SOE 20 - Sometimes, the end isn't coming...

[Hollow Island]

yeah, it's absurd to think that U2 are slaves to a contract of any kind. They can clearly do whatever they want whenever they want. They've always known how important self-determination is and I doubt that they'd want to become mere employees in their 50s.

They could use a more stringent record contract, though. Maybe one like bands used to have where they had to turn in an album every year.

 

[Hewson]

-abandon Leo

 

[lazarus]

 

[mikal]

Leo's in good hands now, folks.

 

[Registered Dude]

They determine their schedule and workload, not Oseary and Live Nation. You don't think their agreement with the latter gives them the freedom they've earned by being around for so long? There's no other band with as much clout.

There's been a lot of talk (maybe too much talk! ) that says the are very much indebted to Live Nation.

I mean, you're right that they have the freedom to determine their own fate. But U2 The Business brings in a lot of revenue for Live Nation. Live Nation facilitates a lot of shit for U2 The Band. U2 The Band, consequently, can't make decisions in a vacuum without consequences that affect them.

U2 had the freedom to pull back from releasing SOE last year, and they did. But here's the thing - there was a tour tied to that. A tour that promised live nation revenue in quarters X,Y and Z. A tour that was planned and budgeted for, and even plotted with venue holds.

Pulling out of that, like they did, at the 11th hour, pissed off a lot of people. People that are friends of this band, that invest and pay for this band.

I dont think we'd be in the middle of a Joshua Tree tour if the band hadn't backed out on the next iE legs last fall

 

[BEAL]

Which is why the excuse of Donald Trump was a complete shit one

 

[ascender_RS]

Can we give this shit a rest, please? These guys are in their mid-50s and can understandably retire at any time. There's no pressure or contract that compels them to keep touring until they drop. They determine their schedule and workload, not Oseary and Live Nation. You don't think their agreement with the latter gives them the freedom they've earned by being around for so long? There's no other band with as much clout.

Yes, you're right, it's probably all just gentlemen's agreements and people helping U2 out of the sheer goodness of their hearts while not expecting a buck in return.

Of course they have lots of clout but it's naive to think there's not some sort of minimum expectation from them over the duration of their contract. Presumably some records and tours to support them, with some sort of timeframe until they retire or renew etc.

 

[Wide Awake n AZ]

I am pretty sure U2 has wide latitude on album release schedules and tours and no one made them do this tour.

I also know they are still a cash register, and no promoter would dare piss them off and lose AB30 or whatever comes down the road beyond the contract.

And this band was in a very, very strong negotiating position, similar to what the Rolling Stones would have been in for any deal, and I am sure gave themselves maximum flexibility and easy retire options. Beyond all of that, I am sure there is a buyout, and if this band wanted to, they could easily execute that and go independent. They prefer to work within the protections of another party handling this business, but there is no fucking way they are being forced to do this. In even a slight way.

 

[super fly guy]

New song title...........Stop (The Trump). Better have a song about Donald to justify the delay.

 

[lazarus]

I am pretty sure U2 has wide latitude on album release schedules and tours and no one made them do this tour.

I also know they are still a cash register, and no promoter would dare piss them off and lose AB30 or whatever comes down the road beyond the contract.

And this band was in a very, very strong negotiating position, similar to what the Rolling Stones would have been in for any deal, and I am sure gave themselves maximum flexibility and easy retire options. Beyond all of that, I am sure there is a buyout, and if this band wanted to, they could easily execute that and go independent. They prefer to work within the protections of another party handling this business, but there is no fucking way they are being forced to do this. In even a slight way.

DING DING DING.

We have a winner.

Thanks for breaking it down in more detail. These guys aren't dummies, and haven't needed "help" since the early 80s. No way they would get stuck in a contract they couldn't get out of.*

Spoiler

*please kill me for making that joke

 

[superchuk5]

I've been MIA from this thread for a while, so what are these strong rumors you all are mentioning?

 

[TartItUp]

There's been a lot of talk (maybe too much talk! ) that says the are very much indebted to Live Nation.

I mean, you're right that they have the freedom to determine their own fate. But U2 The Business brings in a lot of revenue for Live Nation. Live Nation facilitates a lot of shit for U2 The Band. U2 The Band, consequently, can't make decisions in a vacuum without consequences that affect them.

U2 had the freedom to pull back from releasing SOE last year, and they did. But here's the thing - there was a tour tied to that. A tour that promised live nation revenue in quarters X,Y and Z. A tour that was planned and budgeted for, and even plotted with venue holds.

Pulling out of that, like they did, at the 11th hour, pissed off a lot of people. People that are friends of this band, that invest and pay for this band.

I dont think we'd be in the middle of a Joshua Tree tour if the band hadn't backed out on the next iE legs last fall

I respect what you are saying here and if I remember correctly from some of your past posts you are friendly with Live Nation staffers so it makes sense to read your loyalty to their concerns, but, with all sincere respect, "pay for this band" is over the top. I imagine U2 the Business has been profitable for all concerned for quite some time now, no one 'pays' for this band. It's a business that is structured to pay for itself, cover its expenses and turn in a profit. LiveNation 'friends' being "pissed at the band" sounds like good storytelling (benign), or phony outrage (vindictive?).

I also take exception to any notion they 'backed out' of anything. They course-corrected and didn't activate the 'go' button on the second i+e tour. Live Nation was perhaps in a bit of a whirl for a minute as this course correction messed with their quarterly revenue projections, and they perhaps had to explain the new projections to a few cranky shareholders (for, like, five seconds maybe and for the ones that really should have just taken a seat and breathed into a paper bag for a damn minute) but it wasn't as though LiveNation was suddenly on the verge of bankruptcy when U2 pushed revenue freight further down the quarters. And the freight they are pushing is nothing to sneeze at, not to mention ALL the other LiveNation acts generating revenue.

