#Johnson'sCabinet

Unless there has been a massive upset Boris Johnson will confirmed as the new leader of the Conservative Party tomorrow and his appointment as prime minister will quickly follow.

One of his first tasks and a most crucial one - will be to choose his Cabinet.

For the political geek - this is a fascinating moment. What does he have to consider? Well he has to balance up the following considerations :

• Johnson wants to push through Brexit on 31st October. He needs individuals in Cabinet post who will fully back him on that. Unlike May who had a "remain" Cabinet - Johnson needs an unequivocally "leave" Cabinet - people that believe in the opportunities Brexit offers.
• He needs to reward talent and appoint people to roles that suit their abilities and interests.
• He will want to reward loyalty - those that have personally supported him.
• He will need to consider gender and ethnic balance.
• Now the complex one - as the saying goes - "keep your friends close but your enemies closer". Hunt and Gove particularly want to be Prime Minister. Their personal interests will be paramount. Rudd is a wet remainer but has a following. Clearly Hammond (who will resign before pushed) together with May and Gaulk will be anti no deal trouble on the back benches. Rudd will join them if sacked - a powerful group.
• To some extent he will be mindful of trying to unite the Tory Party - to heal the divisions the Brexit issue has caused - the blue on blue stuff. However it might be too early for that. Brexit has to be done. There might be some defections to the Liberal Democrats that are unavoidable.

Here are a few personal thoughts :

• Dominic Raab is very talented and very committed to Brexit. I would make him our lead Brexit negotiator and to bolster his status make him Deputy Prime Minister.
• Liss Truss is talented and committed and more a Thatcherite than wet. I would make her Chancellor - with gender balance in mind.
• Sajid Javid is talented and accepts Brexit. I would keep him as Home Secretary but his star rose further in the leadership contest - so if he ended up as Chancellor it would not be a surprise.
• Foreign Secretary - tricky. To demote Hunt or not ? He can do the job - he will help bring the party together. He is now publicly committed to Brexit - but he is a duplicitous weasel. FS is a massive prize and a key role. Does Hunt deserve to keep it or should it go to a more prominent Brexiteer to send a strong message ? Where would Hunt go if he is not FS ? A problem. I don't like him (see my previous blog).  
• There must be something really good for Rees-Mogg & Steve Baker and Duncan-Smith if they want it. James Cleverly has been a Brexit stalwart - and has fronted up well on a lot of media stuff. Andrea Leadsom deserves a big job. Geoffrey Cox has gravitas with a high personal reputation and came out for Boris early. Liam Fox is obviously a committed Brexiteer but he seems to lack energy (and he was a prominent Hunt supporter).
• Hancock is doing a good job at Health and stays.
• Mourdant apparently is suited to Defence, is a Brexiteer and would think she stays. However Defence is a big glamorous ministry and a star prize for someone.
• Gove is Gove - a talented minister and he is a clear leaver. He is an asset - gets things done and communicates well - but his personal ambition a liability. Tricky - but on balance it would be a massive waste not to use him.
• Stephen Barclay did pretty well as Brexit Secretary despite appearing shackled.
• Preti Patel is a leave rotweiller - uncompromising. I like here no nonsense approach as a right winger. I would want her on my side across the board. 
• Rudd is a wet Tory. She is a remainer who has made a last minute conversion to the possibility of no deal. I don't rate her but maybe she is what is needed at the dour ministry of Work and Pensions. Wouldn't be surprised if she stays because she could be trouble on the back benches.

We will know soon enough. Things are going to have to move quickly.

#DesignerLabels Bernhard Arnault

The other day I came across an article saying Bernhard Arnault was currently the second richest man in the world and the richest man in Europe.

Idle curiosity - I had never heard of him - he is French - how has he made his money? So I did a quick bit of research - ha!.

As with the internet - it was all before me in a few seconds!

Bernard Arnault is aged 70 and Chairman and Chief Executive of  LVHM. LVHM stands for Louis Vuitton Hennessey Moet the largest luxury goods company in the world.

That made me smile - took me right back to my school days - studying supply and demand curves - all that stuff about elasticity! I remember my economics teacher Mr Dakin talking about demand in an economic recession and how the luxury goods market was typically recession proof - ie the rich are always rich and spend accordingly.

Clearly Bernard Arnault had listened to Mr Dakin and planned his business strategy accordingly!

