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

  • Replies 37.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • FloorFiller

    1190

  • Rose-Colored Boy

    1060

  • Matt42

    1040

  • eFestivals

    1008

Hang on, all of a sudden we're acting like Swifty has been confirmed!? Don't give up hope yet lads.

Hope that one act out of thousands at a massive festival wont be there? Mate, behave.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

for this year I reckon you can put that very particular three-night nightmare away.

Tho that's no guarantee of anything less horrible. :P

On that subject have you heard any serious rumours about Madonna doing Glastonbury? Not just this year, but for any year? I'm interested to know if the Eavi see her as suitable or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin

On that subject have you heard any serious rumours about Madonna doing Glastonbury? Not just this year, but for any year? I'm interested to know if the Eavi see her as suitable or not.

I've heard some vague stuff about them having tried but I've no idea if there was really any substance to it.

From what's been said directly to me by people who really know these things, Glasto don't approach acts of that size because they can't offer an appropriate commercial fee, and instead hope that acts like that will approach them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On that subject have you heard any serious rumours about Madonna doing Glastonbury? Not just this year, but for any year? I'm interested to know if the Eavi see her as suitable or not.

I spotted this a couple of weeks ago because I wondered the same thing as you did but if you look at what happened two years later then you can make your own mind up.

Edited by dentalplan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I spotted this a couple of weeks ago because I wondered the same thing as you did but if you look at what happened two years later then you can make your own mind up.

Contact music bought a review of mine once off the website I originally wrote it for and I got fuck all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin

I spotted this a couple of weeks ago because I wondered the same thing as you did but if you look at what happened two years later then you can make your own mind up.

I think Michael got in a bit of a state around the Jay-Z booking, due to the worry that the tickets weren't going to sell. Further away from that time he's likely to have a more-reasoned and nuanced view than the sweeping statement of "no pop acts" was at that time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Michael got in a bit of a state around the Jay-Z booking, due to the worry that the tickets weren't going to sell. Further away from that time he's likely to have a more-reasoned and nuanced view than the sweeping statement of "no pop acts" was at that time.

Yeah that makes sense. I wasn't really taking it at face value anyway. :P

Plus there's this that I just found now with him explicitly saying he wanted to book her. Also that he rejected Whitney Houston's offer to headline!

Edited by dentalplan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah that makes sense. I wasn't really taking it at face value anyway. :P

Plus there's this that I just found now with him explicitly saying he wanted to book her. Also that he rejected Whitney Houston's offer to headline!

Yep good read cheers dental. I wonder when he was approached by Whitney - if it was recent when that article was published then the date on it would place 'the rejection' at or near the beginning of her descent into the tragic figure of later years (at least as far as the public were aware of it, an industry insider like Eavis could know differently of course).

(edited because researched my points for once)

Edited by Zac Quinn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would hope if Taylor is headlining then the other one isn't Florence, that'd be really disappointing

God, imagine if this years headliners were Foo Fighters, Florence, Taylor Swift...

At least tickets would be easier to get next year.

*EDIT - Just seen that horrifying prospect was covered earlier.

Edited by MichaelsBeard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin

Yep good read cheers dental. I wonder when he was approached by Whitney

didn't someone post on here one year that she might play? (which I thought odd at the time).

I wonder if it was the same year, and the two things were connected?

not the same year.

Edited by eFestivals
Link to comment
Share on other sites

God, imagine if this years headliners were Foo Fighters, Florence, Taylor Swift...

At least tickets would be easier to get next year.

Why would tickets be easier to get for 2016 if 2015 had a combination of one stadium-sized heavy-ish rock act, one arena-sized NME-tastic act and one arena-sized mainstream act, when they weren't for 2015 after 2014 had a combination of one stadium sized heavy rock act, one arena-sized NME-tastic act and one arena-sized mainstream act? Not directed at you but I don't get it, soz

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...