Courtney Doesn't Love U2 - Page 3 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Your Blue Room > Everything You Know Is Wrong > Everything You Know Is Wrong Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 03-22-2002, 02:29 AM   #41
The Fly
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Posts: 262
Local Time: 10:10 PM
This promotional debate is very interesting! I had no idea some of the songs from Pop did that well in the charts. All I remember is a bunch of publicity then--nothing. The only song I ever heard from Pop on the radio was Staring at the Sun.

I'm not an expert on the record business, but is there, perhaps, a difference between record label promotion and the promotion that the band does for themselves? That could explain us seeing a lot of promotion, yet Paul being mad at the label for not promoting a record. (I read he was furious that there current label released whatever was #1 the week ATYCLB was released and keeping it from debuting at #1)
__________________

u2utah is offline  
Old 03-22-2002, 01:29 PM   #42
MBH
Acrobat
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: wantagh, ny usa
Posts: 392
Local Time: 10:10 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2:
Matthewpage2000,
Its very interesting that you bring up the issue of displays in record stores because the first time I ever saw one for U2 was in 1997 during the POPMART tour. It was huge and had their entire catalog of albums. It was at the independent record store at the University I went to, so that shows that they went past the major chains to promote this album.

MBH,
I certainly agree with you about reception of ATYCLB vs POP and a few other things, but still not on promotion. The Billboard information is of course fact that cannot be disputed. Ones memory is based on the local area they lived in which may or may not be accurate and which is NOT a national measurement which Billboard is. I could dig up video play info to add to radio play info as well.
On the topic of TV appearences could you specifically list the 30 TV shows that U2 appeared on since the release of ATYCLB. I have roughly the same number of TV appearnces taped for POPMART as I do ATYCLB.
When it comes to promotion, TV appearences are important, but not as important as solid radio airplay, video play, and concerts. This was just recently stated in Billboard magazine after the Grammy awards when the effect of the awards was being discussed.
I agree with you about the reception that ATYCLB has recieved, and it certainly has sold a hell of a lot more copies than POP, but I see know clear evidence that the band and label promoted ATYCLB more than POP. I think they did the best they could for POP, there is certainly know logic in doing half assed promotion for your first album in nearly 4 years when your going out on the most expensive tour in the history of the planet for POPMART.
U2s nationaly televised K-MART press conference, their largest ever, and the Year in POP music special one hour long on ABC in prime time televised spot, are two huge examples of promotion that U2 did for POP that they did not do for ATYCLB. The Super Bowl and Grammy's were things that were out of the bands control, while the big media events for POP were planned and controlled by the band.

Sting2, this discussion is fun, but quite redundant. I think that we just have different PERCEPTIONS on the matter at hand.

First of all, U2 certainly DOES have control over attending the Super Bowl and the Grammys. If they DIDNT want to attend either of those, they would not have.

As for promotion, here are some facts:
The Super Bowl 36 Halftime show received a 38.0 rating(approx.); that means that over 38 million households were tuned into U2 during halftime. There is approximately an average of 2-3 people in those households so the audience for the halftime show in the US alone was approximately 100million +. In Canada, the ratings were also sky high. The overall estimate for the viewership for the Halftime show is somewhere near 800 million worldwide!!!


The rating for the grammy's was approximately 20.0. That means about 20 million homes were watching the Grammy's in the US. Again, that means that probably between 50-60 million people saw U2's performance for the 2002 grammy's; note that more people saw the 2001 grammy's when U2 performed BD b/c the rating were higher(about 25.0).
Yes, the band did promote themselves on the ABC special for the opening night in Vegas of the POP tour. Unfortunately it was the Lowest Rated Non-news special ever(If you know of the exact rating, let me know). The rating for this is unquestionably significantly lower than for either Grammy telecast and the Super Bowl(one of the highest rated shows ever).

Here are the national and/or local shows that I have seen U2 appear on since September of 2000 (this does not even include commercials or video play on any music channels such as VH1, MTV or MuchMusic/Canadian Music Station)

1. Grammy's 2001
2. Grammy's 2002
3. Saturday Night Live (12/9/00)
4. CNN People in the News (5/01)
5. CNN People in the News (2/02)
6. MTV: Touring Band Live (6/01)
7. Elevation Live-VH1 (11/01)
8. Vh1 live promotion w/Bono & Larry (9/00)
9. TRL on MTV (10/31/00)
10. Charlie Rose Show w/Bono (6/21/01)
11. Jay Leno Show (11/22/01)
12. David Letterman Show (10/29/01)
13. 60 Minutes 2 on CBS (2/01)
14. 60 Minutes 2 on CBS (2/02)
15. NBA Halftime Show on NBC (6/01)
16. U2 @ the Halftime Show on Fox (2/3/02)
17-19. Entertainment Tonight x 3
20-22. Access Hollywood x 3
23. Sportscenter Press Conference (2.02)
24. From A Whisper to a Scream on Bravo (3/02)
25. Live @ Much (5/25/01)
26-7. E! News Daily x 2 (2/01, 2/02)
28. MTV Video Music Awards 2000 (9/00)
29. MTV Video Music Awards 2001 (9/6/01)
30-32. Extra TV Show on NBC

Besides all of this exposure/promotion which is connected to the band in some way(purposely or not), they have appeared vividly or mentioned in several magazine articles such as Oprah, Rolling Stone, Guitar Magazine, Spin, Bender, Details Time, Entertainment, ESPN, Sports Illustrated and People.

The bottom line is(besides the fact that all of us probably care too much about U2--ha, ha), that the band CLEARLY promoted ATYCLB more than POP. If they could, I think they would go back and promote POP more and in a different manner.

Look forward to your reply.
__________________

MBH is offline  
Old 03-22-2002, 07:02 PM   #43
MBH
Acrobat
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: wantagh, ny usa
Posts: 392
Local Time: 10:10 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2:
Well, how many artist can you name that would reject going on the Grammy's and the Super Bowl. U2 were invited and nominated for both. Those were things out of the bands control. It was technically possible that this could have happened for POP, but again, this was out of the bands control. You can't honestly tell me you think the band would have turned down the Super Bowl in 1997/1998 or the Grammy's if they had been invited and were up for 10 awards.
So again, I count things that require the direct effort of the band and label and is not dependent on invitations or nominations. Certainly the total number of TV appearences are ahead for ATYCLB vs POP. But U2 largest promotion efforts are still the events I described for POP, since the Grammy's and Superbowl are out of the bands control. They did not invite themselves to the Superbowl and simply voting for themselves at the Grammy's would not be enough to win when 13,000 people are voting.
The Year In POP was a real effort by the band to get on USA TV on one of the big 3 networks that you don't need cable to see, in a prime time spot. That was 100% the bands push and ABC accepted. Same with MTV A to Z and U2 largest press conference ever at K-MART. The Year in POP at a 4.5 rating, but whats in important is the effort! A one hour show focused on the band on a major network in primetime spot. The effort to pull that off dwarfs anything that could be said about the Grammy's and Superbowl since all the band had to do was accept and they would have accepted if the same had happened during POPMART.
But my most important point is that radio airplay, Video play, and concerts are where 80% of the promotion is and there is no way you could say in those area's that it was lacking for POP vs ATYCLB. I would argue that the Type of TV Appearences done for POP for only promotion reasons reached a larger crowd than the numerous events for ATYCLB on smaller less widely viewed shows although U2 did a few of these for POP as well. Again I'm only counting things where the band pushed to be on a show or appearance.
I also have numerous magazine articles on the band in 1997 from list of magazines you list. POP and POPMART were massive undertakings. The band did not go out with low budget promotion for the most expensive tour in history and their first major album in nearly 4 years. With the exception of a few minor TV appearnces more for ATYCLB, the band, management, and label gave a 100% effort for POP and POPMART. There is simply no evidence to suggest otherwise.
Of course most of our discussion has focused on the size and number of TV appearences which overall are only 20% along with magazines, of the promotion equation according to those in Billboard magazine and music business executives.
Sting2,
Ok, here is....
This discussion has never been about the EFFORT the band made to promote themselves for the last 2 albums. I am talking about OVERALL PROMOTION, EXSPOSURE AND PRESENSE in the public eye. If you want to tell me that the band promoted the hell out of POP and did it themselves without certain invitations, then fine, I guess that is the case.

However, U2 WAS NOT IN THE PUBLIC EYE AS MUCH FOR AS LONG A DURATION OF TIME during POP as they have been for ATYCLB.

The Super Bowl, Grammys and Time Magazine alone most likely reached a lager scope of people--probably a large percentage of the world!!---then ALL or MOST of the promotion for POP.

I dont care if they had no control over being nominated for the grammys(by the way, they said the "thought we could make the best album of the year," so they certainly DID have control), THEY WENT to the Super Bowl and they made the decision to go. Nobody kidnapped them and sent them to the Super Bowl. Bono also made time to pose for Time magazine which is one of the most prestigious and most visible Magazines in the World!!!!!

This is some of the greatest exsposure the band has ever seen(only Amnesty Int. concert, Live Aid and the '87 cover of Time can possibly match).