Another Mr Dakin parable comes to mind. He told us about the watch seller whose watches were not selling. His adviser said you are selling them too cheap - try putting the price up and of course they immediately started flying out the door! It is a marketing strategy. Price is so often associated with quality. The more expensive - the more desirable - particularly if others cannot afford it.

Many years ago I was at a conference where the guest speaker said he was a consultant to the Swiss watch industry. (the Swiss historically made the best timepieces but sales were stagnant). He told them wake up - you are no longer in the business or selling watches that keep accurate time - you can buy a quartz crystal watch for a fiver that does that - what you should be selling is fashion. He claimed out of that realisation SWATCH was born.

Anyway whether they came from Mr Dakin or not Mr Arnault has put these lessons together and ran with it to incredible success.

According to Wikipedia Arnault did a degree in Mechanical Engineering and worked for his fathers substantial engineering business. Later he persuaded his father to sell up and invest in real estate. Somehow he bought an ailing textile business that owned Christian Dior. He now owns 70 luxury brands - here are some additional names - they don't mean much to me - Givenchy, Guerlain, Marc Jacobs, Sephora, Emilio Pucci, Fendi, Loro Piana, Nicholas Kirkwood, Thomas Pink, R.M Williams, EDUN, Moynat and Donna Karen.

His strategy is to keep these brands separate from a marketing point of view but to use them to support each other and develop. If he sees a new kid on the block emerging he snaps it up.

So in summary Mr Arnault is a very clever man. He has earned his fantastic success by being shrewd and working hard - by having flair and drive.

My issue is with his customers. His materialistic consumers - his fashion conscious designer label fiends!

As someone devoid of designer labels - (unless you include Craghopper, M&S Blue Harbour and the odd Musto item) - I put it to you that Mr Arnauld's fortune has been built because in essence, many people are both shallow and gullible - ha! - (no offence meant!)

Designer labels are expensive - evidently margins are high. Is the price justified? Does their desirability go much beyond some sort of measure of status - of showing off? It would be a great surprise is Mr Arnault's 70 designer companies did not share manufacturing resources - to achieve economies of scale. Of course they must. To what extent are their products really the same? Greatly I would suspect - but with a different label to appeal! So will my gonads be any better modeled and cossetted in a pair of Lois Vuitton undergarments compared to my M&S boxers? Will my locks be even more lovely using Christian Dior shampoo than with my typical £2 brand? Will our Christmas champers from Tesco be any less lovely than a mega expensive bottle of Moet? I doubt it so what is the point?

The point is what it says about you. If you have got it flaunt it. Some people will be impressed.

Mr Bernard Arnault is laughing all the way to the bank. Good on him! 

#Brexit 10 things that stopped Brexit happening (so far)

I have cut and pasted a link below to an article posted on the BBC news web site today. It is written by Nick Robinson and reflect the transcript of a BBC Panorama programme yet to be screened.

The article is entitled

10 things that stopped Brexit happening

The article is definitely worth a read. Confirms for me pretty much everything suspected. EU believed the Brexit decision could be reversed. The Irish backstop was primarily a ruse used to give the EU the upper hand in trade. Theresa May (I would say while meaning well) has been effectively useless. Two of May's most powerful colleagues The Chancellor and her Deputy are both remainers. Finally the EU never believed the threat of No Deal because they could see May had not prepared for it.
All that might change now. Brexit is about to come to a head under Johnson. The UK has made major mistakes. ( maybe it was inevitable ). The UK is down - but maybe it is not out. Finally we might be getting our act together. We can see where it has gone wrong. We can regroup and now stand our ground. This is so typical of our history. We will get there in the end and democracy will prevail.

These are Nick Robinsons concluding paragraphs :

Those misunderstandings have dogged the Brexit negotiations as both sides have miscalculated how the other side will react. 
What has not been tested yet is whether the credible threat of no deal, a refusal to compromise on the Irish border and a willingness to withhold the £39bn divorce bill which Britain has agreed to pay will improve or destroy the chances of getting a deal.
We're about to find out.

I recommend you read the article. Here is the link :

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49008826

#Brexit finally the UK has learned how to play poker - & the Irish Backstop

It is 17th July. In a few days Boris Johnson will be our Prime Minister.

He will have been elected on a simple mantra - we are leaving the EU on 31st October - deal or no deal.

He would prefer a deal - but a deal which is based around the current withdrawal agreement containing the Irish Backstop is unacceptable - it is dead - and if the EU insist it stays - then we leave without a deal.

Can Johnson get a no deal through Parliament? It is another poker hand.

It seems pretty clear Parliament cannot stop a no deal by statutory means - even Grieve has acknowledged so.

Increasingly it appears the only way Tory MP's against a no deal will be able to stop it is to bring down Johnson's government in a vote of no confidence and force a general election.

If the reason they are against leaving without a deal is the predicted damage it will do to the UK economy- the harsh reality they have to confront is what damage would be done to the UK if they open up the possibility of a Corbyn led Labour General Election win? For any Tory that must be a catastrophic prospect - so would they really bring the Government down? A few might. A few might cut off their noses to spite their faces - people like Grieve and Soubry but in the main it is so illogical I think the majority will stack their hand and Johnson will find the support he needs for a no deal.

The EU - and particularly the Irish want to use the argument that removing the back stop threatens peace in Ireland. Johnson just does not buy that. Why? The UK is never going to put up a hard border in Ireland. If the EU are prepared to - be it on their shoulders. The reality is they won't in a no deal scenario - so the risk to peace by physically dividing Ireland is not going to happen with or without a deal.

To round off the logic of this blog and the real prospect of us leaving on 31st October without a deal I have cut and pasted below from an earlier blog I have written. There is a change of mood under Johnson. The chips are down now and the UK is going to play its poker hand because it is no longer afraid of losing. That is my assessment.

It is clear now the Brexit crisis will not be resolved by consensus and technocratic managerial type political thinking. Johnson is in tune with the majority I think. It goes something like this - we want out of the EU - we don't like the way the EU is going - we don't quite know how we are going to pull it off - but we are a great country - somehow we will find a way - and how bad can it be? Lets just get on with it and leave and be damned with the naysayers and pessimists!
Critics say - madness - we must have a detailed plan. Remainers continue to argue the risks of Brexit are too great. Johnson has the ability to transcend that negativity and create optimism and a can do attitude. It is motivating. People are not stupid  - they know there will be bumps in the road - they know it will cost the UK but frankly they don't care. They want to be free - they want democracy to be upheld - and they believe Johnson might be the only one that can deliver it. The people also understand that the only way to be respected in negotiations with the EU is to say we are leaving regardless of a deal and mean it. The people understand the basic logic and commonsense of that position and are on Johnson's side and will back him. 

#Toryleaderdershipcontest Johnson or Hunt - who will make the better Prime Minister?

In a week or so the outcome of the Conservative Party election of a new leader will be announced. The two candidates are Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt. The winner not only becomes the new leader of the Conservative Party but becomes our Prime Minister (as the Conservative Party are the largest party in Parliament and can form a majority.) Johnson (Boris) is the overwhelming favourite to win.

So what of the two candidates?

25/5/2019 I posted this blog :

#Politicians - the Conservative leadership contest - "Politicians are too political" - Rabbi Jonathan Sacks. 

davidshoulder60onwards.blogspot.com/2019/05/politicians-conservative-leadership.html

This is the final paragraph from the blog :
But to finish on a slightly more positive note Rabbi Sacks observes that at times of real crisis - and the Brexit issue is a real crisis - eventually a real statesman will emerge - some one capable of rising above - some one with exceptional qualities - a Churchill or a Thatcher. Is he or she one of those Tory hopefuls?

So can Hunt or Johnson have any prospect of being what Rabbi Sacks refers to? Any prospect as I characterised of being someone with the leadership ability at a time of national crisis as a Churchill or Thatcher?

Well possibly - but it is definitely not Jeremy Hunt! In my view Hunt is quite awful. He has been described as Theresa May in trousers - a manager - not a leader. That is being kind. He is a snake.(The extraordinary Junior Doctors strike was a heartfelt attempt by good people to tell him his 7 day elective plans were unworkable and unsustainable. Hunt's bullying, lying and cynical interpretation of statistics made his so called victory a pyrrhic one.) The NHS is falling apart now because he played shitty politics with it. I am not going to waste time writing about him because he is exactly what we don't need - a small horizon technocratic career politician..

So we are left with Boris Johnson!

Let's start with the negatives. He has been accused variously by his many detractors of being - self interested, a self publicist, unprincipled, duplicitous, casual, lazy, slap dash, lacking attention to detail, does not master his brief, unpriministerial, verbose, waffler, phony, double dealer, dangerous, not taken seriously on the world stage etc etc!

Some or all of these might be true. The question is does it matter at the end of the day? The question is - can he rise above it? The question is for all his perceived faults could he be the man of the hour - the maverick the nation needs at this time of crisis?

