2025 Headliners

[CaledonianGonzo]

9 minutes ago, fraybentos1 said:

Tabloids? This is the BBC article:

 

Glastonbury Festival organiser Emily Eavis has said she has recently been offered a "really big American artist" who she hopes will headline next year.

 

She didn't reveal their identity, but told BBC podcast Sidetracked she is aiming to book two female headliners.

 

 

Ok maybe she was talking about Dua and Madonna but if you are saying you're getting flack for having 0 female headliners in 2023 then for 2024 say you're aiming for 2 female headliners, you're kinda backing yourself into a corner. 

 

Which is exactly how it played out cause she booked SZA to do it to a tiny crowd. She clearly was trying to make the 2 female headliners happen at almost any cost cause she felt bad about 2023.

 

Except after Madge d@bbed down they tried to get Stevie Wonder in, so obviously the 'two women headliners' thing wasn't something they felt the need to stick to especially closely.

Edited October 2, 2024 by CaledonianGonzo

[incident]

Just now, fraybentos1 said:

Ok maybe she was talking about Dua and Madonna but if you are saying you're getting flack for having 0 female headliners in 2023 then for 2024 say you're aiming for 2 female headliners, you're kinda backing yourself into a corner. 

 

Which is exactly how it played out cause she booked SZA to do it to a tiny crowd. She clearly was trying to make the 2 female headliners happen at almost any cost cause she felt bad about 2023.

 

That logic falls apart completely if you believe (and I do) that SZA was drafted in as a last minute replacement for Stevie Wonder, and was already booked / under contract because she was due to headline the Other Stage.

 

None of us know whether they tried to bring in someone from outside or not once they lost Stevie, and it would have been better if they had done so, but from the admittedly poor set of "bump up" options they had SZA was (easily) the most credible choice regardless of gender.

[CaledonianGonzo]

12 minutes ago, NorthernSoul52 said:

Fair enough. Believe he words were "she could totally headline" when asked about her being billed on the top line with the three headliners.

 

It is more inference on our part, and of course she isn't going to go and suggest that she couldn't - especially given she is on that top-line for billing.

 

If we'revtrying to represent Emily Eavis fairly, there's a big difference between "she could headline" and "she is headlining".

[fraybentos1]

18 minutes ago, CaledonianGonzo said:

 

 

Except, again, she didn't say it.

She did say about Lizzo 'she could totally headline' but the headline slot had already been promised to someone else which was total BS cause we know they were scrambling to get GnR late on

[NorthernSoul52]

Just now, CaledonianGonzo said:

 

If we'revtrying to represent Emily Eavis fairly, there's a big difference between "she could headline" and "she is headlining".

Indeed.

[incident]

14 minutes ago, NorthernSoul52 said:

Fair enough. Believe he words were "she could totally headline" when asked about her being billed on the top line with the three headliners.

 

It is more inference on our part, and of course she isn't going to go and suggest that she couldn't - especially given she is on that top-line for billing.

 

If we're reading things in to who's on the top line of the poster, then a couple festivals prior to that, Janet Jackson was on the top line. And nobody other than Janet Jackson ever thought, implied, or claimed she was a headliner.

[fraybentos1]

13 minutes ago, CaledonianGonzo said:

 

Except after Madge d@bbed down they tried to get Stevie Wonder in, so obviously the 'two women headliners' thing wasn't something they felt the need to stick to especially closely.

 

12 minutes ago, incident said:

 

That logic falls apart completely if you believe (and I do) that SZA was drafted in as a last minute replacement for Stevie Wonder, and was already booked / under contract because she was due to headline the Other Stage.

 

None of us know whether they tried to bring in someone from outside or not once they lost Stevie, and it would have been better if they had done so, but from the admittedly poor set of "bump up" options they had SZA was (easily) the most credible choice regardless of gender.

The fact they settled on SZA who played to a tiny crowd suggests they really wanted a woman. The Stevie stuff, who knows?

 

Also why wasn't Lana or Lizzo bumped up in 2023 then? Both more credible than SZA the following year. imo it's because they had in their heads 2 female headliners 

[NorthernSoul52]

1 minute ago, incident said:

 

If we're reading things in to who's on the top line of the poster, then a couple festivals prior to that, Janet Jackson was on the top line. And nobody other than Janet Jackson ever thought, implied, or claimed she was a headliner.

But there wasn't any question posed that year, you can comparatively argue. (Devil's advocate here.)

 

Whereas EE, while likely posed with the question rather than going out of her way to suggest, did pretty much infer Lizzo was on the top-line because "she could totally headline".

 

We could do with a full transcript of these chats sometimes.

