Miami New Times: Millenials Don't Give a Shit About U2

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Yet, I can assure you there will be several of these JT shows that will not come close to equaling the sales levels seen on 360, a tour for a NEW album No Line On The Horizon. How this years Pittsburgh show compares with the 360 show there in terms of attendance will be interesting. The 360 show had 56,000. This years Pittsburgh show for JT may not get to 40,000.
Well no shit, sting. 360 had 20 to 30k more seats available per show.

That's some splendid deductive reasoning on your part
 
The level they should? Sorry, I don't think they should be touring an old album with a full blown world tour.

If this was happening back around The Bomb you'd be against it. Just because you don't care for their more recent material doesn't make it any less of a priority for an act that still wants to feel vital.



I could t agree more with this statement. There is still a very large appetite for "new U2" music contrary to what people may think.
 
Yet, I can assure you there will be several of these JT shows that will not come close to equaling the sales levels seen on 360, a tour for a NEW album No Line On The Horizon. How this years Pittsburgh show compares with the 360 show there in terms of attendance will be interesting. The 360 show had 56,000. This years Pittsburgh show for JT may not get to 40,000.



JT Pittsburgh hit 41k in attendance
 
Bruce ?

Firstly, he's about 15 years older .

67 (Bruce) - 57 (Bono) = 15.

36113588.jpg
 
The only reason Springsteen would skew higher is the earlier start of his active career - inevitably there will be people there from day one and what are we even discussing?

That's a good assumption, but it could also be because Springsteen has not had mainstream selling success in the way U2 has since the 1980s, at least in the United States. Oh, and were discussing Millinnials and their like or dislike of U2, music etc, as that was how this thread started with the news article.

I'll just go tell my partner that we won't be attending any U2 shows here as we're Millennials and don't belong.

Who ever stated that Millennials should not attend a U2 concert because "they don't belong"?
 
I think it's more that people (not just millennials) don't hate Springsteen, because he doesn't do stupid shit like put an album no one asked for on everyone's phone, he just tours regularly and plays great shows with a minimum of fuss. U2 can't/won't do that.

Actually its more that few people have been able to hear much of Springsteen's new music, because it gets little airplay. When your popularity declines, so does the number of people who express negative opinions or hatred toward you. Springsteen has not had any heavy mainstream success like U2 since the 1980s. People don't hate what they don't know about. So in a sense, the relative obscurity of Springsteens new music prevents or lowers the any levels of animosity.


Disingenuous. It was really only for NLOTH in 2009. By 2010 and 2011 it had absolutely nothing to do with NLOTH, which shows you that not only do they spend way too long overthinking releases, they go cold on them in an instant. 360 also had way more seats available.

Absolutely nothing to do with NLOTH? Thats false, plus remember that the overwhelming majority of people purchased their tickets at the end of 2009 for the shows that were played in 2010 and 2011 and their reasons for purchasing those tickets were based on the 2009 shows and the ROSE BOWL DVD release.
 
That's a good assumption, but it could also be because Springsteen has not had mainstream selling success in the way U2 has since the 1980s, at least in the United States.

Right, like in 2000/2002 for example:

All That You Can't Leave Behind debuted at number three on the Billboard 200 chart in the US, selling 427,826 copies in its first week

Upon its release, The Rising was a critical and commercial success, and hailed as the triumphant return for Springsteen. It debuted at #1 on the Billboard 200 chart, with first-week sales of over 520,000 copies.
 
Well no shit, sting. 360 had 20 to 30k more seats available per show.

That's some splendid deductive reasoning on your part

Well Mr. Donald Trump, consider this, the 360 show in Pittsburgh did not use all the seats that could be used for an in the round concert. So it doesn't matter that more were available.

Consider Taylor Swifts show at Heinz Field in Pittsburgh on July 6, 2013. Taylor Swift of course does not do in the round 360 shows in stadiums. The configuration set up is 270, just like it was for U2's JT show a few days ago there.

