Jump to content

Don't Miss a Beat

Join the UK's most passionate festival community. Keep up with the latest conversations, line-up rumours, and music news.

250,000+ Members

Connect with a massive network of fellow festival-goers.

Lively Discussions

Thousands of active topics on music, campsites, and tips.

Hot Rumours & News

Hear about secret sets and lineup drops before anyone else.

Create Free Account
OR
  • Sign Up!

    Join our friendly community of music lovers and be part of the fun 😎


Acid_Haze

Recommended Posts

I said to Mardy that Emily's letter to the Guardian could have been aimed at appeasing another set of very regal ears. If a certain person has been booked I can only imagine her mortification at the thought of him getting wind of "who should and who shouldn't" articles...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 37.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • FloorFiller

    1190

  • Rose-Colored Boy

    1060

  • Matt42

    1040

  • eFestivals

    1008

My total guesswork goes like this...no news or leaks could mean an American act but we already have 2. if we then take a leap to it being a UK act then I can only think of one who have been able to keep big news top secret in the recent past. We also know the keavney bloke was over in la a couple of weeks ago and now there is talk of an interview that can't be aired till next week. With Annie mac announcing Kanye on radio 1 it follows that the bbc 6 music breakfast host might announce the next biggie. keavney is way too loose a cannon to interview prince but he is alleged to be good mates with the UK act who have shown they can keep things under their hat. If Ian brown was recently in LA then it's the Roses.

Maybe :-)

Edited by comfortablynumb1910
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My understanding of the Purple MO is that his band are basically on retainer / standby 24/7 at his convenience and always playing / recording. So it's not like most of the other mega acts where they need time and rehearsal to get their act together. They're usually ready to perform at the drop of a hat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin

Neil posted in the sunday headliner thread that the fact he's hearing nothing means it's probably prince

Or something along those lined

No, I said the info I've had - but it's exceeding tiny info - points to Prince above anyone else; but it's nothing meaningful. Meanwhile, RdB has (supposedly) said it's not Prince.

It won't be Foals, that much I know. They're too hit-free (in a 'big' sense) to be chosen to headline Sunday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, I said the info I've had - but it's exceeding tiny info - points to Prince above anyone else; but it's nothing meaningful. Meanwhile, RdB has (supposedly) said it's not Prince.

It won't be Foals, that much I know. They're too hit-free (in a 'big' sense) to be chosen to headline Sunday.

RDB has said it won't be Prince for Glastonbury or Bestival?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, I said the info I've had - but it's exceeding tiny info - points to Prince above anyone else; but it's nothing meaningful. Meanwhile, RdB has (supposedly) said it's not Prince.

It won't be Foals, that much I know. They're too hit-free (in a 'big' sense) to be chosen to headline Sunday.

RDB has also ruled Florence out of doing Bestival... Time to pay up Neil! :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why are Wham not a stronger link after what was said about them having a reunion at glastonbury.

Is it because they are far too cheesy to headline?

Theyve only really got about half a dozen 'hits' that would be recognisable to most people. Theres no body of work there for such a gig, imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Theyve only really got about half a dozen 'hits' that would be recognisable to most people. Theres no body of work there for such a gig, imo.

Ah ok. I know little about wham. George Michael with the other guy making a cameo might make sense? Or am I acting like I'm on the same stuff george is probably on

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Theyve only really got about half a dozen 'hits' that would be recognisable to most people. Theres no body of work there for such a gig, imo.

Wham play the 5pm Sunday and that field is full. George could prolly headline.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Theyve only really got about half a dozen 'hits' that would be recognisable to most people. Theres no body of work there for such a gig, imo.

George could also do some solo stuff. But yeah, not a headliner.

People should stop talking about Wham/George Michael, because I'm starting to think it would be amazing (and that it could even be possible). And I'm not even a big fan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I reckon Kanye is the knockout headliner this year. I don't have high hopes for someone stunning on the Sunday night, not for me anyway. There isn't one rumour that complies with my taste, I just hope it's someone actually good and not just radio 1 fodder like the last couple of years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If stone roses are to be announced would they do other festivals as well? Pukkelpop have an announcement tomorrow so could that have anything to do with when glastonbury will announce? Sorry if these have already been discussed haha

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yep, Emily's kept everything hushed up this year by telling any tom dick and harry who the headliners are. :lol:

No need to be so coy Squire!

