U2's Bono to become the world's richest musician tomorrow - NME.com

[U2girl]

Again, the Mary J. Blige thing (I know very little about it -- Bono could be her god-parent for all I know) is just one of several random things that turn me off. It's not my main bone of contention.

How long they knew Johnny Cash and whether Bono smoked a joint with him or not is not really an issue either (though it's well-documented that Adam and Bono dinnered with him in 1987/88, and the recording of 'The Wanderer' is documented in U2 At The End of The World; Cash himself stated that he had no idea they were going to put that track on the album). (Incidentally, I also think that issuing the B.B. King song as a single was sort-of in bad taste, though at least it gave B.B. a chart hit.)

What I do have issues with is how U2 market themselves in the 2000s. I find it often to be overkill and in bad taste.

Examples:

- Appearing at the Super Bowl as flag-waving, reactionary American heroes, and the 2009 Grammies (for example, why did they appear at the 2009 Grammies? They didn't have a record out yet, and there was no great demand for them. They appeared in order to flog "Get On Your Boots" to a disinterested mainstream audience.)

- Corporate sponsorship/advertising/whatever with iPod

- Five nights hosting the Letterman Late Night show. I love the Letterman show, but U2 are not funny in American terms, and their appearance on here was just awful. Not to mention they appeared to be hogging the limelight and over-selling themselves.

- The over-issuing / over-marketing of catalogue material. They used to have quality control over official releases. It took 19 years of recording before they issued a single Greatest Hits. Now, they've released another hits collection; countless over-inflated, bloated reissues; countless DVDs, etc. I personally think it's better to go away for a while and then come back and feel fresh to your fans. Nowadays, it's 6 years between albums and I find I'm already sick of them when they come back (and I do think over-exposure hurt the response to NLOTH).


So, these are a few examples of a few things I dislike much more than I dislike the Mary J. Blige record, which was nevertheless a travesty.

You're still not making any sense.

Mary J Blige is an artist with enough credibility. It came out because the U2 audience liked the song ! Only later did they actually record the song. And it wasn't
"a highly marketed single", far less than usual U2 singles, and it was actually a single off Mary's album, not U2's...

There is no debating of credibility of Cash and BB, either. And in the position of being the biggest band, in 1987 with playing with BB, in 1993 with Cash, and in 2006 with Blige, there is no selling out anymore. Was it selling out when Bono met Orbison, Sinatra, Reed, Dylan... ?

- just like playing right after 9/11 with the same US flag outfit, and well before that ? And 2009 Grammys promoted Boots. There's a funny corelation between artists attending big industry award events and promoting their new material.

- Whatever indeed. No money was made. The definition of a sell out, no doubt.

- Same hogging comments were heard when U2 went on the mini promo tours before ATYCLB/HTDAAB release. Again, it's called promotion.

- Most ageing artists are using the new technology abilities to offer fans better sounding material (with new additions). And I think most bands with career spanning over 30 years have probably more than 3 of Best of's.

 

[Galeongirl]

It came out because U2 wanted to bring it out. Their fans have shit to do with it.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

IS BONO OKAY????

I can't believe it took 8 hours for someone to ask this.

We're slipping, people!

how come the original poster of the "is bono okay???" comment only pops her head up to complain about it when i post it

 

[financeguy]

firstly, super bowl is two words.

second... "the highest-possible ratings to the lowest common denominator audience?"

why thank you. i'm honored that you think so highly of me.

a massive world-wide sporting event is marketed towards the lowest common denominator audience? really? so is your snobbery based simply on american football, or sports in general? if u2 had played the Olympics, or the UEFA Champions League final, would that have been different for you? or are all sports verboten to your delicate sensibilities?

yes, the super bowl is one of the most corporate events in the world. if that is your lone beef, then yes, you have a point there. if u2 were to avoid all things that have become corporate shills, then they'd have to avoid the grammys, the oscars, any and all television shows, live nation and most major stadiums and arenas.next.

Outside of America, no-one cares about the Superbowl. It's not like the Oscars where everyone watches it because Hollywood is the global centre of film. I honestly didn't even realise U2 had played at it when I read it on here, around the time I first joined this forum (2004). From U2's point of view, yes it probably made sense to help them win back the element of the US audience that seemingly they lost during Popmart.

 

[gvox]

It came out because U2 wanted to bring it out. Their fans have shit to do with it.

I doubt the decision to allow her to cover one of their most revered songs, ever, was taken lightly...I'd put money on the reaction of U2 fans at the shows they did it at factoring in, if ever so slightly.

I mean, we're talking about the holy grail of U2 songs here. They probably felt based on what they saw on tour, that it would be well-received. And for the most part, they were absolutely right.

 

[Rachel D.]

I don't even...

