Author Topic: **SPOILERS**Las Vegas 2 U2eiTour Show Thread  (Read 3010 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline bass slap

  • Running to Stand Still
  • **
  • Posts: 1,141
  • Hot as a hair dryer.. In your face!
Re: **SPOILERS**Las Vegas 2 U2eiTour Show Thread
« Reply #75 on: May 15, 2018, 04:06:06 PM »
It's a given that any comment is a personal opinion so why prefix or book end every comment to state the obvious?

If something comes across a little opinionated, take with a pinch of salt and let it brush over, nobody gets hurt..

I'm happy with acrobat because it's a decent song (guitar awesome) but not AB finest.
Rather hear that than another MW which hasn't sounded great live since the 90's plus bono has made it too tongue in cheek with his dad dance moves and tom Jones funky 'huh's and 'ha's. Killed it.

Offline laoghaire

  • Numb
  • **
  • Posts: 797
  • IT MEEEEEEEANS SOMETHING!!!!!!
Re: **SPOILERS**Las Vegas 2 U2eiTour Show Thread
« Reply #76 on: May 15, 2018, 04:08:04 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Yes it would go over a lot nicer if opinions are stated as such and not as facts.

"New York really doesn't do it for me, I find it so generic." Awesome, let's share our takes.

"Acrobat is clearly the weakest song on the album and the reason they can't sell tickets." Buzz off.

This is ALL I am saying. When you state your opinion as a fact, you start drawing false conclusions. Case in point, saying that since Acrobat is the weakest song the album, U2 must know it, and that's why it didn't get played for 26 years. Start with an incorrect premise, and you are going to end up with a false conclusion.

The idea that this setlist is causing sluggish sales is giving me a headache. Like I said before, 90 percent of these tickets sold either in presale or hours after they went live 6 months ago. The setlist wasn't even a gleam in Edge's eye yet. Look at the shows on u2.com's tour page that aren't sold out. Look at the stops from last year. Now look at the ones that are showing sold out. Now, look for those shows from 2017.

Notice anything?

BTW, I absolutely LOVE New York. :)

Fight me.

No, seriously, you get a big pass for "gleam in Edge's eye" <wipes away a tear>

Offline laoghaire

  • Numb
  • **
  • Posts: 797
  • IT MEEEEEEEANS SOMETHING!!!!!!
Re: **SPOILERS**Las Vegas 2 U2eiTour Show Thread
« Reply #77 on: May 15, 2018, 04:10:02 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
It's a given that any comment is a personal opinion so why prefix or book end every comment to state the obvious?

Well, Saint22's post explained it pretty well.

Offline bass slap

  • Running to Stand Still
  • **
  • Posts: 1,141
  • Hot as a hair dryer.. In your face!
Re: **SPOILERS**Las Vegas 2 U2eiTour Show Thread
« Reply #78 on: May 15, 2018, 04:16:58 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
It's a given that any comment is a personal opinion so why prefix or book end every comment to state the obvious?

Well, Saint22's post explained it pretty well.
That may have been one of the posts I was referring to. Everything on here is an opinion.. and the word "think" was used in this particular example.. shouldn't be any need to tread on egg shells? I didn't read anything offensive here anyway... At least IMHO...

Offline redapple129

  • Wanderer
  • *
  • Posts: 67
Re: **SPOILERS**Las Vegas 2 U2eiTour Show Thread
« Reply #79 on: May 15, 2018, 05:54:09 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
It's a given that any comment is a personal opinion so why prefix or book end every comment to state the obvious?

Well, Saint22's post explained it pretty well.
That may have been one of the posts I was referring to. Everything on here is an opinion.. and the word "think" was used in this particular example.. shouldn't be any need to tread on egg shells? I didn't read anything offensive here anyway... At least IMHO...

In the comment chain with Saint22, there's a decent amount of acting like people's opinions are a bit more objective than a personal opinion. Comments like "the fact that this is a sub-par U2 show" and "Acrobat IS a weak song" (the all caps coming across as this being a definitive statement about the song). If the band were to end the show mid-set or play out of tune for songs on end, maybe then it's time to start throwing around the f-word about saying the show was sub-par. I'll roll my eyes a bit at someone saying "it's becoming painstakingly clear that it's very probable that this is the worst U2 show ever" (PopMart would have a word about judging a U2 show on its first few nights, even if the issues were quite different) but that still comes across as a personal opinion even without being couched with opinion-signaling words.

I don't think we should have to end our posts with disclaimers saying what we write is just our opinion. I just find it a bit obnoxious when people treat their opinions as more than just opinions.

