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 😎

TITP 2017


Fezzy_buzzer

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 357
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

32 minutes ago, hamishrankin said:

Fri: Biffy

Sat: Coldplay 

Sun: KOL

 

Simon did say before anything was announced last year that Biffy would only be playing a handful of festivals in 2016 so in my opinion Biffy weren't passed on by TITP, R&L were always going to come before T for Biffy

Yes, Biffy only played in 2014 at T and as much as they are Scottish etc, they aren't the huge headline act that has been booked for huge outdoor shows like the Arctics, KOL, The Killers etc.

I think Biffy, Coldplay and Green Day.

KOL possibly but GSS more me is more likely, it could be either of then though. If it wasn't for no London show like BST looking very likely then I'd say no for KOL to T completely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's your thoughts on Muse possibly playing next year? With them just finishing their album tour there after summer and being at a fair few festivals along the way I can't see it happening myself, as much as I'd like it to happen. 

Gorillaz may be in with a shout, unless they end up going to Glastonbury.

Drake, I doubt as he's since announced another Glasgow date but who knows.

Green day and biffy are shouts I'd say although I doubt Coldplay

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Threestripes said:

Any chance of Jeff Lynnes ELO headlining???

 

Would definetly get the older crowd back.

I'm in the older crowd and there's absolutely no chance they'd be a big draw.  They were horrific at Glastonbury this year. Move away from strathallen is probably best thing to get the crowds back. When you get a tad older the thought of staying in the T campsite is not appealing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, ac99 said:

What's your thoughts on Muse possibly playing next year? With them just finishing their album tour there after summer and being at a fair few festivals along the way I can't see it happening myself, as much as I'd like it to happen. 

Gorillaz may be in with a shout, unless they end up going to Glastonbury.

Drake, I doubt as he's since announced another Glasgow date but who knows.

Green day and biffy are shouts I'd say although I doubt Coldplay

Low, they finished their Drones tour at the end of summer and are now taking a break before, i can only guess, they start on their next album. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
32 minutes ago, Red Day said:

I'm in the older crowd and there's absolutely no chance they'd be a big draw.  They were horrific at Glastonbury this year. Move away from strathallen is probably best thing to get the crowds back. When you get a tad older the thought of staying in the T campsite is not appealing

hey, that's not fair.

They were note-perfect.

Just so perfect it was all a bit sterile, and no atmosphere, and boring.

:P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

If you like. :)

'horrific' was far too strong tho, cos they weren't bad. They just didn't do anything to draw you to them, if you get what I mean. It was all a bit flat.

Certainly came across as that.  Sometimes the hype and anticipation of comebacks don't match the actual event. People sometimes forget how bad a band were first time round .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/20/2016 at 7:46 PM, Threestripes said:

Any chance of Jeff Lynnes ELO headlining???

 

Would definetly get the older crowd back.

Chance? Zero. I think a crowd that ELO would draw back are actually in old folks homes or broon breid. Not the lot that ever went to festivals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
13 hours ago, devilman said:

Chance? Zero. I think a crowd that ELO would draw back are actually in old folks homes or broon breid. Not the lot that ever went to festivals.

Not quite true, tho I'd agree that they'd be much more interest in them from people who don't go to festivals than do, and would a be a tough sell for a multi-day camping fest (tho a little easier for a fest with day tix like T).

They're much better suited to their own shows than festies, i'd say.

Also see: Queen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DomDom1984 said:

Would a Blink/Green Day co-headline be realistic for this btw?

I could see Greenday doing it similar to RHCP last year and it would interest me to be fair, but can't see them going for Blink tbh. Co headliners I'd expect to be a dance act or maybe none this year and maybe like Drake on the Saturday?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Gozpot said:

Green Day seem like a very safe bet one of the headliners

I thought that but @DownboundTrain52 mentioned something about them pencilling in a Scottish show and dropping it for Leeds Arena so I don't think the 'lack of Scottish show' is a thing anymore. I know you didn't say that and they could still do it anyway but I think that was the main thing people had going for them headlining.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, dentalplan said:

I thought that but @DownboundTrain52 mentioned something about them pencilling in a Scottish show and dropping it for Leeds Arena so I don't think the 'lack of Scottish show' is a thing anymore. I know you didn't say that and they could still do it anyway but I think that was the main thing people had going for them headlining.

Well my assumption on Green Day was largely based on no Scottish show and the fact that they are touring festivals in Europe in the summer. Could the Scottish show have been dropped for Leeds because they were asked to headline TITP?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gozpot said:

Well my assumption on Green Day was largely based on no Scottish show and the fact that they are touring festivals in Europe in the summer. Could the Scottish show have been dropped for Leeds because they were asked to headline TITP?

Hello, yes, someone say my name? 

From what I know with contacts in SMG, Green Day were pencilled in for a show at the Hydro - but were then snared by Leeds in the booking process by SMG as operator. Whether Green Day were further convinced because of a new Scottish opportunity, I don't know. I'd expect them to line up a Summer Sessions show over T, but the BST timing makes me think that T is the more likely. If they were already booked there, perhaps SMG didn't have to convince GD too much for Leeds in a fiscal sense, they could have pointed out splitting the market in Scotland. (Live at Leeds was probably mentioned since American rock acts love that record.  )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
14 hours ago, DomDom1984 said:

Queen and Adam Lambert would pull a monster crowd at every festival they do, no matter who they're up against.

Like they did at Sonisphere that had to be cancelled?

Like they did at IoW last year that's been trying to negotiate a site discount with the council because it lost so much money?

Do you mean those sorts of monster crowds? :P

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On Friday, October 28, 2016 at 8:07 AM, eFestivals said:

Like they did at Sonisphere that had to be cancelled?

Like they did at IoW last year that's been trying to negotiate a site discount with the council because it lost so much money?

Do you mean those sorts of monster crowds? :P

 

Fair point. Think they'd need strong headliners beside them. But they'd also pull that crowd. It's Queen and folk at festivals love a singalong. 

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

    • Is anything said we need to be aware of?
    • Just listened to the new Madonna album, it would be a catastrophe if that isn't played on the pyramid!
    • 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.
  • Featured Products

  • Hot Topics

  • Latest Tourdates

×
×
  • Create New...