Lola's at it again

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.

biff

Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
Joined
Aug 21, 2002
Messages
4,014
Location
I may have lost my way
U2 Used Its Money to 'Steamroll' Me: Lola

Irish Independent, December 31, 2006

Larissa Nolan


Lola Cashman, the former U2 stylist who was at the centre of the "Stetsongate" case with U2, has accused the band of using its considerable financial muscle to silence her because of a fear that she might reveal intimate details of the group's life on tour.

In an exclusive interview with the Sunday Independent, the first time she has spoken since losing her case in November, Lola talked of her belief that Bono did not pursue such a seemingly trivial case because he wanted his hat back, but because he was furious with her for writing a book about her time working with the band, Inside the Zoo With U2.

She told the Sunday Independent that while she was once very close to Bono -- who will receive an honorary knighthood next month -- on a professional and personal level, she now sees him in a very different light since the court case.

Said Lola: "He may be a big star, but everything else about him is little.

"Bono did not go to court to get his Rattle and Hum hat back, he went because he was angry that I had written the book and had never let that go. It was all about the book. I think he is terribly insecure.

"After the book, he was not my friend anymore and he morphed into Corporate Brand Bono," she claimed.

Said Lola: "They feared the things I didn't say more than the things I did. Bono himself admitted in court that he had never been so close to any of his employees and it is true that I know a lot of personal information about the band that no one else would know.

"But I know they were angry about even the small details I included in the book. I believe they were concerned that I might spill more details in the future and wanted to silence me.

"The court case was a way to do it and they succeeded. They had the money and the power to steamroll over a small person like me and they did it," she said.

Lola Cashman said she is facing bankruptcy in the New Year with legal costs of €300,000 and now has no credibility after losing her High Court case.

"Let's face it, after this case, I have no credibility. I was called a liar and a thief and a traitor and a money-grabber," Ms. Cashman said.


© Irish Independent, 2006.



Sigh. She's just so full of it.


And how many times must this be pointed out?

SHE took THEM to court. Sigh.
 
biff said:



And how many times must this be pointed out?

SHE took THEM to court. Sigh.

I would suggest that someone write a letter to the editor pointing this out, but somehow I doubt the paper would print it...or care.:|
 
A 3rd thing:

A previous article by Ms. Nolan stated that Cashman's legal costs were estimated to be around 75,000...now it's 300,000?:huh:

Makes ya wonder, huh...
 
Notice how she keeps going on about the book she wrote, obviously trying her darnedest to plug a non-seller!?! :yawn: And I believe, that if she really had all this intimate information, that she claims to have, about the band, I'm sure she would have spilled the beans by now!! :tsk: She's just a bitter woman, full of hot air who really needs to get a life!!! :crack:
 
One more thing (and then I'll shut up). Lola clearly has such a warped sense of reality to be blaming the band for the outcome of the court case she started.

Perhaps instead of running her down, we should hope and pray that she gets the help she needs? Or at least some perspective...

Just a thought..:reject:
 
"Bono did not go to court to get his Rattle and Hum hat back, he went because he was angry that I had written the book and had never let that go. It was all about the book. I think he is terribly insecure.

"After the book, he was not my friend anymore and he morphed into Corporate Brand Bono," she claimed.

Earth to Lola...he went to court b/c you dragged him down there. I'm sure he had much better things to do with his time. And suing him b/c he didn't want to be your friend anymore? Yeah, I'm sure he's the one with the insecurity problem...

And wtf the civil suits had NOTHING to do with her book. NOBODY CARES about the stupid book! Of course they're probably angry about some of the details since she most likely signed confidentiality clauses as an employee, but the cases were not about the details in the book!

:yawn:
 
Why is the Irish Independent so hard on U2? I don't mean this in an inflammatory way, I'm genuinely curious. I mean, there is a definite skew to this story, with a lot of major facts (i.e., the fact that Lola initiated the case, that U2 did not make her pay their legal costs even though they could have, etc.) omitted. It seems biased to make one party look like the 'bad guy', which surprises me. Shouldn't there be some hometown love going on there? I mean, geez, mention Bon Jovi within 100 miles of New Jersey and see what kind of reaction you get. Generally people are proud of their local heros...just wondering why U2 seem to get such negative press there?
 
Last edited:
Sounds to me like someone's still unhappy about their book. :whistle:

"Bono did not go to court to get his Rattle and Hum hat back, he went because he was angry that I had written the book and had never let that go. It was all about the book. I think he is terribly insecure."

She oughta take a look in the mirror to be quite honest.

All she has rambled on about is that book. She just needs to get over the fact that it wasn't a success and learn to deal with that like every other human being has to. Why keep whining about how they beat you out in court if you took them there to begin with? Seriously...she needs help.
 
While Christmas shopping this year I was glad to see that none of the bookstores were carrying the book anymore. But most were highlighting u2 by u2 in their big displays :happy:
 
Ralphie said:
Why is the Irish Independent so hard on U2? I don't mean this in an inflammatory way, I'm genuinely curious. I mean, there is a definite skew to this story, with a lot of major facts (i.e., the fact that Lola initiated the case, that U2 did not make her pay their legal costs even though they could have, etc.) omitted. It seems biased to make one party look like the 'bad guy', which surprises me. Shouldn't there be some hometown love going on there? I mean, geez, mention Bon Jovi within 100 miles of New Jersey and see what kind of reaction you get. Generally people are proud of their local heros...just wondering why U2 seem to get such negative press there?