[NorthernSoul52]

1 minute ago, fraybentos1 said:

Also why wasn't Lana or Lizzo bumped up in 2023 then? Both more credible than SZA the following year. imo it's because they had in their heads 2 female headliners 

 

Well, with LDR, probably because she's a bit of a headcase. But the answer might simply be that GNR were available, and by ticket-shifting and cross-generational metrics, there won't have been many bigger pulls, irrespective of their live capabilities.

[incident]

Just now, fraybentos1 said:

The fact they settled on SZA who played to a tiny crowd suggests they really wanted a woman. The Stevie stuff, who knows?

 

No, of course it doesn't. It suggests they were scrambling and wanted someone who was available - and given they reportedly had about a week to find someone, they chose the biggest available bump up and I doubt they even had time to worry about how people might judge it against an offhand comment on a podcast months previously. Maybe if they had more time to look for a replacement the result would have been different - Who knows? None of us here can really say with any confidence.

 

Just now, fraybentos1 said:

Also why wasn't Lana or Lizzo bumped up in 2023 then? Both more credible than SZA the following year. imo it's because they had in their heads 2 female headliners 

 

Because in 2023 they didn't lose a headliner about a week before the announcement, and so had no need to bump someone up at the last minute?

[CaledonianGonzo]

1 minute ago, fraybentos1 said:

 

The fact they settled on SZA who played to a tiny crowd suggests they really wanted a woman. The Stevie stuff, who knows?

 

As Incident says, of any of the other acts on the roster to move up to fill a gap in the headliners she was the obvious choice.  She was also headlining BST and Primavera, so its not like the G were the only festival who thought she was in the headlining pool.  And that's before you look at her numbers and general cachet.

 

We're there optics involved?  Maybe.  But they weren't the only factor.

 

That it didn't work out is a shame, but I think the chess move had a sound basis 

[fraybentos1]

Just now, NorthernSoul52 said:

Well, with LDR, probably because she's a bit of a headcase.

They booked her to headline other (and yes it was a mess but they couldn't have forseen that)

 

1 minute ago, NorthernSoul52 said:

But the answer might simply be that GNR were available, and by ticket-shifting and cross-generational metrics, there won't have been many bigger pulls, irrespective of their live capabilities.

Yeah absolutely, but what I'm saying is that in 2024 there would have been some sort of alternative to SZA who was male and a bigger ticket shifter ( think KoL or something) but they chose to go with SZA that year because she is female. They clearly changed approach between 2023 and 2024 and it was due to perceived criticism the earlier year.

[NorthernSoul52]

1 minute ago, fraybentos1 said:

They booked her to headline other (and yes it was a mess but they couldn't have forseen that)

 

Yeah absolutely, but what I'm saying is that in 2024 there would have been some sort of alternative to SZA who was male and a bigger ticket shifter ( think KoL or something) but they chose to go with SZA that year because she is female. They clearly changed approach between 2023 and 2024 and it was due to perceived criticism the earlier year.

Oh, I won't argue with that. But at the same time, the fly in the ointment there is Stevie Wonder. If he was indeed the replacement for Madonna, then it still would have been just the one female headliner.

 

I certainly think there was a notion to book more diversely.

[fraybentos1]

2 minutes ago, incident said:

Because in 2023 they didn't lose a headliner about a week before the announcement, and so had no need to bump someone up at the last minute?

is this madonna you mean? how do you know when they pulled out? 2023 wasn't that dissimilar anyway with taylor or Rhianna clearly not working late on. I'm not denying that of the people on the line up already SZA was the best/ only choice but clearly they have scrambled before to find someone new last minute such as The Who or GnR. 

 

4 minutes ago, CaledonianGonzo said:

As Incident says, of any of the other acts on the roster to move up to fill a gap in the headliners she was the obvious choice. 

why does someone already on the roster need to fill the spot? why not that same approach the previous year with Lizzo or LDR?

 

Dunno why you all seem so reluctant to admit that they seemed keen to have 2 female headliners this year. Seems obvious to me. 

[incident]

18 minutes ago, fraybentos1 said:

is this madonna you mean? how do you know when they pulled out?

 

I am referring to them losing Stevie Wonder, as is everyone else, as he was the generally accepted rumour at the time from credible sources. But you seem intent on ignoring the possibility that he was the one previously booked, as it runs counter to the narrative you're trying to push.

 

18 minutes ago, fraybentos1 said:

2023 wasn't that dissimilar anyway with taylor or Rhianna clearly not working late on.

 

I don't know exactly when they lost Rihanna (as she does seem by far the more likely of the two), but it doesn't appear to have been late on or even close to it. The headliner trio we ended up with were all rumoured quite a long way out - you seem to be suggesting that GnR were a late replacement, but they were being rumoured by a credible source as early as October 2022 - with any "doubt" over them mostly because someone loudly refused to accept it and insisted on telling everyone that at every opportunity.

