Live Nation to buy Principle Management

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
But I'm not optimistic, since they had a "beautiful, quiet, spiritual" album in Songs of Ascent, and they threw it away because it didn't have hit potential. :(

Oh yea? Tell us about your listening session for this album that was thrown out and all of the beauty it contained.

waiting-meme.png
 
Health/age might play a part in it, but I think they'll call it quits when they finally have to admit that they cannot achieve that culture-transforming, "relevant" single and album that they're always chasing. It simply isn't possible in today's musical world.

When the new album is released and it is met with a collective whimper outside the U2 fan community, which of course it will be, my guess is they will gracefully bow out after the tour. UNLESS they can somehow abandon the dream of "relevance" and just make music for music's sake again. But I'm not optimistic, since they had a "beautiful, quiet, spiritual" album in Songs of Ascent, and they threw it away because it didn't have hit potential. :(

By that logic they should've quit right after NLOTH.
 
The very fact that the contract was made to end in 2020 tells me that is the timeframe which U2 have tentatively set for themselves. It's a nice, round number, signaling 40 years since their 1st album and the band members will all be at or near 60 years old. They've said on more than one occasion they can't see themselves pushing on past 60. If in about 2024 they wish to tour again, I'm sure LiveNation will be happy to take that on.

Provided everyone stays healthy and able, I fully think we can expect another album:tour cycle after this one.
 
Oh yea? Tell us about your listening session for this album that was thrown out and all of the beauty it contained.

waiting-meme.png

Uh, remember the 2009 Rolling Stone interview with Bono when he talked about "Every Breaking Wave" being the first single, and all of the quiet, prayerful, "Sufi-spiritual" type music?

Then a few months later, after it was clear NLOTH did not have legs, we had quotes from him to the effect of "The last thing the world needs is another introspective U2 album."

I can give you the direct quotes if you like. They're easily found here on Interference.
 
The very fact that the contract was made to end in 2020 tells me that is the timeframe which U2 have tentatively set for themselves. It's a nice, round number, signaling 40 years since their 1st album and the band members will all be at or near 60 years old. They've said on more than one occasion they can't see themselves pushing on past 60. If in about 2024 they wish to tour again, I'm sure LiveNation will be happy to take that on.

Provided everyone stays healthy and able, I fully think we can expect another album:tour cycle after this one.

I can imagine a big marketing campaign around U2020.
 
Uh, remember the 2009 Rolling Stone interview with Bono when he talked about "Every Breaking Wave" being the first single, and all of the quiet, prayerful, "Sufi-spiritual" type music?

Then a few months later, after it was clear NLOTH did not have legs, we had quotes from him to the effect of "The last thing the world needs is another introspective U2 album."

I can give you the direct quotes if you like. They're easily found here on Interference.

I think they were mostly referring to the fact that none of us have heard a note from it, aside from the live performance of EBW. Plus, considering the fact that Bono's comments on unreleased material often get bashed or made fun of on here once the product does come out, I can see why some people would have a little skepticism.
 
Health/age might play a part in it, but I think they'll call it quits when they finally have to admit that they cannot achieve that culture-transforming, "relevant" single and album that they're always chasing. It simply isn't possible in today's musical world.

When the new album is released and it is met with a collective whimper outside the U2 fan community, which of course it will be, my guess is they will gracefully bow out after the tour. UNLESS they can somehow abandon the dream of "relevance" and just make music for music's sake again. But I'm not optimistic, since they had a "beautiful, quiet, spiritual" album in Songs of Ascent, and they threw it away because it didn't have hit potential. :(

I'm just waiting for the NLOTH remaster and the bonus tracks that come with it
 
I would expect this upcoming album/tour to be the penultimate, with one more in them around 2020- although I'm planning on enjoying the next couple years as much as possible in case this does in fact end up being the end.
 
Maybe now Paul can become a REAL 5th member of U2, and get behind a keyboard and wear a little headset microphone like Edge and Larry! He's been pushing pencils behind the scenes for far too long!! :applaud:

The last time I saw U2 (Pittsburgh '11) I didn't have any children, though my wife was pregnant. Now I have TWO!! Going to multiple shows will be a lot more challenging now. But I plan to go to at least 2. If they'd play the
Midwest a little better instead of just thinking Midwest = Chicago, then that'd be a lot easier. The Elevation Tour spoiled me. 2 shows in Ohio, 2 in Indiana, 1 in Kentucky... good times! :)
 
Doesn't Madonna have a somewhat frosty inclination towards U2? :hmm: IIRC, she stormed out of the Grammys once when she lost out in a category to the '2. I don't think I've ever read a quote of either artist being complimentary to the other (which is unusual considering how long they've both been around). Now that they share the same manager, it'll be interesting to see if they warm to each other (probably not).

