u218 observation

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
aye, I thought it had something to do with global sales / airplay whatever

what with the best of 80-90, best of 90-00 + all their albums being available in every music store in town and online it doesn't really matter

I like U218 as it does what no other album does:
combine some of the band's most well known tracks from their entire career

sure it could have been different
but unless you're looking for something to moan about, who cares?
 
phillyfan26 said:


Discotheque was their third biggest hit ever in the US. It went to number 10 on the Billboard 100, if I recall.

And then quickly dropped off. When was the last time anyone heard this one on the radio?
 
rihannsu said:
I said GLOBAL airplay. It doesn't matter how much something is being played in the US if it isn't playing as well elsewhere. [...]The US is not the be all and end all of everything.

Funny, ever looked at my avatar? I'm usually the one calling people out for being Americentric. I'm a Kiwi who lives in Australia, and I've heard AIWIY on the radio plenty of times in both countries. I barely ever listen to the radio too, and yet I can say I've heard AIWIY and EBTTRT both within a year prior to U218's release, while I have heard Walk On precisely once, back when it was released (and in those days, I listened to the radio a lot).

As a matter of fact, Australian radio was playing WLCTT fairly frequently until the last few years. In about 1998-2000, I could bank on hearing it at least once a week on the Gold Coast.

Now, I don't know where you got this quote from Adam, I don't know why I should believe you (especially because you usually act like you're always right but are frequently wrong and rarely cite any sources), it's a shit criteria that fails on many levels, and I don't know why it makes a jot of difference anyway.
 
Axver said:


Funny, ever looked at my avatar? I'm usually the one calling people out for being Americentric. I'm a Kiwi who lives in Australia, and I've heard AIWIY on the radio plenty of times in both countries. I barely ever listen to the radio too, and yet I can say I've heard AIWIY and EBTTRT both within a year prior to U218's release, while I have heard Walk On precisely once, back when it was released (and in those days, I listened to the radio a lot).

As a matter of fact, Australian radio was playing WLCTT fairly frequently until the last few years. In about 1998-2000, I could bank on hearing it at least once a week on the Gold Coast.

Now, I don't know where you got this quote from Adam, I don't know why I should believe you (especially because you usually act like you're always right but are frequently wrong and rarely cite any sources), it's a shit criteria that fails on many levels, and I don't know why it makes a jot of difference anyway.

I believe the quote from Adam was in the Julie Saprong Interview done right before the start of the final leg of Vertigo, but I'm not positive.

I don't particularly care whether you think I'm right or wrong, all I was doing was passing on something I remembered that Adam had said.

One more time I will state that I was talking about global airplay and you were quoting back info about what was big in one country which is apples and oranges. And again in this post you respond with more info about one or two individual countries but no mention of global figures. How can you extrapolate global airplay from the info from only a couple of countries? I welcome any response that contains info on global airplay otherwise it is a meaningless response. As I have no idea how to find out what global airplay is for U2 tracks I have no way of knowing if this stacks up with what they put on the collection and am more than happy to accept being corrected if supplied with global airplay info not individual county info.

I don't know why you think I act like I am always right. I usually only post things I've come across and often say right out that I don't remember where I came across the info and if someone corrects me that fine. I apologize if I came across any other way. I don't claim to be any kind of expert and I'm not very good at remembering where I saw or heard things and am more than happy to be corrected if I'm wrong. If I can't track my own source down than I can't very well argue the point.

I don't know if it makes a jot of difference either but everybody was talking about how the selections were made and I just thought I'd mention what Adam said. Hell he could have been joking for all I know. After all everybody pretty much ignores info that doesn't match up to what they want to believe anyway. The band has stated many times that the collection was geared mostly toward new fans but no one seems to want to accept that because heaven forbid U2 do something that's not directed towards the hardcore fan. Like it's somehow illegal to want to appeal to people that aren't already listening to you.

You are perfectly welcome to not believe anything I say and perfectly welcome to correct me anytime and if I can't prove my arguement then that's my problem.

Cheers,
Dana
 
Axver, you're getting a little hot-to-trot lately. Calm down, man.

