why FM never did Glasto? they pay 10% of what other festivals do
 

remember when they were rumored to do Glasto and they did Isle of Wight instead? and Isle of Wight organizers said that's because they paid huge money? well guess what? Glasto pays only 10% of what other festivals do.

Emily Eavis: 'Glastonbury pay bands about 10% of what other festivals would' https://t.co/pJEq4mXVwK pic.twitter.com/4RMpuuR1C9

— NME (@NME) January 30, 2019

https://www.nme.com/news/music/emily...tivals-2440552

Emily Eavis: ‘Glastonbury pay bands about 10% of what other festivals would’

image: https://ksassets.timeincuk.net/wp/up...ll-150x150.jpg

Andrew Trendell
Jan 30, 2019 12:39 pm

Glastonbury's Emily and Michael Eavis Credit: Getty
"We've got integrity in that we kind of do it our own way"

Glastonbury organiser Emily Eavis has spoken of how the festival focusses more on investing in the site and charitable causes, rather than turning a profit.

Eavis was talking on the George Ezra & Friends podcast, when she spoke of how Glastonbury prides itself on its ‘”integrity and doing it their own way” – often at the expense of the huge fees that other events pay to big acts. As a result, Glastonbury 2017 raised over £3million for good causes.

“There are elements like all the charity stuff that we try to do,” Eavis told Ezra. “The fact that we’re trying to give money away to charity and not make big profits, that’s unusual for a business of this size.”

“Obviously people would try and save money on the areas, but we put all the money into the areas so you do get these incredible areas that are just like another world. But then we also don’t pay the bands big fees, and so we’re competing with really big commercial festivals who pay bands… like we’re 10% of what they’d get from any other…”


When Ezra put it to her that Glastonbury is more about the honour and prestige than the money to the artists who play, Eavis replied: “That’s really sweet of you to say about the fee, because I think that you understand it and you’ve been and you’ve got it.

“But I think it is harder for artists who haven’t been especially when they’re coming from the States and you’re going ‘this is really significant’ and the agent looks (at the fee) and is like ‘is that a joke?'”

Eavis continued: “But the thing that happens every time is because of the TV and because of the exposure that they get, they do go on to do really well afterwards, so they’ll sell records afterwards, so we’re saying ‘look, come and do this but even though there’s a small fee, we can almost guarantee afterwards you’ll make up for it’.”

So far, Stormzy has been announced as the first Pyramid Stage headliner, while Janelle Monae has been confirmed to top the bill on the West Holts Stage and Kylie Minogue will take the Sunday afternoon ‘Legends Slot’.

The Killers recently became bookies favourites to take another main stage headline slot after a flurry of bets, while Interpol are also tipped to perform due to coinciding UK tour dates. The same goes for The Stereophonics.


Other rumoured acts for Glastonbury 2019 include The Cure, Lana Del Rey and Arctic Monkeys. Many fans have been speculating that Lauren Hill may appear, while Mel B has stated that Spice Girls are also “in talks” with the festival.


Read more at https://www.nme.com/news/music/emily...bKUI5mauYsG.99

That says it all..Fleetwood Mac have become all about the money. Whatever happened to that band that released a sprawling artistic and brilliant double album in the wake of having the biggest selling studio album by a rock band ever:shrug:

It’s the Kudos of playing Glastonbury not the fee.

It’s the biggest festival in the world.
The world audience for the 3 day event is enormous..
Talk about taking the short sighted plan...instead of the long term.

Playing Glastonbury would have re-ignited the band.
And made a fitting swan song....

yup. 2015 was the right year for it, too, with Christine back and the Classic 5 finally reunited.

I love ya'll but are you really shocked? If everything wasn't driven by money they would be playing smaller venues and actually doing interesting things musically, as a band.

They could be doing a residency at the Beacon but that will never happen.

There are so many hands in the jar that they probably have to make a certain amount of money just to break even.

Reason enough for LB to consider this solo = enormous positive exposure for him as a solo artist and showing his integrity for not chasing the money

glasto or some other summer festivals around Europe - you know i've been floating that idea for a while for LB. :nod:

last summer people like David Byrne or St. Vincent did bunch of these touring their new albums, in between their US dates. interestingly, both their albums received multiple grammy nods this year. and neither one of them was a headliner at any of the festivals they played.

$tevie and M$ck ain't gonna like that. Those money freaks don't do ANYTHING that doesn't pay a TON of money.

Im always with you on that one too :nod:

Not true. Maybe true for Mick but not true for Stevie. She made her latest two solo albums knowing that she wasn't going to make any money from them and she did so for the love of new music.

Hahahahaha, yet $he refused to be a part of Mirage II, aka BuckVie. $he's a @#$%^&*@ genius.

Stevie was under contract to do those albums. The label put a lot into promoting IYD, so she’ll be lucky to see a dime from those, because I think it will be a while, if ever, before the label recoups their money.

I could see Lindsey on the Other Stage at Glastonbury......doing a load of acoustic...

Bull.