The results

July 6, 2013 Taylor Swift Red Tour show at Heinz Field
Attendance: 56,047

July 26, 2011 U2 360 show at Heinz Field
Attendance: 55, 823

June 7, 2017 U2 JT 2017 show at Heinz Field
Attendance: 41,413

You see Donald, there was plenty of seats available even in the configuration U2 were set up in a few days ago for them to potentially sell even more tickets than for their 360 show. Taylor Swift outsold the 360 show even though she did not use any seats behind the stage.

So, it is odd to see that a show promoting No Line On The Horizon outsold a nostalgia show for the Joshua Tree album by nearly 14,000 tickets!
 
Last edited:
Right, like in 2000/2002 for example:

Lost of people have good first week sales. There were no top 40 hits for the Rising and it barley got to 2 million in sales in the United States. All That You Can't Leave Behind sold over 4.5 million copies, had a top 20 hit as well as another HOT 100 hit, plus one 7 Grammy awards.

Everyone expected the Rising to go Platinum as his old fanbase was large enough to insure that would happen. The question was could it do anything beyond that unlike much of his other music did. He did a little not much though. Added another million. But in many respects that's no different that the Stones releases in the 1990s that were not really seen has mainstream hits.
 
Right, like in 2000/2002 for example:



You can't just pick first week sales in the US and conclude that The Rising was just as or more successful than ATYCLB.

The Rising sold about 2 million copies and ATYCLB sold 4 million, that's huge difference and just in the US mind you.

With that said, I would consider The Rising a success with selling 2 million copies in the US.
 
You can't just pick first week sales in the US and conclude that The Rising was just as or more successful than ATYCLB.

The Rising sold about 2 million copies and ATYCLB sold 4 million, that's huge difference and just in the US mind you.

With that said, I would consider The Rising a success with selling 2 million copies in the US.

Well Sting was speaking specifically about the US.
 
The Rising by Springsteen shipped 2 million. Its actual sales at the end of 2002 stood at 1,764,000. It remained on chart for another 14 weeks in 2003 although primarily in the bottom half of the chart below #100. So I don't actually know if it did get to 2 million in soundscan sales even though it had already shipped 2 million as certified by RIAA.

Still, Zooropa at 2 million was considered a failure, while POP at 1.5 million was savaged by everyone for selling that figure. So I'm not really sure the Rising could be said to be a success when compared to his albums from the 70s and 80s.
 
This JT tour is a bit of a novelty that exists simply to (other than the obvious $$$$) re-engage a largely disinterested general fan population by getting lots of nostalgia seekers into the seats. As someone who has been a pretty strong fan since about 1986, I was very 'meh' about this tour and only went to Seattle because it was in my town, I was not traveling for business and I was able to score GA at the last minute for $70 from TM directly.

The show itself was OK but far from spectacular. Disappointing in fact in many regards.

And when I look at much of the YouTube footage I really do have to admit that if they keep this going, my interest as a fan will drop off a cliff; admittedly it already has for many of the same reasons people have been posting about (album delays, relevance, PR stunts etc).

This is the first time I have gone to a U2 show and really since then have not given a shit about the rest of the tour. I did check out some footage as mentioned, and I was aghast at how the Streets intro for example came across so ham-fisted with the 4 of them standing in that strange formation that seemed to signal triumph or something. What the hell was that.

What I have always loved about U2 as a live act is missing this tour. Feels like there is something lacking.... the spirit of new music, new adventures, moving forward.... challenging preconceptions, creative boundaries etc. The visuals are sometimes brilliant but that's it. The rest seems devoid of the usual energy and spirit. At least that was my experience and it shows up, to me, in the video I have seen.
 
Last edited:
you guys are overestimating the popularity of Bruce amongst my age group, I'm pretty sure they don't give a damn about Bruce.
 
None of this is about popularity. No old act is "popular."

Some old act age with grace and respect, some age as a joke because they can't figure out that they're old.

U2 is in danger of being the joke. The JT tour is a good start in reversing that, and a SOE release that isn't sad and pandering will go further.
 
This JT tour is a bit of a novelty that exists simply to (other than the obvious $$$$) re-engage a largely disinterested general fan population by getting lots of nostalgia seekers into the seats. As someone who has been a pretty strong fan since about 1986, I was very 'meh' about this tour and only went to Seattle because it was in my town, I was not traveling for business and I was able to score GA at the last minute for $70 from TM directly.