'Walk On' was a #1 hit in Canada by the way -- as was almost everything they've put out since the mid-80s. If you look at the international charts, you'll see that their chart performance in Canada is better than anywhere else in the world, including the US and Australia. (Despite this, they barely toured here at all before 1997, but never mind...) The Joshua Tree is the best-selling CD in the history of Canada, and on some radio stations 'With Or Without You' is the #1 song ever. 'The Saints Are Coming' hit #1... until it bumped off the top of the charts by 'Window In The Skies.'

As in the USA, nobody in Canada cares about chart performance, however. I suspect that the Canadian chart is based solely on sales (and maybe now downloads) of singles; hence the big difference from chart performance in the USA.
 
One more thing -- when they played here in Vancouver on the 1992 Zoo TV tour, the city's telephone system shut down due to the strain on the phone system by ticket hunters... To quote Bono after the Joshua Tree tour: "We made a big mistake not playing more shows in Canada."
 
rihannsu said:


One more time I will state that I was talking about global airplay and you were quoting back info about what was big in one country which is apples and oranges. And again in this post you respond with more info about one or two individual countries but no mention of global figures. How can you extrapolate global airplay from the info from only a couple of countries?

:up: :up: :up:
 
The compilation may be seen as a waste of time or money to long time fans, because they own everything that is even remotedly connected to U2 and it's natural that such compilations aren't very welcomed. BUT I think it's very clear that U2 were aiming at another, a new and younger audience with this release. I remember that the Milan concert was shown on a special Music Night programme that is shown on our national television every saturday night, and I heard from a lot of people who were not particular familiar with the band that they really enjoyed watching the concert and some of them even went and bought the CD/DVD combo, as it not only contained the greatest hits, but also the concert. So I guess the concept worked both ways. I'm not very fond of the U2:18 CD compilation either, but I can understand the idea behind its release.
 
Some of you aren't listening. I'm not saying the compilation was a waste of time just for dedicated fans. Obviously it was; anyone with more than half a brain knows that. But what I've been arguing is that it ALSO fails completely as an introduction for new fans. It was a complete waste of time for them too. Its poor chart performance worldwide in comparison to most U2 studio albums and the previous Best Ofs shows it just wasn't generating the same level of interest amongst ... well, anyone.

rihannsu said:
I believe the quote from Adam was in the Julie Saprong Interview done right before the start of the final leg of Vertigo, but I'm not positive.

Alright. I haven't even heard of that interview. That said, U2 all have a habit of talking out of their arses and having less of a clue about their own music than those of us here do. Sure, Adam's generally seen as more accurate than a persistently wrong character like Bono, but I don't uncritically take any of them at their word any more.

One more time I will state that I was talking about global airplay and you were quoting back info about what was big in one country which is apples and oranges. And again in this post you respond with more info about one or two individual countries but no mention of global figures. How can you extrapolate global airplay from the info from only a couple of countries? I welcome any response that contains info on global airplay otherwise it is a meaningless response.

Oh goodness you're painful. Global airplay stats don't fucking exist. Stop pretending they do. Many countries don't even have charts, or have wildly inaccurate charts due to the black market. In any case, I doubt U2 are all over the radio in Senegal or Bhutan. The main parts of the world to consider with airplay are the US, Canada, UK, Europe, Australia, New Zealand, and parts of South America. We've got accurate charts for them, and the persistent pattern is that Walk On performed like shit compared to some glaring omissions. I provided some personal anecdotal evidence, and something like how Walk On fared can be easily found on Wikipedia. To get global data, you're going to have to look at individual country data and try to put it together to get a broader picture.

I don't know where you'd find statistics on how much Walk On and EBTTRT were played in 2005-06 as neither were on the charts then, but I'm willing to bet EBTTRT easily outdid Walk On. That's pretty damn obvious. One's an enduring U2 classic; the other, whatever its merits might be, made little impact on the public at large.

I don't know why you think I act like I am always right. I usually only post things I've come across and often say right out that I don't remember where I came across the info and if someone corrects me that fine. I apologize if I came across any other way. I don't claim to be any kind of expert and I'm not very good at remembering where I saw or heard things and am more than happy to be corrected if I'm wrong. If I can't track my own source down than I can't very well argue the point.

You just don't seem to listen to anybody else, you just keep going on about how what you're posting is right and whoever you're responding to is wrong. Just look at this thread. You didn't even correctly comprehend what I posted. I was just automatically wrong to you.

