The Next U2 Single?

[U2WaTCher]

well COBL seems to be bombing at the charts does anyone think Original has a chance in making some chart movement? I think they should bring out the big guns miracle drug then orginal.

[Axver]

Originally posted by U2WaTCher
well COBL seems to be bombing at the charts

Only in the US.

I don't believe any single will do well in the US. Especially not OOTS or MD, as they're too 'traditional' U2. At least LAPOE might turn some heads around.

[whitehead]

They are most likely going to be releasing something to coincide with their 2nd North American leg.

A Man and a Woman perhaps?

U.S. marketing

[mikeuk]

Originally posted by whitehead
They are most likely going to be releasing something to coincide with their 2nd North American leg.

A Man and a Woman perhaps?

U.S. marketing

that would be my choice as U2 need something different on the radio- something that will attract fans who don't normally get into u2, rather than release something traditional u2 fans (who have probably already bought Bomb) will identify with. Apart from that I think AMAAW is under-rated.

Mike

[beLIEve]

I think U2 will release two more songs off of HTDAAB, one in late August/early September for the 3rd leg, and another (Miracle Drug) for Christmas and the 4th leg. This bit of news can be found on @U2.com:

U2 READYING NEW SINGLE
July 21, 2005
posted by: m2
While in the Netherlands recently, U2 spent time with producer Jacknife Lee at Wisseloord Studios in Hilversum preparing the band's next single. According to the studio's web site, U2 used two studios and had an orchestra with them working on the new single. (Thx Peter J. and U2log.com)

Hmmm. Orchestra? Sounds "Original"...

[ybird3k]

seems strange for this to be a single, as its hardly been played during the tour.

id rather Miracle Drug be next, its the best

[STING2]

Originally posted by beLIEve
I think U2 will release two more songs off of HTDAAB, one in late August/early September for the 3rd leg, and another (Miracle Drug) for Christmas and the 4th leg. This bit of news can be found on @U2.com:

U2 READYING NEW SINGLE
July 21, 2005
posted by: m2
While in the Netherlands recently, U2 spent time with producer Jacknife Lee at Wisseloord Studios in Hilversum preparing the band's next single. According to the studio's web site, U2 used two studios and had an orchestra with them working on the new single. (Thx Peter J. and U2log.com)

Hmmm. Orchestra? Sounds "Original"...

It might be Miracle Drug as well. The last third of the song has some strings put into it during the show. Its pre-recorded stuff of course. They may have decided to re-record it.

I think releasing "Original" as the 5th single would be a big mistake. The 5th single should be the song most likely to succeed at radio and do well at the Grammy awards as the cut off date for Grammy eligibility is September 30.

In a Poll of the best song on the album here at interference, Miracle Drug was the clear winner. I've found it to be the most liked among non-U2 fans who have heard the album as well.

But I guess will know in a few weeks what U2 has chosen for the next single.

[fedeu2]

I agree, MD is the best song in HTDAAB. I love that song, it´s in my all time U2´s Top 20.
Having said that, I believe Love and peace or else would have a greater impact on the charts, specially Europe. At the same time, it would be a slap in the face of those that claim U2 have stopped experimenting and just played safe with ATYCLB and HTDAAB.

Originally posted by STING2


It might be Miracle Drug as well. The last third of the song has some strings put into it during the show. Its pre-recorded stuff of course. They may have decided to re-record it.

I think releasing "Original" as the 5th single would be a big mistake. The 5th single should be the song most likely to succeed at radio and do well at the Grammy awards as the cut off date for Grammy eligibility is September 30.

In a Poll of the best song on the album here at interference, Miracle Drug was the clear winner. I've found it to be the most liked among non-U2 fans who have heard the album as well.

But I guess will know in a few weeks what U2 has chosen for the next single.

[BigMacPhisto]

"MD" also would've been my next choice for fourth worldwide single (and fifth in the US)........definitely seems the most radio friendly track left from the album, followed by "A Man And A Woman"...........but I guess the band cares too much about "Original" to let it not be a single......but hey, they're remixing it, so perhaps it'll be the most radio ready in the long run.