In both instances she made comments to the press well after it's release about how disappointed she was that her album ran out of steam and didn't sell the way she thought it was going to.

As usual, BEFORE the release of the album it was all roses and bullsh*t about how she just wanted to make an album for herself and then changed her tune when the awards didn't fall into her lap.

Heck - Dave Grohl had to convince her to quite complaining and actually get off her keister to edit and finish the In Your Dreams movie.

She also threw Fleetwood Mac under the bus and moaned to anyone who could listen how she had to do that album in two weeks, but also loved to gloat how she did the album in two weeks.

Then, she soured further on the experience and decided not to participate during Buckingham McVie and said in plain english it wouldn't make enough money and it would require too much time.

Love of new music? Right.

She essentially broke up the band because of new music. How much more can anyone possibly break this situation down.

It's painfully obvious that the LAST person within this group of individuals with ANY new interest in new music is Stevie Nicks. With or without Lindsey Buckingham.

Perfectly stated BigAl84, you nailed it 100%---> With or without Lindsey, she only does what she wants to do in that exact moment, with no concern for anyone else around her. Whether she can or not doesn't make it right, because then she contradicts herself and says something completely different.

$he's an idiot, and a pathological liar. And cares about no one except her own spoiled ass.

That's the part of her personality that's irrefutable. We all saw how she lied on national tv. She said Lindsey refusing to tour was the reason THEY fired him (well, we don't use the word 'fired'). And it turned out it was a lie.


But it was all Lindsey's fault….

Stevie Nicks 2012 – 2:22-3:08: youtube.com/watch?v=rEXglFYtGCk
“Fleetwood Mac is going out next year, but we’re not really making a record – because it would take us a year to make a record, and they have been wait[ing]. I kind of put them on hold. I mean, I made this record. That was a year. Then I toured last year–off and on all last year–and did lots and lots of press. And then I decided to take this year also to tour all summer, because I did not feel that this record was finished.

"And so it did not make Fleetwood Mac happy but I said to them, ‘I’m taking 2012 for In Your Dreams. I’m sorry. And if you can’t understand that in your heart–how important this is to me–then I’m sorry, but I’m doing it, and I will see you in 2013.'”


Stevie Nicks 2018 – 3:20-3:41: youtube.com/watch?v=346fynuN-b4
"This team wanted to get out on the road, and one of the members did not want to go out on the road for a year.” “We just couldn’t agree and, you know, when you’re in a band it’s a team. I mean, I have a solo career and I love my solo career. And I’m the boss, absolutely – but I’m not the boss in this band.”

I bet Lindsey didn't even have the chance to say: "I'm sorry, but if you can't understand how important this is to me... " Because in Stevie's mind (God, what a place it must be! :laugh: ) Lindsey already toured alone when he toured with Christine. She was in fact, jealous.

And I'd have loved to see Christine's face when $tevie said: "when you're in a band it's a team" :laugh::laugh: No wonder she couldn't wait to tell Lindsey it was all $tevie!

"It did not make [them] happy but I said... 'I'm sorry, but I'm doing it.'"–"not the boss"

Maybe not. It depends on when the decision to fire him actually happened.

Buckingham confirms that, at a band meeting in late 2017 — shortly after a series of shows with McVie to promote their project, Lindsey Buckingham/Christine McVie — he asked for “three or four months extra” to do solo dates. There was “stonewalling,” he claims. “I left the meeting because there was nothing else to talk about.”

https://www.rollingstone.com/music/m...firing-733460/

The last LBCM show was in mid-November. So, that meeting was probably sometime in late November/early December. I think that was when Stevie, Mick, and Azoff decided Lindsey was gone.

And this is the key difference between the two situations. Stevie was working an album that was already out.

If we’re being honest, their solo careers are not equivalent. Stevie has a legitimate second mainstream career. She can play stadiums and large amphitheaters on her own. She’s part of two large machines and is responsible for the livelihoods of significantly more people. If she felt a certain momentum for one project, she has the right and obligation to see it through. She put the band on hold because there was some apparent momentum for IYD, and then she put her solo plans on hold when Fleetwood Mac had the momentum.

Lindsey didn’t have a true solo career. He tried in the early ‘90s, but it didn’t work out. After that, his solo work was more extracurricular, large machine vs. small machine. His solo tours are more artistic endeavors intended to make an artistic statement more than profit. I think Elle has said on a few occasions that One Man Show was his only tour (at least prior to 2013) that was profitable.

Not that one is better than the other, it’s just the reality of the situation.

The sales of IYD weren't that great according to Stevie herself, so where was the "right and obligation" to extend the tour? I guess that was just "apparent" momentum after all. I also don't agree that Lindsey can only ask to do a solo tour in order to promote an album. Where are all these rules coming from? You could just as easily argue that Stevie was less justified in her request, as she'd already completed a solo tour and simply wanted to extend it, and FM had provisionally agreed to tour in 2012.