The band has stated many times that the collection was geared mostly toward new fans but no one seems to want to accept that because heaven forbid U2 do something that's not directed towards the hardcore fan. Like it's somehow illegal to want to appeal to people that aren't already listening to you.

This is proof of my point. Please actually read my posts and those by others with whom you disagree before you try to restate our arguments. To repeat what I said above, I know that U218 wasn't for the diehards, I'm not stupid; I'm shitting on U218 because I think it completely fails in its intended purpose.
 
The Adam interview bit is true, I remember seeing it too. Airplay was the factor used in U2:18. Agreeing with the band members opinion is a different matter.

Obviously this would be the current (last few years) airplay when the big hits and especially last two albums were played heavily. Personally, I don't remember hearing anything outside of MW and One from AB, nothing from Zooropa and Pop (except a verrry odd Stay and SATS, but still far less than the other songs mentioned), but lots of Bomb/ATYCLB songs and of course the big 80's hits, say, from 2000-now. Also S. Thing and E. Storm.
Yes, "global" most likely means US/Canada/Europe/Australia.

Of course they could do this Best of differently, but that still doesn't mean internet forums wouldn't have some comments either way. A Live Best of would get pages upon pages. "Why this song ? Why the version from this tour?" etc

I don't know where U2:18 charted, but from what I've seen in Peeling off the dollar bills it will very likely outsell the 90's Best of.
 
roy said:


Oh Dear...

haha what? :wink:

anyway, the whole radio airplay thing seems fair enough in a way, i'm not sure what I think of that because even if that's how they WANTED to choose the tracks for U218 then why did they just let themselves put out an album lop-sided with singles from their last two records? It's crazy!

It's nothing to do with hardcore fandom to point out what a track-wreck that compilation is. We all know it's for NEW fans and roping in the young'uns who liked Vertigo and Beautiful Day. But when U2 put out another best of no sooner than we've stopped complaining about the shortcomings of the LAST one then it's always going to be a bit of a problem when half of it's from the last two albums as if that's all there is to U2 and the flimsy selection of other 'classics' is just a footnote as long as some 12 year old picks up a copy.

It just strikes a lot of people as greedy on U2's part. Of course there's the whole 'we just want a set for new fans' but disguising it as some career spanning set with that cover but it just seems like U2 trying to seriously cash-in on their 'comeback' over the last 7 years and it's just sad that they've reached that their stage.
 
65980 said:
One more thing -- when they played here in Vancouver on the 1992 Zoo TV tour, the city's telephone system shut down due to the strain on the phone system by ticket hunters... To quote Bono after the Joshua Tree tour: "We made a big mistake not playing more shows in Canada."

Bono ALWAYS comes out wi crap like that about the places they play. I wouldnt read anything into it.
 
Well, the people I know who were not dedicated fans but knew some of U2's songs were NOT 12 year olds and they were quite pleased with the selection of older songs they knew from radio airplay and songs like "Walk on" that most of them didn't really know.

It is indeed refreshing to talk to people who are only casual fans of some of the band's music and not prejudiced in their approach, instead of constantly having to listen to all the whining and complaining of so-called die-hard fans.
 
Originally posted by last unicorn It is indeed refreshing to talk to people who are only casual fans of some of the band's music and not prejudiced in their approach, instead of constantly having to listen to all the whining and complaining of so-called die-hard fans. [/B]

The die hards are complaining because they know they're being had by this band that has turned into a greedy monster. Casual fans are gullible and don't know any better. That's why they're being taken advantage of by the band.

There is no excuse for having a career from 1980 to 2006 and then choosing most of the songs from between 2000 and 2006. Plus adding a couple of mediocre new songs and a half assed dvd of a concert just to rope in the die hards is just pathetic. :down:
 
gman said:
Over here, you can get the ordinary disc for £8.95 and with the so called "Bonus Disc" it will cost £16.99, (thats a difference of almost $19 Aus or $16 US)
The point I am making is, it can hardly be classed as a "Bonus Disc" if your paying almost twice as much to have it.