Johnson's strengths. Well first of all there is no doubt of his intelligence. He has the capacity. Apparently when focused he can master facts very quickly. There is no doubt for the majority he is a larger than life personality -  he can communicate - people like him - he makes people smile - he breaks the mould of the typical politician - he is a one off. And Boris has self confidence - he is not easily kowtowed by conventional thinking - he has the ability to confront political correctness and say the unthinkable and get away with it.

It is clear now the Brexit crisis will not be resolved by consensus and technocratic managerial type political thinking. Johnson is in tune with the majority I think. It goes something like this - we want out of the EU - we don't like the way the EU is going - we don't quite know how we are going to pull it off - but we are a great country - somehow we will find a way - and how bad can it be? Lets just get on with it and leave and be damned with the naysayers and pessimists!

Critics say - madness - we must have a detailed plan. Remainers continue to argue the risks of Brexit are too great. Johnson has the ability to transcend that negativity and create optimism and a can do attitude. It is motivating. People are not stupid  - they know there will be bumps in the road - they know it will cost the UK but frankly they don't care. They want to be free - they want democracy to be upheld - and they believe Johnson might be the only one that can deliver it. The people also understand that the only way to be respected in negotiations with the EU is to say we are leaving regardless of a deal and mean it. The people understand the basic logic and commonsense of that position and are on Johnson's side and will back him. 

My final thought on Johnson relates to the way he handled the recent Andrew Neil interview. Neil tried to expose the validity of the accusation Johnson was not a master of his brief (for geeks reference to paragraph 5c). Neil succeeded. But what he also succeeded in demonstrating is it does not matter - in a way it would matter with a Hunt or a May. Johnson is the driver - he does not need to understand how the engine works. He rejects that type of political thinking and I think he will get away with it - in fact I would go further - it is the type of leadership we need now. Boris will never be embarrassed by an interviewer trying to catch him out over the price of a pint of milk! Churchill's great strength was we are going to fight back - we will never surrender - and people believed him. His coalition - his support team - came up with the detail in support. Johnson - we are a great country. We can do it. We should do it. We are leaving the EU - full stop!

Johnson could be the man of the hour. Johnson is probably the only chance now of making Brexit happen. However it would be ridiculous not to see the risks in his election. We hope he will knuckle down - but we also understand he is gaff prone and cavalier. Can he pull it off before he is run out of office - which he surely will be in the fullness of time? We will see - but I am glad he is going to get a chance because I am sure a full Brexit is right for our country - if for no other reason than to fulfill the democratic imperative.

#RogerFederer men's GOAT!

Yesterday was men's Wimbledon semi finals day. Federer beat Nadal and Djokovic won the other semi. I ended up watching most of both matches on the BBC and as a result listened to a lot of punditry - ha! (as if there is nothing more useful to do!)

Boris Becker at one point referred to Federer as one of the "goats". He then explained goat stood for "Greatest of all time"!

This is a classic topic for any sports fan in any sport. Who is the greatest of all time? Fangio, Senna or Hamilton? Marciano, Ali or Tyson?

Any discussion is a mix of subjectivity, objectivity, bias and of course your view will be tempered by your era - your experience - your exposure. No one can be right but of course but there can be consensus.

Becker and GOAT reference gnawed away. So here is my thought on the tennis "GOAT".

First of all I generally agree with the view that it is impossible - almost pointless trying to compare eras. How can you compare say Rod Laver of the 1960's using a wooden racket and cat gut - with Borg of the 70's, and later Connors and McEnroe and Lendl and Sampras. How can you compare them with the modern player who typically have an entourage of experts supporting them from dieticians to psychologists and tactical analysists?

Suffice to say they were all great players. Suffice to say at various times they dominated their era. Suffice to say they would have risen to the challenge of any era and have been a great player.

Another discussion point is criteria to consider and use. The most grand slam titles, Wimbledon wins especially, holding all major titles at the same time, the longevity of career - number of weeks ranked world number 1 - great matches - personality ????

Ok this short blog needs to be brought to the boil! My pick as the GOAT? ( I better say I claim to be no tennis expert - but I have an armchair based opinion supplemented by a lifetimes participation in amateur sport - ha!)

I cannot with all credibility argue the case for Andy Murray - but without doubt his journey and his Wimbledon wins are especially stand out for me. I have so much regard and respect for him. A true great.