Saint22

  • Guest
Re: **SPOILERS**Las Vegas 2 U2eiTour Show Thread
« Reply #80 on: May 16, 2018, 09:46:03 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
It's a given that any comment is a personal opinion so why prefix or book end every comment to state the obvious?

Well, Saint22's post explained it pretty well.
That may have been one of the posts I was referring to. Everything on here is an opinion.. and the word "think" was used in this particular example.. shouldn't be any need to tread on egg shells? I didn't read anything offensive here anyway... At least IMHO...

IMO, it is just polite. And honestly, we don't know each other in real life. Everyone knows someone who thinks their opinion is Gospel truth, so, IMO, IMO stands as a prefix that means 'this is just what I think; I could be wrong'.

But, it also is practical. Like I said, when you start with a false premise, you come to a false conclusion. See the Acrobat post. Unless someone can produce a quote from one of the guys saying Acrobat is the weakest song from the album, let's not put words in their mouths. There are folks here who are young and/or new to the band, and they tend to believe everything the read. Let's make sure we can tell fact from opinion; that's all I am asking.
« Last Edit: May 16, 2018, 09:48:24 AM by Saint22 »

Offline Ron2112

  • Babyface
  • *
  • Posts: 14
Re: **SPOILERS**Las Vegas 2 U2eiTour Show Thread
« Reply #81 on: May 16, 2018, 10:53:42 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
"Acrobat is clearly the weakest song on the album and the reason they can't sell tickets." Buzz off.

NO ONE said this.  Seriously, you are really demonstrating the proclivity for reading into what's written, then projecting it back on the group.

OF COURSE anything someone writes here is their own opinion.  That's a given by the very nature of the forum.  Unless it's a member of U2 talking, and even then, it would be a subjective statement.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The idea that this setlist is causing sluggish sales is giving me a headache. Like I said before, 90 percent of these tickets sold either in presale or hours after they went live 6 months ago. The setlist wasn't even a gleam in Edge's eye yet. Look at the shows on u2.com's tour page that aren't sold out. Look at the stops from last year. Now look at the ones that are showing sold out. Now, look for those shows from 2017.

BTW, I absolutely LOVE New York. :)

Of course no one knew what the set list was going to be when tix went on sale.  But one could (and rightfully would have) assumed that it would draw heavily on SOI and SOE.  And SOE has met with mixed reviews.  Thus the low sales.....the last time the band seemingly tried so hard to avoid their back catalog on tour was Popmart.  And as much as I love the Pop album, the tour didn't really hold up and the sales reflected that.

And "New York" is a weak song, too.  IN MY OPINION.

Saint22

  • Guest
Re: **SPOILERS**Las Vegas 2 U2eiTour Show Thread
« Reply #82 on: May 16, 2018, 12:09:42 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
"Acrobat is clearly the weakest song on the album and the reason they can't sell tickets." Buzz off.

NO ONE said this.  Seriously, you are really demonstrating the proclivity for reading into what's written, then projecting it back on the group.

OF COURSE anything someone writes here is their own opinion.  That's a given by the very nature of the forum.  Unless it's a member of U2 talking, and even then, it would be a subjective statement.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The idea that this setlist is causing sluggish sales is giving me a headache. Like I said before, 90 percent of these tickets sold either in presale or hours after they went live 6 months ago. The setlist wasn't even a gleam in Edge's eye yet. Look at the shows on u2.com's tour page that aren't sold out. Look at the stops from last year. Now look at the ones that are showing sold out. Now, look for those shows from 2017.

BTW, I absolutely LOVE New York. :)

Of course no one knew what the set list was going to be when tix went on sale.  But one could (and rightfully would have) assumed that it would draw heavily on SOI and SOE.  And SOE has met with mixed reviews.  Thus the low sales.....the last time the band seemingly tried so hard to avoid their back catalog on tour was Popmart.  And as much as I love the Pop album, the tour didn't really hold up and the sales reflected that.

And "New York" is a weak song, too.  IN MY OPINION.

That first quote didn't come from me.

Secondly, you may not be blaming the setlist for soft sales, but some people are.

As for PopMart, that was back in the days when people actually bought whole albums and listened to them and tours had to be promoted. There's really no comparing 1997 to 2018, IMO; two completely different eras for how music and tours were marketed.

Offline Ron2112

  • Babyface
  • *
  • Posts: 14
Re: **SPOILERS**Las Vegas 2 U2eiTour Show Thread
« Reply #83 on: May 16, 2018, 12:51:41 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

As for PopMart, that was back in the days when people actually bought whole albums and listened to them and tours had to be promoted. There's really no comparing 1997 to 2018, IMO; two completely different eras for how music and tours were marketed.