Just a guess, but this is more fun/interesting to read than yet another article about Bono meeting [insert random politician] and lobbying for more ARV monies that he probably won't get.

Bono's probably getting negative press on this issue b/c unlike Lola he's keeping his mouth shut (as he should). She can blab all she wants but six months from now I doubt many people will remember or care. There's really no point in Bono coming forward to defend himself. Lola lost her case twice, there's nothing more to be said. Bono doesn't need any hometown pride on his side. If people think less of him and U2's music because of this shit, then they probably don't want them as fans anyway! I hope the U2 camp stays quiet rather than stooping to her level.
 
Liesje said:


Just a guess, but this is more fun/interesting to read than yet another article about Bono meeting [insert random politician] and lobbying for more ARV monies that he probably won't get.

Bono's probably getting negative press on this issue b/c unlike Lola he's keeping his mouth shut (as he should). She can blab all she wants but six months from now I doubt many people will remember or care. There's really no point in Bono coming forward to defend himself. Lola lost her case twice, there's nothing more to be said. Bono doesn't need any hometown pride on his side. If people think less of him and U2's music because of this shit, then they probably don't want them as fans anyway! I hope the U2 camp stays quiet rather than stooping to her level.

Also, I wonder if it's as much The Irish Independent as it is this one reporter who works for them. All of the "exclusive" favorable Lola interviews seem to be conducted by the same reporter. :shrug:
 
Last edited:
I think U2 moving the business side of things over to the Netherlands, upset quite alot of people in the Irish media. Maybe that's the reason why it shine Cashman in good light. Well as good as you can get for her..
 
Bones58 said:
I think U2 moving the business side of things over to the Netherlands, upset quite alot of people in the Irish media. Maybe that's the reason why it shine Cashman in good light. Well as good as you can get for her..

yes, that was a major point for the Irish press(and people) to get mad at U2, but mostly at Bono, since :shrug: according to most he IS U2...
 
I don't understand why will ppl be upset that U2 is moving the business to the Netherlands. They will still live in Ireland? Right?:confused:

I heard of this happening but I don't know the details :reject:

And to Ms. Cashman:madspit:
 
Carmelu2fan said:
I don't understand why will ppl be upset that U2 is moving the business to the Netherlands. They will still live in Ireland? Right?:confused:

I heard of this happening but I don't know the details :reject:

And to Ms. Cashman:madspit:


the main thing is that Ireland will start with taxes for musicians on merchandise and otehr stuff in 2007(aka now for me) and that in Holland the taxes are a lot lower, so they moved their business to Holland to avoid the Irish tax.... Irish people are mad at them because Bono is asking for money for Africa, but he refuses to give his money to his own country... :rolleyes:

:wink: their business is in the same amsterdam building as the rolling stones btw
 
The woman's just a bitter loser. As has been pointed out numerous times in this thread she took them to court. They didn't take her to court.
 
Galeongirl said:



the main thing is that Ireland will start with taxes for musicians on merchandise and otehr stuff in 2007(aka now for me) and that in Holland the taxes are a lot lower, so they moved their business to Holland to avoid the Irish tax.... Irish people are mad at them because Bono is asking for money for Africa, but he refuses to give his money to his own country... :rolleyes:

:wink: their business is in the same amsterdam building as the rolling stones btw

Actually, it's not taxes "on merchandise and other stuff". Up to now, artists in Ireland have been exempt from paying taxes on royalties earned from their creative endeavours. Starting next year, those particular earnings will be taxed. U2 have moved only the publishing wing of their business interests to The Netherlands.
They have always been taxed on all other income, including income from touring and related merchandise. As well, those of the band who own businesses in Ireland (Bono owns several) have always paid and will continue to pay full taxes on those earnings. They all have paid and will continue to pay huge amounts in personal income tax.
The press has, as usual, made a mountain out of a relatively small molehill. The band have not become "tax exiles" nor have they "refused to pay taxes", both of which I have seen claimed in the so-called reputable press.
 
Last edited:
biff said:


Actually, it's not taxes "on merchandise and other stuff". Up to now, artists in Ireland have been exempt from paying taxes on royalties earned from their creative endeavours. Starting next year, those particular earnings will be taxed. U2 have moved only the publishing wing of their business interests to The Netherlands.
They have always been taxed on all other income, including income from touring and related merchandise. As well, those of the band who own businesses in Ireland (Bono owns several) have always paid and will continue to pay full taxes on those earnings. They all have paid and will continue to pay huge amounts in personal income tax.
The press has, as usual, made a mountain out of a relatively small molehill. The band have not become "tax exiles" nor have they "refused to pay taxes", both of which I have seen claimed in the so-called reputable press.


Thanks Biff! Funny how the media has left all this out of their bashing of U2. :huh: As you mentioned they are moving a small percentage of business (publishing wing and not the entire business as some may believe) to the Netherlands.
 
The publishing wing of their business may well be a small percentage of their business, but if the amount was truly insignificant, they would not have bothered to move it. You can bet your ass it's a pretty hefty chunk of change.
 
indra said:
The publishing wing of their business may well be a small percentage of their business, but if the amount was truly insignificant, they would not have bothered to move it. You can bet your ass it's a pretty hefty chunk of change.

No one said it wasn't, but plenty of people are nevertheless misrepresenting what it actually is. Yes, they are in a bejillion dollar business and they are looking after their interests, but the last time I checked that wasn't illegal or even immoral. Many in the press are implying that it is.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom