PJ Harvey confirmed

[eFestivals]

11 minutes ago, ghostdancer1 said:

the idea that their management isn't going to pass on offers of one of the biggest festivals in the world to them is complete nonsense.

It's really not.

Do you think management would pass everything upwards, or do you think they'd only pass upwards what they thought the band might consider doing?

(Plus, do you think management automatically pass upwards offers that would cut their own wages? I know for sure they don't with other bands)

The Stones only do a limited number of shows. Doing Glasto will have been at the expense of another show that will have paid better - and it's the big-paying shows the stones normally go for.

Festivals also don't give the control over the show the band normally demand. When the Stones played IoW they demanded and got a special stage set-up - which was never going to be an option at Glastonbury.

I'd say they only did it because the band have moved themselves to a slightly different place with what they want to do in their final years, where doing something a bit different is of more interest to them than just chasing the money - which appears to be why they've just announced a show in Cuba (cos that won't be for the money).

[CaledonianGonzo]

I suspect that Mick's daughters probably had more influence on it...

Wasn't it Ronnie that played a big part in persuading the Stones to do Glastonbury?

[ghostdancer1]

40 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

It's really not.

Do you think management would pass everything upwards, or do you think they'd only pass upwards what they thought the band might consider doing?

(Plus, do you think management automatically pass upwards offers that would cut their own wages? I know for sure they don't with other bands)

The Stones only do a limited number of shows. Doing Glasto will have been at the expense of another show that will have paid better - and it's the big-paying shows the stones normally go for.

Festivals also don't give the control over the show the band normally demand. When the Stones played IoW they demanded and got a special stage set-up - which was never going to be an option at Glastonbury.

I'd say they only did it because the band have moved themselves to a slightly different place with what they want to do in their final years, where doing something a bit different is of more interest to them than just chasing the money - which appears to be why they've just announced a show in Cuba (cos that won't be for the money).

they'd pass on any serious offers. headlining Glastonbury is a serious offer. if the band would consider it, as they clearly would/did, then they'd pass it on.it would be a serious failure of management to not seriously consider realistic offers.

doing Glastonbury would not be at the expense of another show, there's nothing to stop them playing any other shows and Glastonbury, as demonstrated by them playing gigs several days before and after Glastonbury, as well as all throughout that year leading up to Glastonbury, as well as in the following years. as such, it's not cutting management's wages, or to be more precise, their booking agent's wages. it's less than their own gig would net, but it's still money in their pocket. as shown by their US tour up to the week before Glastonbury, it wasn't a matter of either/or. they could do, and did, both.

 

Edited March 2, 2016 by ghostdancer1

[eFestivals]

9 minutes ago, ghostdancer1 said:

they'd pass on any serious offers. headlining Glastonbury is a serious offer.

On the money front an offer from Glasto is a joke offer in Stones terms.

Which is why I think it's very possible an offer wouldn't have been passed on.

[Mardy]

2 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

On the money front an offer from Glasto is a joke offer in Stones terms.

Which is why I think it's very possible an offer wouldn't have been passed on.

Precisely, the Stones got 3 million to play a private party last year, 5.5 million for  Deutsche Bank bash a couple of years back, GA concerts will be 10 millionish, I presume.

 

If they get a fax (yeah, whatever) offering them 500,000, I'd guess it goes straight in the bin. It's a pisstake. The Glastonbury bit, to their management, is irrelevant.

[stuartbert two hats]

Just now, Mardy said:

Precisely, the Stones got 3 million to play a private party last year, 5.5 million for  Deutsche Bank bash a couple of years back, GA concerts will be 10 millionish, I presume.

 

If they get a fax (yeah, whatever) offering them 500,000, I'd guess it goes straight in the bin. It's a pisstake. The Glastonbury bit, to their management, is irrelevant.

Probably worse than irrelevant. They don't want to set a precedent.

[Mardy]

1 minute ago, stuartbert two hats said:

Probably worse than irrelevant. They don't want to set a precedent.

Yeah, good point, will damage their market/brand value or whatever it's called

[eFestivals]

23 minutes ago, ghostdancer1 said:

doing Glastonbury would not be at the expense of another show, there's nothing to stop them playing any other shows and Glastonbury

on the same basis, there's nothing to stop them doing a gig every day in every year. But they don't.

