Definitely maybe.

I always preferred Blur anyway.

No

I think there's a large fanbase because of the intersection of people who grew up with them and the people who were too young to see them live but wished that they could, so yes, people probably do care to an extent, but it's more accurate that people will be interested to hear it so they can try and get tickets

I can't really think of a band that reasonably could get back together which would have a larger pull except for maybe One Direction, but even that's a push when considering the number of people who could be interested in getting tickets

It's clear to me that someone thinks it's important enough to repeatedly include it in my news feed regardless of how I feel about it.

Nope

My wife is well excited about being able to see them live. She’ll pay whatever they want.

Not a jot.

Meh. I remember the late 90s living in Nottingham and suddenly 50% of young men had monobrows.

Personally, I'd pay good money to see Pink Floyd (not Syd, obviously, but the later line-up), or Marillion's original line-up. If we could gently and ethically bring Neil Peart back from beyond the grave, then Rush.

Never liked the music to be honest. They were at a Reading festival I went to one year, and I thought I would try to see what all the fuss was about. I walked away after two songs. Just not for me.

I never care about reunions, I'd rather go listen to a cover band of enthusiast.

Who?

No, not the Who, Oasis...

the only Oasis song I know is the one people play to be deliberately annoying. I'd much rather be rickrolled

anyway, here's

I would have...but not at those prices. Dynamic pricing is an utter scam, and it is utter madness that artists will charge the amounts they're charging.

They should have probably arranged a residency somewhere, and just done a full week at different stadiums around the world.