I dont understand the repetitive use of the "80%" quote that you use from Billboard.
80% of promotion may come from radio and TV.

However, the factual numbers of people who saw the Super Bowl(nearly 20% of the world saw it, how many people read Billboard magazine?!?), constant appearances on TV, combined with the political converage toward Bono's activism dwarfs the coverage of POP. Much of the mainstream public wanted to forget about POP in the US b/c it is not what they wanted or expected of U2. ATYCLB is nearly as big if not bigger than JT---refer to McGuiness quote---POP is arguably U2's most disappointing album in the US. Promotions--whether done intentionally, unintentionally, invited, uninvited, voted on or whatever---is still promotion.

U2 did a much more aggresive Promotional campaign (especially in the US) for POP than they did for ATYCLB. THe success of the record is tied to that and the success speaks for itself. In fact, ATYCLB is now in its 72 week on the Billboard Chart. POP was gone after 28. That should say a lot about exsposure, quality and promotion of an album in the mainstream eyes that we are talking about in the first place.

MBH is offline  
Old 03-23-2002, 12:42 AM   #44
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 10:10 PM
As far as total Exposure regardless of how it happened, I would have to agree with you.
Billboard magazine tracks and monitors such things as national radio airplay in all formats, as well as video play, album and single sales, and concert stats. When comparing these area's from year to year, Billboard is the only guide.
As I have all ready shown before, when it comes to radio airplay, ATYCLB was not more exposed in the USA than POP. If you want me to delve deeper than I already have in this area, I could take an airplay format like Modern Rock, this is considered U2s home but this time out Beautiful Day peaked at #5 while both Discotheque and Staring At The Sun hit #1 easy with the latter staying there for 4 weeks! So when it comes to radio airplay, exposure was clearly overall the same as seen by stats I posted before this.
When it comes to exposure with video play I would give a slight lead to ATYCLB although MTV, VH1 today do not show as many video's overall as they did in 1997.
As far as concerts I would say exposure was about the same. Although more shows were played in 2001 in the USA, U2 played to more people in 1997.
TV exposure ATYCLB would win out but not nearly by the margin you think. Also judging by the stats, number of extra copies sold after certain shows, I think the effect of TV is overrated as music business people would say as well. Its still helpfull though and a part of the package.
So overall exposure regardless of how it happens, yes ATYCLB wins out.
The promotion effort by the band and label though was about the same.

On another topic though, I would not begin to compare the exposure level of the band in 2001 with that in 1987. I'll just state two of many reasons for that. With Or With Out #1 played song nation wide in the USA regardless of format for 3 weeks straight. I Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For #1 for 2 weeks. The only contender against 1987 would be 1992 for Achtung and ZOO TV.
STING2 is offline  
Old 03-23-2002, 02:43 AM   #45
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 10:10 PM
Well, how many artist can you name that would reject going on the Grammy's and the Super Bowl. U2 were invited and nominated for both. Those were things out of the bands control. It was technically possible that this could have happened for POP, but again, this was out of the bands control. You can't honestly tell me you think the band would have turned down the Super Bowl in 1997/1998 or the Grammy's if they had been invited and were up for 10 awards.
So again, I count things that require the direct effort of the band and label and is not dependent on invitations or nominations. Certainly the total number of TV appearences are ahead for ATYCLB vs POP. But U2 largest promotion efforts are still the events I described for POP, since the Grammy's and Superbowl are out of the bands control. They did not invite themselves to the Superbowl and simply voting for themselves at the Grammy's would not be enough to win when 13,000 people are voting.
The Year In POP was a real effort by the band to get on USA TV on one of the big 3 networks that you don't need cable to see, in a prime time spot. That was 100% the bands push and ABC accepted. Same with MTV A to Z and U2 largest press conference ever at K-MART. The Year in POP at a 4.5 rating, but whats in important is the effort! A one hour show focused on the band on a major network in primetime spot. The effort to pull that off dwarfs anything that could be said about the Grammy's and Superbowl since all the band had to do was accept and they would have accepted if the same had happened during POPMART.
But my most important point is that radio airplay, Video play, and concerts are where 80% of the promotion is and there is no way you could say in those area's that it was lacking for POP vs ATYCLB. I would argue that the Type of TV Appearences done for POP for only promotion reasons reached a larger crowd than the numerous events for ATYCLB on smaller less widely viewed shows although U2 did a few of these for POP as well. Again I'm only counting things where the band pushed to be on a show or appearance.
I also have numerous magazine articles on the band in 1997 from list of magazines you list. POP and POPMART were massive undertakings. The band did not go out with low budget promotion for the most expensive tour in history and their first major album in nearly 4 years. With the exception of a few minor TV appearnces more for ATYCLB, the band, management, and label gave a 100% effort for POP and POPMART. There is simply no evidence to suggest otherwise.
Of course most of our discussion has focused on the size and number of TV appearences which overall are only 20% along with magazines, of the promotion equation according to those in Billboard magazine and music business executives.
STING2 is offline  
Old 03-23-2002, 10:12 AM   #46
MBH
Acrobat
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: wantagh, ny usa
Posts: 392
Local Time: 10:10 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2:
As far as total Exposure regardless of how it happened, I would have to agree with you.
Billboard magazine tracks and monitors such things as national radio airplay in all formats, as well as video play, album and single sales, and concert stats. When comparing these area's from year to year, Billboard is the only guide.
As I have all ready shown before, when it comes to radio airplay, ATYCLB was not more exposed in the USA than POP. If you want me to delve deeper than I already have in this area, I could take an airplay format like Modern Rock, this is considered U2s home but this time out Beautiful Day peaked at #5 while both Discotheque and Staring At The Sun hit #1 easy with the latter staying there for 4 weeks! So when it comes to radio airplay, exposure was clearly overall the same as seen by stats I posted before this.
When it comes to exposure with video play I would give a slight lead to ATYCLB although MTV, VH1 today do not show as many video's overall as they did in 1997.
As far as concerts I would say exposure was about the same. Although more shows were played in 2001 in the USA, U2 played to more people in 1997.
TV exposure ATYCLB would win out but not nearly by the margin you think. Also judging by the stats, number of extra copies sold after certain shows, I think the effect of TV is overrated as music business people would say as well. Its still helpfull though and a part of the package.
So overall exposure regardless of how it happens, yes ATYCLB wins out.
The promotion effort by the band and label though was about the same.