Bono was knowingly photographed in the VIP section at a Madonna show in Paris in 2008 or 2009. They've probably crossed paths many times at grammys, brits, RRHOFs and stuff like Live 8.

I don't think Paul is retiring. The article says that he will become chairman of Principle Mgmt and leave the day to day running to Guy.

Although this is big news considering the fact that we have always seen this fat bald man by U2's side in photos and promo shots etc., will it affect the music at all??

Paul is taken out of the picture more or less and given a token job credit. U2 think so highly of him they haven't made any public comment in the past 24 hours after hiring a new manager months ago. Some music board forums have openly wondered about his health(referenced in one Irish paper) and other business motivations.

U2's next tour will be quite different without PM and Mark Fisher.

But they had the most successfull tour of all time between 2008-2011 which makes alot more money then record sales

The song Vertigo was released nearly a decade ago. How many U2 songs have captivated their general fan base since?
 
I wonder how the new guy will be handling two acts that are so big at the same time. What if Madonna and U2 are touring at the same time? Paul was always with U2 when they went on tour, so how will that be with the new manager? Although he was mostly in the background, I think I still miss Paul's presence, simply because of his personal relationship to the band. With the new guy, I guess it will be mainly "business".
 
Just a quick question, doesn't this "this will be their last album" type of stuff get thrown about before EVERY album?
 
Uh, remember the 2009 Rolling Stone interview with Bono when he talked about "Every Breaking Wave" being the first single, and all of the quiet, prayerful, "Sufi-spiritual" type music?

Then a few months later, after it was clear NLOTH did not have legs, we had quotes from him to the effect of "The last thing the world needs is another introspective U2 album."

I can give you the direct quotes if you like. They're easily found here on Interference.

There was also a quote how they declined on releasing the follow up to NLOTH mid-tour because Spiderman writing got involved.
 
Sure... Surgically repaired backs never have additional problems for those in their late 50s and up. They're fine forever.

What issues? Any issues. They're getting old. The late 50s through late 60s are a rough time, health wise.

You brought up Bruce Springsteen. Bad example. Two members of the E Street band are dead and others have had to take health related breaks over the past few years. Bruce? Yea, he's a freak of nature. He also keeps himself in phenomenal shape... something that can't be said about Bono.

Is this automatically the end? Of course not... and I sure as shit hope it isn't. But every album/tour cycle from this point certainly COULD be, and every fan should approach it as such.

Spinal disc surgery isn't the end of physical activtiy. Come touring he will be back in shape.

Mainly Bono's voice and moreso Larry's wrists type of issues.

The point isn't how many E street band members are alive. I said they're still touring, while being a decade-ish older than U2. In fact they just wrapped up a two year world tour in September, with new dates next Spring already announced.
 
I wonder how the new guy will be handling two acts that are so big at the same time. What if Madonna and U2 are touring at the same time? Paul was always with U2 when they went on tour, so how will that be with the new manager? Although he was mostly in the background, I think I still miss Paul's presence, simply because of his personal relationship to the band. With the new guy, I guess it will be mainly "business".

Considering the gigantic size of both act's respective touring crews and tour administration, I'd say quite easily.
 
Spinal disc surgery isn't the end of physical activtiy. Come touring he will be back in shape.

Mainly Bono's voice and moreso Larry's wrists type of issues.

The point isn't how many E street band members are alive. I said they're still touring, while being a decade-ish older than U2. In fact they just wrapped up a two year world tour in September, with new dates next Spring already announced.

... yea. Can't wait to see Clarence and Danny at those spring shows!
 
Out of what deal, exactly?

The digital merch and touring deal they inked in 2008 with LN? That has nothing to do with recording obligations. The only reason they'd need to "get out" of it would be if they wanted someone else to handle their digital merch and touring. If they tour never again (or once more and never again) they don't "owe" LN a tour.

And even this most recent deal has nothing to do with an obligation on the part of U2 to give LN n recordings by year whatever. As a matter of fact, it likely doesn't even drastically change whatever contract they have with Principle. It's not a recording contract between U2 and anyone. It's an ownership deal between PM and LN, to transfer control from PMcG to LN headed by GuyO.

U2 is affected, but it would appear only insofar as their assets being managed by new hands. Other artists in PM's stable will likewise experience the same change.

They can very well make this the last album and tour. Even this album and tour, they could pull the plug on and just pay out whoever they've already made promises to.

Now...would LN have paid $30M for an ownership deal of a company who's biggest client looks about to call it quits and not output anything ever again (other than reissues and compilations, of course)? Logically, no. But I don't think it necessarily means there's another decade or more of new U2 music, per se.