Anyway ... my response just now is showing my loyalty to the artist and the artist's absolute right to make their own creative decisions. U2 can make whatever creative decision they please in whatever vacuum may exist. The Business will adjust accordingly. Everyone still makes bank. (okay, yeah, I'll get down off my soapbox now. please know I am replying to you with all due respect!)

 

[Registered Dude]

I respect what you are saying here and if I remember correctly from some of your past posts you are friendly with Live Nation staffers so it makes sense to read your loyalty to their concerns, but, with all sincere respect, "pay for this band" is over the top. I imagine U2 the Business has been profitable for all concerned for quite some time now, no one 'pays' for this band. It's a business that is structured to pay for itself, cover its expenses and turn in a profit. LiveNation 'friends' being "pissed at the band" sounds like good storytelling (benign), or phony outrage (vindictive?).

I also take exception to any notion they 'backed out' of anything. They course-corrected and didn't activate the 'go' button on the second i+e tour. Live Nation was perhaps in a bit of a whirl for a minute as this course correction messed with their quarterly revenue projections, and they perhaps had to explain the new projections to a few cranky shareholders (for, like, five seconds maybe and for the ones that really should have just taken a seat and breathed into a paper bag for a damn minute) but it wasn't as though LiveNation was suddenly on the verge of bankruptcy when U2 pushed revenue freight further down the quarters. And the freight they are pushing is nothing to sneeze at, not to mention ALL the other LiveNation acts generating revenue.

Anyway ... my response just now is showing my loyalty to the artist and the artist's absolute right to make their own creative decisions. U2 can make whatever creative decision they please in whatever vacuum may exist. The Business will adjust accordingly. Everyone still makes bank. (okay, yeah, I'll get down off my soapbox now. please know I am replying to you with all due respect!)

Absolutely! No disrespect taken.

There's a heck of a lot of conjecture about what kind of arrangement u2 have with Live Nation. The truth is probably somewhere in between

 

[TartItUp]

The truth is probably somewhere in between

yes, indeed!

 

[RoKKeR]

Man, Little Things is really good. The melody from the first half is always stuck in my head, and I really love Edge's guitar when it comes in. It's really gets things driving.

 

[mama cass]

I respect what you are saying here and if I remember correctly from some of your past posts you are friendly with Live Nation staffers

man, i've been here a while but even i didn't know that level of detail... stalker much?

 

[KUEFC09U2]

Absolutely! No disrespect taken.

There's a heck of a lot of conjecture about what kind of arrangement u2 have with Live Nation. The truth is probably somewhere in between

What is your honest opinion? Will we get an album this year?

 

[mama cass]

it doesn't really matter what anyone's opinion is though does it

 

[Registered Dude]

What is your honest opinion? Will we get an album this year?

Yeah I think we will.. But Cass is right, that's just a useless opinion!

I've not been told anything about an album release date. Have just heard about a single.

But, if u2songs are hinting album, than that's good news. They legitimately seem to be in the know

 

[CosmoKramer]

Yeah I think we will.. But Cass is right, that's just a useless opinion!

I've not been told anything about an album release date. Have just heard about a single.

But, if u2songs are hinting album, than that's good news. They legitimately seem to be in the know

I wouldn't say your opinion or even most here's opinion are useless. You don't have an agenda, you're not a troll, you know U2 well and what typically happens before an album and you seem to know more "connected" (whatever that might mean) people than most.

I was of the opinion that we would have an album last November and I was wrong but I think I was right....before I was wrong(I do think the plan was to release it). I'm with you now, I think everything that we are hearing is very positive and one could reasonably conclude that an album is imminent.

 

[Registered Dude]

I wouldn't say your opinion or even most here's opinion are useless. You don't have an agenda, you're not a troll, you know U2 well and what typically happens before an album and you seem to know more "connected" (whatever that might mean) people than most.

I was of the opinion that we would have an album last November and I was wrong but I think I was right....before I was wrong(I do think the plan was to release it). I'm with you now, I think everything that we are hearing is very positive and one could reasonably conclude that an album is imminent.

 

[Axver]

it doesn't really matter what anyone's opinion is though does it

Well, it does when they've had good info in the past, which RD has had, unlike many who've claimed an inside track.

 

[mama cass]

Well, it does when they've had good info in the past, which RD has had, unlike many who've claimed an inside track.

even so, we've seen this backfire on more than one occasion

this band likes to keep everyone on their toes

 

[The_acrobat]

I remember RD was the first one to tell us that IHeartRadio had nothing to do with SOE... nobody wanted to believe him, but he was right.

He was also the first person to bring up the JT Tour. People thought there was no way in hell... he was right.

I trust his sauces.

 

[TinKnight]

Is dropping Little Things from the setlist a good sign or a bad sign?

 

[prbiker15]

Is dropping Little Things from the setlist a good sign or a bad sign?

I don't think it will impact the album's rumored release.

 

[aMansAman]

Is dropping Little Things from the setlist a good sign or a bad sign?

The Best Thing will be played soon instead of TLTTGYA

this is just an opinion

 

[lazarus]

I trust his sauces.

I knew it was you, (Al)fredo. You broke my (I) heart.

 

[Reggie Thee Dog]

Well, it does when they've had good info in the past, which RD has had, unlike many who've claimed an inside track.

Agreed, and he never rubs it in anyone's face, or gloats when he's correct...so I tend to take his posts a little more seriously.

My best guess is U2Songs is onto something.....album release-wise...

 

[BEAL]

If we are getting a single in July, maybe we'll get Best Thing at a few shows. Very least when they come back in September.

but this is the 2