The parallels are actually pretty compelling.  As with 1997, the band is trying a bit too hard to push a concept that they started with SOI, at the expense of the presentation and the setlist.  Pairing that with very expensive tickets is making for a lot of empty seats.

Saint22

  • Guest
Re: **SPOILERS**Las Vegas 2 U2eiTour Show Thread
« Reply #84 on: May 16, 2018, 01:11:04 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

As for PopMart, that was back in the days when people actually bought whole albums and listened to them and tours had to be promoted. There's really no comparing 1997 to 2018, IMO; two completely different eras for how music and tours were marketed.

The parallels are actually pretty compelling.  As with 1997, the band is trying a bit too hard to push a concept that they started with SOI, at the expense of the presentation and the setlist.  Pairing that with very expensive tickets is making for a lot of empty seats.


The reasons Pop was a relative failure in 1997 and SOE was a relative failure in 2017 are different. The end result may be soft sales, but the reasons are completely different.

In 1997, U2 released an album that wasn't well-received by fans at all. They had already committed to a massive stadium tour with high prices for the time.
In 2017, U2 released an album in an era where the rock album is dead, they get zero radio play and they are almost 60 years old, and they booked their third tour in four years.

It really wouldn't matter if SOE were pushing an agenda or not; SOE could have been a grab bag of songs completely unrelated to SOI and full of what should be ready-for-radio material, and it still not sold. Bands that have been around for 40 years are going to struggle to sell anything other than copies of their classic albums. I know people who are going to see U2 in Nashville who had no idea SOE even existed.

E+I isn't selling because U2 were just out in 2015 and 2017. Again, look at the cities were shows are selling well and where they aren't. The cities that got shows in 2015 and 2017 are slow compared to cities that didn't. There's no magic there. Nashville and Atlanta are either sold out or close to it, and LA has tickets remaining.

Tickets sold in Nashville in 2015: 0
Tickets sold in Nashville in 2017: 0
Tickets sold in LA in 2015: 83,505/SELL OUT
Tickets sold in LA in 2017: 123,064/SELL OUT

They have sold 200,000 tickets in the last three calendar years in Los Angeles, and you are surprised that a third tour in the last four years isn't selling as quickly?

Aging, legacy bands, and U2 is now considered a legacy band for industry purposes, sell tickets, not albums. If U2 hadn't toured since 2015, the numbers would be much better. If they hadn't toured since 2011, people would be killing each other over tickets and they literally could name their price and sell out in minutes.

Bands like the Stones and The Who make albums that few people listen to or care about put still pack people in at shows, but they can't go on massive, exhaustive tours every two years. Look at Springsteen. He's not made a good album in 10 years, and he had to start playing sheds rather than arenas and stadiums in some markets because he just tours so much. He finally oversaturated the market.

Now? Now Bruce has gone away for a while doing the Broadway thing, and when he finishes that run and takes some time off, the fans will be rabid to see him with a band again.

IMO, U2 will take a break from touring for a while after this. They almost have to.
« Last Edit: May 16, 2018, 01:13:12 PM by Saint22 »

Offline Ron2112

  • Babyface
  • *
  • Posts: 14
Re: **SPOILERS**Las Vegas 2 U2eiTour Show Thread
« Reply #85 on: May 16, 2018, 04:07:36 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

As for PopMart, that was back in the days when people actually bought whole albums and listened to them and tours had to be promoted. There's really no comparing 1997 to 2018, IMO; two completely different eras for how music and tours were marketed.

The parallels are actually pretty compelling.  As with 1997, the band is trying a bit too hard to push a concept that they started with SOI, at the expense of the presentation and the setlist.  Pairing that with very expensive tickets is making for a lot of empty seats.


The reasons Pop was a relative failure in 1997 and SOE was a relative failure in 2017 are different. The end result may be soft sales, but the reasons are completely different.

In 1997, U2 released an album that wasn't well-received by fans at all. They had already committed to a massive stadium tour with high prices for the time.
In 2017, U2 released an album in an era where the rock album is dead, they get zero radio play and they are almost 60 years old, and they booked their third tour in four years.

It really wouldn't matter if SOE were pushing an agenda or not; SOE could have been a grab bag of songs completely unrelated to SOI and full of what should be ready-for-radio material, and it still not sold. Bands that have been around for 40 years are going to struggle to sell anything other than copies of their classic albums. I know people who are going to see U2 in Nashville who had no idea SOE even existed.