[doctorwho]

U2 can release every single song off this album as a single, but if they fail to market it, as they've done with every song since "Vertigo", it won't make a dent in the U.S. charts.

I highly recommend another U2/iTunes coupling. Get the song listed on the main page of iTunes. Have a "special" where people can load two songs for the price of one (like a b-side). If the single is remade/remixed with an orchestra, that will at least make it different from the album version (as opposed to just a simple album edit) and promote downloads. Once the song is out there via iTunes, it might help get it noticed.

iTunes provides a quick and easy way of advertising, without giving the impression of "selling out". But U2's marketing team can also redo TV/radio ads, showcasing the newly remixed single that advertises HTDAAB. Advertise the album, while playing the new song, and state how it also features hits like "Vertigo". Again, those ads aren't selling out - just normal TV ads promoting the album.

iTunes is probably far less expensive than the TV/radio ads, but by doing all three, U2's marketing team will FINALLY be pushing a new song and the album - something that hasn't been done since "Vertigo". If U2's marketing team claims they've been doing all that they can in the U.S., they are full of it. If U2 wasn't touring, I wouldn't hear a word about their new album!!

[fedeu2]

Excellent marketing plot doctorwho.
If only U2 marketing team checked out this forum from time to time. Then, they would know what to do!

Originally posted by doctorwho
U2 can release every single song off this album as a single, but if they fail to market it, as they've done with every song since "Vertigo", it won't make a dent in the U.S. charts.

I highly recommend another U2/iTunes coupling. Get the song listed on the main page of iTunes. Have a "special" where people can load two songs for the price of one (like a b-side). If the single is remade/remixed with an orchestra, that will at least make it different from the album version (as opposed to just a simple album edit) and promote downloads. Once the song is out there via iTunes, it might help get it noticed.

iTunes provides a quick and easy way of advertising, without giving the impression of "selling out". But U2's marketing team can also redo TV/radio ads, showcasing the newly remixed single that advertises HTDAAB. Advertise the album, while playing the new song, and state how it also features hits like "Vertigo". Again, those ads aren't selling out - just normal TV ads promoting the album.

iTunes is probably far less expensive than the TV/radio ads, but by doing all three, U2's marketing team will FINALLY be pushing a new song and the album - something that hasn't been done since "Vertigo". If U2's marketing team claims they've been doing all that they can in the U.S., they are full of it. If U2 wasn't touring, I wouldn't hear a word about their new album!!

[MumblingBono]

Miracle Drug is milquetoast U2-by-numbers. OOTS and LOPOE are the best choices remaining for singles.

Or better yet - Crumbs

[fedeu2]

Crumbs?
It´s Walk on meet Electrical storm revisited, at best. Together with One step closer, the weakest song in the album.

Originally posted by MumblingBono
Miracle Drug is milquetoast U2-by-numbers. OOTS and LOPOE are the best choices remaining for singles.

Or better yet - Crumbs

[ybird3k]

good ideas Dr Who, i dont suppose u can get them through to U2's marketing (or lack of) team?

[doctorwho]

I wish I could get this through to U2's marketing team!

When ABoY failed to chart high - even on the Modern Rock charts - I knew something was up. So I started making the same suggestions I made aobve for "Sometimes...". Of course, nothing was done and the song "flopped" in the U.S. (if you can call a song cracking the Top 100 a flop).

Looking at Billboard, HTDAAB has, at best, another week in the Top 200. After 36 weeks, it may very well be off the charts in the U.S. That's pathetic! "Pop", which even U2 calls a "flop", was in the Top 200 for 28 weeks. It appears HTDAAB won't be far behind (despite selling more).