The show itself was OK but far from spectacular. Disappointing in fact in many regards.

And when I look at much of the YouTube footage I really do have to admit that if they keep this going, my interest as a fan will drop off a cliff; admittedly it already has for many of the same reasons people have been posting about (album delays, relevance, PR stunts etc).

This is the first time I have gone to a U2 show and really since then have not given a shit about the rest of the tour. I did check out some footage as mentioned, and I was aghast at how the Streets intro for example came across so ham-fisted with the 4 of them standing in that strange formation that seemed to signal triumph or something. What the hell was that.

What I have always loved about U2 as a live act is missing this tour. Feels like there is something lacking.... the spirit of new music, new adventures, moving forward.... challenging preconceptions, creative boundaries etc. The visuals are sometimes brilliant but that's it. The rest seems devoid of the usual energy and spirit. At least that was my experience and it shows up, to me, in the video I have seen.



Nice story, any millennials around you to make this relevant?
 
This JT tour is a bit of a novelty that exists simply to (other than the obvious $$$$) re-engage a largely disinterested general fan population by getting lots of nostalgia seekers into the seats. As someone who has been a pretty strong fan since about 1986, I was very 'meh' about this tour and only went to Seattle because it was in my town, I was not traveling for business and I was able to score GA at the last minute for $70 from TM directly.

The show itself was OK but far from spectacular. Disappointing in fact in many regards.

And when I look at much of the YouTube footage I really do have to admit that if they keep this going, my interest as a fan will drop off a cliff; admittedly it already has for many of the same reasons people have been posting about (album delays, relevance, PR stunts etc).

This is the first time I have gone to a U2 show and really since then have not given a shit about the rest of the tour. I did check out some footage as mentioned, and I was aghast at how the Streets intro for example came across so ham-fisted with the 4 of them standing in that strange formation that seemed to signal triumph or something. What the hell was that.

What I have always loved about U2 as a live act is missing this tour. Feels like there is something lacking.... the spirit of new music, new adventures, moving forward.... challenging preconceptions, creative boundaries etc. The visuals are sometimes brilliant but that's it. The rest seems devoid of the usual energy and spirit. At least that was my experience and it shows up, to me, in the video I have seen.

I'm looking forward to the shows I'm going to see. While I wish they had kept this tour short as I would prefer not to wait even longer for the next album and tour, this is something U2 has NEVER done before which makes it very exciting.

I've seen U2 19 times starting in 1992. But in all those shows, I have never seen any of side 2 of Joshua Tree played live:

Red Hill Mining Town
In God's Country
Trip Through Your Wires
One Tree Hill
Exit
Mother's Of The Disappeared

After seeing U2 19 times, this will be the first time I have ever been at a concert where U2 performed these songs live. That alone is exciting and makes it more than worth it.

I also love the new boxset. I listen to the remix CD every day. The Remix's are incredible. I also love Edge's book of photographs. One day I have to get out to the California Desert that straddles the Nevada border where they took all these photos and that inspired much of the music on the album.
 
None of this is about popularity. No old act is "popular."

Some old act age with grace and respect, some age as a joke because they can't figure out that they're old.

U2 is in danger of being the joke. The JT tour is a good start in reversing that, and a SOE release that isn't sad and pandering will go further.

That is not necessarily true. U2 were mega popular in the 00s . Although I suppose one might not have defined them as "old" in the 2000-2010 period. It is more difficult to be popular when one is old in an industry that favors youth, but its not impossible. The fact is, whether young or old, its a business and being popular, selling your product to the widest number of people is and will always be a goal or objective of every artist.

U2 still operate the same way they did on the first album and tour, and that is NEVER going to change, nor should it.

The only thing stupid or sad is people who feel, because they have reached a certain age, feel as though they should change who they are. That is pathetic. You never have to stop being who you are because of age or a number. Behaving like that is so fake and in many ways childish. Sure, you expect that behavior among High School students, but to see that mentality continue into adulthood is sad. Its your life, you get to live it the way you want to. Be yourself, no matter what they say.
 
Back
Top Bottom