Could U2 ever do a free tour?

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
vaz02 said:


im quite sure actually 100% sure that it was popmart that survived only due to t shirt sales.

I went to see if I could find the interview where I remember reading that ZooTV broke even only due to t-shirt sales and all I found was the Popmart wikipedia...

I still remember reading it before that tour but oh well.
 
vaz02 said:


It supported the album brilliantly.
Not all tours are to make money from , making money is just a added bonus.

So you think zoo tv was a failure ...... you think 5.4 million people attending one tour is a failure ..... no offence but are you for real ?

I'm not talking about the impact of the concert on the band or popular culture, I'm talking strictly about the money.

Money-wise, ZooTV did not turn a high profit, it barely broke even.

The ZooTV tour is my favorite U2 tour for many reasons, but it did not make lots of money.

The ZooTV tour was amazing, but did not make a lot of money, it also did not make a lot of money.

Am I being clear enough? It did not make a lot of money.
 
topic.

who would get to decide who would be allowed to attend? surely there would be more people who wanted to go than could fit into the venue.
 
U2Man said:
topic.

who would get to decide who would be allowed to attend? surely there would be more people who wanted to go than could fit into the venue.

simple.

battles to the death outside of the venue.

the winner takes 5 other people in with them, and so on and so on until full.

*cues kirk/spock battle music*
 
yeah, or perhaps more peacefully, the people who didnt get tickets would start to offer the ones that did get tickets money, and the tour wouldnt be so free anymore.
 
vaz02 said:


u2 almost went bankrupt during popmart but shirt sales saved them.

Zoo tv was a sucess.

Thats false, U2 made the second highest profit ever for a band on tour with POPMART. Michael Cohl gave U2 a cool $100 million dollars for the POPMART tour!
 
annie_vox said:
they couldn't do an entire free tour... they'd go bankrupt. But they could do a couple of free shows... that wouldn't hurt. But the best thing they could do was reduce the ticket prices even if it was just a bit... that would be a great idea...

Free tours or reduced ticket prices tours will only bring in more scalpers and make it harder of U2 fans to get tickets or tickets at ticketmaster prices.
 
Can you imagine the scalping that would ensue? :lmao:

What would you rather pay...

$100 a ticket from ticketmaster?

or

$1,000 for a "free" ticket from a site you've never heard of? :shifty:

Please, U2, don't do a free tour! :no:
 
Last edited:
Unless they did not announce until 1 p.m. on the day of where the venue was and what time the concert would be held. Meaning events like the Brooklyn Bridge, not full scale stadium or arena concerts.
 
They could do it if they wanted to. But I doubt they ever will.
 
:lol: Yup, and U2 won't get eaten alive by the critics for doing a corporate sponsored tour.
 
It would be nice if U2 could play shows for the sheer hell of it, for the love of being on stage just playing songs, but they won't. To contrast them with someone like REM, who did the Bingo Handjob gigs unannounced, or Peter Buck who will just jump on stage with any of his mates. Pity really, cos I reckon they could have some fun with it. :(
 
elevated_u2_fan said:


I thought it was the other way around...:slant:

Where are the "Peeling off those dollar bills" nerds when you need them?:wink:

I'm pretty sure you're right, the t-shirt sales was definitely about the Zoo TV tour.
 
They have done free gigs in the past - weren't Save the yuppies in '87, Irving Plaza and Brooklyn Bridge all free shows?
 
i say do a free concert in africa instead of showing african flags in their shows.... one concert at least. would make more sense.
 
True, there was the 46664 Mandela show but it's not quite the same.

(I also think Sarajevo should be a permanent addition to their tours...)
 
I think Zoo TV broke even for U2.

Popmart took in $80 million but it cost $100 million for the band to put on the whole tour. So they lost money for Popmart. I think that's what it said in U2 by U2.
 
On Ozzy's tour, there are going to be a lot of other bands, so it's really a chance for those other bands to get the exposure. The tickets might be free, but the merchandise and concessions will still have to be bought.
Plus, Ozzy also joked: it's free to get in, but you'll have to pay to get out.
 
Joey788 said:
I think Zoo TV broke even for U2.

Popmart took in $80 million but it cost $100 million for the band to put on the whole tour. So they lost money for Popmart. I think that's what it said in U2 by U2.

the only income they had on Zoo TV was the shirts sales, they sold 600,000 it comes in Flannagans book which is far more reliable than Wikipedia

Popmart was supposed to be a huge success among Voodoo Lounge and The Division Bell but that was a while ago, but yes I do believe they lost money eventhough the ticket sales where huge in most places, well except the US but it is there biggest market so...
 
Bono would have to change his One speech, to an ode about Dunkin Donuts and Adidas, since every signle part of a free tour would have to be sponsored, from the seats to the songs, to your feet.
 
Central_Park_Reservoir.jpg


On September 19, 1981 the folk-rock duo Simon and Garfunkel reunited for a free concert in New York's Central Park attended by more than 500,000 people.

elton john got 400,000... garth brooks got somewhere around 600,000... u2 could get the million that was predicted for garth, and bono could even walk home.

do it.
 
No, in theory they could - but they, their families & stuff live expensive lives. U2 have mouths to feed, so they want to make it of course for love, but even more of course FOR MONEY!
 
Back
Top Bottom