SOE 21 - It comes down to this...

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
I suppose the debate with Australia is do they bring JT there and play stadiums, or do they bring IE there and play arenas. DO BOTH!
 
I'm not convinced they would do arenas here..... we are looking at a 7 year gap they can easy sell out some stadiums and make some cash. Arenas dont have the same pull for them here I'm afraid. I also doubt them opening E+I down here.....Hopefully I am wrong because I would love an arena tour. I think after all the waiting we deserve to see them up close haha
 
They should do JT stadiums in NOV/DEC Down under, then SOE tour next year, and come back for arenas in early 2019. Why not?
 
They should do JT stadiums in NOV/DEC Down under, then SOE tour next year, and come back for arenas in early 2019. Why not?



That would be ideal..... but given we get skipped so often I dont know if we would be lucky enough to get both....
 
The Rolling Stones don't need the money either. They don't need to be playing stadium shows in 2017, with all band members well above 70. But they just announced a slew of European stadiums. They do it because they are a business, and businesses exist to make money.

Same with U2. This JT Tour has gone from being a sidestep, to being a priority because it's a slam dunk success. Why not strike while the iron is hot, make as much money for the JT 30th Anniversary, THEN release SOE, and Tour for that and make even MORE MONEY!!!!! They certainly didn't add MORE US shows in cities like Indianapolis and Kansas City for any reason other than to make money. Not sure why it's so hard for some people to get.

U2 are artists who are able to make giant piles of money from said art. Sometimes the commerce dictates the art... but they are still artists, nonetheless.

The Stones are corporate whores and have been for decades. They barely highlight their new material when they tour. They've sold their songs for countless commercials.

Don't even bother making the comparison.

If U2 was only doing this out of a monetary interest they could have announced more shows from the beginning, especially in Europe, where they're playing probably 1/4 of the shows they could if they wanted to.

Thanks for playing.
 
I've been thinking about why u2 would choose to release two singles well in advance of an album, one as far as five months ahead, and I think it really boils down to maximizing their album sales number, and SOE's ultimate chart position.

In 2015 Billboard changed their metrics for the top 200 albums chart, to incorporate song streams. As it now stands, if a song is streamed 1500 times, that counts as 1 "album sale"

Billboard 200 Makeover: Album Chart to Incorporate Streams & Track Sales | Billboard

For some artists, this had led to releasing bloated albums of 15 to 20 songs, not because this makes for a great record (booooo Drake, boooooo) but because, crudely, more songs means more streams, and most importantly - more revenue.

Against the Extra Long Pop Album | Pitchfork

I don't think u2 care about streaming revenue, but we know they care about relevance, and we know they equate relevance, in part, with having a number 1 album. So for them, releasing a song, and letting it rack up the stream count over several months can only help. Theyre building up the streaming numbers, so that ultimately when SOE is released, it's chart position will be boosted by all these extra streams.

Make sense? Too cynical?

I don't think this is crazy. Obviously the band isn't going to load up the album with more songs, so this is another way to get a jump on it. Maybe it's something Oseary is aware of and suggested, who knows?

I can understand the impetus behind it, my issue is still with the mixed message of putting out new stuff while touring an old album. There's a difference between treating fans to a "surprise" new song at the end of the show and actually attacking radio/TV/internet with new material.
 
I'm not convinced they would do arenas here..... we are looking at a 7 year gap they can easy sell out some stadiums and make some cash. Arenas dont have the same pull for them here I'm afraid. I also doubt them opening E+I down here.....Hopefully I am wrong because I would love an arena tour. I think after all the waiting we deserve to see them up close haha

Yeah, given Adam has said EI will be an arena tour, and that Michael Coppel was in Philly, I'm starting to think they're trying to work out a JT30 leg for Australia despite the denials. Why? Because they know demand is strong and they know they can't do an arena tour, so they have to bring a stadium production here.

