Why don’t acts play Glastonbury

[Staberinde]

Ive been a big Queen fan from the 70's

Micheal Eavis agrees with badger culling, Brian May is against it.
 

I'm guessing that's why we'll never see  Queen at Glasto ?

[Matt42]

6 minutes ago, Staberinde said:

Ive been a big Queen fan from the 70's

Micheal Eavis agrees with badger culling, Brian May is against it.
 

I'm guessing that's why we'll never see  Queen at Glasto ?

It’s okay I doubt Queen + Adam Lambert have ever been asked.

[MetaKate]

I find theres usually a ton of acts playing. 

[LGH]

12 hours ago, gigpusher said:

Although that will only happen if you perform well so maybe some acts are worried that they won't be as good which is wht with the Rolling Stones negotiations about how much the BBC could show were going on whilst they were on stage. It was going well so they let them show more than originally intended. 

Is this true? I'm not sure what to do with the knowledge of the Rolling Stones getting performance anxieties! 

[gigpusher]

5 minutes ago, LGH said:

Is this true? I'm not sure what to do with the knowledge of the Rolling Stones getting performance anxieties! 

I'm fairly sure I've not made it up. I remember the BBC footage saying something about how it had just been agreed that they could bring more footage. The Bowie footage wasn't shown at the time either. Think the only played 2 or 3 songs and then went away from it. 

[Ayrshire Chris]

47 minutes ago, MetaKate said:

I find theres usually a ton of acts playing. 

Correct, I don’t think there’s ever been a single moment at Glastonbury when I wasn’t spoiled for choice as to what act to see. If some bands dont want to play Glastonbury,for whatever reason, that I might want to see then I can catch them on tour elsewhere. 

[maelzoid]

1 hour ago, gigpusher said:

I'm fairly sure I've not made it up. I remember the BBC footage saying something about how it had just been agreed that they could bring more footage. The Bowie footage wasn't shown at the time either. Think the only played 2 or 3 songs and then went away from it. 

Dylan (98) specified no filming entirely, so wasn't even on the jumbotrons, let alone on the BBC broadcast.

I expect some acts don't want the danger of a bad performance following them around. Think Led Zep at Live Aid, or the Dead at Woodstock - in both cases the performances are not nearly as bad as the myths suggest, but the reputation lingers. I'm much more admiring of bands that can laugh off a bad performance.

[ghostdancer1]

for most acts, a 4 minute TV slot on BBC2 and the minimal sales bump from that isn't even remotely worth the paycut they'd take for playing when they could be at some other festival in Europe making 5 times the amount.

in this day and age, I very much doubt that the sales bump is even worth it for headliners, considering that the record company/rights holders take the vast majority of the profits from any sales.

[eastynh]

Sorry to keep harping back to Depeche Mode as I have bored everyone on here to tears with them over the years. They are the band that immediately spring to mind for a thread like this.

For years they have moaned about the lack of recognition they get from the mainsteam in this country. For them to then turn down the opportunity to headline Glastonbury seems rather strange. They clearly do not need the money and it seems to be adulation that they crave. Surely headlining the countries premier festival would increase their credibility over here. Their stance just does not make any sense to me. I would not mind but they are fantastic live.

[gigpusher]

4 minutes ago, eastynh said:

Sorry to keep harping back to Depeche Mode as I have bored everyone on here to tears with them over the years. They are the band that immediately spring to mind for a thread like this.

For years they have moaned about the lack of recognition they get from the mainsteam in this country. For them to then turn down the opportunity to headline Glastonbury seems rather strange. They clearly do not need the money and it seems to be adulation that they crave. Surely headlining the countries premier festival would increase their credibility over here. Their stance just does not make any sense to me. I would not mind but they are fantastic live.

From what I have heard they hate each other and only still do things together for the money so I'd guess money could well be an issue for them. 

[eastynh]

3 minutes ago, gigpusher said:

From what I have heard they hate each other and only still do things together for the money so I'd guess money could well be an issue for them. 

I think hate is going way over the top. There is only 3 official members now with Martin and Fletch being extremely close. There is some creative tension between Dave and Martin over Dave wanting to contribute more in regards to the song writing. There is no chance they hate each other though. They would not produce new music every 4 years, nor would Martin turn up and play on stage at Dave's solo shows, if they hated each other. You can see by their chemistry on stage that they don't hate each other.

Hate is what happened to New Order. Depeche Mode have creative differences and maybe a sense of familiarity after being together for 40 years. 

[gigpusher]

Just now, eastynh said:

I think hate is going way over the top. There is only 3 official members now with Martin and Fletch being extremely close. There is some creative tension between Dave and Martin over Dave wanting to contribute more in regards to the song writing. There is no chance they hate each other though. They would not produce new music every 4 years, nor would Martin turn up and play on stage at Dave's solo shows, if they hated each other. You can see by their chemistry on stage that they don't hate each other.

Hate is what happened to New Order. Depeche Mode have creative differences and maybe a sense of familiarity after being together for 40 years. 