Compare HTDAAB to ATYCLB. Why was ATYCLB in the top 200 for so long? BD and "Vertigo" were both powerful, Grammy-award winning first singles. Both songs started their respective albums off well and kept it going strong initially. So far so good. But after that, what happened? Well, U2 made the "Elevation/Tomb Raider" video. You may hate that video, but that song was part of a blockbuster movie in 2001 - and it got U2 noticed, even if the song failed to break through on the Hot 100. This video kept U2 in the news and helped keep the album from free-falling off the charts, as HTDAAB is doing now. When U2 returned to the U.S., post-9/11, and released "Stuck...", U.S. audiences were ready to re-embrace AYTCLB.

In contrast, we don't have U2 making fun videos. We don't have U2 hooking up with Hollywood. Sure, U2's doing some charity with L8, but so did tons of other artists. U2's marketing team must think it's 1992 again, where all U2 has to do is release a song and it'll be played on the radio!

Maybe the U2 camp is happy with a #1 album and 3M in U.S. sales. Those are indeed impressive numbers, especially in this era and for a 25 year old band. But HTDAAB is a great album and it should do far better. The fact that it's not is U2's marketing team's fault. And that's really a shame. For this album to have only "Zooropa" type sales and a "Pop" type performance on the charts, despite its initial outburst, proves to me that the marketing team really dropped the ball after "Vertigo".

[STING2]

Originally posted by doctorwho
I wish I could get this through to U2's marketing team!

When ABoY failed to chart high - even on the Modern Rock charts - I knew something was up. So I started making the same suggestions I made aobve for "Sometimes...". Of course, nothing was done and the song "flopped" in the U.S. (if you can call a song cracking the Top 100 a flop).

Looking at Billboard, HTDAAB has, at best, another week in the Top 200. After 36 weeks, it may very well be off the charts in the U.S. That's pathetic! "Pop", which even U2 calls a "flop", was in the Top 200 for 28 weeks. It appears HTDAAB won't be far behind (despite selling more).

Compare HTDAAB to ATYCLB. Why was ATYCLB in the top 200 for so long? BD and "Vertigo" were both powerful, Grammy-award winning first singles. Both songs started their respective albums off well and kept it going strong initially. So far so good. But after that, what happened? Well, U2 made the "Elevation/Tomb Raider" video. You may hate that video, but that song was part of a blockbuster movie in 2001 - and it got U2 noticed, even if the song failed to break through on the Hot 100. This video kept U2 in the news and helped keep the album from free-falling off the charts, as HTDAAB is doing now. When U2 returned to the U.S., post-9/11, and released "Stuck...", U.S. audiences were ready to re-embrace AYTCLB.

In contrast, we don't have U2 making fun videos. We don't have U2 hooking up with Hollywood. Sure, U2's doing some charity with L8, but so did tons of other artists. U2's marketing team must think it's 1992 again, where all U2 has to do is release a song and it'll be played on the radio!

Maybe the U2 camp is happy with a #1 album and 3M in U.S. sales. Those are indeed impressive numbers, especially in this era and for a 25 year old band. But HTDAAB is a great album and it should do far better. The fact that it's not is U2's marketing team's fault. And that's really a shame. For this album to have only "Zooropa" type sales and a "Pop" type performance on the charts, despite its initial outburst, proves to me that the marketing team really dropped the ball after "Vertigo".

This album has sold 3 million copies, well beyond the 2 million that Zooropa did in its first year in the USA. In addition, if this album was in a business environment like 2000 or 2001, sales of BOMB would already be closer to 4 million.

That being said, it is a surprise to suddenly see the album drop so steadily over the past 12 weeks to the point that it is now going to disappear from the chart in the USA. This week the album is at #187 in its 35th week.

Unfortunately, I'm not convinced that TV Ads or another link up with Hollywood would necessarily boost sales. During POP, U2 got a full hour on a major network and made several appearances on TV shows but it unfortunately did nothing for POP.

The best way to have a hit is still the old fasion way, but its not something that the band or the marketing team can completely control. Just because you spend x amount of money on marketing and promotion does not mean your song will go from not being played on the radio, to suddenly racing up the charts.

Just the other day, a record executive made the comment that in this current era of massive downloading of free music and CD burning, that Usher's sales of 9 million for his latest album was the same as Michael Jackson selling 20 million copies of Thriller back in 1983. If that is the case, current sales of BOMB in the USA are more like 6 or 7 million.

