....

[The Nal]

On that subject has anyone seen the telly advert for Rod Stewart's Christmas record?

I nearly vomited all over myself, sickening stuff.

[thesecretingredientiscrime]

I hear the argument a lot about the lack of substantial fee paid at Glastonbury compared to other fests, yet they still keep getting the huge names. So it can't be as simple as that.

Look at a kudos a big Glastonbury set brings. Not just record sales, but magazine covers, chat all over the internet. It's great PR and that is often worth more than the gig itself.

FM want to do a new album. A massive World Tour combined with a Glastonbury appearance makes sense to get them firmly back on the radar.

Or perhaps i'm just wishing too hard for a band I love?!

Glastonbury got Springsteen, a man who sells out stadiums, for very little money.....

Edited December 4, 2012 by thesecretingredientiscrime

[mrtourette]

They certainly are very successful in selling the festival to acts to encourage them to take smaller paydays, but some will always resist, and I guess the assumption is that Fleetwood Mac are one of those.

[eFestivals]

I hear the argument a lot about the lack of substantial fee paid at Glastonbury compared to other fests, yet they still keep getting the huge names. So it can't be as simple as that.

oh absolutely it's considered prestigeous for an act to play it now - tho of course many of those acts are using Glasto at the same time. i'd say that U2 played because they felt it would give them a credibility boost, for example.

I'm guessing that the normal route for the Eavii when going after big headliners is to try and bypass their management and get straight at the band themselves because it cuts around the fee problems with the management. If the band tell the manager they're playing there's not a lot he could do about it, whereas the manager is looking to maximise his own income rather than necessarily do what the band might prefer to do - especially when that manager knows he could get the boot at any time so he should milk the golden goose while the sun shines ().

Look at a kudos a big Glastonbury set brings. Not just record sales, but magazine covers, chat all over the internet. It's great PR and that is often worth more than the gig itself.

it does, but it's often the case that these sorts of things don't earn the management anything,

[Mud Dweller]

The biggest 'user' of Glastonbury in recent years has to be Jay Z. The increase in mainstream appeal he got was huge, before that he was selling arenas out but it was largely just to a hip hop based audience.

Obviously im only talking about on this side of the Atlantic as he was already pretty mainstream in America but you get my drift. A few years later his other half headlines - coincidence I think not. Jay Z is a smart business man, he knows the power Glastonbury holds

Edited December 4, 2012 by Mud Dweller