They do a very limited number of shows, and not shows every year, limited only by how many shows they're prepared to do - which very clearly isn't very many.

[CaledonianGonzo]

Though, since Glastonbury (and before that, the Isle of Wight) they've played a tonne of festivals. Their most recent European tour was practically nothing but. The bottom's fallen out of their previous market.

[Mardy]

1 minute ago, CaledonianGonzo said:

Though, since Glastonbury (and before that, the Isle of Wight) they've played a tonne of festivals. Their most recent European tour was practically nothing but. The bottom's fallen out of their previous market.

That thing in Hyde Park just after Glastonbury, did it sell out? I can't remember

 

I guess, in one respect, festivals mean no expensive outlay on stage sets, equipment etc, especially if they don't want to do a whole 18 month world tour

[eFestivals]

5 minutes ago, CaledonianGonzo said:

Though, since Glastonbury (and before that, the Isle of Wight) they've played a tonne of festivals.

tho before IoW they never really did festies - perhaps because of what happened in Altamont in 1969.

[CaledonianGonzo]

That and Knebworth in 1976. I suppose it just wasn't something that bands of their scale really did in the period from the 70s to the early 2000s. Once you reached a certain size you graduated out of the festivals market. These days the mega-bands have over-milked their fans and often have no choice but to play them.

[FloorFiller]

New song here if you skip to the 50:40 mark

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0721htf

[russycarps]

what's it like? 

[Gucci Piggy]

On 11/03/2016 at 10:31 AM, FloorFiller said:

New song here if you skip to the 50:40 mark

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0721htf

 

On 11/03/2016 at 10:36 AM, russycarps said:

what's it like? 

A banger as per. It's up on Spotify now. Not quite as good as The Wheel for me but still brilliant.

[admscott]

Where do I start with PJ Harvey? Aware of, but never really listened. 

[SwedgeAntilles]

45 minutes ago, admscott said:

Where do I start with PJ Harvey? Aware of, but never really listened. 

I'd go;

1. Stories From The City, Stories From The Sea

2. Let England Shake

Let us know what you think after that.

[russycarps]

This is the best place to start

 

[Wooderson]

Peej in her "Love what you've done to me" McPhisto years.

[FloorFiller]

seems this track is causing a bit of controversy with DC politicians because of it's not-so-flattering lyrics

[tevaburger]

article in the Washington Post (the 2nd best American newspaper) today on her reconnaissance of DC...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/i-gave-a-famous-rock-star-a-windshield-tour-of-dc--and-didnt-know-who-she-was/2016/03/18/8124ab28-e488-11e5-bc08-3e03a5b41910_story.html?hpid=hp_local-news_pgharvey-1030am%3Ahomepage%2Fstory

[weirdforces]

On 13/03/2016 at 11:49 AM, SwedgeAntilles said:

I'd go;

1. Stories From The City, Stories From The Sea

2. Let England Shake

Let us know what you think after that.

Thanks for the suggestions, I'm really excited now. She's got an amazingly unique voice and very catchy songs on those albums. I feel ashamed to not have known about her earlier.

[SwedgeAntilles]

9 minutes ago, weirdforces said:

Thanks for the suggestions, I'm really excited now. She's got an amazingly unique voice and very catchy songs on those albums. I feel ashamed to not have known about her earlier.

Glad to hear you enjoyed it!

Really looking forward to seeing her, just hoping if she's third down she doesn't clash with Tame Impala. Would be a nightmare of a clash.

[weirdforces]

Just now, SwedgeAntilles said:

Glad to hear you enjoyed it!

Really looking forward to seeing her, just hoping if she's third down she doesn't clash with Tame Impala. Would be a nightmare of a clash.

Let England Shake will be my new commuting soundtrack, just wonderful!

I've been wondering about that, too. It would be really tough to choose between those two. Fingers crossed!

[SwedgeAntilles]

28 minutes ago, weirdforces said:

Let England Shake will be my new commuting soundtrack, just wonderful!

I've been wondering about that, too. It would be really tough to choose between those two. Fingers crossed!

I'm hoping she'll sub, both of them back to back would be a cracking Sunday