Name another website that has had a one to one with her in the run up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hey guys, finally made an account after monitoring this chat for weeks. Under strong impressions that the roses will play. Some joker in here was banging on about an interview? Turns out something like that did take place. Will be announced next week along with the rest of the line up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Latest Activity

    • Restore getting more than Lib Dems is not good.
    • https://x.com/amirtibon/status/2083054470871535853   Some thoughts on the Gaza agreement announced overnight, which despite my reservations and concerns, I hope will be implemented. 1. Donald Trump is trying to collect "wins" and "achievements" ahead of the midterm elections. His party is entering that election at a disadvantage, but because Democrats may choose weak and unpopular candidates in specific states, much like Republicans did in 2022, there's a reason for Trump to at least try achieving a surprising result like the one Biden secured four years ago.   2. The will to provide Trump such a "win" was an important motivation for all sides involved in this agreement: Hamas, Netanyahu, Qatar, Egypt, UAE and Turkey. All of them hope, each for their own reasons, that the transactional president will remember their role in the agreement and the positive media coverage it has generated and will continue to generate. You can like it or not, but that's the nature of diplomacy, especially in the Middle East, under Trump.   3. Netanyahu and his band of liars in the Israeli media (and the last few suckers in the American media still buying his spin) are already trying to oversell the agreement and present it in terms that contradict the Board of Peace statements and briefings. Of course, the October 7 Prime Minister can't just say the truth on this one, which goes something like: "I'm trying to stay on good terms with Trump ahead of an election here in Israel that will determine my personal fate and whether or not I go to jail in 2027."   4. For Hamas, the agreement is a way to buy time and survive, which is basically the organization's overarching goal since October 7. They lost most of their leadership and thousands of their fighters; they will also, I believe, give up some of their weapons to the new Gaza-based Palestinian government, which is a good thing. But at the bottom of all their decisions is a simple calculation: being able to say, "we committed the most deadly and humiliating attack against Israel since the start of the conflict, and survived as a movement and an organization to tell about it."   5. Hamas was able to say that yesterday, before the agreement was signed, and it can also say that today, after the conclusion of the negotiations. So in that regard, the agreement is preferable to the murky post-war reality that preceded it, in which Hamas was recruiting again thousands of young fighters, holding on to all its weapons, and controlling 99% of Gaza's population, making money off people buying fuel and cigarettes. Changing even a part of that terrible reality, by collecting some of the weapons and allowing progress on reconstruction under a non-Hamas government, is better. It means coming to terms with the fact that Israel under this government failed to dismantle Hamas and allowed its survival even before this agreement was signed.   6. Do I think the agreement will be fully implemented over the next 300 days, as I understand the timeline? I'm highly skeptical. But I'm also asking: what are the alternatives? Netanyahu, in his quest for political survival at all costs, ignored David Ben-Gurion's national security strategy of seeking short and decisive wars, which was based on Israel's unique internal and external challenges that make it dangerous for this country to have long wars of attrition. The result is an Israel that is hated, isolated and denounced around the world like never before, and is totally reliant on the support of one man (TRUMP) to avoid crushing international sanctions. Going to war in Gaza once again based on the same promise of "finishing Hamas," which this government failed to achieve after three long years, would have been suicidal unless Trump promised his full backing. And Trump, for good reasons, can't give such a commitment after his bitter experience with Netanyahu in Iran and Lebanon.   7. For me and my family, these are all very personal, not only political, questions. My six-year-old daughter will start school on the Gaza border in exactly one month, as we rebuild our life in the same home where Hamas tried to murder us on October 7. We've learned over the years to be highly skeptical of premature victory announcements and diplomatic celebrations. When these things collapse under the cynical realities of the conflict, most of those announcing them are not around to face the consequences. Still, I don't see a better alternative to the 20-Point Plan that Trump presented last year, at least not with Israel's current position of isolation and exhaustion under this government. So I have some hope that the agreement will succeed, even partially, and deliver a period of quiet. For us on the border, that would be significant after three years of war and trauma. And maybe in the long run, with different Israeli and Palestinian leadership, this will become a first step in a broader positive change for the region.
    • Until they're through the first round of votes there's no point believing any reports about who'll win.
    • David Byrne’s obviously got a few hits to play, but he’s not cheesy enough for the Legend Slot. Other headliner perhaps?
    • Too good for the legends slot 
  • Featured Products

  • Hot Topics

  • Latest Tourdates

×
×
  • Create New...