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.
Saying U2 is a "sinking ship" is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard or read. I think every sinking ship in the business wants to have a little part of the success U2 had with their last tour. I'm pretty sure U2 will be fine for the time that's still left for them to have a career.
ye I agree that was quite a ridiculous statement too make
 
U2's commercial and artistic (i.e. critical) success regarding their albums and singles have consistently dropped from All That You Can't Leave Behind to How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb to No Line On The Horizon while the time between their declining output continues to increase. That's a sinking ship.

They can boast all they want about tour success, but that's pretty much irrelevant. Nobody considers Madonna or The Rolling Stone's recent work to be of any importance. It comes out, it sells a million in the US thanks to the tour and then is quickly forgotten about. Hmmm, reminds me of some 2009 release from an Irish band...
 
Under the arrangement, McGuinness would become chairman of Principle Management, while Oseary will assume day-to-day management of U2, as he has already for several months, Billboard has learned.

Wait, so Guy Oseary has been U2's manager for a while now?
 
It's not like he has had to do much, but it would make sense for him to preemptively take over the reigns. The fact that he's been negotiating for a Super Bowl ad tie-in shows that he's been with them for some time as those ad-buys/ads will have to be made fairly soon.
 
U2's commercial and artistic (i.e. critical) success regarding their albums and singles have consistently dropped from All That You Can't Leave Behind to How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb to No Line On The Horizon while the time between their declining output continues to increase. That's a sinking ship.

So every artist above 35 is a sinking ship? Yeah, that totally makes sense.
 
U2's commercial and artistic (i.e. critical) success regarding their albums and singles have consistently dropped from All That You Can't Leave Behind to How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb to No Line On The Horizon while the time between their declining output continues to increase. That's a sinking ship.

I'll gladly board that sinking ship. I like those records. They're really good.
 
They can boast all they want about tour success, but that's pretty much irrelevant.

Not to Live Nation, it's not. Everyone knows album sales themselves are declining in general. From a label's standpoint, is it wrong to turn their eyes to other sources of revenue?

Yeah, yeah - the music is more important, obviously we all hang out here because of the music. But we're talking about a music business deal, so there you go.
 
I know I'm a little/lot late to this train station, but after reading this little tidbit of info, I honestly think they've taken this relevancy thing a little too far and we can only hope this doesn't turn out for the worst, but I believe folks are about to be seriously fucked over.

Fingers crossed though.
 
My first impression when I read the news late last night was that this is terrible. It is sad that Paul won't be their manager anymore after all this time and I don't like the idea of them having some Hollywood dude in his place. Who also works for Madonna. :yuck: This news is really shocking, since the core structure of U2 never changes. Ever.

After letting the news sink in since last night: If GuyO (there, I've given him a nickname) gets them to utilize social media and the internet in general, that would be a good thing. The Super Bowl commercial sounds like a desperate move, but maybe that's what they have to do to grab people's attention; U2 are getting old and American pop culture has a two-second attention span. They've been doing album promotions the same way for over a decade and it seems like no one is really paying attention to them anymore (mostly because they aren't doing anything for years on end, but that's another rant).

I say just wait and see what happens. This could destroy U2, or be the beginning of something new and amazing. They're not stupid, so I don't think they would have done this if it didn't feel right. We need a reassuring statement from Larry, like "Don't worry, this guy is OK."
 
U2's commercial and artistic (i.e. critical) success regarding their albums and singles have consistently dropped from All That You Can't Leave Behind to How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb to No Line On The Horizon while the time between their declining output continues to increase. That's a sinking ship. They can boast all they want about tour success, but that's pretty much irrelevant. Nobody considers Madonna or The Rolling Stone's recent work to be of any importance. It comes out, it sells a million in the US thanks to the tour and then is quickly forgotten about. Hmmm, reminds me of some 2009 release from an Irish band...
But they had the most successfull tour of all time between 2008-2011 which makes alot more money then record sales
 
Album sales declining is NOT something that affects U2 only, it's a worldwide phenomenon on the music market. Judging from album sales, most artists would be "sinking ships". There are so many other factors involved in what you can call "success" these days, like touring or commercials, and I'm pretty sure U2's spectacular tour - something that's still talked and written about today - is something that IS important to the industry. U2 are not some washed-up artists that make headlines with personal scandals and have no control over their lives or career. You have a lot of sinking or sunken ships in show business, but they certainly aren't one of them. They can still make great music and put on an amazing show. I'm very sure, in spite of all the hate that sometimes seem to be dominant on the internet towards the band, there are a lot of people who are looking forward to a new U2 release and a tour.
 
Damn, you might be in running with the "U2 has no longevity" guy as most ridiculous post of 2013. Only one month left, time will tell...

They promised dance & electronica yet gave us Pop.

They recorded Original Soundtracks but played it safe by saying it was Passengers and not U2 (and barely promoting it)

They gave us three U2-colour-by-numbers albums in a row during the 2000s

In between these albums they ditched 3 (probably complete) albums which promised more edgy/experimental music

They released Crazy Tonight as a single instead of MOS

I honestly believe there's a warning light in the U2 machine that's holding them back from doing something brave - and they could be more exciting and edgy if they just said "fuck it" once in a while. You say "ridiculous" but that's my opinion.
 
^U2 won't be saying "fuck it" so late in their career any more, I think NLOTH was the closest they got to that and obviously they weren't very happy with the outcome, still many fans (me included) loved the album. I'm pretty sure we just have to live with what's coming in the (little) time they have left with their career, be happy that they are still around, healthy, making music and not expect anything really "brave", maybe something a little "brave" will still come out of it, but IMO they are beyond any wild experimental ambition. Personally, I'm fine with that, there are many other (younger, newer) bands to turn to for a different kind of music, I'm happy to hear a new U2 album and I'm pretty sure it will be a good one.


Here's some interesting comments by Dave Fanning:

"The band takes care of themselves anyway and know what they want to do or how they want to do it."

The Reaction: how manager mastered music industry - Independent.ie
 
it would be nice to hear something from the band on this, i mean, it's pretty massive news really...
 
They promised dance & electronica yet gave us Pop.

They recorded Original Soundtracks but played it safe by saying it was Passengers and not U2 (and barely promoting it)

I don't recall them ever "promising" dance and electronica. That was by and large the assumptions/rumors flying around at the time based on the producers they were using (namely Howie B). As for Passengers, I believe it started out life as a U2 project, but the record company refused to market/release it as such. Still, U2 had the tenacity to get it into the record stores, which was a ballsy move on their part (00's U2 would have probably shelved the project altogether). But I tend to agree with the rest of your post.
 
"The band and Paul have enjoyed an amazing journey together. There is a lot of emotion in the air, I'm sure, at a time like this – all the moreso when a team has been together for 35 years. But both the band and Paul and his team at Principle Management have achieved the most amazing things together. It is fantastic to have that kind of legacy and the position of strength that goes with it, to hand over to Live Nation."

Paul McGuinness to hand over U2 management reins | Music | News | Hot Press
 
Paul McGuinness; thank you for 35 years!


Oh wait, he is not going to read this, is he?
 
Paul McGuinness; thank you for 35 years!


Oh wait, he is not going to read this, is he?
My theory is that McGuinness decided to call it a day after stumbling upon this forum.
So he might still read your message.
 
Back
Top Bottom