But the band are going to have at least one more single from this album, and maybe there will be some new marketing strategy to go along with it.

[doctorwho]

Sting2, you have to remember that "Zooropa" wasn't really promoted at all! I recall that time very well. I was at a local record store and just happened to glance at their upcoming releases list. I was stunned to see U2 and "Zooropa" listed for a July release! I hadn't heard a thing about it! For AB, there were posters and MTV days and promotions, etc. Then, when "Zooropa" was released, the first single was a video single!! So not only was there no real marketing, but the single wasn't accessible - at least in the U.S. Yet the album still debuted at #1 and sold 2.5M copies - initially due to AB and the ZOO TV tour. HTDAAB debuted at #1 and sold very well initially as well, due to ATYCLB and the "Vertigo" single. But that time has passed. A prior album can only boost a new album so much. A hit single can only carry an album for so long. New material is needed.

I fully agree that having U2 on prime time is, in and of itself, not the answer. But I didn't say that U2 should have some hour long special as they did with the PopMart and Elevation tours. Both of those shows on TV produced very low numbers. U2 can sell out tours and have blockbuster DVD sales - but put the concert on TV and it doesn't get watched. But then, the same was true for the L8 concert - people just weren't watching. And I think this is a reflection of the culture here. People WILL watch country music on TV, but not rock. This shows how popular country music is. Rock/pop music, however, is popular more with kids, and kids are internet savvy. This is why AOL set a record with people watching the L8 concert, but why the TV show flopped. Same is true with U2 - people will go online to read and watch them, but not sit in front of the "boob tube" to do so.

Hence, having another "special" won't work at all. HOWEVER, having another ad will. Create an ad that focuses on promoting HTDAAB. Start the ad with the new single. Tie it in with iTunes. Claim that the song can be found on HTDAAB, but the new remade, orchestrated single is an iTunes special! To sweeten the deal, state that every download of the new single entitles one to the free b-side release (perhaps a new U2 song or a remix). The "two-for-one" aspect always gets people. Then conclude the TV ad stating how the album features other great "classics" such as "Vertigo" and "Sometimes..." (playing small tiny bits of those songs). It could be done in as little as 30 seconds (a full 60 second ad can also be created). Show it on MTV and any other station during the right hours and it will get noticed and help sales. Then put the new song in a banner on the front page of iTunes (like what was done with "Vertigo") and suddenly people will start downloading the song. U2 fans will download as they'll want to hear the new orchestrated version of the song. Others will download because they were inspired by the commercial. Others will download as they may like the song. And still others will download because they like the "two-for-one" deal. Even if the song only gets into the Top 50 on the U.S. charts due to the download, that's oceans higher than all of U2's other singles from HTDAAB, barring "Vertigo".

Right now, if they just release the new single to coincide with their fall return to touring, I just don't see much happening. ABoy, "Sometimes" and CoBL did nothing on the charts. ABoY had the advantage of following "Vertigo" - and while it did O.K. on the Modern Rock charts, it didn't break through. After that, nothing. Radio stations are now hesitant to play U2 because the last two songs did nothing - so why play CoBL? And now that CoBL "failed", radio stations will be even less inclined to play the new song!! It's a Catch 22 - you need a hit to get on the radio, but the only way to get a hit is to be on the radio! Radio isn't playing U2 because their songs aren't hits - but that's radio's fault!! So U2 have to go outside of radio to get a hit. They did this with "Vertigo", time to do it again.

And there's nothing wrong with this. Even when Britney Spears was huge, it wasn't just due to radio hits. The woman made sassy videos, was strutting her stuff all over TV and was on tons of magazines. This "free" marketing garnered her tons of attention, which in turn caused demand to hear her songs. Hence radio played them and she had hits. If Spears had done none of that and just released songs to radio, I doubt they'd get played. They were catchy and cute, but they hardly stood out from all the other catchy/cute songs that were out there at the time. It was Spears' ability to market herself that garnered her attention. Same must be done with U2. But U2 can do this with class and elegance, and without "selling out". They can use iTunes, their iPod and TV to help promote themselves. While there'll still be the die-hards here who will complain, these people are living in the 70's. The world has changed and marketing is a big part of it. We have short attention spans. U2 have to do something new and as far as the public is concerned, they haven't done anything since "Vertigo".

