By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
This weekend and I have just looked at the line ups on the main stages.
1. The 1975, are they really that big they can headline the pyramid stage on Friday night.
2. Neil Young is a massive headliner on the Saturday, but Raye as second on the bill, the whole day doesnt give me much hope.
3. How is Rod Stewart that low down on the Sunday bill, i know its the legends spot but there is no one above that would fill the Brook let alone Glastonbury, Olivia Rodrigo has only had two albums FFS, Noah Kahan 1 big albim released 3 years ago again never heard of him.
The Other stage seems to be a little better, but Charli XcX & The Prodigy hardly Glasto headliners,.
All in all yet another step to Glastonbury being a middle class type gathering, not a rock festival anymore
Satisfying The Bloodlust Of The Masses In Peacetime
1
Glastonbury Thread on 14:58 - Jun 23 with 1300 views
TBF Olivia Rodrigo is one of the biggest stars around now.
Glastonbury getting her to appear shows that they are still relevant, and not just getting bands in their twilight years.
Hate to break it to you Nick, but there is no Glastonbury next year, so you are going to have to pile in with some weighty criticism on the IOW Festival next year
The pinnacle year for me was ‘94 as there were some fantastic acts on offer. If ever anyone wants to see one of the best sets Glasto has witnessed then it has to be the Manics that year - absolutely at their best.
I wouldn’t mind being there this year as never seen Amyl and the Sniffers nor Supergrass. Love the Brian Jonestown Massacre and would go and see Leftfield, Neil Young and Alanis Morisette.
Sadly the truly big acts just aren’t there Nick however, I always recommend taking a punt on the smaller tents with those unknown gems.
[Post edited 23 Jun 15:33]
Ready and waiting to mop up those European places......
I personally think Glastonbury jumped the shark about 10 years ago, not for line ups but just it got too big.
Saying that though Nick i do think the Prodigy will be superb headliners, they are hands down one of the best live acts i've seen and are absolutely set up for something like Glastonbury.
I remember going to the big Oasis Knebworth gigs in the 90s and The Prodigy were the best act of it by some distance.
0
Glastonbury Thread on 15:37 - Jun 23 with 1240 views
Glastonbury Thread on 15:34 - Jun 23 by franniesTache
I personally think Glastonbury jumped the shark about 10 years ago, not for line ups but just it got too big.
Saying that though Nick i do think the Prodigy will be superb headliners, they are hands down one of the best live acts i've seen and are absolutely set up for something like Glastonbury.
I remember going to the big Oasis Knebworth gigs in the 90s and The Prodigy were the best act of it by some distance.
Prodigy were at IOW last year, but I was at the Euros in Germany, so missed it.
Glastonbury Thread on 15:34 - Jun 23 by franniesTache
I personally think Glastonbury jumped the shark about 10 years ago, not for line ups but just it got too big.
Saying that though Nick i do think the Prodigy will be superb headliners, they are hands down one of the best live acts i've seen and are absolutely set up for something like Glastonbury.
I remember going to the big Oasis Knebworth gigs in the 90s and The Prodigy were the best act of it by some distance.
The Prodigy were massive in the 1990's but are they really big enough as a headlining act when you think of those that have gone before
Satisfying The Bloodlust Of The Masses In Peacetime
0
Glastonbury Thread on 15:42 - Jun 23 with 1229 views
The Prodigy were massive in the 1990's but are they really big enough as a headlining act when you think of those that have gone before
I think you underestimate their influence on younger generations tbf, same as the chemical brothers they're held up as "legends" the same way guitar bands like Pulp are for a lot of younger folk.
I work in a very young industry so hear quite a lot about music from people i work with and a lot of those young people will cite acts like the chemical brothers, prodigy, disclosure, lcd soundsystem, dizzie rascal etc. in the same way our age group would've the 60s bands.
I think the thing a lot of people on here don't get is that guitar rock is seen as being pretty outdated and the music of "dads", kind of like if we'd been listening to skiffle in our youths
Interesting (particularly in the context of the “what is middle class?” thread) to read that Michael Eavis has made plans to gift his Glastonbury estate to his daughter and a family trust.
He is now 89 years old, and I think that if he lives for another 7 years this gift of approx £400 million could avoid inheritance tax of up to £80 million.
He is a fairly ardent socialist and has in the past stood as a Labour candidate in a General Election.
Nothing illegal in what he is doing; perfectly within the law, and inheritance tax is of course deeply unpopular.
I just wonder how this sits with those who have supported his political views over the years.
Glastonbury Thread on 20:28 - Jun 24 by PatfromPoole
Interesting (particularly in the context of the “what is middle class?” thread) to read that Michael Eavis has made plans to gift his Glastonbury estate to his daughter and a family trust.
He is now 89 years old, and I think that if he lives for another 7 years this gift of approx £400 million could avoid inheritance tax of up to £80 million.
