Reggie Thee Dog
Blue Crack Addict
Earnie Shavers said:
There are about 3 or 4 of you.
No, there are about 10 - 20 who don't want this album, the rest could either careless or are eagerly awaiting it.
It's all good in the end.
Earnie Shavers said:
There are about 3 or 4 of you.
Utoo said:
Hopefully some people can be a little less harsh now. All of these "super fans" who think they know everything about the band, but apparently haven't seen this info that so many others have.
As for U2 somehow magically being able to alter their contract "if they really didn't want to release this Best Of"...... Yeah, a contract's a contract. Suddenly this band who sucks ass because they're releasing a Best Of..we now love so much to believe that they have the power to just alter contracts because they feel like it and because we think they can. Are we forgetting that in just about every piece of literature about the band, someone comments on how U2 are such an extraordinarily loyal band, so loyal to all the people that got them where they are? Island's among those people. I doubt U2 would diss Island and break a contract like that.
I can't believe people have so little faith in these guys.
Lancemc said:Am I the only person even slightly looking forward to this Best Of album?
That's true. And you're certainly right -- there have been things like Wide Awake in America, but it just comes up every now and then that there is not one full concert, from start to finish, available as an album.
Well, you know what? They record everything. They film everything. Their archive is impeccable. I know it. I've seen it -- impeccable. It'll happen! It's just that I think they've got other things on their agenda, y'know
ahittle said:Are they contemplating creating their own megalithic production/distribution force based out of the imposing and sorta evil-looking U2 Tower?
Chizip said:
um you do know they ripped up their previous contract in order to negotiate their current one?
if they wanted to do something similiar again, im guessing it wouldnt be too hard
Agreed. I remember reading somewhere that the Best Of deal was basically a thank-you to Island Records for being there for U2 since the beginning. This goes to show U2 are loyal to those who have supported them. But screw loyalty! It's far easier to label U2 sellouts.Utoo said:
Forget it. There's one friggin' Best Of album left in the contract. To screw around with that deal with Island, who was there from the start---when you created the contract as a show of thanks to Island, and when there's only one little compilation album left in it----that's a dick move. U2 are doing the right thing and putting out the album. Instead of fucking with the whole thing, they're putting out one measly little compilation album. Big deal.
I agree. The label wouldn't want to piss off the biggest band in the world, I mean their contract is going to end at some point and I think they would want U2 to stay with them and renew the contract. U2 is one of those rare few bands that probably have more control over their work and future decisions than the label. They do whatever they want.Chizip said:i guarantee you if u2 didnt want to be releasing a best of right now, then they wouldnt be
i dont buy the record label is forcing them to do it argument, u2 has all the power in the relationship
Michael Griffiths said:I remember reading somewhere that the Best Of deal was basically a thank-you to Island Records for being there for U2 since the beginning. This goes to show U2 are loyal to those who have supported them.
Not true: U2 is no longer with Island Records. The Best Of deal was a thank you to Island Records for all the good years. U2 are now with Interscope. If memory serves me correct, U2 also got ALL their publishing rights from Island in exchange for the Best Of deal. Quite the opposite of selling out, if you look at it in context. What other band has full control of their songs (minus a few Best Of collections) like U2 does? I think it's a pretty amazing trade off - one that most bands with any sense of artistic integrity would practically die for.TheBrazilianFly said:
I agree. The label wouldn't want to piss off the biggest band in the world, I mean their contract is going to end at some point and I think they would want U2 to stay with them and renew the contract. U2 is one of those rare few bands that probably have more control over their work and future decisions than the label. They do whatever they want.
Lancemc said:Am I the only person even slightly looking forward to this Best Of album?
BonoVoxSupastar said:
Was it milking the cash cow in 97 when they signed the deal or just now when they are fulfilling the contract?
I think the term "sellouts" is actually quite flattering compared to some of the things the band is called in hereMichael Griffiths said:
Agreed. I remember reading somewhere that the Best Of deal was basically a thank-you to Island Records for being there for U2 since the beginning. This goes to show U2 are loyal to those who have supported them. But screw loyalty! It's far easier to label U2 sellouts.