It will have been a seven year gap by the time they get down here, possibly seven and a half. For context, the longest previous gap was Popmart to Vertigo, eight and a half years. Demand will be very high. To come even close to scraping the surface of demand, an arena tour would need:

Melbourne x8
Sydney x8
Brisbane x4-6
Auckland x4 (and maybe Christchurch or Dunedin x2 to cover the South Island; Wellington won't get a look-in on an arena tour, only a stadium one)
Perth x4
Adelaide x2-4

That's just the bare minimum; I'm sure all of them could sell more. And if they wanted to they could add 1-2 dates in cities like Canberra, Hobart, Newcastle, and Wollongong, all of which have arenas regularly visited by major artists, though those arenas are probably too small and we all know they won't go beyond the traditional five state capitals in Australia.

Does anybody seriously think that U2 in this day and age would do a tour like this? Working on the principle of 2 show days then 2 rest days, like in 2015, just Sydney and Melbourne would take over a month! The whole tour would be a two-month endeavour. Forget it. Australia is stadiums or nothing.
 
Yeah, given Adam has said EI will be an arena tour, and that Michael Coppel was in Philly, I'm starting to think they're trying to work out a JT30 leg for Australia despite the denials. Why? Because they know demand is strong and they know they can't do an arena tour, so they have to bring a stadium production here.

It will have been a seven year gap by the time they get down here, possibly seven and a half. For context, the longest previous gap was Popmart to Vertigo, eight and a half years. Demand will be very high. To come even close to scraping the surface of demand, an arena tour would need:

Melbourne x8
Sydney x8
Brisbane x4-6
Auckland x4 (and maybe Christchurch or Dunedin x2 to cover the South Island; Wellington won't get a look-in on an arena tour, only a stadium one)
Perth x4
Adelaide x2-4

That's just the bare minimum; I'm sure all of them could sell more. And if they wanted to they could add 1-2 dates in cities like Canberra, Hobart, Newcastle, and Wollongong, all of which have arenas regularly visited by major artists, though those arenas are probably too small and we all know they won't go beyond the traditional five state capitals in Australia.

Does anybody seriously think that U2 in this day and age would do a tour like this? Working on the principle of 2 show days then 2 rest days, like in 2015, just Sydney and Melbourne would take over a month! The whole tour would be a two-month endeavour. Forget it. Australia is stadiums or nothing.



Agreed. Nice to imagine arenas for a second.... It is a bit crummy we might not get a tour supporting new songs... I mean if they dont bring IE there is a good chance it will be another 5-10 years before (if) they come back.
 
The Stones are corporate whores and have been for decades. They barely highlight their new material when they tour. They've sold their songs for countless commercials.



Don't even bother making the comparison.



If U2 was only doing this out of a monetary interest they could have announced more shows from the beginning, especially in Europe, where they're playing probably 1/4 of the shows they could if they wanted to.



Thanks for playing.



The same could be said about U2 though maybe not at the Stones level yet (blackberry, apple, sales force and even Red). Bono made a boat load of money with his shares in Facebook. To think the band have no interest in money any more is crazy. And yes band members may not need the money but you're forgetting about all else that is involved with the band at a business level. To think that they add more shows purely by the goodness of their hearts or the fans is kind of laughable. I'm not saying U2 are slaves to the man as some think here but money makes the world go round.
 
Last edited:
So about those Australian stadium holds in December that are sooooo for the Joshua Tree Tour...

DC1fb7CXgAEiV2r
 
Melbourne x8
Sydney x8
Brisbane x4-6
Auckland x4 (and maybe Christchurch or Dunedin x2 to cover the South Island; Wellington won't get a look-in on an arena tour, only a stadium one)
Perth x4
Adelaide x2-4

That's just the bare minimum; I'm sure all of them could sell more..

Yeah but surely for the I&E European dates in 2015 they could have done similar in some of those cities? Just because they could do 6-8 shows in one city doesnt mean they have to. Plus I'm not so sure the demand is really this strong in Australia. They have generally dropped out of people's consciousness here.

Also this conundrum about whether to extend the JT30 tour is their own iditoic fault. No sympathy. Its yet another means by which they have compromised their ability to release new music (something they once cared about). They should take the JT30 tour (in all its pathetic 21 song sub 2 hour glory) everywhere, release SOE some time next year and then call it quits.
 
Last edited:
Also this conundrum about whether to extend the JT30 tour is their own iditoic fault. No sympathy. Its yet another means by which they have compromised their ability to release new music (something they once cared about). They should take the JT30 tour (in all its pathetic 21 song sub 2 hour glory) everywhere, release SOE some time next year and then call it quits.