This video is wrong in so many ways, I don't even know where to start. Don't watch unless you're in the mood for eleven minutes of pure crazy. He mentions Bono's Facebook involvement and other things.

Bono's Secret: Frontman for Genocide - YouTube

Bono is a genocidal maniac. Who knew?

 

[BVS]

Alex Jones has made millions creating stories for conspiracy theorists. He knows there's an audience out there, so he gives them what they want. I don't think he believes half the shit he says.

 

[corianderstem]

Bono is a genocidal maniac. Who knew?

I did.

I wasn't going to say anything, though. It just felt awkward to bring it up.

 

[financeguy]

Alex Jones has made millions creating stories for conspiracy theorists. He knows there's an audience out there, so he gives them what they want. I don't think he believes half the shit he says.

No, you're wrong, he is not creating stories - groups like Bilderberg exist, they are real. It is only because of campaigners like Alex Jones that the mainstream media have finally been forced to pay some attention to them.

Bono may not personally be involved in genocide - on that score, Jones might be engaging in some hyperbole - but he is certainly closely allied to groups like Bilderberg and their close counterparts in the Davos group. The fact that Bonobot fan(atic)s like yourself refuse to acknowledge this, doesn't make it less true

 

[BVS]

No, you're wrong, he is not creating stories - groups like Bilderberg exist, they are real. It is only because of campaigners like Alex Jones that the mainstream media have finally been forced to pay some attention to them.

Bono may not personally be involved in genocide - on that score, Jones might be engaging in some hyperbole - but he is certainly closely allied to groups like Bilderberg and their close counterparts in the Davos group. The fact that Bonobot fan(atic)s like yourself refuse to acknowledge this, doesn't make it less true

The man rose to fame lying about Y2k. He created a hype leading up to it and then did a broadcast on New Years Eve to all the fearful. He broadcasted for three hours, those three hours were filled with stories "from the AP", "this just in from CBS", "I just got confirmed word" of nuclear plants melting down, planes falling, city's grids crashing. All of them complete lies, made up, every single source was a complete lie. It's well documented.

The rest of his career has been the same thing. Today he can't make up stories like that out of thin air like he did back then, but he can carefully make subtle correlations that don't exist and tie them all together in a package that CTs salivate over. That video alone had numerous facts wrong and I only watched the first few minutes. It has nothing to do with me being a fan or not, it has everything with me understanding and being a fan of real logic and facts.

 

[financeguy]

The man rose to fame lying about Y2k. He created a hype leading up to it and then did a broadcast on New Years Eve to all the fearful. He broadcasted for three hours, those three hours were filled with stories "from the AP", "this just in from CBS", "I just got confirmed word" of nuclear plants melting down, planes falling, city's grids crashing. All of them complete lies, made up, every single source was a complete lie. It's well documented.

The rest of his career has been the same thing. Today he can't make up stories like that out of thin air like he did back then, but he can carefully make subtle correlations that don't exist and tie them all together in a package that CTs salivate over. That video alone had numerous facts wrong and I only watched the first few minutes. It has nothing to do with me being a fan or not, it has everything with me understanding and being a fan of real logic and facts.

I won't deny he exaggerates but the fact remains the mainstream media bascially operated a self-imposed blackout policy re Bilderberg (and a Financial Times reporter was sacked for mentioning them in an article in passing) until Jones made a big fuss about them.

 

[Rachel D.]

Regardless of the other conspiracy stuff this guy talks about, it seems like he just made up a bunch of crap about Bono and ran with it. When did Bono say we should all pay more taxes and stop using hot water? And since when has he ever indicated that he wants to kill off Hispanics, Asians, and Africans? I would laugh about it, but I'm too busy thinking of the people out there that actually believe this stuff.

And the reason I looked up Alex Jones today is because I heard that he claims the world leaders at the Bilderberg thing are eating roasted babies covered in gold. Yeah... I'm going to have a hard time believing anything else he says.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Outside of America, no-one cares about the Superbowl. It's not like the Oscars where everyone watches it because Hollywood is the global centre of film. I honestly didn't even realise U2 had played at it when I read it on here, around the time I first joined this forum (2004). From U2's point of view, yes it probably made sense to help them win back the element of the US audience that seemingly they lost during Popmart.

Your point in relation to what I said is?

118 million TV sets in the US tuned in to the super bowl last year. Considering how most people go to parties or bars for the game, that number is absolutely massive.

Obviously it does not compare internationally to, say, the World Cup Final, which is a once every four year event... but for an annual event, its ratings and marketing reach are simply staggering.

In comparison, this year's Oscars were seen by 33.9 million.

So back to my only point... the Super Bowl is one of the largest commercial events in the world. Which it is, regardless if anyone outside of the US gives a shit.

 

[corianderstem]

And since when has he ever indicated that he wants to kill off Hispanics, Asians, and Africans?

It's the hidden message if you play Peace On Earth backwards.

 

[mama cass]

Outside of America, no-one cares about the Superbowl.

sorry Headache, have to agree with financeguy here...

world-wide event my ass - ROW truly don't give a shit about it lol!!

it's not like PROPER football you see...

 

[mama cass]

I won't deny he exaggerates but the fact remains the mainstream media bascially operated a self-imposed blackout policy re Bilderberg (and a Financial Times reporter was sacked for mentioning them in an article in passing) until Jones made a big fuss about them.

have you seen all the coverage recently on Bilderberg?? it's hilarious - really great actually! they can't shroud it in secrecy any more these days... so many people who denied ever being part of it are now being caught with their pants down!

fwiw, i'm by no means a "bonobot" but certainly don't believe those claims... i would hope B-man would have the sense to keep away from the Bilderberg lot, they're a seriously dodgy, sinister and arrogant bunch! if i ever saw concrete proof that he was in that crowd, wow, i dunno... i would be very surprised!

 

[OpenG180]

sorry Headache, have to agree with financeguy here...

world-wide event my ass - ROW truly don't give a shit about it lol!!

it's not like PROPER football you see...

What's a super bowl? A huge vessel?

 

[LuckyNumber7]

sorry Headache, have to agree with financeguy here...

world-wide event my ass - ROW truly don't give a shit about it lol!!

it's not like PROPER football you see...

Interest is growing, and more and more people are becoming familiar with it. I think you're letting the fact that the international audience is tiny in comparison with the North American audience.

Something like Wrestlemania is absolutely an 'international' event. It just depends on how you're defining international. The Super Bowl might not be an international event, but it's at least international when you're talking about the Western world.

 

[Salome]

The Super Bowl might not be an international event, but it's at least international when you're talking about the Western world.

I think when you live in the Western World outside the US you might know when the Super Bowl is if you follow enough sports media
most of the people who know when the Super Bowl is will also know what sport it involves
however barely anyone will know which teams will play
and even less will be arsed to figure out on what channel they can watch it

so basically you can compare it with running bulls down the streets of Pamplona

 

[blueeyedgirl]

I did.

I wasn't going to say anything, though. It just felt awkward to bring it up.

Do you also, er, know people?

 

[corianderstem]

 

[Dfit00]

I think when you live in the Western World outside the US you might know when the Super Bowl is if you follow enough sports media
most of the people who know when the Super Bowl is will also know what sport it involves
however barely anyone will know which teams will play
and even less will be arsed to figure out on what channel they can watch it

so basically you can compare it with running bulls down the streets of Pamplona

Fair enough, there is only one kind of football in the world, fyi.

 

[LuckyNumber7]

I think when you live in the Western World outside the US you might know when the Super Bowl is if you follow enough sports media
most of the people who know when the Super Bowl is will also know what sport it involves
however barely anyone will know which teams will play
and even less will be arsed to figure out on what channel they can watch it

so basically you can compare it with running bulls down the streets of Pamplona

Okay? I mean take something like the UEFA league's championship game. It's arguably Europe's counterpart to the Super Bowl, no? It generates 100 million + viewers. Over here in the US? 2 million. That's almost identical to the Super Bowl numbers, in reverse.

I think once again you'd absolutely be letting the bigger number make the smaller number look small in such a case. Of course the audience here is tailored and specific whereas it's very broad internationally, but it's still there. It's not a European event (if we're going to call Europe as one entity), it's an international event. There's viewers everywhere.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

So I'm guessing Macca has his title back?

 

[bono_212]

Wait...Elevation Partners didn't sell after it went public? I mean, I don't know a lot about stocks or anything, but it seemed really obvious that this stock was only going to plummet.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

http://www.herald.ie/entertainment/...-as-facebook-shares-fall-further-3202593.html

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

According to this Larry is the 7th richest drummer in the world

The 30 Richest Drummers in the World - MSN Music News

1. Ringo Starr (The Beatles, $300 million)
2. Phil Collins (Solo/Genesis, $250 million)
3. Dave Grohl (Nirvana/Foo Fighters, $225 million)
4. Don Henley (The Eagles, $200 million)
5. Lars Ulrich (Metallica, $175 million)
6. Charlie Watts (The Rolling Stones, $160 million)
7. Larry Mullen Jr. (U2, $150 million)
8. Roger Taylor (Queen, $105 million)
9. Joey Kramer (Aerosmith, $100 million)
10. Chad Smith (Red Hot Chili Peppers, $90 million)

Can't believe Max Weinberg is only 23rd. Someone's getting screwed Money not split equally there but I still thought he'd be higher.

 

[pepokiss]

So, is Bono the poorest musician now?

 

[LemonMelon]

Pretty soon, he won't be busking for fun.

 

[pepokiss]

Pretty soon, he won't be busking for fun.

No more...