John Lydon rides gain

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Did people go to a 360 show because of a fancy telephone?

Lydon's personality is what is driving the PIL reunion. His personality was featured prominently in the ad. Money funded music getting to people just like u2. u2 needed RIM to get their singles heard on TV because radio didn't want any of the NLOTH tracks.
I think you're missing the point. One had absolutely nothing to do with the music, and one at least had a tie in to the music. Say what you want about being in a commercial, I could care less either way. All I'm saying is that one of these at least still had to do something about the music and one didn't. That doesn't make it identical in my mind.

U2 were on record during the ZooTv tour that they would NEVER accept corporate advertising for one of their tours. Their opinion did a 180 for the fund the 360 tour.
They were also on record for saying they wouldn't play SBS or NYD, that only lasted one leg of the tour. I guess people change their minds :shrug:
 
This really is one of the weakest arguments I've heard in a looooong time, and you've had some doozies.

I've dealt with the issues of seeing a loved one deal with alcoholism and how it effects everything around them, but you're saying I would have to actually be an alcoholic myself in order to write about it? Seeing my loved one go through it isn't enough "experience" to write a song about it?

Weak :|

Writing one song on an indirect topic is fine - like Walk On or Mothers of the Dissappeared.

Writing upwards of 8 songs on the Heroin addiction topic strikes me as disingenuous.
 
I think you're missing the point. One had absolutely nothing to do with the music, and one at least had a tie in to the music. :

Wouldn't PIL music license usage go to his old label and negate Lydon objective to fund a reunion? In other words, he's not allowed to use his own music for legal reasons.

Lydon got his name and likeness out there and funded a music project. So did U2 with the difference of a music soundtrack and a good label deal.
 
Wouldn't PIL music license usage go to his old label and negate Lydon objective to fund a reunion? In other words, he's not allowed to use his own music for legal reasons.

Lydon got his name and likeness out there and funded a music project. So did U2 with the difference of a music soundtrack and a good label deal.

I don't know the situation, my point is that one looks much more ridiculous than the other to the general public.
 
:doh: I'm just telling you what they stated at the start of the tour, it's very well documented. They changed their minds when they hit stadiums. Period. People change their minds.
 
:doh: I'm just telling you what they stated at the start of the tour, it's very well documented. They changed their minds when they hit stadiums. Period. People change their minds.

That interview was 4 months before they played a stadium. I think even before the stadium dates were officially announced.
 
You like chasing your tail don't you?

I've been a fan for nearly 20 years and I've never heard any statement saying any past material would not be played at future concerts.

I posted a quote from about 5 weeks into a tour, when you say there are earlier remarks saying their first 3 albums would never be played publically again?
 
I've been a fan for nearly 20 years and I've never heard any statement saying any past material would not be played at future concerts.

I posted a quote from about 5 weeks into a tour, when you say there are earlier remarks saying their first 3 albums would never be played publically again?


:banghead:

They specifically stated they didn't want to play SBS and NYD anymore, this tour was not about their previous hits. Like I said, it's very well documented. When they moved the tour to the stadiums they realized they needed to pull out those anthems again.
 
BVS you always seem to get so frustrated with so many posters. Why keep continuing an argument with these posters if you just get upset?
 
Would there be a tie in to the tour? Now you're just arguing for argument's sake.

So your your point is if it has a new u2 song/tour it's ok.

But if promotes only a famous personality and his quest to fund future tour it's not ok.

What I find amusing about this thread is that no one has made a list of Bono penned songs that obvious come from first hand life experiences. Even I know they exist, but this is just a Lydon insult match when he is deserving of praise for his musical accomplishments.
 
:banghead:

They specifically stated they didn't want to play SBS and NYD anymore, this tour was not about their previous hits. Like I said, it's very well documented. When they moved the tour to the stadiums they realized they needed to pull out those anthems again.

U2 went well over a decade refusing massive offers for corporate sponsorship.

You're comparison is U2 saying "we don't want to play NYD and SBS anymore" in a couple interviews prior to a tour, then openly changing thier minds a few weeks later?
 
Blackberry ad to help subsidize the 360 tour.

Butter ad to pay the start up costs for a PIL reunion(Lydon said as much).

Very, very close if not identical in my mind. Only difference is one showcases a song and the other showcases Lydon's personality.