A bit extreme there, maybe? I get the frustration in getting new music (we're fans after all), but honestly... some people on here are going to go on about how much it doesn't measure up anyway. 5-year-gaps with little info weren't fun at all, but it'll be ready and released when they're mostly happy with it (I say that because most musicians are never 100% happy with their work anyway, even after the fact). Anyone who thinks releasing things on a whim without being close to 100% with it probably hasn't written a song in their life anyway. On top of that, the fact that they're still doing this after 10+ albums and in their 50's is still pretty much a bonus on top of whatever. They could just tour every so often, count the money and never do anything new again.

It hasn't even been 3 years since SOI came out. They've met us halfway by playing a new track live. I think we're okay for a bit longer here.

As for show length, again... 2 hours, 21 songs is about their average in the past and still beats 90% of the bands out there. I'm sure Prince and Soundgarden fans would probably kill to hear just ten songs over an hour these days anyway. Probably even less than that.
 
Last edited:
Yeah but surely for the I&E European dates in 2015 they could have done similar in some of those cities? Just because they could do 6-8 shows in one city doesnt mean they have to. Plus I'm not so sure the demand is really this strong in Australia. They have generally dropped out of people's consciousness here.

Also this conundrum about whether to extend the JT30 tour is their own iditoic fault. No sympathy. Its yet another means by which they have compromised their ability to release new music (something they once cared about). They should take the JT30 tour (in all its pathetic 21 song sub 2 hour glory) everywhere, release SOE some time next year and then call it quits.

Is it not also the case that the touring costs of the current JT set up have been significantly reduced due mainly to the stage and screen set up and technology? I still don't see what the big deal is about a hybrid tour, especially to Oz/NZ? Is anyone really going to care that they played the JT in full, then started the encore with 5 new songs from SOE followed by a second encore of 6 classics/biggest hits? I don't see how doing that for a short leg of the tour (1 month?) "confuses" the public?!
 
Yeah but surely for the I&E European dates in 2015 they could have done similar in some of those cities? Just because they could do 6-8 shows in one city doesnt mean they have to. Plus I'm not so sure the demand is really this strong in Australia. They have generally dropped out of people's consciousness here.

Also this conundrum about whether to extend the JT30 tour is their own iditoic fault. No sympathy. Its yet another means by which they have compromised their ability to release new music (something they once cared about). They should take the JT30 tour (in all its pathetic 21 song sub 2 hour glory) everywhere, release SOE some time next year and then call it quits.



Just when I was going to compliment you on a somewhat calm/non hyperbolic/ somewhat factual post, you had to go and make that edit. :lol:
 
So about those Australian stadium holds in December that are sooooo for the Joshua Tree Tour...

DC1fb7CXgAEiV2r

Ha, yep.

Though actually, looking more closely at that itinerary, the only two venues he's using that U2 would also use are Suncorp in Brisbane and Mt Smart in Auckland. Macca is playing an arena in Sydney and smaller stadiums in Perth and Melbourne, where U2 would almost certainly use Subiaco and Etihad respectively. Brisbane also has QSAC, which is where U2 played on Vertigo, so the only real problem here is Auckland - Ian could say much better than I can, but it's been a while since I've noticed a major act playing any of Auckland's other stadiums. Of course, there's still the Cake Tin down the other end of the island in Wellington...

(I should note the tip that I got regarding Perth - which I now don't think is accurate, but for the record - was specifically regarding Subiaco in November, not nib Stadium.)

Yeah but surely for the I&E European dates in 2015 they could have done similar in some of those cities? Just because they could do 6-8 shows in one city doesnt mean they have to. Plus I'm not so sure the demand is really this strong in Australia. They have generally dropped out of people's consciousness here.

IE was just weird though, and U2's touring for bloody ages has grossly underplayed Europe. When they do come down here they do seem to try to mop up as much demand as possible, I guess because with Europe they know they'll be back soon while Australia is not as routine a destination. Look at Vertigo where they pushed on to a third date in Sydney, or 360 with the second nights in Perth or Brisbane. A "Europe" touring pattern would've never had those dates.