He is a fairly ardent socialist and has in the past stood as a Labour candidate in a General Election.
Nothing illegal in what he is doing; perfectly within the law, and inheritance tax is of course deeply unpopular.
I just wonder how this sits with those who have supported his political views over the years.
[Post edited 24 Jun 20:30]
Good for him, I hope he makes it as inheritance tax is vile. Totallly unfair and when you look back into the history of why it was introduced, totally unnecessary in the modern world where there are many more ways to raise taxes effectively without the need to mug the dead. I really don’t care how a person got their money, or how much of it they have got, as far as I am concerned the government have no right to mug anyone for a single £ note. I sincerely hope he makes it to the line in the sand irrespective of the politics of the government in power at the time so long as they can’t then mug the family for £80m. Obviously others may well disagree, it’s not political on my part, nor class based, just unacceptably vile tax in my opinion.
[Post edited 24 Jun 20:52]
0
Glastonbury Thread on 22:13 - Jun 24 with 605 views
Glastonbury Thread on 20:48 - Jun 24 by InTimeAddedOn
Good for him, I hope he makes it as inheritance tax is vile. Totallly unfair and when you look back into the history of why it was introduced, totally unnecessary in the modern world where there are many more ways to raise taxes effectively without the need to mug the dead. I really don’t care how a person got their money, or how much of it they have got, as far as I am concerned the government have no right to mug anyone for a single £ note. I sincerely hope he makes it to the line in the sand irrespective of the politics of the government in power at the time so long as they can’t then mug the family for £80m. Obviously others may well disagree, it’s not political on my part, nor class based, just unacceptably vile tax in my opinion.
[Post edited 24 Jun 20:52]
30 years ago few people paid IHT, a 3 bedroom semi on a nice estate cost £65 k, no one had much in their pensions and savings and so no one hit the threshold to pay IHT.
Today the same house would cost you about £350 k
But it is still a tax on the rich, a couple have effectively a £1 million nil rate band.
Its about planning for it, but in my experience few want to spend a couple of grand on effective IHT planning whilst there are cars to buy and holidays to go on
Satisfying The Bloodlust Of The Masses In Peacetime
0
Glastonbury Thread on 22:53 - Jun 24 with 567 views
30 years ago few people paid IHT, a 3 bedroom semi on a nice estate cost £65 k, no one had much in their pensions and savings and so no one hit the threshold to pay IHT.
Today the same house would cost you about £350 k
But it is still a tax on the rich, a couple have effectively a £1 million nil rate band.
Its about planning for it, but in my experience few want to spend a couple of grand on effective IHT planning whilst there are cars to buy and holidays to go on
That’s a very good point Sir, actually, I did wonder why Michael Eavis had left it so long to do this considering what is a stake in their case and 96 is a fair old innings to clock up. I remember seeing him on TV either last year or 2023 sat in that little inside gallery at the side of the Pyramid stage with a blanket over his legs and thinking he was looking his age.
0
Glastonbury Thread on 23:04 - Jun 24 with 552 views
Glastonbury Thread on 20:48 - Jun 24 by InTimeAddedOn
Good for him, I hope he makes it as inheritance tax is vile. Totallly unfair and when you look back into the history of why it was introduced, totally unnecessary in the modern world where there are many more ways to raise taxes effectively without the need to mug the dead. I really don’t care how a person got their money, or how much of it they have got, as far as I am concerned the government have no right to mug anyone for a single £ note. I sincerely hope he makes it to the line in the sand irrespective of the politics of the government in power at the time so long as they can’t then mug the family for £80m. Obviously others may well disagree, it’s not political on my part, nor class based, just unacceptably vile tax in my opinion.
[Post edited 24 Jun 20:52]
It's not a tax on the dead. It's a tax on the inheritors who haven't earned a single penny of it. Every tax involves "mugging" someone, but all other taxes "mug" the person who's earned the money. This makes inheritance tax the fairest of all taxes.
But the biggest reason to favour it over other taxes is that all other taxes disincentivise something. Mostly they disincentivise good things e.g. put up income tax and people work less, put up employers NI and there will be less jobs etc. This issue doesn't exist with inheritance tax. You can't disincentivise dying.
Personally I think we'd have a fairer, better and more successful society if there was no such thing as inheritance and everyone started from the same point, rather than some starting with multi million fortunes they haven't earned. The only real problem with inheritance tax is the lengths some people will go to avoid it e.g. hypocrites like Michael Eavis.
0
Glastonbury Thread on 08:22 - Jun 25 with 365 views
It's not a tax on the dead. It's a tax on the inheritors who haven't earned a single penny of it. Every tax involves "mugging" someone, but all other taxes "mug" the person who's earned the money. This makes inheritance tax the fairest of all taxes.
But the biggest reason to favour it over other taxes is that all other taxes disincentivise something. Mostly they disincentivise good things e.g. put up income tax and people work less, put up employers NI and there will be less jobs etc. This issue doesn't exist with inheritance tax. You can't disincentivise dying.