On another topic though, I would not begin to compare the exposure level of the band in 2001 with that in 1987. I'll just state two of many reasons for that. With Or With Out #1 played song nation wide in the USA regardless of format for 3 weeks straight. I Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For #1 for 2 weeks. The only contender against 1987 would be 1992 for Achtung and ZOO TV.
Please put that stupid Billboard magazine down of one minute and just listen to me!

MY point is that U2 HAS been exsposed and had a ubiqitous presense in the US that hasnt been seen since JT. I am talking about exsposure that reaches ALL ages. Parents, teens college students....middle aged people, etc....

When my father or people of his age(50's) make comments about U2 on a weekly basis, they have been over exsposed. By just talking to people, I am sure that they will tell you that they cant remember the last time a band has been in their face as much as U2 has been this time around(and if they do remember, they will probably tell you during the late 80's/JT era).

As far as radio play, I am not going to argue with your BB stats. All I know is that U2 has 4 singles off of ATYCLB that have made a ubiquitous presence for a year and a half whereas POP seemed to come and go because the people did not enjoy those songs as much.
MBH is offline  
Old 03-23-2002, 11:18 AM   #47
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 10:10 PM
Ones own personal experience with how widely U2 has been exposed could vary considerably from person to person. On the local level, you could find radio stations that rarely played U2 at all, or where they were in the top 10 for weeks on in.
Because of that, Billboard is an excellent way to get a grasp of how well an artist has done from an exposure point of view as well as raw sales figures and airplay figures on a National Scale.
Myself as well as many of my friends rarely if ever heard Walk On or Elevation played on the radio, and this does not surprise me when you look a the fact that neither song was able to crack the national top 100 airplay chart.
20 to 30 TV appearences is impressive but most people would not know about half of those. But when a song such as With Or With Out You is played on your local radio station almost EVERY hour, EVERY day, for several months, that is impossible to get away from. This is the type of promotion Linkin Park and Creed recieve here in the USA which is why their albums are selling so much. Radio is in bed with them.
U2 has done well despite much more limited radio airplay. The album is about to hit 4 million in sales in the USA. But I would credit TV appearences and other media with less than 20% of those sales. The rest come from the time tested true formula of radio airplay, Video play, and concerts. I'd say the main reason this album has sold so much more than POP is not because of exposure, but because people mainly old fans love what they have heard briefly here and there and have bought the album. Certainly as many people heard songs from POP but simply did not like it. I think you'll find that most people who have bought ATYCLB are long time fans or old fans coming back around after a decade or so. I think the number of brand new fans is very small.
STING2 is offline  
Old 03-23-2002, 11:45 AM   #48
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 10:10 PM
I did agree with you though about the overall exposure level on ATYCLB being higher than that for POP. Its the highest its been since 1992 for Achtung.
__________________

STING2 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:10 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×