 

18 minutes ago, fraybentos1 said:

why does someone already on the roster need to fill the spot? why not that same approach the previous year with Lizzo or LDR?

 

As above, 2023 isn't remotely comparable given all 3 headliners were seemingly in place at least 9 months before the festival so there was no "late replacement" at all. But for this year, and as I've already said - I have no idea whether they tried to look outside the acts they already had booked or not. Nor do you.

Edited October 2, 2024 by incident

[fraybentos1]

2 minutes ago, incident said:

I am referring to them losing Stevie Wonder,

They clearly never 'had' Stevie Wonder, they may have asked the question but clearly wasn't far down the line if he apparently had health issues and never ended up doing BST. Maybe 2025.

 

And I do believe they tried for Stevie and I'm not trying to 'push' anything. All I'm saying is wanting  2 female headliners and greater diversity high up the lineup based on comments re 2023 played a part in them going for SZA. Do you honestly disagree with that?

[incident]

Just now, fraybentos1 said:

And I do believe they tried for Stevie and I'm not trying to 'push' anything. All I'm saying is wanting  2 female headliners and greater diversity high up the lineup based on comments re 2023 played a part in them going for SZA. Do you honestly disagree with that?

 

A part? Sure, it could have been a small consideration, as one of numerous factors - but I don't think for a second it was an overriding concern. Whereas your previous statement was: "She clearly was trying to make the 2 female headliners happen at almost any cost".

[fraybentos1]

24 minutes ago, incident said:

 

A part? Sure, it could have been a small consideration, as one of numerous factors - but I don't think for a second it was an overriding concern. Whereas your previous statement was: "She clearly was trying to make the 2 female headliners happen at almost any cost".

Well we will have to agree to disagree. I think it looked an out of place booking and that was confirmed by the fact she played to about 8 people. A misjudgement by the festival which has done more harm than good imo.

[CaledonianGonzo]

7 minutes ago, fraybentos1 said:

Well we will have to agree to disagree. I think it looked an out of place booking and that was confirmed by the fact she played to about 8 people. A misjudgement by the festival which has done more harm than good imo.

 

Thats true, but it can be true despite SZA's gender 

 

I think it's fair to say that looking at what was hot / flavour of the month in 2024 played a sizable role in the SZA move.  Her walloping large. streaming numbers for one thing - and obviously in retrospect that's a flawed metric on which to place all your faith. 

 

But the fact she was headlining other large European festivals in the same timeframe still shows that Emily wasn't way out on a limb making mad moves just to tick a box.

[NorthernSoul52]

14 minutes ago, CaledonianGonzo said:

 

Thats true, but it can be true despite SZA's gender 

 

I think it's fair to say that looking at what was hot / flavour of the month in 2024 played a sizable role in the SZA move.  Her walloping large. streaming numbers for one thing - and obviously in retrospect that's a flawed metric on which to place all your faith. 

 

But the fact she was headlining other large European festivals in the same timeframe still shows that Emily wasn't way out on a limb making mad moves just to tick a box.

Concur on this. The signs and the metrics - those streaming numbers, the actual hard sales (they weren't a slouch either) and the other major festival dates mostly suggested that it wouldn't be a complete misfire on paper.

 

In practice, there's possibly a few things against her - understand the only option was the Sunday, but that really did feel like the kiss of death for people not interested enough to stick around.

[CaledonianGonzo]

The genre she works in played a role.  I really like SZA but didn't go as I didn't want to end the festival with some slow jamz.

[balti-pie]

It could very easily have been Emily's decision to make cos she loves SZA's album and out of all the potential ones to promote to the open pyramid headliner spot, she liked that one best!

She basically made Kings of Leon headliners in 2008 cos she loved them at the time, they weren't touring or anything, and as they got that headline slot they wrote 'bigger' songs that were aimed at a larger audience - which both made them (as headliners) and also broke them (cos they're fairly crap aside from the first three albums 😄)

So it might not be any more complicated than she promoted SZA to headline cos she really likes her. And if i were Emily Eavis you're damn right i'd do the same thing. 

[CaledonianGonzo]

Taking back everything I've said in Emily's defence after learning she f**ks with Kings of Leon.

[balti-pie]

4 minutes ago, CaledonianGonzo said:

Taking back everything I've said in Emily's defence after learning she f**ks with Kings of Leon.

tbf they were good, sixteen years ago. Back when they were hairy and you couldnt understand a single word they sang. 

[MEGABOWL]

6 minutes ago, CaledonianGonzo said:

Taking back everything I've said in Emily's defence after learning she f**ks with Kings of Leon.

First 3 album KOL? Nothing wrong with that. She wasn’t to know he was going to start setting Sexes on Fire and getting shat on by pigeons soon after.

Edited October 2, 2024 by MEGABOWL