[prof_peabody]

doctorwho - do you work in the promoter industry?

Interesting insight, thanks.

[Harry Vest]

I've always thought MD should of been released instead of COBL. If I was U2 I would of released MD for the summer and saved COBL for the fall/winter. COBL is more of a fall/winter feeling song.
Oh well, hope MD does better when it's released. One post somewhere up there mentioned A Man And A Woman - interesting choice. That would do very well at more mainstream radio stations - almost, dare I say...easy listening. Great little tune though - very underated.

[STING2]

Originally posted by doctorwho
Sting2, you have to remember that "Zooropa" wasn't really promoted at all! I recall that time very well. I was at a local record store and just happened to glance at their upcoming releases list. I was stunned to see U2 and "Zooropa" listed for a July release! I hadn't heard a thing about it! For AB, there were posters and MTV days and promotions, etc. Then, when "Zooropa" was released, the first single was a video single!! So not only was there no real marketing, but the single wasn't accessible - at least in the U.S. Yet the album still debuted at #1 and sold 2.5M copies - initially due to AB and the ZOO TV tour. HTDAAB debuted at #1 and sold very well initially as well, due to ATYCLB and the "Vertigo" single. But that time has passed. A prior album can only boost a new album so much. A hit single can only carry an album for so long. New material is needed.

I fully agree that having U2 on prime time is, in and of itself, not the answer. But I didn't say that U2 should have some hour long special as they did with the PopMart and Elevation tours. Both of those shows on TV produced very low numbers. U2 can sell out tours and have blockbuster DVD sales - but put the concert on TV and it doesn't get watched. But then, the same was true for the L8 concert - people just weren't watching. And I think this is a reflection of the culture here. People WILL watch country music on TV, but not rock. This shows how popular country music is. Rock/pop music, however, is popular more with kids, and kids are internet savvy. This is why AOL set a record with people watching the L8 concert, but why the TV show flopped. Same is true with U2 - people will go online to read and watch them, but not sit in front of the "boob tube" to do so.

Hence, having another "special" won't work at all. HOWEVER, having another ad will. Create an ad that focuses on promoting HTDAAB. Start the ad with the new single. Tie it in with iTunes. Claim that the song can be found on HTDAAB, but the new remade, orchestrated single is an iTunes special! To sweeten the deal, state that every download of the new single entitles one to the free b-side release (perhaps a new U2 song or a remix). The "two-for-one" aspect always gets people. Then conclude the TV ad stating how the album features other great "classics" such as "Vertigo" and "Sometimes..." (playing small tiny bits of those songs). It could be done in as little as 30 seconds (a full 60 second ad can also be created). Show it on MTV and any other station during the right hours and it will get noticed and help sales. Then put the new song in a banner on the front page of iTunes (like what was done with "Vertigo") and suddenly people will start downloading the song. U2 fans will download as they'll want to hear the new orchestrated version of the song. Others will download because they were inspired by the commercial. Others will download as they may like the song. And still others will download because they like the "two-for-one" deal. Even if the song only gets into the Top 50 on the U.S. charts due to the download, that's oceans higher than all of U2's other singles from HTDAAB, barring "Vertigo".

Right now, if they just release the new single to coincide with their fall return to touring, I just don't see much happening. ABoy, "Sometimes" and CoBL did nothing on the charts. ABoY had the advantage of following "Vertigo" - and while it did O.K. on the Modern Rock charts, it didn't break through. After that, nothing. Radio stations are now hesitant to play U2 because the last two songs did nothing - so why play CoBL? And now that CoBL "failed", radio stations will be even less inclined to play the new song!! It's a Catch 22 - you need a hit to get on the radio, but the only way to get a hit is to be on the radio! Radio isn't playing U2 because their songs aren't hits - but that's radio's fault!! So U2 have to go outside of radio to get a hit. They did this with "Vertigo", time to do it again.