LB/CM was supposed to be an FM album. Stevie chose not to participate, so on some level Lindsey's tour with Christine in 2017 was an FM year. I say he was right in asking for a solo break, as LB/CM should have been an FM project. There's really no way to spin Stevie's hypocrisy here, except I guess the rules are different for her because, let me guess, $$$$? But they would never say "Let's just close our eyes and take the money." It's really saying it out loud that's the problem, but doing it night after night is just fine.

The key difference between their solo careers is that Stevie is selling a brand and Lindsey is selling music. Good sales figures don't make music sound any better, or the concert more enjoyable.

Since FM wants to cash in on Tom Petty's legacy this tour, I wonder what Tom would have made of this idea that greed and profitability trumps everything else:

“You don’t hear any more of, ‘Hey, we did something creative and we turned a profit, how about that?’ Everywhere we look, we want to make the most money possible. This is a dangerous, corrupt notion. That’s where you see the advent of programming on the radio, and radio research, all these silly things. That has made pop music what it is today. Everything — morals, truth — is all going out the window in favor of profit."

Tom didn't think too highly of charging $150 a ticket, either, and this was back in 2002. This is pretty much the antithesis of FM, and I doubt Stevie or Mick even knows or cares what parking costs:
“My top price is about $65, and I turn a very healthy profit on that; I make millions on the road. I see no reason to bring the price up, even though I have heard many an anxious promoter say, ‘We could charge 150 bucks for this.’ I would like to do this again and maybe come through and not leave a bad taste in people’s mouths. I was at one of our gigs recently, and I was just stunned driving in that it cost $30 dollars to park your car. It’s so wrong to say, ‘OK, we’ve got them on the ticket and we’ve got them on the beer and we’ve got on everything else, let’s get them on the damn parking.’ You got to care about the person you’re dealing with.”

God damn I love this post. EVERYTHING that's wrong with the music business, summed up. Well said.

LMAO..do you really think Stevie takes into consideration all of the people a FM tour employs? That's reaching pretty hard for somebody who can literally take the scenario of Christine returning and make it into a 15 minute speech about herself. A person who gets on stage at Music Cares and talks about herself. A person who wants to write a song about US Military soldiers and makes it about herself. A person who just openly admits to not wanting to do projects because it takes too much time and makes too little money.

But it's about the momentum and all of the people she's employing? An obligation to see something through? Right. Sure. Her only obligation is to cash the checks.

Honestly, at this point I think she could serve cat turds on toothpicks and call them fiesta weenies and people would run around ranting and raving about them....and then she would nominate herself for a James Beard award, followed up by a self appointed documentary.

That's freaking awesome, and I laughed out loud.:laugh::laugh::laugh::xoxo:

I agree with the above, though I'm surprised Lindsey's band tours make no money.

I was stunned recently to run across the article below from the Say You Will era. In it Lindsey says of Fleetwood Mac, "I would be completely happy to continue with this, never to pursue anything solo again. Because it's a hell of a lot easier." I read "easier" as referring, at least in part, to getting his music released.

https://www.fleetwoodmac-uk.com/articles/FMart115.html

I would've loved Fleetwood Mac to play Glastonbury when Christine rejoined, if they did it now it would just be sad (like everything associated with them is) as Lindsey wouldn't be there.

Stevie also did Hyde Park recently in terms of UK festivals.

Well, Don Henley and Joe Walsh have said the same, about being in The Eagles. That it's a lot easier being in a band, than being a solo artist.

But then again, they don't have that old hag in their band...

No, not all the people. Just her cult and the Lindsey haters, who justify and magnify everything she does just because they dislike Lindsey so much they have no choice but to join the chiffonheads. :nod::nod:

yes to all of this.

i think people have also discussed they'd love to see Lindsey solo playing glasto and a number of other festivals, not as a headliner but the way he played that cool San Francisco festival last September. or with his band. either way.

yeah same as if the band continued in the direction he pushed them on Tusk - he said many times if they did, he would never have a need for solo outlet.

he tried the 2nd time with Say You Will - many of his songs were much edgier than regular FM sound. he hoped maybe now when they were older and happily reunited the band would be on board with just making interesting music together. the man is not egomaniac and just cares about making and putting out music, any way he can. :thumbsup:

The current band is boring in my opinion. The set list isn't much different then previous tours. They throw in 5-7 songs they have either never performed live or ones not performed in ages but the rest of the show is stuff they have played to the death. Even with new players it doesn't hide the fact that 1) They are mostly sticking to the same old same old and 2) They have nothing new to offer in terms of music. If they make new music it will only be so SN can give an F - U to Lindsey. It is sad that the band is ending things as a stale nostalgia act.

I still can't believe FM fired Lindsey Buckingham! Its' creative genius! That was a dumb ****ing move if any band ever had one! :laugh:

NF and MC are contracted players doing songs they have never done before. They're having fun and taking care of their pension fund. :D

It is indeed sad that the rest of the Rumours 5 is letting SN dictate their end as nothing more than a cover band instead of one of the biggest bands in rock history. :(