And I stand by those estimates. U2 are now a "destination" sort of artist; they've dropped off the radar for new shit but the second they announce a tour everybody will be all "yeah I fucking love Beautiful Day and One, and that Vertigo's a right tune mate, SUNDAY BLOODY SUUUUN-DAAAYYYY". A stadium tour will definitely be x2 for Sydney and Melbourne, and x8 arenas in those cities wouldn't equal that attendance. (Though maybe Sydney could be lowered to x6 since its arena is bigger than Rod Laver.)
 
Um, we had this clip before the Kyro mix.

How does that change the fact that they went back in to tweak and rerecord songs with more of a "live" feel. Kygo I'm sure used the raw audio they had at the time, but then used electronic beats and elements in the song that weren't there in the bands own version.
It in no way changes the original audio that the band is going to use on the album.
Not sure what this comment means...
 
I've been thinking about why u2 would choose to release two singles well in advance of an album, one as far as five months ahead, and I think it really boils down to maximizing their album sales number, and SOE's ultimate chart position.

In 2015 Billboard changed their metrics for the top 200 albums chart, to incorporate song streams. As it now stands, if a song is streamed 1500 times, that counts as 1 "album sale"

Billboard 200 Makeover: Album Chart to Incorporate Streams & Track Sales | Billboard

For some artists, this had led to releasing bloated albums of 15 to 20 songs, not because this makes for a great record (booooo Drake, boooooo) but because, crudely, more songs means more streams, and most importantly - more revenue.

Against the Extra Long Pop Album | Pitchfork

I don't think u2 care about streaming revenue, but we know they care about relevance, and we know they equate relevance, in part, with having a number 1 album. So for them, releasing a song, and letting it rack up the stream count over several months can only help. Theyre building up the streaming numbers, so that ultimately when SOE is released, it's chart position will be boosted by all these extra streams.

Make sense? Too cynical?

I don't know if they are thinking about it in that way or not. But as i have said many times before, there are many marketing ploys they could use to boost single chart placement and album chart placement, but not sure they will employ those either.
The most obvious being that they could do the ol, get an album with ticket purchase thing and be guaranteed a number one album.
Its going to be very interesting this time around to see how the songs and album do, since SOI was completely taken out of any sales/streaming scenario.
 
How does that change the fact that they went back in to tweak and rerecord songs with more of a "live" feel. Kygo I'm sure used the raw audio they had at the time, but then used electronic beats and elements in the song that weren't there in the bands own version.

It in no way changes the original audio that the band is going to use on the album.

Not sure what this comment means...



I misunderstood, I thought you were saying this clip was a result of them going back and rerecording that live feel.
 
Though actually, looking more closely at that itinerary, the only two venues he's using that U2 would also use are Suncorp in Brisbane and Mt Smart in Auckland.
Yeah, this still doesn't rule out a November leg in Australia.

The only issue would be that people would have just spent a lot of money on McCartney tickets and it might dent sales for U2 a bit, especially since folks would need to buy those U2 tickets sooner.

On the other hand, now that I think about it, this might explain why a JT30 November leg hasn't been announced yet. There may have been contract-signing reasons that forced the promoters and venues to announce the McCartney gigs first, so U2 have to wait until his have gone on sale. First-signed first-sold or something like that.

On the other other hand, maybe McCartney was trying to decide whether to tour Australia or not, and 4 little birdies told him that U2 would not be touring Autralia, so he decided to jump at the opportunity.
 
I misunderstood, I thought you were saying this clip was a result of them going back and rerecording that live feel.

ah gotcha. Yeah, i see where you got that. I dunno. One might guess that since that one was remixed and played to an audience, it's pretty set in stone. But who knows with them. thanks for the reply
 
ah gotcha. Yeah, i see where you got that. I dunno. One might guess that since that one was remixed and played to an audience, it's pretty set in stone. But who knows with them. thanks for the reply

Unless.... When Kygo was playing it live he was recording it so his final remix could have a live feel :hmm: :wink: :doh:

Ok I will go crawl back into my hole :reject:
 
Whenever this album comes out all I ask is that it's better than SOI

I love SOI, and I'm a little worried cause I would put TBT and Little Things somewhere in the middle of the pack compared to SOI songs.
I have high hopes for SOE, but I'm not sold that it will be miles better than SOI.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom