Jump to content

Predictions for the festival in the forthcoming decade


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, chazwwe said:

Silver Hayes to have a make over/complete change.
More focus into getting bigger dance acts for the SE corner, along with making it easier to walk around during the busy evenings. 
More focus to plastic free/continue pushing to take stuff home. 
Pangaea to grow in size and creativity just like Arcadia did this year. 
More focus towards female headliners. 

I can see the SE corner being done over the course of 21-22, a conversation I had with someone this year with their idea was to turn the area into a 1/2 stage  area with big dance/dj acts on, the type you'd see at Tomorrowland. 
 

 

Perhaps bigger dance acts moved to Silver Hayes (yes I know there are sound restrictions) but big name DJs on proper stages like Tomorrowland/Boomtown but in a smaller space... (not sure about sound bleed though)

Bigger dance acts in the SE corner would be a nightmare to navigate unless they made it bigger.

Just my thoughts.

edit: for example Calvin Harris, Martin Garrix, big headline DJ in Silver Hayes as headliners at the same time as Pyramid/Other headliners. Would certainly get a new younger crowd interested, a bit like The Park Stage did for... that type of person. I can imagine Insta stories going mad for the younger gen saying they saw DJ Khalid on a big production stage when the the rest of us are of our nits watching Coldplay again. Money would be an issue though

Edited by Bisque
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 136
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Michael will say it’s the best one yet ... every year 

That’s one thing a brand can be, sure. But speaking as a Brand Manager, it’s definitely a brand.  Funnily enough, it’s currently at no.2 in the UK in this list from ‘coolbrands’: https://www

Prediction for the festival forum: Any topic that goes past page 1 will start a pointless argument sometime thereafter...

Posted Images

Michael Eavis will get knighted.

At least half of the tickets will be coach tickets by the end of the decade and at least half pre erected camping.

As the festival continues to attract massive acts and the demographics of the fest change, the Pyramid field will get permanently extended.

Reading/Leeds/Coachella style massive LED screens next to the Pyramid.

They'll finally sort Silver Hayes out.

Edited by ProperTea
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Sawdusty Surfer said:

Pre erected camping options will increase year on year until there's almost no space left to pitch your own tent.

This.... maybe not to that extreme but one of the major camping areas becoming pre erected..

also rather than the talk of moving lock, stock to a different site, I could see some brands creating spin off's as seperate events:

Glastonbury's Park Festival, a reengineered Silver Hayes becoming a new music festival and even The Pyramid doing a series of shorter but massive name gigs during late July, early August to rival Hyde Park, APE and the likes.... All under a Glastonbury umbrella.

It is not practical to make the annual event bigger but they will want to grow the brand. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Matt42 said:

This should be fun!

What do you think will happen with the festival in the forthcoming decade?
 

The 10s were pretty massive for the festival. It transformed into an instant sell out event and now hosts (comfortably) some of the biggest acts in the world. Some acts waaaay bigger than it ever has. I’d say the 10s for Glastonbury is the decade where it became bigger than it already was, and I definitely think we are living in the peak of the festival.

Here is some of my predictions 

- Emily Eavis will continue the trend of booking current and exciting headliners (instead of phoning up older bands). We will see a continuation of the rise of solo acts and alternative / R&B / Hip Hop headliners.

- However... I think the festival will bag one massive reunion. Oasis, Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin, R.E.M — I reckon one real big reunion will happen and they will play the festival.

- We will see loads of new headliners come into the scene. Glastonbury will give a leg up to some exciting new acts (just as it always has done).

- The south east corner / late night activities will continue to grow and rival some of the festivals specifically designed for this.


So what do you think? Of course funny responses are okay but I would like to hear some serious predictions about what the 20s will bring for the festival?

Has the festival bagged any big reunions in the past? They couldn’t land the Stone Roses or Fleetwood MAC, and it seems unlikely GnR will ever stop by. A lot of bands who do the big reunions are purely for the money, which kind of rules GF out. Only exception in recent years was Blur, and they had already announced dates at Hyde Park.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Supernintendo Chalmers said:

I think after G50 we'll start to see a more obvious demographic shift. Some of the veterans will give way to a younger or certainly newer audience and I think this might be reflected in the lineups, particularly the headliners.

Ticket price will probably be £300 by 2025.

My prediction is that these two things will happen but also that it will make for a rocky transitional period with Glastonbury, and they could retreat somewhat if one year doesn't sell out as quick as hoped. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BlueDaze said:

This.... maybe not to that extreme but one of the major camping areas becoming pre erected..

also rather than the talk of moving lock, stock to a different site, I could see some brands creating spin off's as seperate events:

Glastonbury's Park Festival, a reengineered Silver Hayes becoming a new music festival and even The Pyramid doing a series of shorter but massive name gigs during late July, early August to rival Hyde Park, APE and the likes.... All under a Glastonbury umbrella.

It is not practical to make the annual event bigger but they will want to grow the brand. 

Don’t really think they’re in it to turn it in to a brand? They want to make the festival better for the punter each year but in regards to Glastonbury as a brand I just don’t think they’re really that arsed about creating a brand out of the festival. Could never see them staging separate events, especially on the current site. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Freddyflintstonree said:

I don't think £300 by 2025 is an unreasonable increase to the ticket price by then. 

Not to people who go, no. When you tell muggles about the ticket price, jaws hit the floor.

But yeah, £300 by 2023 is probably safe enough a bet too.

Edited by dentalplan
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the demographic is changing all the time anyway really isn’t it. Like 10 years ago you wouldn’t really have saw Alex getting up with Dave doing Thiago Silva. 
I do think they’ll look in to more pre-erected camping options as they’re obviously a big money maker. Can’t see them taking over many fields within the walls of the festival for it, although obviously the “blue sea tents” next to Glastonbury-on-sea is an excuse to trial it within the festival ( minus the tipis). If that is a success then maybe you will get another small field to see how well it works without using Glastonbury-on-sea as an excuse to charge people to stay in a pre-erected tent.
 

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, lukethekid said:

I think the demographic is changing all the time anyway really isn’t it. Like 10 years ago you wouldn’t really have saw Alex getting up with Dave doing Thiago Silva. 
I do think they’ll look in to more pre-erected camping options as they’re obviously a big money maker. Can’t see them taking over many fields within the walls of the festival for it, although obviously the “blue sea tents” next to Glastonbury-on-sea is an excuse to trial it within the festival ( minus the tipis). If that is a success then maybe you will get another small field to see how well it works without using Glastonbury-on-sea as an excuse to charge people to stay in a pre-erected tent.
 

I think it’s great. Younger generations now (more than ever) look to Glastonbury as this special place. It’s how the festival will go on!

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, lukethekid said:

Don’t really think they’re in it to turn it in to a brand? They want to make the festival better for the punter each year but in regards to Glastonbury as a brand I just don’t think they’re really that arsed about creating a brand out of the festival. Could never see them staging separate events, especially on the current site. 

Its already a brand and one they quite rightly are very protective of... (remember the poster on here that wanted to create his game based on the festival..?).

enhancing that brand doesnt mean they have to change the ethos of sustainability and charity, in fact the timing couldnt be better to be at the forefront of the global sustainability movement... and increased revenue and profits is only going to benefit the charities right.?

Increasing the size of the site (even if it were possible) could dilute the 'Golden Ticket' elite feel.. They will need to increase revenue to keep affording the bands they want to play (we have all felt the pinch of gig prices going sky high..) but to your point, they will want to keep it as a 'festival of the people' and so cant charge £500 a pop...

So, how are they going to earn more money.?

Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, dentalplan said:

Not to people who go, no. When you tell muggles about the ticket price, jaws hit the floor.

But yeah, £300 by 2023 is probably safe enough a bet too.

I love how this went from £300 by end of decade, to £300 by 2025 to £300 by 2023 haha. 

I doubt its gonna shoot up £50 in 3 years

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, BlueDaze said:

Its already a brand and one they quite rightly are very protective of... (remember the poster on here that wanted to create his game based on the festival..?).

enhancing that brand doesnt mean they have to change the ethos of sustainability and charity, in fact the timing couldnt be better to be at the forefront of the global sustainability movement... and increased revenue and profits is only going to benefit the charities right.?

Increasing the size of the site (even if it were possible) could dilute the 'Golden Ticket' elite feel.. They will need to increase revenue to keep affording the bands they want to play (we have all felt the pinch of gig prices going sky high..) but to your point, they will want to keep it as a 'festival of the people' and so cant charge £500 a pop...

So, how are they going to earn more money.?

I don’t believe it is a brand, I will have to disagree with you on that one. A brand is a product created by a company for the purpose of monetary gain, Glastonbury has never really been a commercialised enterprise. Sort of the same way that a football club can’t really be described as a brand. I have no knowledge of someone wanting to create a video game based on the festival but I’m assuming he was shot down? That’s up to the festival isn’t it whether they want the name of the festival to be used in a game that they don’t have any knowledge of? That’s got nothing to do with him using a brand name. That’s just him using a copyrighted name, just because something is copyrighted doesn’t necessarily mean it’s a brand.