E+I isn't selling because U2 were just out in 2015 and 2017. Again, look at the cities were shows are selling well and where they aren't. The cities that got shows in 2015 and 2017 are slow compared to cities that didn't. There's no magic there. Nashville and Atlanta are either sold out or close to it, and LA has tickets remaining.

Tickets sold in Nashville in 2015: 0
Tickets sold in Nashville in 2017: 0
Tickets sold in LA in 2015: 83,505/SELL OUT
Tickets sold in LA in 2017: 123,064/SELL OUT

They have sold 200,000 tickets in the last three calendar years in Los Angeles, and you are surprised that a third tour in the last four years isn't selling as quickly?

Aging, legacy bands, and U2 is now considered a legacy band for industry purposes, sell tickets, not albums. If U2 hadn't toured since 2015, the numbers would be much better. If they hadn't toured since 2011, people would be killing each other over tickets and they literally could name their price and sell out in minutes.

Bands like the Stones and The Who make albums that few people listen to or care about put still pack people in at shows, but they can't go on massive, exhaustive tours every two years. Look at Springsteen. He's not made a good album in 10 years, and he had to start playing sheds rather than arenas and stadiums in some markets because he just tours so much. He finally oversaturated the market.

Now? Now Bruce has gone away for a while doing the Broadway thing, and when he finishes that run and takes some time off, the fans will be rabid to see him with a band again.

IMO, U2 will take a break from touring for a while after this. They almost have to.

I Pretty much disagree with everything in this post.  I'm also old enough to remember when U2 toured every year to sold out venues.

Strong album + reasonable prices == good attendance.

Offline Luzita

  • Headache in a Suitcase
  • *
  • Posts: 324
Re: **SPOILERS**Las Vegas 2 U2eiTour Show Thread
« Reply #86 on: May 16, 2018, 11:43:51 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

As for PopMart, that was back in the days when people actually bought whole albums and listened to them and tours had to be promoted. There's really no comparing 1997 to 2018, IMO; two completely different eras for how music and tours were marketed.

The parallels are actually pretty compelling.  As with 1997, the band is trying a bit too hard to push a concept that they started with SOI, at the expense of the presentation and the setlist.  Pairing that with very expensive tickets is making for a lot of empty seats.


The reasons Pop was a relative failure in 1997 and SOE was a relative failure in 2017 are different. The end result may be soft sales, but the reasons are completely different.

In 1997, U2 released an album that wasn't well-received by fans at all. They had already committed to a massive stadium tour with high prices for the time.
In 2017, U2 released an album in an era where the rock album is dead, they get zero radio play and they are almost 60 years old, and they booked their third tour in four years.

It really wouldn't matter if SOE were pushing an agenda or not; SOE could have been a grab bag of songs completely unrelated to SOI and full of what should be ready-for-radio material, and it still not sold. Bands that have been around for 40 years are going to struggle to sell anything other than copies of their classic albums. I know people who are going to see U2 in Nashville who had no idea SOE even existed.

E+I isn't selling because U2 were just out in 2015 and 2017. Again, look at the cities were shows are selling well and where they aren't. The cities that got shows in 2015 and 2017 are slow compared to cities that didn't. There's no magic there. Nashville and Atlanta are either sold out or close to it, and LA has tickets remaining.

Tickets sold in Nashville in 2015: 0
Tickets sold in Nashville in 2017: 0
Tickets sold in LA in 2015: 83,505/SELL OUT
Tickets sold in LA in 2017: 123,064/SELL OUT

They have sold 200,000 tickets in the last three calendar years in Los Angeles, and you are surprised that a third tour in the last four years isn't selling as quickly?

Aging, legacy bands, and U2 is now considered a legacy band for industry purposes, sell tickets, not albums. If U2 hadn't toured since 2015, the numbers would be much better. If they hadn't toured since 2011, people would be killing each other over tickets and they literally could name their price and sell out in minutes.

Bands like the Stones and The Who make albums that few people listen to or care about put still pack people in at shows, but they can't go on massive, exhaustive tours every two years. Look at Springsteen. He's not made a good album in 10 years, and he had to start playing sheds rather than arenas and stadiums in some markets because he just tours so much. He finally oversaturated the market.

Now? Now Bruce has gone away for a while doing the Broadway thing, and when he finishes that run and takes some time off, the fans will be rabid to see him with a band again.

IMO, U2 will take a break from touring for a while after this. They almost have to.

Very well-reasoned post — and the comparison of ticket sales in those different cities is extremely telling.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline Luzita

  • Headache in a Suitcase
  • *
  • Posts: 324
Re: **SPOILERS**Las Vegas 2 U2eiTour Show Thread
« Reply #87 on: May 17, 2018, 12:05:28 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
It's a given that any comment is a personal opinion so why prefix or book end every comment to state the obvious?