Yesterday I saw a special offer for U2:18 of £9.97. It was for the 'special edition'. The only thing 'special' about it seemed to be that it had a cardboard case over it. :|
 
i think it's because the UK got I Will Follow as the opening track. We got The Fly on our Best Ofs too and they all came with Special Edition stickers! :up:
 
Last edited:
U2girl said:
The Adam interview bit is true, I remember seeing it too. Airplay was the factor used in U2:18. Agreeing with the band members opinion is a different matter.

Obviously this would be the current (last few years) airplay when the big hits and especially last two albums were played heavily.

And that's why I think it is quite possibly the stupidest possible criteria. You're going to get a woefully lopsided tracklist that provides casual fans with a horrible introduction.

I would also contend that it's likely many casual fans already have ATYCLB and HTDAAB, so this is especially stupid as it's giving them what they already have rather than helping them dive deeper into U2's back catalogue and showing them that the band is, in fact, about more than soaring choruses and radio-friendly big hits. Seriously, if you want to market this to new fans, at least show them the diversity of U2 by putting Bad and SOMETHING from Zooropa or Pop on there!

Also, regarding airplay as the basis, where the hell's Electrical Storm? All the other recent singles evidently had enough airplay to get there, and I find it hard to believe that Electrical Storm has received less airplay than singles that charted worse than it in many territories.
 
Axver said:
Some of you aren't listening. I'm not saying the compilation was a waste of time just for dedicated fans. Obviously it was; anyone with more than half a brain knows that. But what I've been arguing is that it ALSO fails completely as an introduction for new fans. It was a complete waste of time for them too. Its poor chart performance worldwide in comparison to most U2 studio albums and the previous Best Ofs shows it just wasn't generating the same level of interest amongst ... well, anyone.

Well, I wouldn't say it fails completely as even if chart positions weren't as good as the previous Best of's it is still selling very well and actually still in the charts (granted not very high) in a lot of countries as reported in the Peeling Off the Dollar Bills forum on this board. I don't happen to agree with comparing Best of performance with Studio albums, but to each his own.




Alright. I haven't even heard of that interview. That said, U2 all have a habit of talking out of their arses and having less of a clue about their own music than those of us here do. Sure, Adam's generally seen as more accurate than a persistently wrong character like Bono, but I don't uncritically take any of them at their word any more.

Fair enough


Oh goodness you're painful. Global airplay stats don't fucking exist. Stop pretending they do. Many countries don't even have charts, or have wildly inaccurate charts due to the black market. In any case, I doubt U2 are all over the radio in Senegal or Bhutan. The main parts of the world to consider with airplay are the US, Canada, UK, Europe, Australia, New Zealand, and parts of South America. We've got accurate charts for them, and the persistent pattern is that Walk On performed like shit compared to some glaring omissions. I provided some personal anecdotal evidence, and something like how Walk On fared can be easily found on Wikipedia. To get global data, you're going to have to look at individual country data and try to put it together to get a broader picture.

I don't know where you'd find statistics on how much Walk On and EBTTRT were played in 2005-06 as neither were on the charts then, but I'm willing to bet EBTTRT easily outdid Walk On. That's pretty damn obvious. One's an enduring U2 classic; the other, whatever its merits might be, made little impact on the public at large.

As I said in my response which you are quoting back -- I have no idea how to find out what global airplay is for U2 tracks I have no way of knowing if this stacks up with what they put on the collection and am more than happy to accept being corrected if supplied with global airplay info not individual county info.

For all we know, maybe they took charts from all over and manually compared them, anything is possible and I was never defending that as a choice just mentioning what I heard in the interview. If you're going to compare things they need to be comparable and I don't see that one or two countries info is comparable to global info. If you think it's a valid comparison then fine, that's your opinion.


You just don't seem to listen to anybody else, you just keep going on about how what you're posting is right and whoever you're responding to is wrong. Just look at this thread. You didn't even correctly comprehend what I posted. I was just automatically wrong to you.

I didn't say you were wrong, I said you were comparing apples and oranges by giving info on one or two countries to refute global airplay. Nowhere did I dispute the info itself.

This is proof of my point. Please actually read my posts and those by others with whom you disagree before you try to restate our arguments. To repeat what I said above, I know that U218 wasn't for the diehards, I'm not stupid; I'm shitting on U218 because I think it completely fails in its intended purpose.

