I'm going to reply to the original post, but imply by association the other posters (not necessarily you, namkcuR) who are taking this to the nth degree.
namkcuR said:
look at the concert dates that have been released. It's like half as much as there were on the first leg of Elevation(bare in mind I know they could add more, but still).
Still what? You're now officially arguing a circle in a circle. They'll add more dates. They had to focus on the big markets -- selling tickets in high-profile markets at first guarantees the album will keep selling through the year, which will justify coming back later. They have a limited window in which to schedule the shows, so they're doing the best they can with what they have. They did the same thing with ZooTV -- a quick hit-and-run tour in the spring, a longer tour come fall. This is neither a surprise nor unprecedented.
PM still has not given a decipherable/meaningful explanation for the delay in the announcement or the less than full tour schedule. I'm not asking for a detailed essay here, just two lines that spare of us from typical PM BS.
Let me get this straight...
1. McGuiness said the problem was due to routing issues.
2. The media leaked that there was a health problem in Edge's family.
3. The NHL strike is throwing everything into disarray.
None of these are good enough? (And if Edge chooses not to come forward about whatever's going on, what's that to any of us? His privacy is his privacy, for pete's sake.)
Also, Ticketmaster is apparently involved again...now, I didn't use Ticketmaster last time around, but I've heard horror stories about how they fucked it up quite badly. If this is true, why is U2 still using it?
Can you suggest another vendor who has the capacity to handle the incredibly high volume of demand for a U2 tour?
Also, the ticket prices themselves are also arguably higher than they've ever been. Whatever happened to the U2 that actually didn't profit during ZooTV just so that their fans could get in without paying an arm and a leg?
Adjusted for inflation, tickets aren't that bad. As I recall, tix to ZooTV were $30 twelve years ago -- and now they're giving the best seats in the house for $49. What's the problem? In my mind, that's a steal. People b*tched when PopMart came out -- for a whopping $40. Some people will never be happy.
And for the record...*both* ZooTV and PopMart operated at a loss. (ZooTV at least was saved by T-shirt sales.) What do you expect? With the music industry contracting, live is where musicians make their living. Do you expect U2 to organize every tour without making money? Of course the logical retort to this is that they're well taken care of, they're not worrying about where their next meal is coming from and blah blah blah, but seriously -- U2 work hard, they put an awful lot out there -- do you really expect them to do all this work and not make money? Is that what they owe us as fans? To work as hard as they do, and not make any money at it? What if the people you work for held you to the same standard?
People. Really. If you're angry at their prices, don't buy tickets. Don't buy the iPod. Don't buy fifteen different T-shirts. Don't buy the ultra-special-edition-with-bells-and-whistles special edition. Prioritize based on what you can afford. Save up if that's what it takes. Don't complain about high prices -- especially when you consider people are paying three, four, and five times this amount to see Madonna, Billy Joel, Sting, etc.
BTW...I'm an old-school Prop member. Had no problems with my subscription. Had no problems joining the site. And have no problems paying a measly $20 for the chance at early tickets. Wouldn't have had a problem paying $40 either -- but I frankly appreciated the courtesy to the fans. Was it perfect? No, but what is? A few vociferous ones got attention. The majority of fans were/are well-served.
Better to come in and light a candle than stand outside and curse the darkness...