The Live Nation deal, as stated. Not a recording deal per se but U2 planning tours = U2 recording albums.
Then there's the issue of the record contract, that is, whatever they signed when they left from Island to Mercury.

Obviously a big act can walk out on their terms, but this will likely mean ponying up cash to both Live Nation and their record label (squeezing albums out to fulfill the deal a la U218 ?).

Then again, signing a 12 year deal with LN and getting a new manager this late in the game doesn't sound like retirement plans.

Maybe Larry will get tired of the circus before 2020. Maybe Mrs Clayton won't enjoy Adam touring and recording, and he decides to be a full time father. Maybe Bono's voice will go out. At the moment, I don't think there's anything to assume they can't reach 2020 with another album and tour under their belt and then decide what to do.
 
Clearly... Other than that they're old and shit happens.

Clearly nobody wants shit to happen... but all I'm saying is that every show fans get the chance to go to should not be taken for granted as if "oh, they'll be tons more."

Because shit tends to happen more often once you pass a certain age. What is hard to grasp about that?
 
How this recording truly went and how the new album goes will determine it mostly, I think. If this recording process was actually really really really difficult, and then it does (at best) No Line reception and numbers, I would bet that's that. If the long recording process was their own doing and not because they were struggling, and if the album then does really well - perhaps a different story. But I would definitely be treating each gig you go to this time as potentially your last, either way.
 
But I would definitely be treating each gig you go to this time as potentially your last, either way.

Possible, but I think it is unlikely. As long as they are all healthy they will continue to tour. However they may do shorter tours at some point. When they stop touring completely, it will most likely be due to health reasons only. That could happen the next tour, it may not. It almost happened on the last tour and here we are now talking about their next tour. :shrug:

I have been a U2 diehard since the JT. I have heard the break up or done touring rumors after every single album and tour since AB and Zoo TV. Here we are 5 tours later.
 
Uh, remember the 2009 Rolling Stone interview with Bono when he talked about "Every Breaking Wave" being the first single, and all of the quiet, prayerful, "Sufi-spiritual" type music?

Then a few months later, after it was clear NLOTH did not have legs, we had quotes from him to the effect of "The last thing the world needs is another introspective U2 album."

I can give you the direct quotes if you like. They're easily found here on Interference.

And you're contrasting this with, what, exactly? The album you haven't heard a note of? In any case, if they wanted to make an extroverted record, they could have chosen a far more suitable producer than Danger Mouse.

This forum is so quick to mythologize unheard/unreleased material.
 
Artistically, yes. Very few important artists in the rock-era have cut records ten years into their recording career, or later, that are as vital and significant as what they did before. Hell, the bulk of acts in the rock canon (think Rock Hall of Fame) built their credentials up within the first five years of their recording career.

That's more a comment on how the marketplace works & less on the quality of work by older artists. Some of the best albums I've ever heard were made by people 35+ with 10+ years in the game. To claim all musicians over 35 are "sinking ships" is silly and narrow-minded.
 
oh silly fans! your worried about how the new manager would handle them touring at the same time! Its part of devious plot. they are not going to tour at the same time, they are gonna to tour TOGETHER! Nosebleeds seats proly run about 500 bucks (US). When you buy tickets their will be a option where you can sign up for a second or reverse mortgage . U2 has been attacked on here for being greedy and corporate and whatnot. Madonna has had the same accusations from some of her fans. So how about the ultimate nightmare for people who think that way?
 
Artistically, yes. Very few important artists in the rock-era have cut records ten years into their recording career, or later, that are as vital and significant as what they did before. Hell, the bulk of acts in the rock canon (think Rock Hall of Fame) built their credentials up within the first five years of their recording career. Next year, U2 will be at the point in their recording career that The Stones were when they released Bridges to Babylon. If we get a good record with a few keepers, we should be thankful.

This is just flat out ridiculous. James Murphy put out his best music post-35 and Tom Waits is still putting out critically acclaimed albums. That's just two examples
 
That's more a comment on how the marketplace works & less on the quality of work by older artists. Some of the best albums I've ever heard were made by people 35+ with 10+ years in the game. To claim all musicians over 35 are "sinking ships" is silly and narrow-minded.

Hi Schploop,

Come and post your favourite electro songs in my B&C thread.

:heart: u
 
Artistically, yes. Very few important artists in the rock-era have cut records ten years into their recording career, or later, that are as vital and significant as what they did before.

The more I read this the more ridiculous it gets. Particularly the arbitrary 10-year cutoff.

I consider In Rainbows Radiohead's best; it came out 14 years after Pablo Honey and more than 20 years after the band formed.
 
Back
Top Bottom