I'm a greatest hits fan by no means a huge fan at all but I know lots of friends who are obsessives and they say hate is an accurate description. I have had jobs where I have had to work with people I hate though and I wasn't getting paid millions. Money is a huge motivator for some. The friends I know say that Fletch is almost the most important member of the band because he acts as peacekeeper. 

I think a lot of bands though are only together for the money, recently heard someone being interviewed (can't remember who for the life of me) but they said it was a game changer when they realised they could all afford to travel separately and didn't have to be in each others pockets and that the only time they often spent together was on stage and in the studio recording and even for that they often did bits apart. 

[eastynh]

9 minutes ago, gigpusher said:

I'm a greatest hits fan by no means a huge fan at all but I know lots of friends who are obsessives and they say hate is an accurate description. I have had jobs where I have had to work with people I hate though and I wasn't getting paid millions. Money is a huge motivator for some. The friends I know say that Fletch is almost the most important member of the band because he acts as peacekeeper. 

I think a lot of bands though are only together for the money, recently heard someone being interviewed (can't remember who for the life of me) but they said it was a game changer when they realised they could all afford to travel separately and didn't have to be in each others pockets and that the only time they often spent together was on stage and in the studio recording and even for that they often did bits apart. 

Here is a good interview with Dave which addresses the relationships between them.

https://www.newstatesman.com/culture/music-theatre/2017/06/depeche-mode-s-dave-gahan-why-i-don-t-understand-my-own-band

[jow95]

Does the beeb pay any sort of substantial fee to glasto for the coverage? It obviously attracts millions of viewers over the weekend and itv/sky/Netflix or whoever would pay big money for the privilege. Would help pay for artists bigger fees or more likely add to the cheque they hand to charities after each year.

 

They seem to have a solid relationship with the bbc for years with very extensive coverage and probably don’t want to pass that up mind.

[eFestivals]

3 minutes ago, jow95 said:

Does the beeb pay any sort of substantial fee to glasto for the coverage?

pretty sure it does, tho I think all it's really buying is an exclusive right to try and make a deal to broadcast with the artist, which I believe is a deal done separately.

 

[Avalon_Fields]

17 hours ago, gigpusher said:

Although that will only happen if you perform well so maybe some acts are worried that they won't be as good which is wht with the Rolling Stones negotiations about how much the BBC could show were going on whilst they were on stage. It was going well so they let them show more than originally intended. 

That was certainly reported at the time. It does seem a little haphazard for a band (Mick, anyway) who are usually highly controlling. 

[Avalon_Fields]

2 hours ago, eastynh said:

I think hate is going way over the top. There is only 3 official members now with Martin and Fletch being extremely close. There is some creative tension between Dave and Martin over Dave wanting to contribute more in regards to the song writing. There is no chance they hate each other though. They would not produce new music every 4 years, nor would Martin turn up and play on stage at Dave's solo shows, if they hated each other. You can see by their chemistry on stage that they don't hate each other.

Hate is what happened to New Order. Depeche Mode have creative differences and maybe a sense of familiarity after being together for 40 years. 

Dave can come up with something as good as Personal Jesus if he wants to be on par with Gore then. I’m still waiting...

[matichin]

Slight tangent, but on the subject of exposure, I wonder how many artists get a boost on streaming services, just by being on the lineup, due to being added to various "getting ready for Glasto" playlists? I know Spotify requires millions of streams to return any proper revenue, but the exposure to in theory 200k new listeners who might hear one or two tracks from an artist to check them out might reflect on streaming numbers the few weeks before the fest.

Anyone on here played Glasto and seen such a boost to their numbers? Thinking of smaller acts, but anyone would do.

Obviously the science behind this is full of flaws and assumptions...

[stuie]

7 hours ago, Staberinde said:

I'm guessing that's why we'll never see  Queen at Glasto ?

We'll never see Queen at Glasto because they've just been a tribute act for 30 odd years.

 

[S west]

8 hours ago, Staberinde said:

Ive been a big Queen fan from the 70's

Micheal Eavis agrees with badger culling, Brian May is against it.
 

I'm guessing that's why we'll never see  Queen at Glasto ?

That and The fact Freddy is dead 

[DareToDibble]

21 hours ago, Gnomicide said:

 

 

[jow95]

22 hours ago, eFestivals said:

pretty sure it does, tho I think all it's really buying is an exclusive right to try and make a deal to broadcast with the artist, which I believe is a deal done separately.

 

Ah ok that’s makes sense, so artists do reserve the right to say no thanks if they wanted like I seem to remember they only broadcast an hour of the stones 

[eFestivals]

6 minutes ago, jow95 said:

artists do reserve the right to say no thanks if they wanted

correct.

[O'Doyle Rules]

Okay

Headline Glastonbury or score a World Cup winning goal in injury time?

[a6l6e6x]

Mainly money but some acts just don't suit the festival

Saying that it has expanded into more heavy stuff as of late which is great for people like me. When I first started going I would never have expected Napalm Death to make the line up. There will always be metal acts that wouldn't accept a smaller stage when they could just play download and get a more favourable crowd. I'm thinking bands like Disturbed, Five Finger Death Punch, Behemoth etc (all bands I don't actually like)