Paul McGuiness

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

Paul McGuiness is:

  • great for U2 and us on the forum

    Votes: 23 41.1%
  • the man we should thank for why AB was recorded

    Votes: 10 17.9%
  • the best manager ever

    Votes: 21 37.5%
  • the man who dosnt care for the money, music first

    Votes: 2 3.6%

  • Total voters
    56
How was he responsible for Achtung Baby being recorded? Did the band not want to release music from the sessions? Please elaborate.

Also, Paul is a dick, though I do dislike illegal file sharing if one loves the music but has no intent to buy, especially for unpopular bands.
 
Damn you McGuinness for wanting to make money for you and your clients, damn you to hell! :madwife:

:rolleyes:

The amount of McGuinness bashing that goes on on this site is beyond ridiculous.
 
Great for U2 and for us. Cause if didn't managed U2 all these years probably there would be no band for us to talk about right now. :up:
 
i met him once in Atlanta, he was a nice enough guy to put up with my drunken ass for a bit. I'd day his track record for success is pretty good, so on that note i would have to say he is great for U2.
 
As much as I teasingly make fun of his... he's a great manager for U2, and I have nothing against him.
 
I didn't like the way he criticized Radiohead's approach. It's like he felt threatened or something, and he rushed to call it a failure, when actually Radiohead said the results were much better than some company report said and which everyone publicized.

I don't like how greedy U2 has gotten (u2.com, little on deluxe DVDs, highly priced tickets, etc) and he's at least partly to blame for that.
 
I didn't like the way he criticized Radiohead's approach. It's like he felt threatened or something, and he rushed to call it a failure, when actually Radiohead said the results were much better than some company report said and which everyone publicized.

I don't like how greedy U2 has gotten (u2.com, little on deluxe DVDs, highly priced tickets, etc) and he's at least partly to blame for that.
I thought he would have loved the Radiohead approach

first get people who are gonna d/l anyway - the fans - to give you some money
get a lot of free publicity
and then make them buy the album in an overprized release later on

as a way to attack illegal downloading Radiohead's approach of course didn't solve anything though


McGuinness of course has his faults like all of us
but mostly he just looks after the band's interest
as is his job
 
Damn you McGuinness for wanting to make money for you and your clients, damn you to hell! :madwife:

:rolleyes:

The amount of McGuinness bashing that goes on on this site is beyond ridiculous.

I know some bands that would love to have had a manager that made them money instead of screwing them over.
 
I thought he would have loved the Radiohead approach

first get people who are gonna d/l anyway - the fans - to give you some money
get a lot of free publicity
and then make them buy the album in an overprized release later on

as a way to attack illegal downloading Radiohead's approach of course didn't solve anything though


McGuinness of course has his faults like all of us
but mostly he just looks after the band's interest
as is his job

qft.
 
monopoly.jpg
 
I didn't like the way he criticized Radiohead's approach. It's like he felt threatened or something, and he rushed to call it a failure, when actually Radiohead said the results were much better than some company report said and which everyone publicized.

I don't like how greedy U2 has gotten (u2.com, little on deluxe DVDs, highly priced tickets, etc) and he's at least partly to blame for that.

So, you're complaining that in assessing Radiohead's sales numbers, McGuinness used a set of numbers that you say right in your post were the ones publicized, and everyone else used as well (so, not just him). Oookay.

I'll give you that U2.com provides little value for the money, but you know what I did about that? I chose not to subscribe to the site! It's a novel idea, I know! Obviously others disagree, and they're quite willing to spend money on it. That's their prerogative.

U2 is currently the biggest band out there, and have been for years. Acts of that caliber and fame charge a LOT more for tickets than U2 do, that's an undisputed fact. And, in their most recent tour, how many shows did they play? Around 200? And what happened in all those cities? That's right, they sold out. Every seat. Usually in minutes. So are they charging too much for tickets? Maybe more than you'd like to pay, but millions of other people are quite willing to pay it. They're obviously charging what the market will bear, and I suspect they may even be charging a little under that.

Not enough bonus material on DVDs? Dude. Then don't buy the bonus versions. Again, a lot of people do buy them, so if you disagree, then exercise your right as a consumer, and leave them on the shelf.

Your arguments are just petty and sound like they're coming from a spoiled, entitled "fan" who would bitch about anything, and from what I've seen around the forum, does. Yeah, McGuinness is the root of all evil in the world, burn him at the stake.


I know some bands that would love to have had a manager that made them money instead of screwing them over.

Exactly.
 
I know some bands that would love to have had a manager that made them money instead of screwing them over.
You know the "ethical" manager is really a recent invention. How many bands from the 60s, 70s and 80s got screwed as the norm? Brian Epstein wasn't all that, was he?
 
Back
Top Bottom