I do cringe when I see the last 30 seconds of this clip:
YouTube - Bono on The Edge - Access U2 Interview

Sell out argument was weak for the U2 themed Ipod (and indeed the entire U2 catalogue going digital) when they themed up with Apple, and it's non-existent with Blacberry sponsoring the tour (and, as the band put it, giving them access into their lab to help design the tour).

Speaking of Zoo TV, they did ask Phillips to pay up for the fancy screens. They didn't, so the band had to pay up for it, but they did consider sponsorship. Read Flanagan's book. I do believe they had a sponsor for Popmart, in S. America at least. And there were little "____ (MTV or VH1 in America, other companies in Europe) presents U2" notes on the tickets for Elevation and Vertigo.
 
So your your point is if it has a new u2 song/tour it's ok.

But if promotes only a famous personality and his quest to fund future tour it's not ok.
I'm not making a judgement if one is "ok" or not. I'm just saying that in the day of dead video and no MTV, etc promotion tools change and I understand finding a way to promote yourself at the same time you're promoting your sponsor. It's smart.

I'm not one to judge if someone "sells out" or not, I think it's often a ridiculous argument. But for those folks a butter commercial would be quite different than one that promoted your tour and your sponsor.
What I find amusing about this thread is that no one has made a list of Bono penned songs that obvious come from first hand life experiences. Even I know they exist, but this is just a Lydon insult match when he is deserving of praise for his musical accomplishments.

Why do you find it amusing? How many songs do you listen to that you know 100% if they experienced that first hand or not. And why would it make a difference if the song is good or not? Did Bruce really have to get a girl pregnant in high school to write the River? Do you really think he got his union card on his 19th birthday?
 
U2 went well over a decade refusing massive offers for corporate sponsorship.

You're comparison is U2 saying "we don't want to play NYD and SBS anymore" in a couple interviews prior to a tour, then openly changing thier minds a few weeks later?

Economies change, the way you tour changes, minds change...:shrug:
 
Speaking of Zoo TV, they did ask Phillips to pay up for the fancy screens. They didn't, so the band had to pay up for it, but they did consider sponsorship. Read Flanagan's book. I do believe they had a sponsor for Popmart, in S. America at least. And there were little "____ (MTV or VH1 in America, other companies in Europe) presents U2" notes on the tickets for Elevation and Vertigo.

In fact both my ZooTV and Popmart tickets say "Sponsored by MTV and VH1".
 
Sell out argument was weak for the U2 themed Ipod (and indeed the entire U2 catalogue going digital) when they themed up with Apple, and it's non-existent with Blacberry sponsoring the tour (and, as the band put it, giving them access into their lab to help design the tour).

Speaking of Zoo TV, they did ask Phillips to pay up for the fancy screens. They didn't, so the band had to pay up for it, but they did consider sponsorship. Read Flanagan's book. I do believe they had a sponsor for Popmart, in S. America at least. And there were little "____ (MTV or VH1 in America, other companies in Europe) presents U2" notes on the tickets for Elevation and Vertigo.

So refusing Pepsi use of "even better than the real thing" in 1991/2 was considered a ouside the band's morals. But allowing Blackberry to use Magnificent is promoting a tour?

Phillips had the same parent company as u2's label and the band thought they'd get the screens for free.

Did MTV give U2 money or free ad space on TV?
 
Do you guys wanna put this to bed? I think we get the gist:

BVS thinks U2 made a casual statement about not playing a couple of tunes. Peter thinks this is false or misinterpreted.

BVS is pointing out the difference between advertising for your music/music-product and appearing in a butter commercial. Peter sees them as essentially the same.

Okay, we got it.
 
So refusing Pepsi use of "even better than the real thing" in 1991/2 was considered a ouside the band's morals. But allowing Blackberry to use Magnificent is promoting a tour?

Phillips had the same parent company as u2's label and the band thought they'd get the screens for free.

Did MTV give U2 money or free ad space on TV?

Yes. Blackberry was sponsoring the tour, so their name pops up in the ad for the tour. (and similar to the U2 Ipod there was a U2 themed applet for the blackberry)

:hmm: As the book puts it

Here's the hardware from Philips, the album from Polygram, and the music from U2. :hmm: And they did get money --
Levy gets Polygram to kick in a half million bucks or so in tour support, as a gesture of
goodwill.


U2 milked MTV well with the TV space especially on Zoo TV. The sponsor line on the tickets makes it look like money was involved, at some point ... :shrug:
 
Back
Top Bottom