I am going to focus on Federer, Nadal and Djokovic. I do so on the following basis. They are all three in the mix regardless of what criteria you use. They are all three undoubtedly truly great players that have been around for a longtime. I think the fact that the next generation have failed to knock them off their perch underlines there exceptional abilities. So my GOAT is one of these three.

Here is my summary.

Nadal. I cannot stand him but I recognise he has had a great career and deserves to be up for consideration. He has been and remains a fantastic competitor - an animal on court (and I mean that as a compliment). His record is exceptional - particularly at the French Open. However I cannot vote for someone who uses gamesmanship to the extent he does. His time wasting tactics and OCD machinations are blatant but he gets away with it through weight of personality.

Djokovic. The youngest of the three and possibly still plenty more to come. (He will probably beat Federer today in the 2019 Wimbledon final. (age difference the telling factor). Djokovic's titles record could ultimately accrue to be the largest. He is an exceptionally talented player and a fantastic competitor (as they all are) but what sets him apart is his incredible athleticism. He is generally regarded as the best serve returner in the business as a result. No one can do the splits like him and recover. His fitness is legendary.

Federer. Class! Federer's record stands up against anyone on any criteria basis. 8 Wimbledon singles titles (the blue riband event) says so much. He has it all - will to win - fitness - athletic ability of course. But what puts Federer into a different league - a status beyond the rest is the manner in which he plays. Federer is silky smooth. His ball striking appears effortless. His timing is supreme. No one else plays like him. There is no grunting and groaning - no histrionics - no rubber man contortions. He bounces the ball and serves (see Nadal!) He glides around the court. He is a supreme tactician. He makes such few unforced errors. Surely there has been no greater exponent of the game of tennis than Roger Federer. (and no one has won more titles yet!). He just exudes 'class' and for me that is the telling factor - the thing that sets him apart from the exceptional journeyman rest.

So Roger Federer is my Greatest of all time - my GOAT - ha!

#Greatesttennisplayerofalltime Men's GOAT?

Yesterday was men's Wimbledon semi finals day. Federer beat Nadal and Djokovic won the other semi. I ended up watching most of both matches on the BBC and as a result listened to a lot of punditry - ha! (as if there is nothing more useful to do!)

Boris Becker at one point referred to Federer as one of the "goats". He then explained goat stood for "Greatest of all time"!

This is a classic topic for any sports fan in any sport. Who is the greatest of all time? Fangio, Senna or Hamilton? Marciano, Ali or Tyson?

Any discussion is a mix of subjectivity, objectivity, bias and of course your view will be tempered by your era - your experience - your exposure. No one can be right but of course but there can be consensus.

Becker and GOAT reference gnawed away. So here is my thought on the tennis "GOAT".

First of all I generally agree with the view that it is impossible - almost pointless trying to compare eras. How can you compare say Rod Laver of the 1960's using a wooden racket and cat gut - with Borg of the 70's, and later Connors and McEnroe and Lendl and Sampras. How can you compare them with the modern player who typically have an entourage of experts supporting them from dieticians to psychologists and tactical analysists?

Suffice to say they were all great players. Suffice to say at various times they dominated their era. Suffice to say they would have risen to the challenge of any era and have been a great player.

Another discussion point is criteria to consider and use. The most grand slam titles, Wimbledon wins especially, holding all major titles at the same time, the longevity of career - number of weeks ranked world number 1 - great matches - personality ????

Ok this short blog needs to be brought to the boil! My pick as the GOAT? ( I better say I claim to be no tennis expert - but I have an armchair based opinion supplemented by a lifetimes participation in amateur sport - ha!)

I cannot with all credibility argue the case for Andy Murray - but without doubt his journey and his Wimbledon wins are especially stand out for me. I have so much regard and respect for him. A true great.

I am going to focus on Federer, Nadal and Djokovic. I do so on the following basis. They are all three in the mix regardless of what criteria you use. They are all three undoubtedly truly great players that have been around for a longtime. I think the fact that the next generation have failed to knock them off their perch underlines there exceptional abilities. So my GOAT is one of these three.

Here is my summary.

Nadal. I cannot stand him but I recognise he has had a great career and deserves to be up for consideration. He has been and remains a fantastic competitor - an animal on court (and I mean that as a compliment). His record is exceptional - particularly at the French Open. However I cannot vote for someone who uses gamesmanship to the extent he does. His time wasting tactics and OCD machinations are blatant but he gets away with it through weight of personality.

Djokovic. The youngest of the three and possibly still plenty more to come. (He will probably beat Federer today in the 2019 Wimbledon final. (age difference the telling factor). Djokovic's titles record could ultimately accrue to be the largest. He is an exceptionally talented player and a fantastic competitor (as they all are) but what sets him apart is his incredible athleticism. He is generally regarded as the best serve returner in the business as a result. No one can do the splits like him and recover. His fitness is legendary.

Federer. Class! Federer's record stands up against anyone on any criteria basis. 8 Wimbledon singles titles (the blue riband event) says so much. He has it all - will to win - fitness - athletic ability of course. But what puts Federer into a different league - a status beyond the rest is the manner in which he plays. Federer is silky smooth. His ball striking appears effortless. His timing is supreme. No one else plays like him. There is no grunting and groaning - no histrionics - no rubber man contortions. He bounces the ball and serves (see Nadal!) He glides around the court. He is a supreme tactician. He makes such few unforced errors. Surely there has been no greater exponent of the game of tennis than Roger Federer. (and no one has won more titles yet!). He just exudes 'class' and for me that is the telling factor - the thing that sets him apart from the exceptional journeyman rest.

So Roger Federer is my Greatest of all time - my GOAT - ha!

#Glastonbury2019 How it was for me.

The Glastonbury Festival for 2019 was a long time coming and now it is over for another year. I am just back from 5 nights at Glasto in tents with 6 mates. I feel drained and ? - elated ? As ever Glastonbury was uniquely special - so laid back - but so intense - a simple - but complex emotional amazing rollercoaster ride. I remain in awe - so chuffed and so privileged to have been part of it. Am I being over the top - maybe but it is how it has felt - feels right now sat at my desk - ha!

This is an account of my Glasto because everyone's Glasto experience will be different - personal to them - who they saw - what they did - what worked for them - what didn't. Glastonbury is so large - so diverse - so original - you are taken on a unique journey even if you start and finish each day in the same place. Just on that even within our small group there are sizeable differences. Kev ( Bob Harris) and Rich have been going to Glasto for years. Kev loves finding new bands - niche bands and covers a lot of ground. He is hard core. Kev has come up with some great recommendations of bands to have a look at. Rich and Rog are perhaps more traditionalists. Rich particularly seems to prefer smaller scale older performers who have a memorable back catalogue. Geoff, Steve and Mike go where the mood takes them. Steve particularly likes to be down the front. That is a tough gig but has its rewards of course. I am into big  stadium rock and roll - 3 guitars and drums do it for me. I have an aversion for one man and a banjo - ha!. I also love the dance stuff. It takes all sorts of course and Glasto offers it all.

Just before I talk about the music I want to mention a couple of other things.

Firstly the guys I go with. Several have been mates for years - back to school days. It would be worth going to Glasto just to be with them - even if there wasn't any music. It is impossible for me to describe how priceless it is to exist with them in tents for 5 days. The humour, the self mocking, the mickey taking, the banter, the people watching, the situational stuff, the history, the laughs that were commonplace made being there just fantastic. Just a few for posterity - what goes on in Rich's tent - Rommel, Roger's shoes - (Rog cracks me up when he starts ripping into me - usually about my clothes - farmers friend or eat - fish!), Kev (Bob Harris) and bargain hunt (Steptoe), Mike and the height tax and his navigation skills, Geoff and the folding camp bed, filling the kettle and the boy band, Steve and the spectacle of his portable shower - Mike on his knees, Hari Krishna and the comb. Just fantastic. How much a belly laugh - we certainly had our monies worth!

The second comment is the way Michael and Emily Eavis run Glastonbury. They have a wonderful ethos. They are not commercial megalomaniacs or high handed dictators. For instance - unlike many festivals you can bring your own booze and food and consume it wherever you want. It is brilliant how they have prevented ticket resale and touting. Of course tickets are hard to come by because of demand but allocation is fair - everybody has an equal chance at an equal price. This year there was a focus on use of plastic. They made a decision to stop the sale of single us plastic bottles on site - a positive step forward. But they were not draconian. There was still a lot of waste at Glasto - still a lot of gear left at the end - too much - but a seed has been sown and I am sure they will gradually take people with their gentle lead and the festival will be the better for it. So much better that way. They treat festival goers with respect and there is an overwhelming Glasto way of tolerance and reasonableness. They are such good people.

