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 😎

2019 Headliners


rzwodezwo

Recommended Posts

34 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

much nearer half I reckon - tho it of course depends on the band.

This is a surprise to me, most of our group see a headliner about once every 2 or 3 festivals, I knew we would be less than average, but hadn't realised it'd be by that much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
6 minutes ago, Hugh Jass said:

Is it 220k the total capacity including everyone?

just over 200k I think at the mo - but not all of those people will be free to go watch a band, don't forget.

My guess is about 180,00 of an 'active' crowd.

 

Quote

Pyramid field holds about 70-80k, more for bigger acts. As you say, depends on the band, but anywhere between say 30% for Radiohead last year to close to 50% for the Stones.

it was waaaaay over 50% for the Stones - more like 80%. I was one of the few not there, so saw some of the tiny crowds at other venues.

Edited by eFestivals
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, eFestivals said:

just over 200k I think at the mo - but not all of those people will be free to go watch a band, don't forget.

There's probably 180,00 of an 'active' crowd.

 

it was waaaaay over 50% for the Stones - more like 80%. I was one of the few not there, so saw some of the tiny crowds at other venues.

I often wonder who was watching the Bootleg Beatles at that moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TheFullShaboo said:

Any reasoning behind The Strokes odds being dropped on Skybet to 6/4? The Cure and the Strokes on the same lineup would be utopia for me. 

As much as I'd love there to be reason to it, probably just cause a bit of money going on

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, TheFullShaboo said:

Always a bit too much wishful thinking when it comes to The Strokes. 

Saying that 6/4 is a huge drop from what it was.... (here I go again) 

Are they even active at the moment? I've lost track of what's going on with them recently 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know it was five years ago, but it genuinely doesn't feel like five minutes since the last time Arctic Monkeys headlined..
It'd be nice to get three Pyramid headliners who haven't received the nod before.  

...that excludes the 1975 though - I'd bump them to the band stand :)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TheFullShaboo said:

Don’t think so. Didn’t stop me and a mate standing outside Dingwalls for 4 hours though. 

Yeah I had a mate who did that as well, what a farce

Edited by mufcok
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
16 minutes ago, Gucci Piggy said:

My mate's mate who's in a band was told by their booking agent that The Strokes are headlining APE next year. I don't know the guy and have no idea how much stock to put in what he says, but yeah.

sound about right - tho I also reckon it might struggle to sell out. Not sure there's huge untapped Strokes-love.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

sound about right - tho I also reckon it might struggle to sell out. Not sure there's huge untapped Strokes-love.

They had to massively drop prices a couple of years ago to shift tickets for BST, £2.50 tickets agogo. That was with a strong undercard too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Hugh Jass said:

They had to massively drop prices a couple of years ago to shift tickets for BST, £2.50 tickets agogo. That was with a strong undercard too.

What's the capacity of APE, though, compared to BST? Surely The Strokes are a better bet for selling tickets than any of last year's headliners, minus maybe Nick Cave? Plus I don't think the BST undergrad was that great for fans of The Strokes. They're hardly likely to be big Beck fans. Stick em on at APE with someone like Interpol below them and it makes a lot more sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Gucci Piggy said:

What's the capacity of APE, though, compared to BST? Surely The Strokes are a better bet for selling tickets than any of last year's headliners, minus maybe Nick Cave? Plus I don't think the BST undergrad was that great for fans of The Strokes. They're hardly likely to be big Beck fans. Stick em on at APE with someone like Interpol below them and it makes a lot more sense.

The capacity of APE is 40,000 so probably half of BST roughly, I have no doubt they could get close to selling that out. I thought the conversation was around their suitability as a Glasto headliner?

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...