Personally I think we'd have a fairer, better and more successful society if there was no such thing as inheritance and everyone started from the same point, rather than some starting with multi million fortunes they haven't earned. The only real problem with inheritance tax is the lengths some people will go to avoid it e.g. hypocrites like Michael Eavis.
There's ridiculous opinions, then there's this. This is up there with the biggest load of bollox I've ever read on here.
It's not a tax on the dead. It's a tax on the inheritors who haven't earned a single penny of it. Every tax involves "mugging" someone, but all other taxes "mug" the person who's earned the money. This makes inheritance tax the fairest of all taxes.
But the biggest reason to favour it over other taxes is that all other taxes disincentivise something. Mostly they disincentivise good things e.g. put up income tax and people work less, put up employers NI and there will be less jobs etc. This issue doesn't exist with inheritance tax. You can't disincentivise dying.
Personally I think we'd have a fairer, better and more successful society if there was no such thing as inheritance and everyone started from the same point, rather than some starting with multi million fortunes they haven't earned. The only real problem with inheritance tax is the lengths some people will go to avoid it e.g. hypocrites like Michael Eavis.
Actually it is a tax on the dead, the tax is paid by the executors of the deceased's estate, before it is distributed in full to the beneficiaries.
So those inheriting pay no tax on their net inheritance.
Perhaps it is evidence that poverty ain't what it used to be, in 1980 it used to be having only 1 car in the family and a redifusion pay as you go TV.
In 1990, it was not habving sky TV, in 2020 it was not having the internet, in 2010 not having a mobile phone that could take photos. In 2015 not having an I pad.
Now it seems Poverty is your parents not having to pay inheritance tax
Satisfying The Bloodlust Of The Masses In Peacetime
0
Glastonbury Thread on 08:53 - Jun 25 with 331 views
There's ridiculous opinions, then there's this. This is up there with the biggest load of bollox I've ever read on here.
It's interesting that inheritance tax seems to cause emotional gut reactions like yours. People just hate it so, like you, they don't actually consider it logically.
0
Glastonbury Thread on 09:03 - Jun 25 with 321 views
Actually it is a tax on the dead, the tax is paid by the executors of the deceased's estate, before it is distributed in full to the beneficiaries.
So those inheriting pay no tax on their net inheritance.
Perhaps it is evidence that poverty ain't what it used to be, in 1980 it used to be having only 1 car in the family and a redifusion pay as you go TV.
In 1990, it was not habving sky TV, in 2020 it was not having the internet, in 2010 not having a mobile phone that could take photos. In 2015 not having an I pad.
Now it seems Poverty is your parents not having to pay inheritance tax
It's not a tax on the dead because it has no effect on the dead. In all cases the dead end up with the same amount of money: £0, regardless of the tax rate.
It's a tax on the inheritors because it directly determines how much they get. If the tax rate was 0% they'd get everything (and the country would still be run by the Lords on their estates). If the tax rate was 100% they'd get nothing.
Technically the tax is paid before the estate is distributed, but that's irrelevant to the real effect.
0
Glastonbury Thread on 13:39 - Jun 25 with 205 views
Glastonbury Thread on 15:47 - Jun 23 by franniesTache
I think you underestimate their influence on younger generations tbf, same as the chemical brothers they're held up as "legends" the same way guitar bands like Pulp are for a lot of younger folk.
I work in a very young industry so hear quite a lot about music from people i work with and a lot of those young people will cite acts like the chemical brothers, prodigy, disclosure, lcd soundsystem, dizzie rascal etc. in the same way our age group would've the 60s bands.
I think the thing a lot of people on here don't get is that guitar rock is seen as being pretty outdated and the music of "dads", kind of like if we'd been listening to skiffle in our youths
[Post edited 23 Jun 15:48]
You should have been at the Ghost gig in Manchester, at least half the audience were teenage girls. A lot of them at this gig in Norway.
[Post edited 25 Jun 13:42]
0
Glastonbury Thread on 14:21 - Jun 25 with 163 views
Maybe it's an age thing but personally I can't think of anything worse than spending the weekend at Glastonbury (or should I be calling it 'Glasto' as that seems to be the law now). Queuing for overpriced food and drink, then jostling for space in a field alongside drunk middle-aged idiots who think they're cool because they've paid a small fortune to watch bands that are so far past their sell-by dates they're now effectively their own tribute acts. As Phill Jupitus once said if you want the Glastonbury experience stick a tent in your garden, stick a TV in your kitchen window where you can see it, then ask your next door neighbour to come and piss on you at three in the morning.
But if Glastonbury is your thing and you have a ticket I hope you have a great time!
Personally I would rather see a good up-and-coming band at The Brook or 1865, grab a bus and be home in time for cocoa and a comfy bed. Oh shit, it IS an age thing...
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