Well, Saint22's post explained it pretty well.
That may have been one of the posts I was referring to. Everything on here is an opinion.. and the word "think" was used in this particular example.. shouldn't be any need to tread on egg shells? I didn't read anything offensive here anyway... At least IMHO...

Yes, everything on here is an opinion (unless someone is stating a fact). It should be self-evident which is which, but some people have trouble distinguishing their opinions from facts, and that’s really annoying. It’s not necessary to tread on eggshells but when a poster make it clear, through the way they phrase things, that they are aware their opinions are opinions, it makes forum interactions much more pleasant.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline Ron2112

  • Babyface
  • *
  • Posts: 14
Re: **SPOILERS**Las Vegas 2 U2eiTour Show Thread
« Reply #88 on: May 17, 2018, 05:45:55 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Bands like the Stones and The Who make albums that few people listen to or care about put still pack people in at shows, but they can't go on massive, exhaustive tours every two years. Look at Springsteen. He's not made a good album in 10 years, and he had to start playing sheds rather than arenas and stadiums in some markets because he just tours so much. He finally oversaturated the market.

Now? Now Bruce has gone away for a while doing the Broadway thing, and when he finishes that run and takes some time off, the fans will be rabid to see him with a band again.

IMO, U2 will take a break from touring for a while after this. They almost have to.

This is a patently untrue statement regarding Bruce and other bands.  Springsteen has toured every year for the last ten and STILL consistently sells out 20K-60K venues.  Look it up.

Iron Maiden tours every year, consistently selling out similar-size venues for 30-40 dates a year.
Rush toured 9 of the last 13 years before Peart retired, same story.
Journey, Def Leppard, REO Speedwagon, Cheap Trick all tour every year, selling out the Summer Festival dates they play.
Don't even get me started on modern country, where most of the artists are locked into a yearly record-release-tour schedule.

And yet, U2 can't fill the same arenas on this tour.  Why? 

- Because their ticket prices are 3X to 7X the price of admission for any of the artists I cited above. 
- Because U2 is only releasing new material once every 4 to 5 years, and that new material all has a bland "sameness" to it, with some exceptions.

I do agree that U2 probably can't tour next year IF they keep this same business model.  If they would just stop second-guessing themselves in the studio and overcharging for tickets, they could tour as much as they wanted.

Saint22

  • Guest
Re: **SPOILERS**Las Vegas 2 U2eiTour Show Thread
« Reply #89 on: May 17, 2018, 08:26:30 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Bands like the Stones and The Who make albums that few people listen to or care about put still pack people in at shows, but they can't go on massive, exhaustive tours every two years. Look at Springsteen. He's not made a good album in 10 years, and he had to start playing sheds rather than arenas and stadiums in some markets because he just tours so much. He finally oversaturated the market.

Now? Now Bruce has gone away for a while doing the Broadway thing, and when he finishes that run and takes some time off, the fans will be rabid to see him with a band again.

IMO, U2 will take a break from touring for a while after this. They almost have to.

This is a patently untrue statement regarding Bruce and other bands.  Springsteen has toured every year for the last ten and STILL consistently sells out 20K-60K venues.  Look it up.

Iron Maiden tours every year, consistently selling out similar-size venues for 30-40 dates a year.
Rush toured 9 of the last 13 years before Peart retired, same story.
Journey, Def Leppard, REO Speedwagon, Cheap Trick all tour every year, selling out the Summer Festival dates they play.
Don't even get me started on modern country, where most of the artists are locked into a yearly record-release-tour schedule.

And yet, U2 can't fill the same arenas on this tour.  Why? 

- Because their ticket prices are 3X to 7X the price of admission for any of the artists I cited above. 
- Because U2 is only releasing new material once every 4 to 5 years, and that new material all has a bland "sameness" to it, with some exceptions.

I do agree that U2 probably can't tour next year IF they keep this same business model.  If they would just stop second-guessing themselves in the studio and overcharging for tickets, they could tour as much as they wanted.

I said IN SOME MARKETS on Bruce. Sure, he can see out Philly and NYC all day long. In other markets, he's playing sheds. I saw him in a shed in Atlanta. And the groupon thing happened. Every word of that post is true. He too is selling more slowly in some markets because he finally oversaturated the market. I used to follow Bruce as closely as I do U2 until he stopping making good albums and started playing crap setlists. I know what I am talking about.

Please take the time to read posts carefully before accusing someone of posting untruths. If you want to disagree, fine.
« Last Edit: May 17, 2018, 08:29:03 AM by Saint22 »