The final point - watching Glasto on the TV. I watched a bit when I got home - a great perspective. But I have to say it is nothing like being there. First of all the big stage view is rarely that clear. TV pictures sanitise and emphasis becomes perhaps more on the visual than the music. In the real it is the opposite. The sound is different. The biggest difference of course is being in the audience rather than looking at pictures of the vast crowds. It is totally something else. Sometimes the crowd can be a nuisance but mainly it is just incredible to be there all revelling in the music - singing and dancing (moving!) and interacting along together. It is just outstanding when it jells - and it so often does. Now and again you get an overwhelming feeling of wow - I am here - can this be real - a feeling of good fortune and privilege. It brings tears to your eyes - and having discussed it with the lads I know I am not unique in feeling this. It is so special.

OK the music - who did I see?

We arrived early Wednesday afternoon in the sun. We set up camp in our usual field - and had a chilled beer or two before heading out for a walk around early evening. Rich had a plan and we ended up - I am not sure where - but we were in a bar with a good stage. We are right at the front - low key - and The New York Brass Band come on. (they are from Yorkshire - no doubt from the great tradition of colliery bands.) What a set. It was really tremendous - brilliant interaction with the audience. They were there for fun - didn't take anything too seriously. The bandleader introduced his daughter on vocals and she put down her trumpet. They really set the standard for the rest of the week. See them if you can. I came away thinking that was pure Glasto - unexpected gold.

Thursday still not an official day (no main stage acts) we are in the Greenpeace Park for "Beans on Toast. One guy with a guitar. There is a big crowd. He is a poet - lyrics are clear. He is of the left. He has a sense of humour. His message was direct and gritty and well observed. His politics are not mine but I respect him - he seems authentic. Having said that I had my fill and he won't be on my list to see again - ha!.

Later we end up in Strummerville to see amongst others Frank Turner doing a solo acoustic set. Frank came with a big billing. Kev, Rich and Rog really rate him. I want to be kind to my mates! I thought he was pretentious. Where Beans on Toast was authentic I read Frank as not. (Eton and LSE educated - investment banking - titled family). He even went on about how he was just back from Africa  (Sierra Leone) where he had been feeding starving babies. Kev says I have him totally wrong - he is a man of the people. I might well have - but actually I found him deeply irritating and I couldn't get out of there quick enough - ha ha! Each to his own - sorry boys!

Finally we get back to Avalon Fields to see Keston Cobblers Club again. Rog loves them. They are a small status high energy folk band. Great fun. There was a wonderful little cameo. For one of the songs Jules? the lovely sister of the main brother/sister duo says there will be a dance competition for the next number with a prize. She chooses a couple out of the audience as winners (the man was on the shoulders of the lady!) and invite them on the stage. The lady is presented with a box and asked to open it and read out what it says to the audience. You guessed it! It says will you marry me? It was so lovely - such a genuine surprise and so well done. The bride to be was speechless. The young guy who was quite shy was beaming when she said yes. It was joyous - a tear in everyone's eye. We felt compelled to kiss the bride to be and shake the betrotheds hand. Brilliant. Rog later arranged for a photo with us and Jules. A great laugh xxxx

And then Friday. Glasto starts proper. Gently fuelled with cider (we took 80 litres of the real stuff) we head to The Other Stage for the opening big stage act. The Vaccines. Great start - lots of jumping around - a big crowd in the sun. Later we watch the Wombats - I really liked their first album. Understandably perhaps they want to show case more of their newer stuff. It fell a bit flat for me but I enjoyed it.

To the Pyramid stage for Bastille. Huge crowd. They deliver. Great. We then split. Amazingly - ha -  Kev, Rich and Rog off to see Frank Turner and his band after Sheryl Crowe! Say no more. It is very hot.

Friday is a big day for me. I am going to see one of my long time fav bands live for the first time. Interpol. I get to John Peel early and find some shade - drink some cider and listen first to Aurora. I describe her as ethereal - a Norwegian Kate Bush - but without the power. She is sweet. Then Pale Waves. I didn't know them. Their first time at Glasto. Their lead vocalist and guitarist is a feisty rock and roll young lady with attitude. Really enjoyed them. A proper band. They will make it big I think. And then Interpol. Everything I hoped for and expected. They are a real class NY Indie band. A fantastic set. I cannot understand why they are not Pyramid headliners - but then what do I know - ha ha!