And there's nothing wrong with this. Even when Britney Spears was huge, it wasn't just due to radio hits. The woman made sassy videos, was strutting her stuff all over TV and was on tons of magazines. This "free" marketing garnered her tons of attention, which in turn caused demand to hear her songs. Hence radio played them and she had hits. If Spears had done none of that and just released songs to radio, I doubt they'd get played. They were catchy and cute, but they hardly stood out from all the other catchy/cute songs that were out there at the time. It was Spears' ability to market herself that garnered her attention. Same must be done with U2. But U2 can do this with class and elegance, and without "selling out". They can use iTunes, their iPod and TV to help promote themselves. While there'll still be the die-hards here who will complain, these people are living in the 70's. The world has changed and marketing is a big part of it. We have short attention spans. U2 have to do something new and as far as the public is concerned, they haven't done anything since "Vertigo".

I recall the time very well too. I remember in the Spring of 1993 hearing on the radio that U2 were planning a new release for summer that was going to be a "mini-album" or EP. Everyone was excited and looking forward to it. Then it was announced that it was going to be a full album, and the excitement level trippled. Every radio station in the area was advertising themselves as being the place to go to first listen to the new single. MTV spotlighted the video and Edge peformed NUMB at the MTV music video awards.

To sum up, the only thing the band did not do for ZOOROPA that they did do for Achtung Baby is launch a full tour for it. At the end of 1993, the album was at the 1.8 million mark according to soundscan and was certified for 2 million in sales from RIAA. Even if the band had toured for the album, I doubt sales would have improved much more for it.

HTDAAB has done amazingly well. Although many would say ATYCLB has helped its initial sales, ATYCLB was released four years earlier, so enough time had passed for much of the excitment around ATYCLB to cool off. Zooropa was release only 1.5 years after Achtung Baby was released and Achtung Baby was still on the Billboard 200.

I think people will watch a rock documentary or rock show on TV, but who ever the artist is must be doing very well in the media prior to the event as well as doing very well in sales. The POPMART documentary was watched by 2.4 million people in the United States which is more than twice as many people who had actually bought POP at that time and also more people than would see the tour in the United States. So, considering the fact that the POP album and tour in the USA was something only the die hard fanbase went after, the TV show actually did very well.

As far as using a new TV ad to promote BOMB or doing some other type of alternative promotion, the band could do that for every single, but it would eventually backfire and make things worse for the band. The goal hear is to attract new listeners, not beat them over the head to the point that they hate the band. Promotion on TV can seem much more in your face, especially when its commercials set between programs people are watching. Doing to much of that can have a negative effect on both non-fans, new fans and old fans. The band cannot piss its die hard base off, because its die hard base is huge and is more than 50% of the reason the band is the #1 concert draw in the world.

After more than 25 years in the business, U2 and its marketing team are argueably the best in the business. The results speak for themselves. U2 is not Britney Spears nor are they Aerosmith that can use near naked models in all their video's. U2 have a reputation and a credibility that has helped them to be the #1 or #2 concert draw in the world. There definitely are various alternative ways of marketing the album but the band are not going to engage in many of them because a. its not them b. it could end up hurting the band more than helping.

In addition, in the promotion life of any album, there is the point of diminishing returns. A new massive TV ad campaign may only add 400,000 to 500,000 in sales. Would the money spent on such a campaign be justified if the result was only a 400,000 increase in album sales? Then consider the number of people, both non fan and fan who would be put off by a massive TV ad campaign. The band may have put all these factors into a cost-benefit analysis and decided the overall benefit to the band is to small.

U2 are signed to the largest record lable on the planet. They work with many of the best people in the business. If they feel a TV add campaign can really benefit the album at this point without hurting the band in other ways, then I think they will do it. Massive TV or alternative promotion is not always succesful and can often fail.