Ok, sorry, that last part was a bit of a rant not particularly directed at you but at the large contingent who ignore that and many other things simply to keep up their arguements. I shouldn't have used the word everybody I probably should have said lot's of people. Again the only thing I was objecting to in your post was comparing individual country info to global info. I've tried to be careful this time to reply to each point in your post clearly.

Peace,
Dana
 
to be fair though Axver, Bad wasn't a single [which you obviously know being you :wink:] so that immediately rules it out! Have to agree though it does seem like they're just giving these new fans what they technically already have! :huh:
 
gareth brown said:
i think it's because the UK got I Will Follow as the opening track. We got The Fly on our Best Ofs too and they all came with Special Edition stickers! :up:

Hey you're right! It still seems a bit cheeky to me to put 'special edition' on an album when it's exactly the same as all the other editions of the album being sold in that country (if you see what I mean). I can see why they've done that though.
 
Axver said:


And that's why I think it is quite possibly the stupidest possible criteria. You're going to get a woefully lopsided tracklist that provides casual fans with a horrible introduction.

I would also contend that it's likely many casual fans already have ATYCLB and HTDAAB, so this is especially stupid as it's giving them what they already have rather than helping them dive deeper into U2's back catalogue and showing them that the band is, in fact, about more than soaring choruses and radio-friendly big hits. Seriously, if you want to market this to new fans, at least show them the diversity of U2 by putting Bad and SOMETHING from Zooropa or Pop on there!

Also, regarding airplay as the basis, where the hell's Electrical Storm? All the other recent singles evidently had enough airplay to get there, and I find it hard to believe that Electrical Storm has received less airplay than singles that charted worse than it in many territories.

:shrug: May be a weak criteria, but a criteria none the less. But hey, any attempt to feature 11 albums with 18 songs will be skewed. I'd also argue this was probably a somewhat panicky release since U2's leaving Island seems to be an abrupt decision, not something planned in advance. Hence the print mistakes in the booklet, and the hurried singles/airplay selection of songs.

I agree, it's odd that they put so much of the last two albums. If it was me, I'd cut S. Thing, Elevation and one more ATYCLB song and put on Gloria, Discotheque and I will follow (no, not just on the UK version) instead. (maybe Stay as a hidden song) At least try to cover all the actual albums.
I'd release Saints and WITS as a double A-sided single, too.

Bad is not a single, so it can't be featured on a singles compilation.

I don't know...it's bizarre enough that the 80's Best of new song S. Thing is there - you'd want E. Storm on it too ?
 
Last edited:
Zootlesque said:


The die hards are complaining because they know they're being had by this band that has turned into a greedy monster. Casual fans are gullible and don't know any better. That's why they're being taken advantage of by the band.

There is no excuse for having a career from 1980 to 2006 and then choosing most of the songs from between 2000 and 2006. Plus adding a couple of mediocre new songs and a half assed dvd of a concert just to rope in the die hards is just pathetic. :down:

Is someone holding a gun to your head and forcing you to buy the albums? How can you be had by a compilation that everyone knew what it would contain before it came out? If you don't like it you vote by not buying it. What's the big deal? Both Saints and WITS were released as Singles so there was no need for diehard fans to buy the compilation if they didn't want to, and anyone who was that convinced it was a rip off could easily get the Milan rip off the internet shortly after the DVD was out. So unless someone is forcing you to buy it, it's not a rip off. If you want to talk about rip-off's look at Crome Dreams that repackage the same documentary with new titles and nothing on the packaging or description that indicates this so once you buy it you can't return it. That's a rip-off.

Dana
 
I don't know why people are even arguing over the tracklisting of U2:18. Since it's designed to appeal to newer, younger fans, it's logical that it would be skewed to include more of the 2000 and up stuff and less of the 80s / 90s.

I have a theory, however, about why it didn't sell quite as well as some expected. I think the mistake was made back in 2002 or so with the Best of 1990-2000. I think that 2nd compilation should have stuck to the 90s and not included anything from All That You Can't Leave Behind (and obviously not 'Electrical Storm' or 'The Hands That Built America' since they're after year 2000). For the casual CD buyer (note: not the people on this forum) the Best of 1990-2000 is still a recent memory when U2:18 suddenly arrives, and there's quite a bit of overlap in the tracklisting.
 
Back
Top Bottom