Saturday - brilliant weather to get very hot. We head for Pyramid for the Proclaimers. Everyone knows their songs.(I'm gonna be (500 miles). A great way to start. People watching around the Mandela bar a bonus. Amazing what the ladies don't wear when its hot - lol! ( for once we have a half serious discussion. For instance we were dining at Hari Krishna (nothing to do with the free nosh - ha!) In the queue is a young woman with a startling figure and all she had on top was a couple of small heart shapes stuck to her nipples. Now here is the question - should we be seen looking or not - ha !? The consensus was yes - but I feel uneasy. I am not a voyeur and I am sure she was not trying to get the attention of blokes of our age - ha!)

After the Proclaimers Kev mentions Gerry Cinammon. I make a case to see him too because he is on at The John Peel stage and it will be "quieter and cooler up there". We head up the hill. It is jam packed! He obviously has a massive following. We stood in the sun - enjoyed most of his set - before wilting.

Clashfinder is tricky this Saturday. Eventually we take up residence in The Pyramid. Anne Marie and then Hozier - neither my bag. Then the controversial Janet Jackson. A big production - mass dancers, backing singers etc. JJ constantly had wind blowing through her hair (for effect!). There was an antipathy to her. It wasn't storming although it was high energy. It seemed a bit synthetic - over staged - a poor man's Michael and of course there is a negativity towards MJ now to say the least. Mixed feelings.

I am in the midst of a dilemma. Killers are headlining. I know it will be great but I have seen them 3 times before. I really want to see the Courteeners - I have missed them before. There is a clash. I head for The Other Stage. I watch Sigrid. She is an engaging young woman. I like her. Then Courteeners. They are what I really like - 3 guitars and a drummer. The place rocks - and I really get into it. Brilliant. Good decision. Now what to do? The closer is Chemical Brothers. The lead from  Courteeners said a must watch - they will change your life! I know it would be amazing but it has been a long hot day. I head back to Avalon to meet up with my mates. Hobo Jones and then Just Two Mother's 80's disco. It doesn't quite happen. Rog and I head back for a 1 am early night!

And then it is Sunday - the final day. It is going to be a good one. It is a day to take up residence for The Pyramid stage. Some of the lads take chairs.

On the way over Kev and I stop off at The Other stage to see Slaves. What a great decision - right up there as a highlight of this years Glasto for me. The 2 guys give it everything - the energy is fantastic. It is real - it is raw - it is talented. Towards the end of the set they played a slow tender number. We were blown away. It was so unexpected - so poignant. Kev and I and the audience all reacted the same. We were stunned. We had tears in our eyes. I don't know how they did it. I said to Kev I am going to give you a hug mate. We laughed about it but bloody hell - it was brilliant to watch them.

We get over to The Pyramid. The atmosphere is that lovely Sunday buzz. Everyone there is there for the right reasons - to enjoy being at Glasto. It feels wonderful to be there.

Years and Years are on. They were perfect in the sun. The lead guy makes a speech from the heart about being gay. It was moving. Everyone applauds.

David Attenborough makes an impromptu speech about global warming and the state of the planet. It was understated. The crowd are riveted and full of respect in a way they are not for some of the shouty campaigners given a voice at Glastonbury. What an amazing life he has led.

And then it is Kylie in the veterans slot. Ok for some hardcore Glasto supporters Kylie is not cool. But Kylie is fun - and she has never done anyone any harm. She was perfect for the occasion. Like the vast majority we loved her set. She went down a bomb. We were "spinning around". Well done Emily. Well done Kylie. Great stuff.

Miley Cyrus and Vampire Weekend passed me by a bit. I was chatting, dozing and taking on the cider maybe - but I have good thoughts from being there.

Then the big one for me. I really rate The Cure but had never seen them live. I love their music. It was a 2 hour set as the closing headliners. I shall love them for ever. It was fantastic. I was totally into it for two hours often with eyes closed just taking in the music. What a place to be - what an emotional privilege.

But alas and inevitably Glasto comes to an end for another year - or at least the music does. It has been amazing.

There is talk of next year already - the 50th Glastonbury anniversary. We all really want to go. It will be amazing if we can get tickets again. If it doesn't happen it will be a real shame - but I have my memories of three and for that I will always be extremely grateful. Thank you again Kev and Rich for making it happen for us. xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

A few snaps but mainly it is seared in the memory bank.

Hari Krishna bistro and the comb

Early days setting up camp

Interpol in John Peel. Fantastic.

Where is Rog?

Keston Cobblers Club and the proposal at the Avalon Café Stage

New York Brass Band (from Yorkshire)