How will they earn more money? Well as has been said the increase in pre-erected tents is obviously going to increase and with that that will increase income, you also have more glamping options popping up which again is going to add money to the pot. Ticket prices will generally increase but how much more money do they actually have to make? It’s obviously a business and the main purpose of a business is to make money but do they need to make more? Obviously raising more money for charities is a massive plus but the festival can only do so much in regards to their charity work. They obviously make enough to keep going now how much more do they need to make?

Edited by lukethekid
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, lukethekid said:

I don’t believe it is a brand, I will have to disagree with you on that one. A brand is a product created by a company for the purpose of monetary gain, Glastonbury has never really been a commercialised enterprise. Sort of the same way that a football club can’t really be described as a brand. I have no knowledge of someone wanting to create a video game based on the festival but I’m assuming he was shot down? That’s up to the festival isn’t it whether they want the name of the festival to be used in a game that they don’t have any knowledge of? That’s got nothing to do with him using a brand name. That’s just him using a copyrighted name, just because something is copyrighted doesn’t necessarily mean it’s a brand.

It’s definitely a brand, and so are professional football clubs.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, dentalplan said:

It’s definitely a brand, and so are professional football clubs.

They’re not when you look at what a brand actually is, it’s something that’s manufactured by a company specifically for the reason of making money, football clubs were not made that way and neither was Glastonbury.

Edited by lukethekid
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, lukethekid said:

They’re not when you look at what a brand actually is, it’s something that’s manufactured by a company specifically for the reason of making money, football clubs were not made that way and neither was Glastonbury.

That’s one thing a brand can be, sure. But speaking as a Brand Manager, it’s definitely a brand. 

Funnily enough, it’s currently at no.2 in the UK in this list from ‘coolbrands’:

https://www.coolbrands.uk.com/results

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, lukethekid said:

They’re not when you look at what a brand actually is, it’s something that’s manufactured by a company specifically for the reason of making money, football clubs were not made that way and neither was Glastonbury.

No not at all. Brands are just entities that are recognisable and that people have feelings towards. We here have positive brand association with the festival and if Glastonbury wasn't a brand then there wouldn't be all sorts of acts desperate to play, people desperate to go, partnerships with companies, etc. Giving money away doesn't have anything to do with that - charities are brands.

Sidestepping the one about football clubs not being about making profit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, dentalplan said:

No not at all. Brands are just entities that are recognisable and that people have feelings towards. We here have positive brand association with the festival and if Glastonbury wasn't a brand then there wouldn't be all sorts of acts desperate to play, people desperate to go, partnerships with companies, etc. Giving money away doesn't have anything to do with that - charities are brands.

Sidestepping the one about football clubs not being about making profit.

I’ll agree to disagree with you. Firstly Football clubs were never formed to make a profit, the Premier League is the brand the clubs that play within it are not. Brands are not just recognisable entities that we have feelings towards they were created for a purpose. McDonalds, Nike, Thomas Cook (R.I.P), Starbucks, Cadbury’s the list can go on. Are all brand names. All companies or products of a company formed to make money. Just because something has a logo doesn’t make it a brand. 
 

Who on Earth is making a Coolbrand website? What on Earth does that even mean?

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, lukethekid said:

I’ll agree to disagree with you. Firstly Football clubs were never formed to make a profit, the Premier League is the brand the clubs that play within it are not. Brands are not just recognisable entities that we have feelings towards they were created for a purpose. McDonalds, Nike, Thomas Cook (R.I.P), Starbucks, Cadbury’s the list can go on. Are all brand names. All companies or products of a company formed to make money. Just because something has a logo doesn’t make it a brand. 
 

Who on Earth is making a Coolbrand website? What on Earth does that even mean?

You'll agree to disagree? I'm not offering you that agreement! Just go on Google or Wikipedia for a couple of minutes and you can find out that Glastonbury is a brand, charities are brands, Russell Brand is a brand and football clubs are among the biggest brands in the world.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, The Martini Police said:

That’s one thing a brand can be, sure. But speaking as a Brand Manager, it’s definitely a brand. 

Funnily enough, it’s currently at no.2 in the UK in this list from ‘coolbrands’:

https://www.coolbrands.uk.com/results

sorry everyone... i introduced a beardy bloke from Hoxton into the discussion... 😁

i'll get my coat. :ph34r:

Link to post
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
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.




×
×
  • Create New...